content
stringlengths 1
15.9M
|
|---|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
The ultimate goal of radiation therapy is to deliver a high dose to the tumor
while minimizing the dose to the surrounding healthy tissue.
Since the first insight into using fast protons in radiotherapy by R. Wilson in 1946~\cite{RobertWilson1946},
the physical characteristics of the Bragg curve have been well studied because of the distinct dosimetric advantages of protons:
reduced integral dose and improved target volume coverage.
The reduced integral dose can be achieved due to the fact that there is no exit dose, and
the highly conformal target volume coverage can be achieved by improved geometric control of the distal fall-off.
At the same time, the sharp dose fall-off demands a higher accuracy;
thus, accurate patient set-up, imaging, dose calculation and quality assurance are required in proton therapy.
In general, Monte Carlo dose calculations are more accurate than analytical dose computations.
Therefore, in proton therapy, the Monte Carlo methods have become important for achieving the most accurate dose calculation.
Monte Carlo methods can also be used in the study of the particle fluence.
Verifications of the analytical dose calculation models, the estimates of the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) in patients,
estimates of the neutron dose, and calculations of neutron shielding are typical Monte Carlo applications in proton therapy.
At the Proton Therapy Center at Samsung Medical Center (SMC),
two different types of nozzles have been installed: the multi-purpose nozzle and the dedicated scanning nozzle.
The multi-purpose nozzle can deliver proton beams either in a passive scattering mode or a pencil-beam scanning mode.
The other treatment nozzle is dedicated only to pencil-beam scanning, with an extended vacuum pipe downstream of the nozzle.
The commissioning of the treatment nozzles will demand numerous sets of measurements.
Especially for the wobbling mode, there are various options with different combinations of nozzle elements
to generate spread-out Bragg peaks (SOBPs).
Thus, the measurements will consume extensive resources.
Although measurements are the solid basis of commissioning, Monte Carlo simulations can play an important role.
The main purpose of this project is to build Monte Carlo models of the treatment nozzles to expedite the commissioning process,
which requires substantial amount of resources, and to support technical developments and clinical operation.
\section{Experiments and discussion}
\subsection{Monte Carlo Simulation}
We have used TOPAS to build Monte Carlo models of the treatment nozzles.
TOPAS, which stands for TOol for PArticle Simulation~\cite{TOPAS},
is a Geant4 application mainly developed for the Monte Carlo simulation of particle therapy nozzles, including proton therapy nozzles.
Geant4 is a framework for simulating the fundamental physical processes at play during the passage of particles through matter~\cite{GEANT4}.
It is a well-proven toolkit and, it is not only flexible but also includes a complete range of functionalities,
like tracking, geometry, physics models and hits.
Especially, the provided physics processes cover a comprehensive range.
Furthermore, it is the result of a worldwide collaboration of physicists and software engineers.
TOPAS basically inherits all these merits of Geant4 with an extended features like a time feature~\cite{TimeFeature} and a user-friendly interface.
We have used g4em-standard\_opt3 with high-precision hadronic process physics models to include the low-energy neutron contribution more precisely.
\subsection{Treatment Nozzles at SMC}
Two different types of nozzles have been installed at SMC:
a multi-purpose nozzle (MPN) and a dedicated pencil-beam scanning nozzle (PBS).
Both nozzles share most of the upstream nozzle elements, such as the quadrupole magnets, scanning/wobbling magnets,
and beam profile monitors, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[width=16.0cm]{./fig1a.png}
\includegraphics[width=16.0cm]{./fig1b.png}
\caption{(Color online)
Diagram of the proton therapy nozzles at SMC; the multi-purpose nozzle (top) and the dedicated scanning nozzle (bottom).
From upstream, there are a pair of quadrupole magnets for focusing and a pair of scanning magnets for wobbling or scanning.
Note that the beam modulation components of the multi-purpose nozzle have been replaced by an extended vacuum pipe in the dedicated scanning nozzle.
}\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
Downstream, the MPN has its own elements for passive scattering of proton beams:
scatterers, ridge filters, and range compensators.
On the other hand, the PBS has an extended vacuum pipe to preserve the emittance of the proton beams.
The MPN has two different operation modes: a wobbling mode and a scanning mode.
In the wobbling mode, the two dipole magnets are used with a $90^\circ$ phase shift
to make a circular trajectory (wobbling) on the scatterers, the trajectory being perpendicular to the direction of the beam's propagation.
Next, the proton beams pass through the ridge filter after passing the scatterers in order to generate a SOBP.
Finally, the multi-leaf collimator (MLC), or the aperture, and the compensator shape the lateral and the distal edges of the proton beams.
For the scanning mode, the two dipole magnets are used to control the proton beams in the x and the y directions, and
scatterers and ridge filters are withdrawn from the proton beam's path.
One of the special feature in the MPN is the MLC.
Even though the MLC is an essential part of modern photon radiotherapy,
only a few proton centers have a MLC for their proton therapy nozzles.
In the MPN at SMC, the MLC is made of brass, and the leaf thickness of the MLC was designed to be thick enough to stop a 230-MeV proton beam.
PBS nozzle is dedicated to the pencil-beam scanning mode and provides a larger radiation field size (up to 30 cm x 40 cm).
Downstream, an extended vacuum pipe is placed to maintain a sharp penumbra by suppressing in-air-scattering of proton beam.
Both in the MPN and the PBS, the scanning beam is delivered via continuous line scanning
with an optional use of patient collimators.
\subsection{Simulation of the Nozzles}
Each nozzle element in both nozzles was modeled with sub-millimeter accuracy
following the detailed information from Sumitomo Heavy Industries, Ltd., as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{./fig2a.png}
\hspace{5ex}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{./fig2b.png}
\caption{(Color online)
OpenGL visualization of the TOPAS model of the proton therapy nozzles at SMC:
the multi-purpose nozzle (left) and the dedicated scanning nozzle (right).
}\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
The MC modules of the common proton nozzle elements, such as the quadrupole magnets and the dipole magnets,
have been provided by TOPAS.
For the site-specific elements, such as ridge filters and MLC,
SMC has developed corresponding module classes and has made a contribution to TOPAS.
For the simulation of wobbling motion, the magnetic field strength of the two dipole magnets (wobbling magnets)
is varied during the simulation by using the time feature of TOPAS.
The magnetic field strength of each dipole is varied, and the deviation of the center of the proton beam
in the plane of the isocenter is determined.
A linear fit result is used to simulate an arbitrary wobbling radius, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig3}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=15.0cm]{./fig3.png}
\caption{(Color online)
Relation between the magnetic field strength of the dipole magnets and the displacement in the plane of the isocenter.
}\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
The scatterer thickness and the wobbling radius need to be determined to generate a uniform proton radiation field.
The beam size is also a parameter for determining the wobbling radius.
Using TOPAS, we could make possible combinations of parameters with a reasonably uniform radiation field.
The total scatterer thickness is varied with a resolution of 0.1 mm by using a combination of 7 scatterers.
The beam spot size for different thicknesses of the scatterer is simulated.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm]{./fig4a.png}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm]{./fig4b.png}
\caption{(Color online)
The flat region around the center (left) is used to make a flat dose distribution.
When the wobbling radius is to large (right), the dose distribution around the center is distorted.
}\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
The simulated spot size is used to determined the wobbling radius, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig4}.
If a single Gaussian distribution is assumed, the wobbling radius can be easily estimated analytically.
A medium is known to have a non-negligible contribution from long-range scattering protons;
thus, a single Gaussian function might fail to describe the exact dose profiles in certain cases~\cite{BeyondGaussians}.
In our study, a single Gaussian function was enough for the purpose of determining the radii.
When the wobbling radius is optimized, a possible flat central region will limit the maximum field size.
Even though a thicker scatterer will provide a larger flat region,
at the same time, the proton beam will lose more energy and, thus, end up with a shorter range.
Therefore, trade-off between proton range and field size always exists.
The optimal combination of these parameters can be decided by using Monte Carlo simulations.
We actually performed the basic analysis by using TOPAS as mentioned above.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=15.0cm]{./fig5a.png}
\includegraphics[width=15.0cm]{./fig5b.png}
\caption{(Color online)
Measured integrated depth dose (IDD) curve of MPN (top) and range comparison with CSDA data (bottom).
}\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig5}, the range-energy relations from the measured integrated depth dose curve of the MPN have been
compared with the continuous slowing-down approximation (CSDA) of the range~\cite{CSDARange}.
They agree well and the data are almost on top of each other except in the low-energy region.
From the difference between the CSDA range and the measured range for a given nominal proton-beam energy,
the water equivalent thickness (WET) of the scanning nozzle can be decided.
\subsection{RayStation-TOPAS Interface}
At SMC, RayStation (RaySearch Medical Laboratories AB, Stockholm, Sweden)
is chosen as the treatment planning system (TPS) for proton therapy.
RayStation provides a Python-based scripting function,
in which users can not only simplify and customize the planning workflow but also directly interact with core algorithms.
This opens an possibility of exporting the plan parameters in the DICOM~\cite{DICOM} RT plan in the TPS
and translating them into TOPAS input text.
Ideally, one click of a button on the TPS screen will generate Monte Carlo simulation data using the plan parameters and patient CT images.
At this moment, we have developed a Matlab GUI application which reads in DICOM RT plan files and interprets plan parameters,
such as the proton beam's energy, gantry�s angle, spot's position, etc.;
then, the application generates a TOPAS input text file based on the plan parameters.
We are currently working on a Python GUI version of the RayStation-TOPAS interface in the RayStation Python scripting environment.
We believe that successful implementation will introduce a one-click Monte Carlo simulation era.
\section{CONCLUSIONS}
We have modeled and simulated the two proton therapy nozzles at SMC by using TOPAS.
Each nozzle elements has been modeled in detail, and various combinations of elements have been studied
by examining dosimetric properties, such as the integrated depth dose curves and dose profiles.
Using the modeled proton therapy nozzles, we will expand our study not only to dosimetric properties
but also to design improvement, e.g., ridge filters, MLCs, etc.
We will perform a validation with the measured data and then use the MC simulation to interpolate/extrapolate the measured data.
We believe the commissioning process of the proton therapy nozzles at SMC will be expedited by the use of MC simulations.
Furthermore, the RayStaiton-TOPAS interface will be a valuable tool to validate clinical cases via Monte Carlo simulations.
\section*{ACKNOWLEDGMENTS}
We would like to thank Sumitomo Heavy Industries, Ltd., for providing the detailed geometry of the proton therapy nozzles to be used in the MC simulation, and J. Perl and J. Shin for the support with the TOPAS toolkit.
This research was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF), funded by Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (NRF-2010-0024314)
and by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT \& Future Planning (2013M2A2A7043507).
|
\section{Introduction}
The definition of galaxy groups is fraught with ambiguity. Practitioners of simulated N-body universes have a relatively easy time, given precise knowledge of the three-dimensional positions and velocities of large numbers of test particles. With observations of the real universe only the two projected dimensions of galaxy positions are known with high accuracy. The third dimension, distance, is usefully measured only for the nearest systems. Radial velocities are only crude discriminants, strongly modified by non-linear gravitational effects. Of proper motions we generally know nothing. Then there are the problems of small numbers and lost information. Most galaxies live in groups that contain only a few members substantial enough to be recorded at a significant distance. As distance increases the recorded fraction of group members drops.
The challenge to a cataloger is to capture the identities of groups consistently over wide ranges of both group mass and distance. Commonly, group constructions are built with a friends-of-friends algorithm \citep{1982ApJ...257..423H}. The information is pairwise separations in projection and radial velocity. The spatial separation scale chosen for the group construction is clearly dependent on distance since the density of recovered candidates falls with distance. Simultaneously, physically appropriate separation scales vary with group mass. Similarly, but even more sensitively, group velocity differentials depend on mass. It is possible to incorporate the additional information of galaxy luminosities into the linkages. A recipe relating light to mass can be introduced.
A catalog can be built under a set of assumptions about the coupling of separations in space and velocity across large ranges in mass and distance. Different assumptions may achieve inclusion of true group members and rejection of interlopers with varying degrees of success. Ultimately at issue is to what degree the properties of the cataloged groups are a correct representation of nature as opposed to a biased representation imposed by the assumptions within the group-finding algorithm. There have been many attempts to build group catalogs since an early qualitative effort by \citet{1975gaun.book..557D}. Many involve variations of friends-of-friends linkages \citep{1982ApJ...257..423H, 1983ApJS...52...61G, 1989ApJS...69..809M, 2000ApJ...543..178G, 2002AJ....123.2976R, 2002MNRAS.335..216M, 2004MNRAS.348..866E, 2007ApJ...655..790C, 2011MNRAS.416.2840L, 2014A&A...566A...1T}. Others construct trees and/or use luminosities as a criterion for connectivity \citep{1978A&A....63..401M, 1984TarOT..73....1V, 1987ApJ...321..280T, 1987MNRAS.225..505N, 1993ApJS...85....1N, 2005MNRAS.356.1293Y, 2006MNRAS.366....2W, 2011MNRAS.412.2498M}. This new catalog is built with a methodology that most closely resembles that by \citet{2005MNRAS.356.1293Y}.
The present project is motivated by the proposition that we have a basic understanding of what constitutes a group so the search parameters should conform to this knowledge. Clearly there is a risk that the constraints will prejudice the outcome. However it can be argued that all extant group catalogs have been prejudiced by their choices of constraints. Indeed in all extant group catalogs it is not hard to find proposed groups that are questionable. A test of the current catalog will be whether it is a better survivor of this critique.
A companion paper \citep{2015AJ....149...54T}, hereafter T15, presents the rationale for the group-finding algorithm that will be used. In that study, a modest number of very well studied groups are given attention. Those groups range from the Coma Cluster at the high mass end, at $\sim 10^{15} M_{\odot}$, to associations of dwarf galaxies with masses of a few times $10^{11} M_{\odot}$. Some of the groups are overwhelmingly dominated by early-type HI gas-poor systems and others are dominated by late-type gas-rich systems. In these well studied cases there are signatures of the extent of the (quasi) virialized halos and infall regions. It was possible to quantify scaling relations between dimensions, velocity dispersions, and masses. It is found that mass-to-light ratios for groups increase with group mass \citep{2005ApJ...618..214T, 2009ApJ...695..900Y}. These group characteristics seem well enough established that they ought to be used as constraints in the construction of a group catalog.
The galaxies that will be considered for the current group catalog are drawn from the 2MASS Redshift Survey (2MRS) sample that, aside from a narrow low Galactic latitude exclusion zone, is almost complete to $K_s = 11.75$ \citep{2012ApJS..199...26H}. \citet{2007ApJ...655..790C} constructed a group catalog with a 2MRS sample limited at $K_s = 11.25$ and \citet{2011MNRAS.416.2840L} built a 2MASS catalog with flux limits that differ across regions of the sky.
The methodology that will be discussed involves a translation from luminosities to masses. Since the input catalog is flux limited, an adjustment is required to account for lost light with distance.
All galaxies in the 2MRS 11.75 sample are given group assignments but the physical nature of the groups at expansion velocities above 10,000 km~s$^{-1}$\ are suspect.
The lost light adjustment flairs to large values at large distances, begging the imposition of an upper limit to the practical catalog at 10,000 km~s$^{-1}$\ in the CMB frame
There is also a practical low velocity limit of 3,000 km~s$^{-1}$\ (CMB frame). Relative group parameters are determined from redshifts (assuming H$_0 = 100 h$ km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$) and peculiar velocities add scatter to parameters at low observed velocities. Also, there are interesting options to a 2MRS sample locally. 2MASS samples misses low surface brightness galaxies. Such galaxies do not make an important contribution beyond 3,000 km~s$^{-1}$\ but are dominant in a nearby sample \citep{2013AJ....145..101K}. At present, perhaps the best group catalog for the volume within 3,000 km~s$^{-1}$\ is the one by \citet{2011MNRAS.412.2498M}. The ambition here is to provide the best group catalog for the volume between 3,000 and 10,000 km~s$^{-1}$. All galaxies in 2MRS 11.75 are given an assignment reflecting their environment, be that to a group of two or more members or as a ``group'' of one.
The outline of this paper is as follows. In the next section there will be a review of what can be claimed to be understood about the properties of galaxy groups, drawing heavily on the companion paper T15. The third section will discuss the 2MRS 11.75 base catalog. There will be an evaluation of completeness issues, then a formulation of a group-finding algorithm consonant with the ideas presented in section 2. Section four hosts the catalog. In section five there is a discussion of the statistics of group properties. A group mass function is constructed in section six.
\section{Properties of Known Galaxy Groups}
Dimension parameters that are accessible to N-body simulators, like the overdensity scale $r_{200}$, a radius at 200 times the density required to close the universe with matter, or the dynamical gravitational radius $r_g$
\begin{equation}
r_g = {\Sigma_{i>j} m_im_j\over\Sigma_{i>j} m_im_j / r_{ij}}
\label{eq:rg}
\end{equation}
are not very useful to observers. How does one define a density surface about groups with only a few members? Likewise, the projected gravitational radius is unstable if statistics are poor and, in addition, requires a postulation of group membership to be applied.
It was argued in the companion paper T15 that a group manifests a scale that is accessible to observations: the projected radius of second turnaround, $R_{2t}$ (the nomenclature of T15 is followed, with projected dimensions in upper case $R$ and those in 3D in lower case $r$). With radial infall in a spherical system, galaxies initially plunge through the group and then continue outward until they stall at the second turnaround radius, $r_{2t}$. Simplest models anticipate a cusp at $r_{2t}$ \citep{1985ApJS...58...39B,1989RvMP...61..185S}. With N-body collapse models the cusp is damped but a density discontinuity feature remains \citep{2009MNRAS.400.2174V}.
The discontinuity associated with $R_{2t}$ can be seen in judiciously selected groups. Here ``judicious'' means the chosen groups have been studied individually in detail, both with imaging and spectroscopy, to depths sufficient to generate large samples. Efforts were made to minimize interloper problems. Details are given in T15.
A second parameter readily measured for these well studied groups is the radial component of the velocity dispersion $\sigma_p$ for galaxies within the radius $R_{2t}$. In T15 it is demonstrated that there is a linear relationship between the two measured parameters \footnote{The scaling relations cited in T15 are derived with distance measures consistent with H$_0=75$~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$. In this paper, distances are converted from velocity units assuming H$_0=100$~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$\ and the scaling relations are modified accordingly. Following the standard convention, $h={\rm H}_0/100$.}
\begin{equation}
\sigma_p / R_{2t} = 491\pm11 h~{\rm km ~s^{-1} ~Mpc^{-1}}
\end{equation}
established from consideration of 13 groups ranging from the M31 halo to the Coma Cluster.
Given a census of group members within $R_{2t}$, the projected gravitational radius can be calculated. Mass weighting, as explicit in Eq.~\ref{eq:rg}, is not a good idea because a mass-weighted solution is dominated by a small number of objects and is unstable. The information from dwarf test particles is ignored. Instead, the unweighted formulation is used
\begin{equation}
R_g = {N^2\over\Sigma_{i>j} 1/R_{ij}}
\end{equation}
where there are N group candidates and pair projections are counted only once. With this information, the group virial mass, $M_{\rm v}$, can be calculated
\begin{equation}
M_{\rm v} = \sigma_{3D}^2 r_g / G = (\alpha\pi/2G) \sigma_p^2 R_g
\end{equation}
where statistically $r_g = (\pi/2)R_g$ and $\sigma_{3D} = \sqrt{\alpha} \sigma_p$. The parameter $\alpha$ depends on the nature of the orbits and in T15 there is justification for the choice $\alpha = 2.5$.
With a dynamical measure of $M_{\rm v}$ in hand (or $M_{12} = M_{\rm v} / 10^{12} M_{\odot}$), T15 demonstrated the correlation
\begin{equation}
R_{2t} = 0.178\pm0.005 h^{-2/3} M_{12}^{1/3} ~{\rm Mpc}
\label{eq:r2t}
\end{equation}
with 8 well studied groups ranging in mass from $2 \times 10^{12} M_{\odot}$ to $2 \times 10^{15} M_{\odot}$. An alternate, not independent, formulation is
\begin{equation}
M_{\rm v} = 1.5 h^{-1} \times 10^6 \sigma_p^3 ~.
\label{eq:sigp}
\end{equation}
How can this information be used to define groups from a redshift catalog? Given knowledge of group mass then the projected group scale $R_{2t}$ and velocity dispersion $\sigma_p$ would be statistically known. Initially there is no knowledge of group mass but there is information from a proxy: $K$ band luminosity. It is next necessary to evaluate the relation $M_{\rm v} / L_K$ for groups over a range of masses.
As a starting point, there is a known dependence of mass-to-light ratio on group mass at optical bands. \citet{2005ApJ...618..214T} found the dependence in blue light $L_B \propto M_{\rm v}^{0.7}$ at masses above $10^{12} M_{\odot}$. Group luminosities drop off rapidly below $10^{12} M_{\odot}$ but this is a regime that will not be of concern here. \citet{2002ApJ...569..101M} and \citet{2003MNRAS.345..923V} reached similar conclusions indirectly from the need to reconcile the galaxy luminosity function and the halo mass function.
At $K_s$ band the Coma Cluster provides a robust mass-to-light calibration at high mass. T15 gave attention to a deeper survey than 2MRS 11.75, the 2MASS Extended Source Catalog \citep{2000AJ....119.2498J} with 367 group redshifts. At a distance given by the group mean CMB frame redshift of 7331 km~s$^{-1}$\ and H$_0 = 100 h$ km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$\ (as will be assumed consistently in this discussion) the Coma Cluster projected second turn-around radius is $R_{2t} = 2.2 h^{-1}$ Mpc, the projected velocity dispersion is $971\pm51$ km~s$^{-1}$, the group virial mass is $M_{\rm v} = 1.7 h^{-1} \times 10^{15} M_{\odot}$, and the $K_s$ luminosity is $L_{K_s}=1.4 h^{-2} \times 10^{13} L_{\odot}$, whence $M_{\rm v}/L_{K_s} = 120 h M_{\odot}/L_{\odot}$. Here, $L_{K_s}$ has received adjustments for incompletion as will be discussed in the next section.
At the other extreme of the mass range of interest, there is good information from the numerical action modeling of galaxy orbits in the vicinity of nearby groups \citep{2013MNRAS.436.2096S}. A characteristic value for the dominant spirals in small groups is $M/L_{K_s} = 40 h M_{\odot}/L_{\odot}$. Elliptical galaxies have 25\% more mass per unit $K_s$ light.
This difference in $M/L$ over the interval $10^{12} - 10^{15} M_{\odot}$ is consistent with the dependence found by \citet{2011MNRAS.412.2498M} of $M_p \propto L_{K_s}^{1.15}$ where $M_p$ is the projected mass \citep{1985ApJ...298....8H}. These consistent constraints motivates the following formula for the translation from observed luminosity to expected group mass $M_{\rm v}^{exp}$
\begin{equation}
M_{\rm v}^{exp} = 43 \times 10^{10} (L_{10})^{1.15} M_{\odot}
\label{eq:ml}
\end{equation}
where $L_{10}$ is the $K_s$ luminosity in units of $10^{10} L_{\odot}$ and assuming H$_0=100$~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$. This equation leads to $M_{\rm v}/L_{K_s} = 43~ M_{\odot}/L_{\odot}$ at $L_{K_s} = 10^{10} L_{\odot}$ and $121 ~M_{\odot}/L_{\odot}$ at $L_{K_s} = 10^{13} L_{\odot}$. Below and above these luminosity limits $M_{\rm v}/L_{K_s}$ is held constant at 43 and 121 $M_{\odot}/L_{\odot}$ respectively. The uncertainty in this transformation from luminosity to mass is estimated at 20\% (68\% probability) from comparisons between virial and luminosity masses discussed in Section~\ref{sec:gpprop}.
\section{The 2MRS 11.75 Catalog}
The 2MASS Redshift Survey (2MRS) with redshifts available for 98\% of galaxies from the Two Micron All Sky Survey \citep{2000AJ....119.2498J, 2003AJ....125..525J} brighter than $K_s = 11.75$ outside a Milky Way exclusion zone of 9\% of the sky is the last publication and tribute to John Huchra \citep{2012ApJS..199...26H}. The redshift catalog used here contains 43,065 entries. In the following, 2MRS total magnitudes corrected for extinction are used, resulting in a completion limit that is slightly boosted to $K_s=11.5$.
\subsection{The 2MRS Luminosity Function}
As with any flux limited sample, intrinsically faint galaxies are lost with increasing distance, so a first order of business is to determine a selection function that describes this loss of information. Others have considered this problem with related data sets. Here, a blind formulation is derived and then compared with the literature.
It is to be appreciated that the 2MASS catalog misses low surface brightness galaxies. The 2MASS exposures were short, observing with modest sized telescopes, against high and variable auroral sky emission in the $K_s$ band. The photometric integrity of the survey is exceptional but Figure 1 provides a demonstration, in comparison with a deeper survey of a small region \citep{1996AJ....112.2471T}, of the loss of low surface brightness flux. Very low surface brightness galaxies are lost entirely from the 2MASS catalog.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig1.ps}
\caption{Demonstration of lost flux from low surface brightness galaxies in the 2MASS catalog for galaxies in the nearby Ursa Major Cluster. On the ordinate, the magnitude difference is shown between the 2MASS $K_s$ magnitude and the magnitude measured in the more sensitive observations by \citet{1996AJ....112.2471T}. The exponential disk central surface brightness of a galaxy is given on the abscissa. Symbols in red represent galaxies that appear in the Large Galaxy Atlas \citep{2003AJ....125..525J} which is more rigorous than the Extended Source Catalog \citep{2000AJ....119.2498J}. The crosses identify lower limits to the magnitude differentials in cases of galaxies excluded from the 2MASS catalog. The 2MASS survey looses flux with a strong dependence on surface brightness.}
\label{lsb}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Although Figure~\ref{lsb} looks scary, the loss of low surface brightness galaxies is not a substantial problem for the present study because a lower redshift limit is set for the `practical' group catalog that is being assembled (the regime 3,000$-$10,000~km~s$^{-1}$). Low surface brightness galaxies are numerically dominant in a local volume limited sample to faint magnitudes but they make a small contribution to integrated flux. Here, a 2MASS $K_s$ band luminosity function is constructed to a limiting magnitude of $M_{K_s} = -19 + 5{\rm log} h$. The contribution from galaxies fainter than this limit would augment the total luminosity budget by 2-5\% depending on the steepness of the faint-end luminosity function. Of slightly greater concern is the missing flux from low surface brightness galaxies above the magnitude cutoff. As a rough estimate, as much as 20\% of the light in stars in galaxies might be missing from our inventory.
In defining the luminosity function it is necessary to contend simultaneously for the loss of faint galaxies with distance and the uneven contributions with distance due to clumping in the distribution of galaxies. In the regime where peculiar velocities are only a small perturbation on expansion velocities, it is possible to deal with the clumping problem by fitting the luminosity function complete to a limit defined by the inner redshift boundary of the shell. A parameterized function can be fit to the observed luminosity distribution to the completeness limit for a sequence of shells over a domain relevant to the input catalog. If the parameters of the fits are stable over successive shells then it can be considered that the luminosity function is reasonably defined.
A Schechter function \citep{1976ApJ...203..297S} is fit following standard conventions. The function for absolute magnitude $M_{K_s}$ is of the form $N(M_{K_s}) =$
\begin{equation}
N_K {\rm exp} [ -10^{-0.4(M_{K_s}-M_K^{\star})}] 10^{-0.4(\alpha_K+1)(M_{K_s}-M_K^{\star})}
\end{equation}
and has three fitting parameters: a faint end power law slope parameter $\alpha_K$, a bright end exponential cutoff parameter $M_K^{\star}$, and a sample normalization parameter $N_K$. Only the first two parameters are important for the present discussion.
It has to be entertained that galaxy luminosity functions may vary with environment. Detailed studies suggest that the variations are, in fact, quite modest \citep{2011EAS....48..281T}. Variations in $\alpha$ at $r$ band range from $-1.35$ for dense, gas-poor environments to $-1.2$ for less evolved gas-rich environments. There is a coupling in the parameter fits: a brighter choice of $M^{\star}$ leads to a more negative choice of $\alpha$. There is tentative evidence at optical bands that there is a weak environmental dependence on luminosity functions but the more robust conclusion is that any dependence is at most small.
Before giving attention to the full 2MRS catalog in redshift shells, three nearby clusters are considered that completely sample to the $M_{K_s} = -19.0$ limit: the Virgo, Fornax, and Ursa Major clusters (here, luminosities have been transformed to be consistent with H$_0=100$). With the Virgo Cluster alone, a sample of 150 galaxies is fit with the $M_K^{\star}$ and $\alpha_K$ parameters $-23.7$ and $-0.97$. Extending the sample to include 234 galaxies in the three clusters gives $-23.4$ and $-0.83$. In comparing these numbers, recall the cautionary note above regarding parameter coupling.
Turning to the full sample, consideration is given to fits in 15 separate shells at half magnitude increments of $M_K^{lim}$, describing the faintest galaxies accessed in shells over the range $-19 \leq M_K^{lim} \leq -26$. The corresponding inner velocity limits range from 1259 km~s$^{-1}$\ to 30,000 km~s$^{-1}$. (With completion to $K_s = 11.5$ then there is a complete representation of the luminosity function to $M_{K_s} = -19 +5{\rm log} h$ for the volume within expansion velocities of 1259 km~s$^{-1}$.)
The nearest shells contain $\sim 500$ galaxies. The most populated shell at 10,000 km~s$^{-1}$\ contains almost 8,000 galaxies.
The best constraints on the faint end slope $\alpha_K$ come from fits to the nearest shells. However in these cases the bright end is poorly populated, creating uncertainty in $M_K^{\star}$. The bright end exponential cutoff parameter $M_K^{\star}$ is most confidently constrained in the mid range of shells which are well populated. In the five most distant shells beyond 10,000 km~s$^{-1}$, $M_K^{lim} < M_K^{\star}$, so $\alpha_K$ is effectively unconstrained and the fits are affected by rare high luminosity systems.
Giving attention to the nearest shells there is the hint that the luminosity function is turning over ($\alpha_K < -1$) but the evidence is not convincing. This hint was already seen with the fits to the three nearby clusters. However the details of the faint end slope are not important here. At the near limit of 3,000 km~s$^{-1}$\ of the `practical' group catalog that will be constructed, $M_K^{lim} = -20.9$. For the ensuing fits $\alpha_K = -1.0$ is assumed and the only free parameter is $M_K^{\star}$. From the discussion earlier in this section it is to be appreciated that the faint end slope measurement for the 2MASS catalog is strongly biased shallow by the loss of low surface brightness galaxies.
Figure \ref{mlms} shows the run of fits to $M_K^{\star}$ as a function of the magnitude limit $M_K^{lim}$ in shells, assuming $\alpha_k = -1.0$. In the four most distant shells, at velocities $> 16,000$ km~s$^{-1}$, there is a drift in $M_K^{\star}$ to higher luminosity. These shells only sample the brightest galaxies in the exponential cutoff tail. There is a hint here that the Schechter description is inadequate, that there is an excess of extremely luminous galaxies. Indeed, there is evidence from a more extensive sample derived from a larger volume that there are more bright galaxies than anticipated by the exponential cutoff of the Schechter function and that a better description is provided by a double power law \citep{2009A&A...495...37T}. That possibility is not of concern to the current discussion given an upper expansion velocity cutoff of 10,000 km~s$^{-1}$\ to the practical group catalog.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig2.ps}
\caption{Best fits for $M_K^{\star}$ in discrete redshift shells assuming $\alpha_K=-1.0$. Expansion velocities at the inner edge of shells are given in units of 100 km~s$^{-1}$\ along the bottom of the figure. Shells at velocities above 10,000 km~s$^{-1}$\ only sample galaxies brighter than $M_K^{\star}$.}
\label{mlms}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In summary of this section, the luminosity function is adequately fit by the exponential cutoff parameter $M_K^{\star} = -23.55 \pm 0.05 + 5{\rm log} h$ assuming $\alpha_K = -1.0$. By comparison, \citet{2001MNRAS.326..255C} cite $-23.44 \pm 0.03$ with $\alpha_K = 0.96 \pm 0.05$ from 17,173 galaxies with redshifts from the 2dF survey, \citet{2003ApJS..149..289B} cite $-23.33$ with $\alpha_K = -0.88$ brightward of $-21 + 5{\rm log} h$ and $\alpha_K = -1.33$ faint-ward, from 22,679 galaxies with redshifts from the Sloan survey, and \citet{2007ApJ...655..790C}, referencing Huchra, cite $-23.5$ with $\alpha_K = -1.02$ from the preliminary 2MRS 11.25 sample. These earlier results are consistent with the present results given the issue of the lost low surface brightness systems and the coupling between the parameters $M_K^{\star}$ and $\alpha_K$.
\subsection{The Selection Function}
Given a luminosity function, the number and flux from missing galaxies can be determined as $M_K^{lim}$ increases in brightness with distance. Figure~\ref{cf} illustrates this lose with expansion velocity. Contributions faintward of $M_{K_s} = -19.0 + 5{\rm log} h$ are ignored so there is complete coverage at 1259 km~s$^{-1}$. The correction factor is a multiplier to account for missing information. The number of missing galaxies explodes quickly but the lose of light increases much less rapidly. The luminosity correction factor $CF_{lum}$ is described by the polynomial expression
\begin{multline}
CF_{lum} = 1 + 1.68\times10^{-8}(V_{LS}-1259)^2 \\+ 2.2\times10^{-17}(V_{LS}-1259)^4 + 1.9\times10^{-33}(V_{LS}-1259)^8
\label{Eq:cf}
\end{multline}
where velocities $V_{LS}$ are in the Local Sheet frame \citep{2008ApJ...676..184T}, a variation on the more familiar but ambiguous Local Group frame. By 10,000 km~s$^{-1}$, where $M_L^{lim} \simeq M_K^{\star}$, the correction factor for lost light is about a factor two.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig3.ps}
\caption{Number and luminosity correction factors as a function of velocity in the Local Sheet reference frame. Eq.~\ref{Eq:cf} for $CF_{lum}$ is described by the solid line, overlying a dotted line that plots the numerically calculated run of this parameter.}
\label{cf}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
A procedure will be described in the next section that requires luminosities for the definition of galaxy groups. If $CF_{lum} \gtrsim 2$ the composition of groups become suspect with the proposed procedure. Consequently, although the full 2MRS 11.75 catalog is given attention and groupings are proposed for the ensemble, group compositions are not considered reliable at velocities greater than 10,000 km~s$^{-1}$. At the other extreme, because of issues mentioned earlier associated with peculiar velocities and missing low surface brightness objects, the current catalog is not the best below 3,000 km~s$^{-1}$. The domain of the `practical' catalog is 3,000$-$10,000~km~s$^{-1}$. The properties of groups outside this regime are not considered reliable.
\section{Construction of the Group Catalog}
Observable properties of established galaxy groups were discussed in section 2, including second turnaround dimensions $R_{2t}$ distinguishable in well studied cases, the line-of-sight velocity dispersion $\sigma_p$ in clean cases, and the associated luminosities. Scaling laws were established that permit the inference of halo properties $-$ mass, velocity dispersion, and radius - from observed luminosities. Section 3 provided a description of adjustments that have to be made to luminosities to account for lost contributions as a function of distance.
The conceptual outline of the group-finding algorithm is as follows. (1) Start with the intrinsically most luminous galaxy in the sample after adjustment with the correction factor. (2) Assume a group mass-to-light ratio appropriate for that intrinsic luminosity using Eq.~\ref{eq:ml} and calculate the halo expectation parameters $R_{2t}$ (Eq.~\ref{eq:r2t}) and $\sigma_p$ (Eq.~\ref{eq:sigp}). (3) Cycle through the sample to search for galaxies that lie within the $R_{2t}$ radius of the primary system and within $2\sigma_p$ of its velocity. (4) After this first cycle, sum the luminosities of associated galaxies and determine their luminosity weighted projected centroid and unweighted velocity mean. (5) Calculate the halo expectation parameters $R_{2t}$ and $\sigma_p$ for this enlarged entity. Repeat cycles until there are no new links. (6) Go to the next intrinsically most luminous galaxy among the unlinked cases and repeat procedures $(2)-(5)$. (7) Continue to successively fainter galaxies until there are no more galaxies to consider.
After the initial construction of tentative groups, it is found that there can be occasional overlaps between close neighbors. Hence another cycle is initiated. (8) Beginning with the most populated candidate group, cycle through the other groups looking for overlaps in both $R_{2t}$ projected dimensions and velocity dispersions (the larger of the quadrature addition of the $2\sigma_p$ values and the $3\sigma_p$ value of the larger entity). (9) Recalculate halo properties for any enlarged candidate group and recycle. Repeat until no new additions. (10) Consider next most populous candidate group and successively smaller candidates until the entire catalog has been explored. The final affiliations of galaxies will be called "nests".
An illustration of groups found in a particular region is given in Figure~\ref{lbpp}. The Perseus-Pisces filament that is shown is the densest region of major filaments in the volume that has been explored. Histograms of the velocities of candidate members in the four largest nests are seen in Figure~\ref{vpp}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig4.ps}
\caption{The Perseus-Pisces filament. Major components are given distinct colors. Dotted circles indicate $R_{2t}$, second turnaround radii for the major halos. Points in black identify all other 2MRS $K<11.75$ galaxies with $3500<V<6500$ km~s$^{-1}$.}
\label{lbpp}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig5.ps}
\caption{Velocity histograms for the four most important components of the Perseus-Pisces filament.}
\label{vpp}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Among details, one is a cutoff in the galaxies that are considered at an expansion velocity of 24,000 km~s$^{-1}$. The idea is to identify groups in some manner to 20,000 km~s$^{-1}$\ with minimal high velocity edge effect. As mentioned already, though, the luminosity correction factor becomes large at high redshifts, reaching 40 at 20,000 km~s$^{-1}$. The group catalog extends to 20,000 km~s$^{-1}$\ but it would be unwise to make much of group characteristics at velocities greater than 10,000 km~s$^{-1}$.
Another detail is that the north and south Galactic hemispheres were evaluated separately since no real group except the most local crosses the zone of obscuration. In the final group catalog, nests are given 6-figure identification numbers with the initial digit for those in the north the number 1 and the initial digit for those in the south the number 2. The 2MRS limit of $\vert b \vert = 5^{\circ}$ fortuitously allows inclusion of two of the largest nearby clusters, Norma and Ophiuchus, as shown in Figure~\ref{norm-oph}. The excluded low Galactic latitude zone occupies 9\% of the sky. As an aside, a systematic X-ray search for clusters has revealed 3 clusters within 10,000~km~s$^{-1}$\ in the 2MRS exclusion zone: CIZAJ0450.0+4501 ($V_h=6655$ km~s$^{-1}$) and CIZAJ0603.8+2939 ($V_h=8994$ km~s$^{-1}$) in proximity to the Perseus Cluster and CIZAJ1324.7-5736 ($V_h=5696$~km~s$^{-1}$) near the Norma Cluster \citep{2002ApJ...580..774E}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig6a.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig6b.ps}
\caption{Norma Cluster shown in the top panel and Ophiuchus Cluster shown in the bottom panel are two major clusters at low Galactic latitude. The plane of the Milky Way lies at SGL=180 and the grey lines conform to the boundary of the 2MRS redshift survey. The PGC number identifies the dominant galaxy in the cluster.}
\label{norm-oph}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
A third, more significant detail follows from close inspection of the nests in plots of projected positions and histograms of velocities. There sometimes were apparent gaps that suggest the linkages were too severe. These gaps were usually more convincing in the spatial information rather than in velocities. In only six instances, nests were split. In these cases the smaller part is given an identification with the number 2 as the second digit. The digits 3 to 6 are the same as the identification number of the larger part. The Abell 1367 Cluster seen in Figure~\ref{a1367} is an example. The main cluster in red is nest 100005 while the secondary cluster in cyan is nest 120005 in the group catalog. It can be expected in such a case that the two entities are on paths to soon merge. Nests are split where the evidence is compelling. With several other nests there are hints of segregation but there is sufficient ambiguity that they were left alone. For example, in the case of the Centaurus Cluster shown in Figure~\ref{cen} there appear to be two kinematic components but they are not distinctly separated and the spatial overlap is severe. The two components in this well known case \citep{1986MNRAS.221..453L, 1997A&A...327..952S} appear to have similar distances. Here and commonly with the halos under consideration it can be expected that merging and cluster growth is an ongoing process.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig7.ps}
\caption{The region around the Abell 1367 Cluster. The main cluster in red and an apparently distinct entity in cyan have strongly overlapping velocities.}
\label{a1367}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig8.ps}
\caption{The region around the Centaurus Cluster. Two relatively distinct kinematic components strongly overlap in projection. The blue and red components separated at 4300~km~s$^{-1}$\ have been called Cen30 and Cen45 in the literature.}
\label{cen}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
A fourth detail results from the observation that the algorithm that is employed fails to pick up extreme velocity outliers. With the large nests it was not uncommon to find velocity outliers reaching $\sim 3.5\sigma$ projected very near to the center of the nest. Their central locations and the paucity of galaxies in the vicinity with similar velocities makes the likelihood of their membership very high. These galaxies are added to the associated nests and the nest parameters are recalculated.
Table~\ref{summary} gives the gross statistics of the group catalog, both overall and in the restricted interval 3,000 to 10,000 km~s$^{-1}$. In the velocity interval 3,000~km~s$^{-1}$\ to 10,000~km~s$^{-1}$\ there are 24,044 galaxies to consider in the 2MRS 11.75 sample. These are assembled into 13,605 groups, with 3,461 groups of at least 2 members and 10,144 singles. The Perseus Cluster contains the most galaxies from the 2MRS 11.75 sample in this restricted velocity range, with 180. Figure~\ref{cf} teaches us that number counts are strongly dependent on distance. Masses from adjusted luminosities and velocity dispersions are more stable with distance. Table~\ref{prominent} lists the top 8 clusters in the $3-10$ thousand velocity interval: on the left, by masses derived from luminosities, and on the right, by velocity dispersions. For comparison, the Virgo Cluster, the most important cluster within 3,000~km~s$^{-1}$\ is included. The Virgo Cluster is a comfortable peer of these prominent groups.
\begin{deluxetable}{lcccccc}
\tablecaption{Summary}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Sample}&\colhead{\# All Galaxies}&\colhead{\# Groups to 20k}&\colhead{$\ge 2$}&\colhead{\# 3k$-$10k}&\colhead{\# Groups}&\colhead{$\ge 2$}
}
\startdata
North & 21,995 & 13,090 & 3,178 & 12,153 & 6,982 & 1,781 \\
South & 21,043 & 12,376 & 3,010 & 11,891 & 6,624 & 1,680 \\
Total & 43,038 & 25,475 & 6,188 & 24,044 & 13,606 & 3,461 \\
\enddata
\label{summary}
\end{deluxetable}
\begin{deluxetable}{llccclc}
\tablecaption{Most Prominent Clusters}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Group}&\colhead{Name}&\colhead{Mass $ h^{-1}10^{15} M_{\odot}$}&\colhead{CF}&\colhead{Group}&\colhead{Name}&\colhead{$\sigma_p$ km~s$^{-1}$}
}
\startdata
100004 & A2199 & $1.8$ & 2.3 & 100009 & Ophiuchus & 976 \\
100001 & Coma & $1.7$ & 1.6 & 200001 & Perseus & 962 \\
100009 & Ophiuchus & $1.6$ & 2.3 & 200002 & Norma & 957 \\
200002 & Norma & $1.3$ & 1.3 & 100001 & Coma & 886 \\
200001 & Perseus & $1.2$ & 1.2 & 100003 & Centaurus & 822 \\
100002 & Virgo & $1.1$ & 1.0 & 200017 & A539 & 754 \\
200016 & A2634 & $0.8$ & 2.3 & 100004 & A2199 & 740 \\
200017 & A539 & $0.7$ & 1.9 & 100002 & Virgo & 717 \\
100005 & A1367 & $0.7$ & 1.5 & 100005 & A1367 & 707 \\
\enddata
\label{prominent}
\end{deluxetable}
\subsection{Local Densities}
\label{sec:locden}
Knowledge of the selection function and of the group characteristics allows for the determination of the smoothed luminous density at the location of every galaxy in the sample. Values for this parameter have been calculated on a $1 h^{-1}$ Mpc grid and each galaxy is given the value at the nearest grid location. The luminosity densities at each grid point are given by the sum of contributions from members of the sample after Gaussian smoothing. Luminosities are adjusted following the recipe illustrated in Fig.~\ref{cf}. The Gaussian smoothing scale is $1h^{-1} \times CF_{lum}^{1/3}$~Mpc so the compensation for missing light is spread across more grid points at larger distances while the contribution from a single galaxy remains constant at the central position of the galaxy. In order to eliminate the finger-of-god elongation of structures in redshift space, yet realistically replicate the depth of clusters, galaxies in the identified groups with velocity $V_{gal}$ are given redshift space positions in the line-of-sight based on the mean group velocity $V_{gp}$ plus $0.1 (V_{gal}-V_{gp})$. Finally to note: since the luminosity adjustment becomes very large at large redshifts, the luminosity density computation is restricted to a box $\pm 200 h^{-1}$ Mpc on a side. Even within this box, density values toward the edges are very uncertain.
Maps of the density distribution are shown in three orthogonal slices in
Figures~\ref{2mrsdens_Z}, ~\ref{2mrsdens_Y}, and \ref{2mrsdens_X}.
The presentations are in supergalactic coordinates and each slice has a thickness of 4000~km~s$^{-1}$. The slices are chosen to include most of the main structural features in the volume being studied. See the captions for details.
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.32]{fig9.ps}
\caption{Slice through smoothed 2MRS luminosity density cube: $SGZ$ interval -2000 to +2000~km~s$^{-1}$. Contours are at logarithmic intervals with a low density cutoff at $10^9~h^2~M_{\odot}~{\rm Mpc}^{-3}$. Galactic obscuration band at $SGY \sim 0$. The most prominent feature is the Shapley Concentration at $SGX=-13,000$~km~s$^{-1}$, $SGY=8,000$~km~s$^{-1}$.}
\label{2mrsdens_Z}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.32]{fig10.ps}
\caption{Slice through smoothed 2MRS luminosity density cube: $SGY$ interval +5000 to +9000~km~s$^{-1}$. Contours as in Fig.~\ref{2mrsdens_Z}. This interval contains the Great Wall with the Coma Cluster near the center, the Hercules complex above center and slightly to the left, and the Shapley Concentration at $SGX=-13,000$~km~s$^{-1}$, $SGZ=0$.}
\label{2mrsdens_Y}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.32]{fig11.ps}
\caption{Slice through smoothed 2MRS luminosity density cube: $SGX$ interval -4000 to 0~km~s$^{-1}$. Contours as in Fig.~\ref{2mrsdens_Z}. Galactic obscuration is tilted by $6^{\circ}$ from the $SGY=0$ axis. The Great Wall rises vertically at $SGY=6,000$~km~s$^{-1}$\ reaching the Hercules complex at $SGZ+8,000$~km~s$^{-1}$. Directly above our position at the origin is the Local Void, blending toward the upper right into the Hercules Void.}
\label{2mrsdens_X}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Tabulated Information}
Three on-line tables are provided that present the group catalog. Table~\ref{nests} gives a summary of each group, one line per group. Table~\ref{members} identifies the individual members of each group. Table~\ref{eddcat} combines these pieces of information: there is one line per galaxy containing information about the galaxy and about the ensemble properties of its group. In each case, the first 10 rows of large tables are shown, with the full tables made available on-line. Table \ref{eddcat} is also available (separated into Galactic north and south halves) at the Extragalactic Distance Database.\footnote{http://edd.ifa.hawaii.edu; see catalogs `2MRS North \& South Groups'} More detailed information about the tables follows.
\noindent
{\it Table \ref{nests}: Summary of Group Properties.} Column (1) Group (nest) identification number; 1xxxxxx if in north galactic hemisphere and 2xxxxxx if in south. If the identification is 12xxxxx or 22xxxxx the group is a split from an adjacent larger group. (2) Number of members from the 2MASS 11.75 catalog. (3) Principal Galaxies Catalog (PGC) name for brightest member in group. (4$-$5) Luminosity weighted supergalactic longitude and latitude of group, in degrees. (6) Logarithm of $K_s$ band luminosity summed over all 2MASS 11.75 members and adjusted by the correction factor for missing light, units of solar luminosity. (7) Unweighted average group velocity, in the cosmic microwave background frame adjusted by a cosmological model as described in \cite{2013AJ....146...86T}, in km~s$^{-1}$. (8) Distance modulus from group velocity assuming H$_0=100$~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$, in magnitudes. (9) Line of sight bi-weight velocity dispersion of group members; requires at least 5 group members, in km~s$^{-1}$. (10) Projected radius of second turnaround calculated from group luminosity and assumed conversion to mass, at group distance given by velocity and H$_0=100$~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$, in Mpc. (11) Line of sight velocity dispersion anticipated from group luminosity and assumed conversion to mass, in km~s$^{-1}$. (12) Group mass calculated from luminosity, adjusted by correction factor, and assumed light to mass conversion factor. (13) Conversion factor for missing light as a function of systemic velocity.
\noindent
{\it Table \ref{members}: Group Members.} Column (1) Group (nest) identification number; 1xxxxxx if in north galactic hemisphere and 2xxxxxx if in south. If the identification is 12xxxxx or 22xxxxx the group is a split from an adjacent larger group. (2) Principal Galaxies Catalog (PGC) name of group member. (3$-$4) Supergalactic longitude and latitude of galaxy, in degrees. (5) Type in the numeric code of \citet{1991trcb.book.....D}. (6) 2MASS $K_s$ total magnitude, extinction corrected, in magnitudes. (7) 2MASS $J-H$ total extinction corrected color, in magnitudes, (8) 2MASS $J-K$ total extinction corrected color, in magnitudes. (9) Logarithm of intrinsic $K_s$ luminosity, extinction corrected, at group distance given by velocity and H$_0=100$~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$, in units of solar luminosity. (10) Velocity of galaxy in the cosmic microwave background frame adjusted by a cosmological model as described in \cite{2013AJ....146...86T}, in km~s$^{-1}$.
\noindent
{\it Table \ref{eddcat}: All Galaxies with Group Tags.}\footnote{Available with updates at http://edd.ifa.hawaii.edu} Column (1) Principal Galaxies Catalog (PGC) name of galaxy. (2$-$3) Galactic longitude and latitude, in degrees. (4$-$5) Supergalactic longitude and latitude, in degrees. (6) Type in the numeric code of \citet{1991trcb.book.....D}. (7) Heliocentric velocity, in km~s$^{-1}$. (8) Velocity in the Local Sheet reference frame defined by \cite{2008ApJ...676..184T}, in km~s$^{-1}$. (9) Velocity of galaxy in the cosmic microwave background frame adjusted by a cosmological model as described in \cite{2013AJ....146...86T}, in km~s$^{-1}$. (10) 2MASS $J-H$ total extinction corrected color, in magnitudes, (11) 2MASS $J-K_s$ total extinction corrected color, in magnitudes. (12) 2MASS $K_s$ total magnitude, extinction corrected, in magnitudes. (13) Logarithm of intrinsic $K_s$ luminosity, extinction corrected, at group distance given by velocity and H$_0=100$~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$, in units of solar luminosity. (14) Logarithm of luminosity density at nearest location on a $1h^{-1}$ Mpc grid, where contributions come from all adjacent 2MASS 11.75 galaxies after smoothing with a Gaussian of $1h^{-1}$ Mpc times an adjustment dependent on the luminosity correction factor as described in the text, in units of solar luminosity per Mpc$^3$. (15) Group (nest) identification number; 1xxxxxx if in north galactic hemisphere and 2xxxxxx if in south. If the identification is 12xxxxx or 22xxxxx the group is a split from an adjacent larger group. (16) Number of members from the 2MASS 11.75 catalog. (17) Principal Galaxies Catalog (PGC) name for brightest member in group. (18$-$19) Distance and distance modulus from group velocity assuming H$_0=100$~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$, in Mpc and magnitudes respectively. (20$-$21) Luminosity weighted supergalactic longitude and latitude of group, in degrees. (22) Logarithm of $K_s$ band luminosity summed over all 2MASS 11.75 members and adjusted by the correction factor for missing light, units of solar luminosity. (23) Conversion factor for missing light as a function of systemic velocity. (24) Line of sight velocity dispersion anticipated from group luminosity and assumed conversion to mass, in km~s$^{-1}$. (25) Projected radius of second turnaround calculated from group luminosity and assumed conversion to mass, at group distance given by velocity and H$_0=100$~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$, in Mpc. (26) Unweighted average group velocity, in the cosmic microwave background frame adjusted by a cosmological model as described in \cite{2013AJ....146...86T}, in km~s$^{-1}$. (27) Bi-weight group \citep{1990AJ....100...32B} velocity, in the cosmic microwave background frame adjusted by the cosmological model, in km~s$^{-1}$. (28) Uncertainty in bi-weight group velocity, in km~s$^{-1}$. (29) Line of sight bi-weight velocity dispersion of group members; requires at least 5 group members, in km~s$^{-1}$. (30) Line of sight velocity dispersion of group members, in km~s$^{-1}$. Null if group of one. (31) Bi-weight projected gravitational radius $R_{ij}$, in Mpc. (32) Uncertainty in bi-weight projected gravitational radius, in Mpc. (33) Group mass from virial theorem with bi-weight dispersion and radius parameters, in units of $10^{12}~M_{\odot}$. (34) Group mass based on adjusted intrinsic luminosity and mass to light prescription, in units of $10^{12}~M_{\odot}$. (35$-$36) \citet{2007ApJ...655..790C} high and low density group identifications. (37) \citet{2011MNRAS.416.2840L} group identification. (38$-$40) Supergalactic X,Y,Z coordinates from group velocities assuming H$_0=100$~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$, with small adjustments described in section~\ref{sec:locden} to create roughly spherical clusters, in Mpc.
\begin{deluxetable}{crrrrcrcrcrcr}
\tablecaption{Nest Properties (1st 10 of 25474)}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Nest}&\colhead{Mem}&\colhead{PGC1}&\colhead{$SGL$}&\colhead{$SGB$}&\colhead{log$L_K^g$}&\colhead{$V_{mod}^g$}&\colhead{DM}&\colhead{$\sigma_V$}&\colhead{$R_{2t}$}&\colhead{$\sigma_p$}&\colhead{Mass}&\colhead{$CF$}
}
\startdata
100001 & 136 & 44715 & 89.6226 & 8.1461 & 13.15 & 7331 & 34.33 & 886 & 2.393 & 881 & 0.171E+16 & 1.65\\
100002 & 197 & 41220 & 103.0008 & -2.3248 & 12.69 & 1491 & 30.87 & 670 & 1.617 & 596 & 0.529E+15 & 1.00\\
100003 & 113 & 43296 & 156.2336 & -11.5868 & 12.75 & 3873 & 32.94 & 822 & 1.708 & 629 & 0.623E+15 & 1.12\\
100004 & 81 & 58265 & 71.5103 & 49.7851 & 13.16 & 9424 & 34.87 & 740 & 2.418 & 891 & 0.177E+16 & 2.26\\
100005 & 61 & 36487 & 92.0255 & -10.4950 & 12.78 & 6987 & 34.22 & 707 & 1.753 & 646 & 0.673E+15 & 1.58\\
100006 & 85 & 31478 & 139.4478 & -37.6063 & 12.48 & 4099 & 33.06 & 648 & 1.347 & 496 & 0.305E+15 & 1.14\\
100007 & 86 & 56962 & 108.5182 & 49.0878 & 13.52 & 11603 & 35.32 & 1261 & 3.168 & 1167 & 0.398E+16 & 3.30\\
100008 & 65 & 39600 & 67.2953 & 3.2390 & 11.94 & 1054 & 30.11 & 209 & 0.837 & 308 & 0.733E+14 & 1.00\\
100009 & 66 & 59827 & 173.2412 & 43.4150 & 13.13 & 9112 & 34.80 & 976 & 2.352 & 866 & 0.163E+16 & 2.15\\
100010 & 55 & 47202 & 149.1678 & -1.3439 & 13.93 & 15265 & 35.92 & 1002 & 4.363 & 1607 & 0.104E+17 & 7.95\\
\enddata
\label{nests}
\end{deluxetable}
\begin{deluxetable}{crrrrrccrr}
\tablecaption{Nest Members (1st 10 of 43038)}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Nest}&\colhead{PGC}&\colhead{$SGL$}&\colhead{$SGB$}&\colhead{Ty}&\colhead{$K_{tot}$}&\colhead{$J-H$}&\colhead{$J-K$}&\colhead{log$L_K$}&\colhead{$V_{mod}$}
}
\startdata
100001 & 44715 & 89.6369 & 8.3951 & -4.3 & 8.40 & 0.69 & 0.99 & 11.69 & 6834\\
100001 & 44628 & 89.6262 & 8.2751 & -3.6 & 8.86 & 0.82 & 0.98 & 11.50 & 7582\\
100001 & 43895 & 90.2180 & 6.9260 & -2.3 & 9.24 & 0.47 & 0.75 & 11.35 & 8837\\
100001 & 44298 & 89.9643 & 7.6957 & -3.9 & 9.19 & 0.75 & 0.88 & 11.37 & 7763\\
100001 & 44323 & 89.0106 & 7.9544 & -4.1 & 9.22 & 0.81 & 1.03 & 11.36 & 7164\\
100001 & 44840 & 89.8613 & 8.5241 & 4.0 & 9.84 & 0.67 & 0.98 & 11.11 & 8420\\
100001 & 44938 & 90.0745 & 8.6928 & -3.1 & 9.89 & 0.67 & 0.94 & 11.09 & 8300\\
100001 & 43981 & 89.9140 & 7.1398 & -2.6 & 9.89 & 0.70 & 1.02 & 11.09 & 8288\\
100001 & 44737 & 89.4237 & 8.4824 & -2.1 & 10.14 & 0.68 & 0.94 & 10.99 & 8998\\
100001 & 44114 & 89.6574 & 7.4958 & -3.0 & 9.71 & 0.68 & 0.98 & 11.16 & 7323\\
\enddata
\label{members}
\end{deluxetable}
\begin{deluxetable}{rrrrrrrrrccrrrcrrrrrrrrrcrrrrrccrrrrrrrr}
\tablecaption{Combined Catalog (1st 10 of 43038)}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{PGC}&\colhead{Glon}&\colhead{Glat}&\colhead{$SGL$}&\colhead{$SGB$}&\colhead{Ty}&\colhead{$V_{hel}$}&\colhead{$V_{LS}$}&\colhead{$V_{mod}$}&\colhead{$J-H$}&\colhead{$J-K$}&\colhead{$K_{tot}$}&\colhead{log$L_K$}&\colhead{log$\rho_K$}&\colhead{Nest}&\colhead{Ng}&\colhead{PGC1}&\colhead{$D_V$}&\colhead{DM}&\colhead{$SGL_g$}&\colhead{$SGB_g$}&\colhead{log$L_K^g$}&\colhead{$CF$}&\colhead{$\sigma_p$}&\colhead{$R_{2t}$}&\colhead{$V_mod^g$}&\colhead{$V_{bw}^g$}&\colhead{$eV_{bw}$}&\colhead{$\sigma_{bw}$}&\colhead{$V_{rms}$}&\colhead{$R_{ij}^{bw}$}&\colhead{$eR_{ij}$}&\colhead{$M_{12}^{vir}$}&\colhead{$M_{12}^{lum}$}&\colhead{HDC}&\colhead{LDC}&\colhead{2M++}&\colhead{$SGX$}&\colhead{$SGY$}&\colhead{$SGZ$}
}
\startdata
2 & 113.9554 & -14.6992 & 341.6442 & 20.7389 & 3.1 & 5017 & 5309 & 4799 & 0.72 & 1.04 & 9.50 & 10.91 & 10.41 & 200275 & 7 & 73150 & 49.8 & 33.48 & 341.4922 & 20.7395 & 11.57 & 1.24 & 222 & 0.604 & 4976 & 4984 & 60 & 159 & 155 & 0.673 & 0.070 & 18.600 & 27.500 & 11 & 2 & 4634 & 44.20 & -14.67 & 17.63\\
5 & 110.6206 & -28.9043 & 326.1772 & 19.7805 & -0.6 & 10445 & 10717 & 10310 & 0.70 & 1.01 & 10.49 & 11.12 & 10.34 & 200619 & 4 & 5 & 100.7 & 35.02 & 326.1907 & 19.7757 & 12.01 & 2.56 & 328 & 0.890 & 10075 & & & & 276 & & & & 88.100 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 78.72 & -52.75 & 34.08\\
12 & 90.1920 & -65.9300 & 286.4249 & 11.3510 & 1.3 & 6546 & 6683 & 6279 & 0.72 & 0.99 & 11.11 & 10.46 & 9.36 & 210177 & 1 & 12 & 62.8 & 33.99 & 286.4249 & 11.3510 & 10.64 & 1.49 & 98 & 0.266 & 6279 & & & & 0 & & & & 2.340 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 17.40 & -59.06 & 12.36\\
14 & 101.7853 & -52.4728 & 300.9143 & 15.3673 & -4.9 & 11602 & 11801 & 11571 & 0.76 & 1.03 & 10.60 & 11.22 & 10.57 & 200601 & 4 & 14 & 118.2 & 35.36 & 300.8070 & 15.3909 & 12.22 & 3.61 & 395 & 1.071 & 11820 & & & & 311 & & & & 154.000 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 58.55 & -97.79 & 31.32\\
16 & 91.6006 & -64.8655 & 287.6120 & 11.7030 & -0.1 & 5664 & 5806 & 5434 & 0.63 & 0.82 & 11.52 & 10.18 & 9.78 & 211419 & 1 & 16 & 54.3 & 33.68 & 287.6120 & 11.7030 & 10.31 & 1.34 & 73 & 0.198 & 5434 & & & & 0 & & & & 0.977 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 16.08 & -50.68 & 11.01\\
18 & 113.9223 & -15.0086 & 341.3140 & 20.7012 & 2.0 & 5366 & 5658 & 5156 & 0.66 & 0.84 & 10.69 & 10.43 & 10.41 & 200275 & 7 & 73150 & 49.8 & 33.48 & 341.4922 & 20.7395 & 11.57 & 1.24 & 222 & 0.604 & 4976 & 4984 & 60 & 159 & 155 & 0.673 & 0.070 & 18.600 & 27.500 & 11 & 2 & 4634 & 44.13 & -14.93 & 17.60\\
23 & 94.2541 & -62.6047 & 290.1153 & 12.4061 & -2.8 & 11365 & 11518 & 11326 & 0.78 & 0.68 & 10.94 & 11.04 & 10.12 & 202425 & 2 & 23 & 112.8 & 35.26 & 290.0671 & 12.6568 & 11.85 & 3.27 & 285 & 0.773 & 11282 & & & & 62 & & & & 57.700 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 37.88 & -103.45 & 24.23\\
25 & 107.8762 & -38.3822 & 315.9687 & 18.3751 & -3.0 & 11691 & 11939 & 11700 & 0.69 & 0.99 & 10.97 & 11.06 & 9.84 & 205376 & 1 & 25 & 117.0 & 35.34 & 315.9687 & 18.3751 & 11.61 & 3.48 & 230 & 0.625 & 11700 & & & & 0 & & & & 30.500 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 79.82 & -77.18 & 36.88\\
30 & 305.4397 & -36.0852 & 215.6453 & -13.3490 & 4.1 & 7907 & 7691 & 8058 & 0.60 & 0.96 & 9.98 & 11.13 & 9.93 & 206399 & 1 & 30 & 80.6 & 34.53 & 215.6453 & -13.3490 & 11.37 & 1.89 & 186 & 0.506 & 8058 & & & & 0 & & & & 16.200 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -63.73 & -45.70 & -18.61\\
31 & 326.3370 & -67.7221 & 247.9873 & -2.4720 & 99.0 & 6032 & 5965 & 5867 & 0.63 & 0.99 & 10.46 & 10.66 & 9.85 & 202464 & 2 & 31 & 58.3 & 33.83 & 247.8761 & -2.5482 & 11.01 & 1.41 & 136 & 0.368 & 5827 & & & & 57 & & & & 6.240 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -21.84 & -54.00 & -2.51\\
\enddata
\label{eddcat}
\end{deluxetable}
\section{Group Properties}
\label{sec:gpprop}
It can be asked if observed velocity dispersion, spatial scale, and inferred virial masses track the assumptions based on luminosity. Correlations are expected but there could be offsets. There will be evident uncertainties with small groups. In best cases with order 100 candidate members, projected velocities and positions reasonably represent the three-dimensional distribution but with only a few members, in the extreme only two, knowledge of only one of three velocity components and two of three spatial components results in large uncertainties in group properties. Uncertainties are compounded by interlopers. Then, more fundamental than the observational considerations, it is appreciated that the structures may often, even usually, stray from dynamical equilibrium.
While ultimately uncertainty will rule, there are better and worse ways to evaluate group parameters. Approaches have been discussed by \citet{1990AJ....100...32B}. They evaluate methods for what they call resistance, robustness, and efficiency. A resistant method is minimally affected by outliers. A robust method works with diverse population characteristics. An efficient method does the best that can be done with poor statistics. Following tests with samples from 5 to 200 in size, Beers et al. identify a preference for bi-weight location and scale estimators. Their recipes are followed here to determine group central velocities and line-of-sight dispersions and measures of the projected separations $R_{ij}$ of group members.
Figure~\ref{MlMv} provides a comparison between group mass estimates derived via the virial theorem from positions and velocities versus group mass estimates following from the integrated $K_s$ band light. The dotted line gives the equality relationship. It is seen that there is excellent agreement with groups containing at least 30 2MRS galaxies, identified by the brown and red points, and still good agreement with memberships as small as 10, points in orange and green. The correlation falls apart with fewer group members, already with 5 to 9 members represented in the plot in cyan, but especially with groups of 2 to 4 represented in blue.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig12.ps}
\caption{Comparison of group mass estimates based on luminosity vs. estimates based on velocity dispersions and spatial separations. The color code identifies the number of members.}
\label{MlMv}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Of course, the virial mass estimates are suspect with small numbers. The systematic trend toward small masses can be understood. The group search algorithm that sets spatial and velocity limits favors inclusion of galaxies with close projected separations and radial velocities and disfavors objects with large projected separations and radial velocities that would make the cut with full 3D information. The scaling laws assume that the accessible phase space information reasonably represents the group which is statistically valid if the membership is large.
The separate velocity dispersion and spatial scale components are given attention in Figure~\ref{r_sig}. Observed dispersions are compared with dispersions anticipated from luminosities in the top panel and observed gravitational radii are compared with second turnaround radii in the bottom panel. Color codings tied to group membership are the same as in Fig.~\ref{MlMv} except groups with less than 5 members are omitted. The absolute luminosity cutoff $M_{K_s}=-19+5{\rm log}h$ translates to lower cutoffs in the dispersions and dimensions derived from luminosities. The dashed lines in the two panels represent best fits to the comparisons involving groups with at least 30 members. In the case of velocity dispersions the difference between measures is marginal. In the case of dimensions, there is no expectation that the two measures would be the same. Statistically, $R_{2t}$ is $27\%\pm3\%$ larger than the gravitational radius.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig13a.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig13b.ps}
\caption{{\it Top:} bi-weight radial velocity dispersion vs. velocity dispersion inferred from $K_s$ luminosity. {\it Bottom:} bi-weight projected gravitational radius vs. $R_{2t}$.
The color code identifies the number of members. Dotted curves correspond to 1:1 dependencies. Dashed curves are the best fits to groups with at least 30 members.}
\label{r_sig}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
There are two conclusions from the discussion of this section. The first is that the absolute scale of the masses derived from luminosities is consistent with a scale from kinematic input. The second is that $K_s$ luminosities provide masses with smaller uncertainties than kinematic masses. Admittedly there could be hidden systematics in the luminosity masses that remain to be revealed.
\section{The Group Mass Function}
The availability of the group catalog presents the opportunity to construct a well formulated halo mass function. The analysis is restricted to groups with mean velocities in the range 3,000$-$10,000~km~s$^{-1}$\ in the CMB frame. The definition of groups includes groups of one, so the concepts of groups and halos are synonymous to the degree that halos are filled with enough stars to be visible. Within the completion limits of the 2MRS 11.75 survey, the group catalog contains {\it all} halos in the volume.
The mass function derived with this sample is presented in Figure~\ref{MN}. Masses are determined from $K_s$ luminosities, as justified in Section~\ref{sec:gpprop}. It is seen that the mass function is built by merging two regimes. The highest mass (luminosity) groups are seen across the full range of velocities (distances). However high mass groups are rare in the nearer part of the survey because of the limited volume. By contrast, the lowest mass groups are not seen in the outer shells but within the range that they can be seen they are present in substantial numbers.
\begin{figure}[!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig14.ps}
\caption{Group mass function. Corrections are made for loss of information with distance. At masses above $3h^{-1}\times10^{13}~M_{\odot}$ the mass function is built with contributions over the full range 3,000$-$10,000~km~s$^{-1}$\ while at lower masses the construction is limited to contributions over the range 3,000$-$6,500~km~s$^{-1}$. The model fit is based on the Sheth-Tormen (ST) formalism with $\Omega_{matter}=0.2$ and a count normalization.}
\label{MN}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{MN} there are overlays of the mass functions built in the two regimes: circles show the mass function with contributions from the full range 3,000$-$10,000~km~s$^{-1}$\ and squares show the mass function restricted to 3,000$-$6,500~km~s$^{-1}$. The numbers for the shallower sample are geometrically augmented to compensate for the reduced volume being explored. The two realizations of the mass function overlap satisfactorily in the mid range of $10^{13} - 10^{14}~M_{\odot}$. In the plot, circles are black and squares are grey above $3h^{-1} \times 10^{13}~M_{\odot}$ while circles are grey and squares are black below this mass. At the high mass end the contributions from the two regimes are consistent but the bin $\sqrt{N}$ error bars are larger for the shallower sample. At the low mass end there are differences attributable to completion effects.
The dashed curve in Fig.~\ref{MN} illustrates a fit\footnote{Kindly provided by Julien Carron and Melody Wolk.} using the Sheth$-$Tormen modification \citep{1999MNRAS.308..119S} of the Press$-$Schechter formulation of the mass spectrum of collapsed halos from an initial Gaussian field \citep{1974ApJ...187..425P}. Fits with recipes by \citet{2001MNRAS.321..372J} or \citet{2006ApJ...646..881W} are not significantly different from the Sheth$-$Tormen case. The Sheth$-$Tormen and related descriptions of the mass function are motivated by Lambda Cold Dark Matter simulations.
The model fit minimizes scatter in bins of log(Number) over the solar mass range 12.8 to 14.7 in log units, with all bins in that range given equal weight. The fit excludes halos with log mass greater than 14.7 because of poor statistics and halos below log mass 12.8 because of probable systematics. Over the fitted range, the scatter of 0.07 in log counts is achieved with a low value of $\Omega_{matter}\sim 0.2$, assuming a topologically flat universe. However, while the shape of the model fit is in excellent agreement with the data, the count normalization is poor. There will be cosmic variance. As a measure of statistical fluctuations, there are 7\% more 2MRS galaxies in the sample volume in the north Galactic hemisphere than in the same volume in the south. However, the nominal Sheth$-$Tormen fit required an augmentation in counts by a factor 4.6 to achieve the fit shown in Fig.~\ref{MN}. This unsatisfactory situation requires an investigation that goes beyond the scope of this paper for reasons discussed next.
The fit clearly fails at group masses below $6h^{-1} \times 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$. There are several possible reasons. There is immediate concern related to the luminosity corrections with distance. The adjustment reaches a factor two at 9,000~km~s$^{-1}$\ and, in the extreme, the adjustment can be as large as 2.6 or a displacement of 4 bins in log mass. Certainly an adjustment is required. Adjustments cause a binning uncertainty at the level of $\pm1$ bin. A related but greater concern is whether the correction for missing light should strictly be assigned to one halo. The assumption to do so is probably valid at high masses but not valid at low masses. High mass groups contain a lot of galaxies and statistically the galaxies missed will be associated. Low mass groups contain few galaxies, possibly only one that makes the 2MRS 11.75 catalog. It is likely that frequently all or part of the added luminosity lies in separate uncatalogued halos. The consequence would be that the present procedure preserves total light but assigns the light to fewer halos than actually exist. There would be depletion of the numbers in the lowest mass bins and possible augmentation of numbers in intermediate mass bins.
One wonders about the effect of the loss of low surface brightness galaxies in the 2MASS samples. The problem is not so much with the systematic loss of light. If that light had been captured then the coefficients of the correction formula Eq.~\ref{eq:ml} would have been smaller in compensation. The greater problem is the loss of halo counts at the low mass end where unseen light either at the extremities of cataloged galaxies or galaxies that are entirely missed impacts the mass function.
It should be possible to evaluate these concerns by "observing" mock catalogs. There are plans to carry out this experiment. However ultimately the 2MRS 11.75 catalog is not optimal for a study of the faint end of the mass function because of the loss of low surface brightness systems. As was discussed in the companion paper T15, it is apparent that there is an abundance of groups with low mass that are entirely missed in the 2MRS 11.75 compilation and would continue to be missed with 2MASS samples to fainter limits. Surveys that target low surface brightness systems can help clarify the situation at low masses \citep{1959PDDO....2..147V, 1981ApJS...47..139F, 1998A&AS..127..409K, 1999A&AS..135..221K, 2000A&AS..146..359K}. Wide field neutral Hydrogen surveys provide complementary inventories \citep{2004MNRAS.350.1195M, 2005AJ....130.2598G}. An anticipated future paper in this series will present a group catalog for galaxies within 3500~km~s$^{-1}$\ that samples low surface brightness systems. That catalog of nearby groups will give much better definition of the low mass end of the mass function.
There can readily be an improvement of the observed mass function at the high mass end as well. The 2MASS Extended Source Catalog \citep{2000AJ....119.2498J} augmented by Tom Jarrett (private communication) with velocities from the 6dF Galaxy Survey \citep{2014MNRAS.445.2677S} and the Sloan Digital Sky Survey extends a factor 2 greater in depth over 3/4 of the sky, giving access to a factor 6 more volume.
While group catalog extensions to the very local volume and to larger distances will greatly clarify the observational status of the group mass function, there remains an issue with the normalization of the Sheth$-$Tormen mass function. There has to be a clearer understanding of whether masses in simulations and the observed universe are commensurate. This issue will be given attention in a future publication.
\section{Summary}
John Huchra's legacy, the 2MASS Redshift Survey with almost all-sky completeness and photometric integrity, provides the best available description of the redshift distribution of galaxies in our corner of the universe \citep{2012ApJS..199...26H, 2006MNRAS.373...45E, 2014MNRAS.445..988N}. The near-infrared photometry captures light from the dominant baryonic component of galaxies, the old stars, with minimal loss from obscuration. Variations of this sample have already been used to build group catalogs \citep{2007ApJ...655..790C, 2011MNRAS.416.2840L}. In the current paper, in addition to using the full 2MRS 11.75 catalog, the groups are constructed to conform to scaling laws defined by detailed studies of individual groups with masses $10^{11}$ to $10^{15}~M_{\odot}$, discussed in T15.
While groups have been defined over the full velocity range of the 2MRS 11.75 catalog, the nearest and furthest groupings are suspect. Due to the loss of low surface brightness galaxies from the 2MRS catalog, this sample is not optimal for the construction of low mass groups, best studied nearby. At high redshifts, once only galaxies brighter than the characteristic magnitude $M_K^{\star}$ of the exponential cutoff are being accessed, the correction factor for missing light creates unacceptable uncertainties. The most useful domain of the present catalog is $3,000-10,000$~km~s$^{-1}$\ in the CMB frame.
In this shell from 3,000 to 10,000 km~s$^{-1}$, the present catalog contains 24,044 galaxies in 3,461 groups of two or more and 10,144 singles. The Perseus Cluster, Abell~426, is the most populated group with 180 assigned members. There are 5 groups with masses greater than $10^{15}~M_{\odot}$ (A2199, Coma, Ophiuchus, Norma, and Perseus), 182 groups in the next decade of mass down to $10^{14}~M_{\odot}$, and 3514 more groups in the subsequent decade down to $10^{13}~M_{\odot}$. The densest concentration of clusters are in the region historically called the "Great Attractor" \citep{1987ApJ...313L..37D}, which is the core of the Laniakea Supercluster \citep{2014Natur.513...71T}, and the Perseus$-$Pisces chain \citep{1988lsmu.book...31H}.
The construction of the group catalog all the way down to "groups" of one permits the construction of the mass function of groups. The volume considered is between 3,000 and 10,000 km~s$^{-1}$\ in the CMB frame, absent 9\% of the sky in the zone of obscuration. Every 2MRS 11.75 galaxy in this volume contributes to halos as small as $2h^{-1} \times 10^{11}~M_{\odot}$ and as massive as $2h^{-1} \times 10^{15}~M_{\odot}$. The halo fitting function determined by \citet{1999MNRAS.308..119S} provides a good fit to the shape of the observed mass function with the choice $\Omega_{matter}\sim 0.2$ in a flat universe. However, the count normalization is poor. This situation requires further analysis but first there are available ways that the observed mass function can be improved with catalog extensions to the local volume and to greater distances.
The mass in halos in the $3,000-10,000$~km~s$^{-1}$\ shell can be summed. Divided by the volume, the product is a density that can be compared with the critical density for a closed universe without vacuum energy. This normalized density in bound halos is $\Omega_{collapsed} = 0.16 \pm 0.02$. The error is the quadrature sums of three components: cosmic variance gauged by the north$-$south difference of $\pm0.009$, 20\% uncertainty in the amplitude of the lost light correction factor resulting in a summed fractional uncertainty of 0.014, and a 10\% uncertainty in the conversion from light to mass, an uncertainty in $\Omega_{collapsed}$ of 0.016..
\bigskip\noindent
{\it Acknowledgements.} Help in the fitting of mass function formalisms by Julien Carron and Melody Wolk is greatly appreciated. Daniel Pomar\`ede generated Figs. \ref{2mrsdens_Z}$-$\ref{2mrsdens_X}. Nick Kaiser and Istvan Szapudi provided useful comments. This research has been indirectly supported by grants from the US National Science Foundation and the NASA Astrophysics Data Analysis Program.
|
\section{Introduction}
\subsection{Game of Matching Pennies}
The payoff matrix for Matching Pennies is displayed on Table~\ref{fig-matching}. For the convenience of using the bitstring notations, we denote the heads move as 0 and the tails move as 1.
The game is repeated, and we assume that it is played long enough that even the smallest strategic advantages get expressed in the outcome. Both players can win or lose arbitrarily large amounts of pennies.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{r||lc|lc|}
\multicolumn{5}{r} {0} \hspace{3.3em} {1}\ \
\\
\cline{2-5}
& & $-1$ & & $1$ \\
&&&& \\
{0} & $1$ & & $-1$ & \\
\cline{2-5}
& & $1$ & & $-1$\\
&&&& \\
{1} & $-1$ & & $1$ & \\
\cline{2-5}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Payoffs for Matching Pennies}
\label{fig-matching}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{How not to lose Matching Pennies}\label{sec-NE}
To determine her strategy, Alice might reason something like this.
\begin{quote}
Suppose that I consistently play 1 with a frequency $p\in [0,1]$ and thus 0 with a frequency $1-p$. If I set $p\lt \frac 1 2$, then Bob can get the expected payoff $-p+(1-p) = 1-2p \gt 0$ by playing 1. If I set $p\gt \frac 1 2$, then Bob can get the expected payoff $p - (1-p) = 2p-1 \gt 0$ by playing 0. If I set $p = \frac 1 2$, then Bob's expected payoff is the same whether he plays 1 or 0: it is $1-2p = 2p -1 = 0$. Since Bob's winnings are my losses, the best strategy for me is to set $p=\frac 1 2$, and to play 0 and 1 with equal frequencies, since that minimizes my expected losses.
\end{quote}
By the same reasoning, Bob arrives at the same conclusion, that he should set the frequency of playing 1 at $q = \frac 1 2$. This is the well known Nash equilibrium of the game of Matching Pennies. Both players arrive to it by minimizing the expected losses.
\subsection{Playing Matching Pennies}
In general, a mixed strategy Nash equilibrium prescribes the frequencies for both players' moves in the long run. The essential assumption is that the moves will be \emph{randomized}. If Bob's move is predictable with some likelihood, then Alice can increase her chances to win. It seems natural to imagine that the players randomize by tossing their coins, and displaying the random outcomes. At the equilibrium, the players are just passive servants of chance, since they cannot gain anything by deviating from it. If they are rational, all they can do is toss their coins.
But suppose that Bob suddenly plays
\begin{equation}\label{eq01} 0101010101010101010101010101010101010101\end{equation}
Will Alice predict that Bob's next move is $0$ and play $0$ to win a penny? If she thinks probabilistically, she will probably notice that the probability of getting \eqref{eq01} by flipping a fair coin is $2^{-40}$, which is exactly the same as the chance of getting, e.g.
\begin{equation}\label{eqrand}
1101000100110101001011100100000100000010\end{equation}
or any other sequence that she would accept as random.
If Alice's rationality is based on probabilities, then she will not be able to distinguish any two strings of Bob's moves, since they are all equally probable if he tosses fair coins.
But if Bob knows or just believes that Alice's rationality is based on probabilities, and that Alice will thus continue to randomize her moves in any case, then Bob has no reason to randomize, since playing \eqref{eq01}, or \eqref{eqrand}, or a string of 0s, or any other string, yield the same expected payoff against Alice's random plays. On the other hand, if Alice believes that Bob's rationality is based on probabilities, then she will also have no reason to randomize, since her payoffs are always the same.
So by combining their beliefs about their probabilistic reasoning, both players will become indifferent towards mixing and randomizing their moves. Their common knowledge that they may both stop randomizing, because they both know that the opponent will be unable to tell, will not change their expected payoffs. Indeed, if they both play non-randomly, one of them will almost surely win and the other will lose, but their chances are the same, and they average out. However, while the expected payoffs remain unchanged, the higher moments will, of course, diverge wildly.
\subsection{How to win Matching Pennies if you can}
In order to exploit Bob's deviation from the equilibrium, or to give him an incentive to genuinely randomize his mixed equilibrium strategy, Alice must go beyond probabilities, i.e. beyond just calculating the frequency of his moves. If she just checks whether the frequencies of 0 and 1 are $\frac 1 2$, she will detect that the string consisting 0s alone is not random, but not that the string \eqref{eq01} is not random; if she checks whether the frequencies of 00, 01, 10 and 11 are $\frac 1 4$, she will detect that \eqref{eq01} is not random, but not that the string where these four digraphs of bits alternate is not random; etc. By checking that each bitstring of length $n$ has \emph{in the long run}\/ the frequency $\frac 1 {2^n}$, she will detect many non-random plays, but still miss most of them. E.g., the string
\begin{equation}\label{eq123}
0110111001011101000100110101100110111101111\ldots
\end{equation}
obtained by concatenating the binary notations for the sequence of natural numbers 0,1,2,3\ldots will pass the bias tests for all $n$-grams, if taken long enough, yet it is, of course, easily predictable, and obviously not random. Moreover, Bob might, e.g., randomize all even bits, and just alternate 0s and 1s at the odd positions. To recognize such opportunities, Alice will have to check that \emph{every substring}\/ of the string of Bob's past moves has unbiased frequencies of all $n$-grams. As the game goes on, Alice will thus have to keep proving that Bob's play, i.e. the ever growing string of his past moves, is what von Mises called \emph{Kollektiv}\/ in his theory of probability \cite{vonMises}. Proving that something is a \emph{Kollektiv}\/ is known to be a problematic task, as specifying the substrings to be tested has led to problems that remained open for many years \cite{Ville:collectif,Bienvenu-Shafer-Shen:martingales}.
\subsection{Randomness from equilibrium}
Scratching the surface of the basic assumption about the players' incentives to implement a mixed strategy equilibrium led us straight into the foundationals of probability. There is, of course, nothing very surprising about the fact that the concept of a mixed strategy, expressed in terms of probabilities, depends on the foundations of probability. The point of the story is not so much that there are deep probabilistic problems lurking behind simple games. Although easily ignored, that fact should not be surprising. A more useful point that we would like to make is that, the other way around, there seem to be instructive ways to state the solutions of the foundational problems of probability in terms of games, simple and intuitive.
In particular, we show that the usual way of defining mixed strategy equilibria based on the notion of randomness (and hiding the subtleties and the complexities of this notion under the carpet) can be reversed --- and that the notion of randomness can be defined the other way around, using mixed strategy equilibria. The upshot of this is not just that a complicated concept of randomness is replaced by an intuitive game theoretic concept of not losing Matching Pennies at the equilibrium; the upshot is also that the effective content of both concepts, of randomness and of equilibrium, can be analyzed in terms of \emph{randomness tests}, which bring both probabilistic and game theoretic concepts on the mathematical ground of inductive inference \cite{FisherR:1959,SolomonoffR:64,Blum-Blum:inductive,RissanenJ:book,wallace2005statistical} --- with a great potential for cross-polination of ideas.
\subsection{Background and related work}\label{sec-related}
We propose a simple and narrow bridge between games and probabilities. An extensive effort towards reconstructing the foundations of probability theory from a particular game, has been ongoing for many years, as reported by Shafer and Vovk \cite{Shafer-Vovk:probability}. The work presented in this paper is not only at the opposite end of the scale in terms of its scope and technical sophistication, but it also goes in a different direction, and therefore uses an essentially different model. While the authors of \cite{Shafer-Vovk:probability} aim to reconstitute the full power of the diverse probabilistic tools in their rich gaming model, the point here is to illustrate how the most basic games capture the most basic probability concepts in a completely natural fashion.
The bridge between games and probabilities is built using significance testing and computation. Significance testing goes back to Fisher \cite{FisherR:1959,FisherR:1959} and lies, of course, at the core of the method of statistical induction. The constructions sketched here are related to the computational versions of testing, developed on one hand in Martin-L\"of's work \cite{Martin-Loef:randomness,NiesA:book}, and on the other hand in the techniques of inductive learning \cite{Gold67,Blum-Blum:inductive,Vovk:Learning}.
We analyze the computational content of testing. The analyses of the computational content of strategic reasoning go back to the earliest days of game theory \cite{RabinMO:effective-strat}, and continue through theory of bounded rationality \cite{RubinsteinA:bounded}, and on a broad front of algorithmic game theory \cite{NisanN:AGT}. The finite state machine model seems preferred for specifying strategies \cite{RubinsteinA:bounded,halpern-pass-automata}, since computable strategies lead to problems with the equilibrium constructions \cite{Knoblauch,Nachbar-Zame}. In recent work, a different family of problems, arising from the cost of strategic computations has been analyzed, including the cost of randomization \cite{halpern-pass-cost,halpern-pass-sequential}. This led the players to not just lose the incentive to randomize, as in the little story above, but to prefer determinism. Although we are here also looking at the problem of deviating from the equilibrium into non-randomness, we are concerned with a completely different question: \emph{How should the opponent recognize and exploit this deviation?} The present work seems to deviate from all previous computational approaches to gaming in one essential aspect: we are not analyzing the computations that the players perform to construct or implement their own strategies, or the equilibrium, but the computations that they perform to test the opponents' strategies. This leads into a completely different realm of computability, that emerges from a different aspect of gaming. While the analysis goes through for most models of computation, abstracted away behind a family of computations ${\cal L}$ (as explained in Sec~\ref{sec-programmable}), it is perhaps worth pointing out that it leads to different notions of randomness, and that stronger notions of computation lead to stronger notions of randomness.
\subsection{Outline of the paper}
In Sec.~\ref{sec-prelim} we spell out the preliminaries and some notations used in the paper. In Sec.~\ref{sec-uni-testing} we motivate and explain the simplest case of randomness testing, with respect to the uniform distributions, and describe its application in gaming. In Sec.~\ref{sec-universal} we construct the universal test that can be constructed when all computable partial functions can be used. Sec.~\ref{sec-randomness} derives as a corrolary the characterization of random strings as the equilibrium plays. In Sec.~\ref{sec-gen-testing} we describe how to construct randomness tests for arbitrary programmable distributions. Sec.~\ref{sec-conclusions} closes the paper with some final comments.
\section{Notations and preliminaries} \label{sec-prelim}
\subsection{Monoid of plays}
In the games considered in this paper, the set of \emph{moves}\/ is always $\mathbbm{2} = \{0,1\}$. We sometimes call 0 heads and 1 tails. A \emph{play}\/ is a finite string (or list, or vector) of moves $\vec x = x_1 x_2 x_3\cdots x_m$, or $\vec y = y_1 y_2 y_3\cdots y_n$ played in a match of a game. The set of all bitstrings, used to represent plays, is denoted by $\mathbbm{2}^\ast$. The empty bitstring is $()$, and the concatenation of bitstrings is $\cons{\vec x} {\vec y} = x_1\cdots x_my_1\cdots y_n$ constitute the monoid $\big(\mathbbm{2}^\ast, ::, ()\big)$, which is freely generated by $\mathbbm{2}$. The monoid structure induces the prefix ordering
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq-prefix}
\vec x \sqsubseteq \vec y & \iff & \exists. \vec z.\ \cons {\vec x} {\vec z} = \vec y
\end{eqnarray}
and the \emph{length} measure $\ell :\mathbbm{2}^\ast \to {\Bbb N}$, which is the unique homomorphism from the free monoid over two generators to the free monoid over one generator. The fact that it is a homomorphism means that
\[ \ell() = 0 \qquad \mbox{and} \qquad \ell\left(\cons {\vec x}{\vec y}\right) = \ell\left(\vec x\right) + \ell\left(\vec y\right) \]
We shall also need a bijective pairing $<-,->: \mathbbm{2}^\ast \times \mathbbm{2}^\ast \to \mathbbm{2}^\ast$ with the projections $-_{(0)}, -_{(1)}: \mathbbm{2}^\ast\to \mathbbm{2}^\ast$, which means that together they satisfy
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left<\vec x_{(0)}, \vec x_{(1)}\right> = \vec x & \quad & \left<\vec x_0, \vec x_1\right>_{(i)} = \vec x_i
\end{eqnarray*}
Using the fact that a free monoid is also cofree, a bijective pairing can be derived from any two disjoint injections $\mathbbm{2}^\ast\hookrightarrow \mathbbm{2}^\ast$. We shall use
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq-def-pairing}
<\vec x,\vec y> & = & x_1 x_1 x_2 x_2\cdots x_m x_m 01 y_1 y_2\cdots y_n
\end{eqnarray}
where $\vec x = x_1x_2\cdots x_m$ and $\vec y = y_1 y_2\cdots y_n$. The length induces the shift homomorphism
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq-pairing}
\ell\left(<\vec x, \vec y>\right) & = & 2\ell(\vec x) + \ell(\vec y) + 2
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Sets and functions}
$|X|$ denotes the number of elements of the set $X$. A functions $f:X\rightarrow Y$ is assumed to be total, whereas a partial function is written as $h: X\rightharpoondown Y$. We write $h(x)\downarrow$ to say that the partial function $h$ is defined on the input $x$, and $h(x)\uparrow$ or $h(x) = \uparrow$ to say that $h$ is undefined on $x$. Whenever we write $h(x)$ in a formula or a definition, we tacitly assume $h(x)\downarrow$, unless specified otherwise.
\subsection{Programmable functions}\label{sec-programmable}
We say that $f:\mathbbm{2}^\ast \rightharpoondown \mathbbm{2}^\ast$ is \emph{${\cal L}$-programmable}, or that it is an \emph{${\cal L}$-function}\/ when it is specified using a programming language ${\cal L}$. The intuitions from reader's favorite programming language, practical or theoretical, should do. For a theoretical example, one could take ${\cal L}$ to be the language of finite state machines. A program could then be either a list of transitions of a Moore or Mealy machine, or a corresponding regular expression \cite{Hopcroft-Ullman,ConwayJH:regular}. The graphs of programmable functions would be regular languages. A larger family or programmable functions would be obtained from a Turing complete programming language, like Python or Java, or the Turing machines themselves. In the latter case, a program could again be a list of the transitions of the machine. The intermediary solution might be to use computations specified in the language of monoidal computers \cite{PavlovicD:IC12,PavlovicD:MonCom2}. In any case, all computable partial functions would be programmable, together with their recursively enumerable graphs.
In all cases, we assume that a program corresponding to a given ${\cal L}$-function $f:X\rightharpoondown Y$ is effectively given as a bitstring $\vec p_f \in \mathbbm{2}^\ast$. When the language ${\cal L}$ is Turing complete, then for all types $x$ and $Y$ there is an ${\cal L}$-function $\upsilon :\mathbbm{2}^\ast \times X\rightharpoondown Y$, the \emph{universal evaluator}, such that for every ${\cal L}$-function $f:X\rightharpoondown Y$ holds $f(x) = \upsilon(\vec p_f, x)$ for the suitable program $\vec p_f$ and all inputs $x\in X$.
\section{Uniform randomness testing}\label{sec-uni-testing}
We focus on Alice's task to detect patterns of non-randomness in Bob's play, which she could exploit to predict his moves. Bob is assumed to be doing the same, observing Alice's play and trying to detect some patterns. But what is a pattern? And what does it mean to detect it?
Intuitively, an object has a pattern if it can be described succinctly, i.e. compressed. E.g. the string \eqref{eq01} can be compressed to $(01)^{20}$ in a regular notation, or to
\begin{lstlisting}
for (i=0; i<20; i++) { print 01 }
\end{lstlisting}
in a programming language like Java. The program to extend \eqref{eq01} infinitely would be $(01)^\ast$ or \begin{lstlisting}
for (;;) { print 01 }
\end{lstlisting}
and the program to output \eqref{eq123} would be
\begin{lstlisting}
for (i=0;;i++) { print i }
\end{lstlisting}
On the other hand, a program to output the string \eqref{eqrand}, without a detectable pattern, would have to spell it out in full length:
\begin{lstlisting}
print 110100010011010100101110010000010000001001
\end{lstlisting}
The idea that randomness can be defined as incompressibility goes back to Kolmogorov \cite{Kolmogorov:Sankhya}, and further back to the scholastic logical principle known as \emph{Occam's Razor}, which established the priority of succinct descriptions as inductive hypotheses, as explained by Solomonoff \cite{SolomonoffR:64}.
\subsection{Detecting regularity, testing randomness}
\be{defn}\label{def-detector}
Let ${\cal L}$ be a family of programmable (partial) functions. An ${\cal L}$-\emph{detector}\/ is an ${\cal L}$-function $h: \mathbbm{2}^\ast \rightharpoondown \mathbbm{2}^\ast$ such that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq-decompression}
h(\vec x) = \vec y & \Longrightarrow & \ell(\vec x)\lt \ell(\vec y)
\end{eqnarray}
A detector\ $h$ is \emph{predictive}\/ if
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq-predictive}
\forall \vec x.\ h(\vec x)\downarrow &\Longrightarrow & \exists \vec z. \ \vec x \sqsubset \vec z \wedge h(\vec x) \sqsubset h(\vec z)
\end{eqnarray}
where $\sqsubset$ is the prefix ordering \eqref{eq-prefix}.
A bitstring $\vec y$ is said to be \emph{$h$-regular at the level $m\in {\Bbb N}$}\/ if
\begin{eqnarray}
\exists \vec x.\ \ \ h(\vec x) = \vec y & \wedge & \ell(\vec x) +m \leq \ell(\vec y)
\end{eqnarray}
The $h$-regular bitstrings at each level form the \emph{$h$-regularity sets}
\begin{eqnarray}
H_m^n & = & \left\{ \vec y \in \mathbbm{2}^n | \exists \vec x.\ h(\vec x) = \vec y \wedge \ell(\vec x) +m \leq \ell(\vec y)\right\} \label{eq-Hmn}\\
H_m & = & \bigcup_{n=1}^\infty H_m^n\label{eq-Hm}
\end{eqnarray}
which all together form the tower
\begin{equation} \label{eq-tower}
H_1\supseteq H_2 \supseteq H_3 \supseteq \cdots \supseteq H_m\supseteq \cdots \end{equation}
This tower is what we call the \emph{$h$-test}.
\ee{defn}
\paragraph{Remark.} Note that a bitstring of length $n$ can only be regular at the level $m$ if $m\leq n$. The $h$-regularity sets $H^n_m$ for $m\gt n$ are empty.
\be{prop}\label{prop-shrink} The $h$-regularity sets decrease exponentially, with
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq-shrink}
\lvert H^n_m\rvert & \leq & 2^{n-m}
\end{eqnarray}
\ee{prop}
\begin{prf}{}
By \eqref{eq-Hmn}, for every $\vec y \in H^n_m$ there is $\vec x$ such that $h(\vec x) = \vec y$ and $\ell(\vec x) + m \leq \ell(\vec y)$, and thus $\ell(\vec x) \leq n-m$, since $\vec y \in \mathbbm{2}^n$. All $\vec y\in H^n_m$ are thus enumerated by the strings $\vec x$ of lengths at most $n-m$. Hence \eqref{eq-shrink}.
\end{prf}
\paragraph{Remark.} Proposition~\ref{prop-shrink} says that the chance that an observation $\vec y$ is $h$-regular at the level $m$ decreases exponentially in $m$. Since this is true for all detector s, the implication is that most bitstrings are irregular: most detector s\ are eventually rejected, and most bitstrings are accepted as random. This is a formal expression of Laplace's observation that regular objects constitute a null set \cite{Laplace}.
\be{defn}\label{def-significance} The \emph{$h$-regularity degree}\/ $\sigma_h(\vec y)$ is the highest $h$-regularity level that the bitstring $\vec y$ achieves, i.e.
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sigma_h(\vec y) & = & \max \{m\leq \ell(\vec y)\ |\ \vec y\in H_m\}
\end{eqnarray*}
The $h$-regularity degree is thus a function $\sigma_h:\mathbbm{2}^\ast \to {\Bbb N}$.
\ee{defn}
\subsection{Alice tests Bob}\label{sec-hyp-testing}
Alice uses detectors as tools for hypothesis testing, e.g. in the style of \cite{FisherR:1925,FisherR:1959}. She tests the hypothesis that Bob's play $\vec y$ is random. She will reject the hypothesis if she finds a detector $h$ such that $\vec y$ is $h$-regular at a sufficiently high level. So Alice tests Bob by going down the $h$-test tower $H_1\supseteq H_2 \supseteq \cdots$, and checking how far is it true that $\vec y \in H_m$. This will cease to be true at the level $\sigma_h(\vec y) \leq \ell(\vec y)$. If the number $\sigma_h(\vec y)$ is high, then $\vec y$ is probably regular, and the hypothesis that it is random should be rejected.
To decide when to reject the randomness hypothesis, Alice first of all stipulates a \emph{significance threshold} $M$, and considers the outcome of testing $\vec y$ by $h$ if $\sigma_h(\vec y) \geq M$. Since this significance threshold is the negative logarithm of the usual statistical thresholds, which are usually $1\%$ or $5\%$, then Alice should presumably take $M$ to be a number between 4 and 7.
If she finds a test that detects a significant degree of regularity in $\vec y$, then Alice attempts to exploit the detected pattern to gain advantage in the game. If the detector\ $h$ is predictive, then Alice extends the succinct $h$-description $\vec x$ of $\vec y$ into a succinct descripton $\vec z\sqsupset \vec x$, from which she extrapolates a prediction $h(\vec z) \sqsupset \vec y$ of Bob's future play, and plays $h(\vec z)$ herself, since she wins whenever they play the same.
Note that the definition of predictive detector s\ implies that $\sigma_h(h(\vec z)) \geq \sigma_h\left(\vec y\right)$, which means that Alice's choice of possible predictions narrows as the observed bitstrings are getting longer and the regularity levels higher: more significant testing outcomes provide more information about the tested bitstring, and \emph{better fitting predictions}. The usual problems of statistical inference enter scene. However, statistical tests derived from detectors, as ${\cal L}$-programmable functions, also have some very special features, which we consider next.
\section{Universal detector}\label{sec-universal}
If the ${\cal L}$ is the family of all computable partial functions, then it contains a universal evaluator, as explained in Sec.~\ref{sec-prelim}. This means that the programs for all detector s can be enumerated. By dovetailig, i.e. executing increasing parts of increasing detector s, we can construct a universal detector, which will eventually detect any pattern that any computable detector can detect. The test derived from the universal detector\ can be viewed as the \emph{universal randomness test}. The idea and the first construction goes back to Per Martin-L\"of \cite{Martin-Loef:randomness}.
\be{defn}\label{def-universal}
An ${\cal L}$-detector\ $u: \mathbbm{2}^\ast \rightharpoondown \mathbbm{2}^\ast$ is \emph{universal} if $u$-testing can detect as significant, up to a suitably modified threshold, the significant outcomes of $h$-testing for any ${\cal L}$-detector\ $h$. More precisely, for every ${\cal L}$-detector\ $h: \mathbbm{2}^\ast \rightharpoondown \mathbbm{2}^\ast$ there is a constant $c_h$ such that for every bitstring $\vec x$ holds
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq-universal}
\sigma_h(\vec y) &\leq & c_h + \sigma_u(\vec y)
\end{eqnarray}
\ee{defn}
\be{prop}\label{prop-universal}
There is a universal ${\cal L}$-detector\ if ${\cal L}$ is the family of all computable partial functions.
\ee{prop}
\begin{prf}{}
Let $\upsilon: \mathbbm{2}^\ast \times \mathbbm{2}^\ast \rightharpoondown \mathbbm{2}^\ast$ be the universal evaluator. This means that for every computable function $f: \mathbbm{2}^\ast \rightharpoondown \mathbbm{2}^\ast$ there is a program $\vec p_f$ such that
\begin{eqnarray*}
f(\vec x) & = & \upsilon(\vec p_f, \vec x)
\end{eqnarray*}
Define
\begin{eqnarray*}
u(\vec x) & = & \begin{cases}
\upsilon\left(\vec x_0, \vec x_1\right) & \mbox{ if }\ell(\vec x) \lt \ell\left( \upsilon\left(\vec x_0, \vec x_1\right)\right)\\
\uparrow & \mbox{ otherwise}
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray*}
Then $u: \mathbbm{2}^\ast \rightharpoondown \mathbbm{2}^\ast$ is a detector\ by Def.~\ref{def-detector}. For any detector\ $h: \mathbbm{2}^\ast \rightharpoondown \mathbbm{2}^\ast$ and any bitstring $\vec x$ then holds
\begin{eqnarray*}
h(\vec x) & = & u\left(<\vec p_h, \vec x>\right)
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\vec p_h$ is a program encoding $h$. Using the pairing
Then for $c_h = 2\ell\left(\vec p_h\right)+2$ holds
\begin{eqnarray*}
c_h + \ell(\vec x) + m \leq \ell\left(u\left(<\vec p_h, \vec x>\right)\right) = \ell\left(h(\vec x)\right)
\end{eqnarray*}
which means that $u$-regularity at the level $m$ implies $h$-regularity at the level $m+c_h$, i.e. $U_m^n \subseteq H_{m+c_h}^n$. Hence \eqref{eq-universal}.
\end{prf}
\section{Matching Pennies randomness}\label{sec-randomness}
The notion of randomness as incompressibility, as formalized by Kolmogorov \cite{Kolmogorov:Sankhya} and developed in algorithmic information theory \cite{Vitanyi:book}, has been justified by Martin-L\"of's proof that incompressible strings are just those that pass all randomness tests \cite{Martin-Loef:randomness,NiesA:book,Vitanyi:book}. But we have seen that randomness tests are also a part of playing Matching Pennies. The players stay at the equilibrium only as long as their plays pass each other's tests. Whenever a test produces a significant outcome, the randomness hypothesis is rejected, and the players depart from the equilibrium, whether the detected pattern was a real consequence of someone's earlier deviation from the equilibrium, or whether the test overfitted a pattern onto an actually random string. The equilibrium persists only if both player's plays pass both players' tests.
\be{corollary}\label{prop-randomness}
A bitstring is uniformly random (in the sense of Kolmogorov \cite{Kolmogorov:Sankhya,Martin-Loef:randomness}) if and only if it can occur as a play of the equilibrium strategy in the game of Matching Pennies
\ee{corollary}
\paragraph{Comment.} The point of this corollary, and of this paper is that \emph{randomness tests can be viewed as a part of a mixed strategy equilibrium}, and \emph{that they are a necessary part}. Although very minor, this observation does seem worth attention. Not just because taking randomness for granted results in swiping under the carpet many interesting and important problems with the equilibrium constructions. More importantly, taking the randomness \emph{testing}\/ for granted hides from sight the whole wide area of players' strategic analyses of each other's plays, which is where the essence of real gaming as competition is played out. If Alice's play pass Bob's tests, but Alice's tests detect the regularity behind Bob's play, then Alice will win by outsmarting Bob. Randomness and outsmarting are two sides of the same coin. That seems worth attention.
\section{General randomness testing}\label{sec-gen-testing}
\begin{defn}
A \emph{string distribution} is an ${\cal L}$-programmable\footnote{The programmability of a real function $p$ can be defined in different ways. The presentation going back to constructive analysis is to present $P$ as a program $\vec p_P : \mathbbm{2}^\ast \to \mathbbm{2}^\ast$ which for each $\vec x$ outputs a program $\vec p_P(\vec x)$ which streams the digits of the real number $P(\vec x) \in [0,1]$.} function $P:\mathbbm{2}^\ast \to [0,1]$ such that
\[P() = 1 \qquad \qquad P(\vec x) = P(\cons{\vec x}0) + P(\cons{\vec x} 1)
\]
\ee{defn}
\begin{defn}
Given a string distribution $P:\mathbbm{2}^\ast \to [0,1]$, a
$P$-detector\ with respect to ${\cal L}$ is an ${\cal L}$-function $h_P:\mathbbm{2}^\ast \rightharpoondown \mathbbm{2}^\ast$ such that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq-p-detector}
h_P(\vec x) = \vec y &\Longrightarrow & \ell(\vec x) \lt \ell(\vec y)\ \wedge \ P(\vec x) \gt P(\vec y)
\end{eqnarray}
A bitstring $\vec y$ is said to be \emph{$h_P$-regular}\/ at the level $m\in {\Bbb N}$ whenever
\begin{equation}
\exists \vec x.\ \ \ h_P(\vec x) = \vec y\ \wedge \ \ell(\vec x)+m\leq \ell(\vec y) \ \wedge\ P(\vec x)\geq 2^m \cdot P(\vec y)
\end{equation}
The $h_P$-regular bitstrings at each level form the \emph{$h_P$-regularity sets}
\begin{multline}
H_m^n \ = \ \big\{ \vec y \in \mathbbm{2}^n\ |\ \exists \vec x.\ h_P(\vec x) = \vec y\ \wedge \\ \wedge\ \ell(\vec x)+m\leq \ell(\vec y) \ \wedge\ P(\vec x)\geq 2^m\cdot P(\vec y)\big\} \label{eq-pHmn}
\end{multline}
The sets $H_m = \bigcup_{n=1}^\infty H_m^n$ form the $h_P$-test
$$H_1\supseteq H_2 \supseteq H_3 \supseteq \cdots \supseteq H_m\supseteq \cdots$$
\ee{defn}
\be{prop}\label{prop-p-shrink} The $p$-size of $h_p$-regularity sets decreases exponentially with $m$
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq-pshrink}
\sum_{\vec y\in H^n_m} P(\vec y) & \leq & 2^{-m}
\end{eqnarray}
\ee{prop}
\begin{prf}{}
By definition of $H^n_m$, for every $\vec y\in H^n_m$ there is $\vec x \in \mathbbm{2}^{n-m}$ such that $P(\vec y) \leq 2^{-m} P(\vec x)$. It follows that
\[\sum_{\vec y\in H^n_m} P(\vec y) \leq \sum_{\vec x\in \mathbbm{2}^{n-m}} 2^{-m}\cdot P(\vec x) \leq 2^{-m}\]
\end{prf}
The search for non-random patterns, deviating from a given string distribution $P$, proceeds just like the search for patterns deviating from the uniform distribution in Sec.~\ref{sec-hyp-testing}. When ${\cal L}$ is the family of all computable functions, there is a universal detector\ again, constructed by extending the definition in the proof of Prop.~\ref{prop-universal} in the obvious way.
\section{Concluding remarks}\label{sec-conclusions}
The starting point of this paper was the observation that finding and playing one's own strategy is often much easier than recognizing and understanding other players' strategies. In particular, randomizing is much easier than testing randomness. On the other hand, knowing that the opponent keeps an eye on how you play is necessary for the implementations of many equilibrium concepts, usually assumed implicitly. In order to stay at an equilibrium, the players must test each other. But capturing their tests opens an alley towards modeling competition, outsmarting, and deceit, which are prominent in the practice of gaming, but often ignored in game theory. We believe that the tools are readily available to tackle this interesting and important aspect of gaming.
Players' randomness testing of each other's plays turned out to be an intuitive characterization of the notion of randomness. It is perhaps worth emphasizing here that the players with different computational powers recognize different notions of randomness. More precisely, different families of programmable functions ${\cal L}$ induce different detector s, different tests, different notions of randomness, and different implementations for the mixed strategy equilibria. Restricting the family ${\cal L}$ to the language of regular expressions or finite state machines would give a weak but interesting notion. The detector s could be implemented along the lines of the familiar compression algorithms, such as those due to Lempel, Ziv and Welch \cite{Ziv-Lempel78,Welch84}. However, since there is no such thing as a universal finite state machine, capable of evaluating all finite state machines, such tests based on regular languages would have to be specified one at a time, and sought ad hoc. In contrast, taking ${\cal L}$ to be a Turing complete language, such as the language of Turing machines themselves, allows constructing a universal randomness test, which Alice could implement as a universal detector\ from Sec.~\ref{sec-universal}. This leads to the canonical notion of randomness spelled out by Kolmogorov, Martin-L\"of and Solovay, and characterized in Corollary~\ref{prop-randomness}. Although the simple dovetailing technique used to construct the universal detector\ in Corollary~\ref{prop-randomness} quickly leads beyond the realm of what is nowadays considered feasible computation, the modern methods of algorithmic learning and statistical induction are nevertheless built upon them \cite{Hutter:UAI,RissanenJ:book,wallace2005statistical}. Learning, evolution and gaming are computational processes that do not happen just among humans, but also in nature. Even very slow computations in sufficiently large populations and at sufficiently large time scales produce their results eventually.
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
The discovery of the Higgs boson \cite{Aad:2012tfa,Chatrchyan:2012ufa} represents a landmark in the exploration of the electroweak scale started with Run I of the LHC. The forthcoming Run II will extend the energy frontier for the direct searches further into the multi-TeV range, providing the first data that will test the up-to-now complete Standard Model (SM) to higher energies and to higher degree of precision. Among the best probes available to study the electroweak scale and the underlying mechanism responsible for its breaking are the vector bosons, the Higgs, and the top quark. Because of their large masses with respect to the electroweak scale, this implies a ``strong" interaction with the Higgs field and therefore possibly enhanced couplings to new resonances and a higher sensitivity to deviations from SM predictions. In particular, the heavy states in the SM are responsible for large radiative corrections to the Higgs mass leading to the hierarchy problem. New physics models that solve the hierarchy problem and feature states at multi-TeV scales therefore will presumably significantly couple to heavy bosons and the top quark.
This sensitivity to new physics makes the efficient identification of vector bosons, the Higgs, and the top quark an important goal for the LHC and future colliders. Two simple factors need to be taken into account in the quest for the optimal tagging strategies. The first is that the largest decay rates of all the electroweak heavy states of the SM are into hadronic final states, producing multiple jets. For instance, the top quark features a two-body (semi-weak) decay into a $b$ quark and a $W$ boson, the latter decaying to a jet pair around 67\% of the time. For the Higgs boson the branching ratio into jets approaches 80\%. The inability to select and identify such objects when decaying hadronically would therefore severely limit the final statistics available for physics studies. The second factor is that all methods for identification and the relevant backgrounds are highly sensitive to the $p_T$ of the heavy state. For example, top quarks produced near threshold decay to widely-separated and relatively low $p_T$ jets, with dominant backgrounds from multi-jet production in QCD. This low-$p_T$ regime presents significant challenges, both because QCD backgrounds can be enormous and because the combinatorics of determining the set of jets which came from a single top quark decay can be very inefficient. The same argument applies to the heavy bosons of the SM.
At moderate boosts, with $p_T$ up to a few times the heavy state mass, the decay products begin to merge, and become collimated in the detector. In this regime, combinatoric ambiguities and QCD backgrounds are greatly reduced. All jets produced from the decay of a heavy state can be clustered into the same jet, with a large jet radius, and so backgrounds are limited to high-$p_T$ jets in QCD which have masses around that of the heavy state. Further, one can study the substructure of the fat jets to identify prongy structure that would be a signature of a decay, and be highly unlikely in a QCD jet. With this motivation, the past several years have seen substantial development and implementation of observables for identifying boosted hadronically decaying heavy objects produced at the LHC \cite{Abdesselam:2010pt,Altheimer:2012mn,Altheimer:2013yza}. Several of the most powerful techniques have been validated on data \cite{CMS:2011xsa,Miller:2011qg,ATLAS-CONF-2012-066,Chatrchyan:2012mec,Aad:2012meb,ATLAS-CONF-2012-065,ATLAS:2012am,Aad:2013gja,Aad:2013fba,TheATLAScollaboration:2013tia,TheATLAScollaboration:2013sia,TheATLAScollaboration:2013ria,TheATLAScollaboration:2013pia,CMS:2013uea,CMS:2013kfa,CMS:2013wea,CMS-PAS-QCD-10-041,Aad:2014gea,LOCH:2014lla,CMS:2014fya,CMS:2014joa,CMS:2014ata,atlas_pu14} and are now standard tools for jet analysis at ATLAS and CMS.
Both because of the relatively low boosts and the fine granularity of the detectors, techniques for identifying heavy states at the LHC have impressive performance by exploiting all of the radiation from an event. However, looking forward to Run II of the LHC and beyond, many of the techniques used thus far will be significantly limited for several reasons. First, at higher luminosities there are more secondary proton collisions (pile-up) that contaminate the primary hard collision event. Tracking can be used to identify the charged particles that originated from the hard collision, but observables that depend on calorimetry will be significantly degraded by pile-up contamination. Grooming the jet \cite{Butterworth:2008iy,Ellis:2009su,Ellis:2009me,Krohn:2009th,Soyez:2012hv,Krohn:2013lba,Dasgupta:2013ihk,Larkoski:2014wba,Berta:2014eza,Cacciari:2014gra,Bertolini:2014bba} to remove that radiation that most likely came from pile-up will be required. Also, as the centre-of-mass energy of the LHC increases, more heavy bosons and top quarks at higher transverse momenta will be created. With a transverse momentum of a few TeV, the decay products begin to merge into a single calorimeter cell with the current resolution of ATLAS and CMS. At higher transverse momenta, unless the angular granularity increases significantly, using the calorimeter for identification of weak-scale particles will be essentially impossible. In this ``hyper-boosted'' regime, where $p_T$s approach and exceed 10 TeV, it may be possible to access multi-boson/multi-top signatures such as $VVV$, $t\bar t H/V$, four top quarks, or even more exotic final states. Such final states produce huge numbers of low $p_T$ jets and it would to be extremely difficult to reconstruct the individual heavy states, separate them from background, or resolve combinatorics.
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ll"l|l|l}
\midrule\midrule
& & \multicolumn{3}{c}{{ Cross section at $pp$, $\sqrt{s}=100$ TeV}}\\
\cline{3-5}
& Process &\makecell{$p_T > 1$ TeV \\ (pb)}& \makecell{$p_T > 5$ TeV \\ (fb)}& \makecell{$p_T > 10$ TeV \\ (ab)}\\
\midrule
\parbox[t]{4mm}{\multirow{9}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{{\bf Standard Model}}}} \parbox[t]{2mm}{\multirow{6}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{Signals}}} &$pp\to t\bar{t}$ & 12 &2.8 & 24 \\
& $pp\to t\bar{t}j$ &52 & 14 & 94 \\
& $pp\to t j$ &0.67 & 0.46 & 0.76 \\
& $pp\to t\bar{t}V$ &0.40 & 0.30 & 3.7 \\
& $pp\to t\bar{t}H$ &0.19 & 7.4e-02 &0.65 \\
& $pp\to t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ &0.17 &8.5e-02 &0.51 \\
\cline{2-5}
\hspace{4mm}\parbox[t]{-40mm}{\multirow{2}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{Bkgds}}} & $pp\to jj$ &3500 &1000 &11000 \\
& $pp\to jjV$ & 110 & 130 & 2200 \\
\midrule
\parbox[t]{6mm}{\multirow{6}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{{\bf BSM}}}} & $pp\to Z' \to t \bar{t}$ ($m_{Z'}$ = 3 TeV) & 4.6 & - & - \\
& $pp\to Z' \to t \bar{t}$ ($m_{Z'}$ = 15 TeV) & 7.1e-03 & 4.7 & - \\
& $pp\to Z' \to t \bar{t}$ ($m_{Z'}$ = 30 TeV) & 7.1 e-05 & 6.5e-02 & 48 \\
& $pp\to \tilde t \tilde t \to t\bar{t} + \hspace{-0.4cm}\not\,\,\,{E}_T$ ($m_{\tilde t}$ = 1 TeV) & 0.49 & 7.8e-03 & - \\
& $pp\to \tilde t \tilde t \to t\bar{t} + \hspace{-0.4cm}\not\,\,\,{E}_T$ ($m_{\tilde t}$ = 5 TeV)& 7.5e-04 & 0.063 & - \\
& $pp\to \tilde t \tilde t \to t\bar{t} + \hspace{-0.4cm}\not\,\,\,{E}_T$ ($m_{\tilde t}$ = 10 TeV)& 4.4e-06 & 0.27e-03 & 0.024 \\
& $pp\to \tilde g \tilde g \to t\bar{t}t\bar{t} + \hspace{-0.4cm}\not\,\,\,{E}_T$ ($m_{\tilde g}$ = 2 TeV)& 2.5 & 0.94 & - \\
& $pp\to \tilde g \tilde g \to t\bar{t}t\bar{t} + \hspace{-0.4cm}\not\,\,\,{E}_T$ ($m_{\tilde g}$ = 5 TeV)& 2.7e-02 & 1.5 & 11 \\
& $pp\to \tilde g \tilde g \to t\bar{t}t\bar{t} + \hspace{-0.4cm}\not\,\,\,{E}_T$ ($m_{\tilde g}$ = 10 TeV)& 1.9e-04 & 0.12 & 4.5 \\
\midrule\midrule
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{
Inclusive leading-order cross sections for Standard Model and beyond-Standard Model ($\text{BR} = 1$) processes with at least one top quark with $p_T >$ 1, 5, 10 TeV at a 100 TeV future collider. For the Standard Model backgrounds, the momentum requirement is imposed on one of the jets. Omitted entries have cross sections which are too small to be relevant.
}
\label{tab:scaling}
\end{table}
With the recent excitement for a long-term goal of a 100 TeV future circular collider (FCC) \cite{Gershtein:2013iqa,cern100,china100}, both of these issues become more acute. For example, at such high collision energies, weak bosons and the top quark could be produced with transverse momenta of order 10 TeV, with decay products separated by angles much smaller than the resolution of any foreseeable (sufficiently compact) calorimeter. To be more concrete, in \Tab{tab:scaling}, we collect representative inclusive cross sections for several SM and beyond-SM (BSM) processes at a 100 TeV collider calculated to leading order. With very strong $p_T$ cuts on jets in the final state, backgrounds of jets from QCD can be dramatically reduced, while probing heavy mass resonances. For example, the decay of a SM-like $Z'$ of 15 TeV to top quarks (assuming a branching fraction equal to 1) would produce about 5 events per fb$^{-1}$ at 100 TeV with $p_T >$ 5 TeV, while the dominant background, from $pp\to jj$ events, produces about 1000 events per fb$^{-1}$. Further predictions at next-to-leading order in QCD for cross sections with final state $W,Z,H$ bosons and top quarks can found in \Ref{Torrielli:2014rqa}.
The 100 TeV collider is projected to run at luminosities that are orders of magnitude greater than the LHC and so pileup will be a huge issue and grooming techniques will need to be understood at transverse momenta well beyond their current range of validity. In addition, even resolving these issues, for a QCD jet with large transverse momentum, a perturbative emission can affect the jet mass by hundreds of GeV, comparable to the electroweak scale. The mass of a jet of radius $R\simeq 1$ and transverse momentum $p_T$ is approximately given by
\begin{equation}
m^2\simeq p_T\,p_{T}^{\rm soft} R^2 \ ,
\end{equation}
where $p_T^{\rm soft}$ is the transverse momentum of a soft emission clustered in the jet. For example, at transverse momenta of $p_T\gtrsim 6$ TeV, an emission of only $p_T^{\rm soft}= 5$ GeV would contribute to the jet mass an amount greater than the mass of the top quark.
Therefore, to push identification of electroweak-scale states to higher and higher energies requires controlling all of these effects.
In this paper, we propose a new method as a robust and relatively $p_T$-independent procedure for identifying heavy SM states at very high boosts produced at a future collider and apply it to the case of the top quark. Our approach to boosted object discrimination at very high $p_T$ consists of combining three elements:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[I.] {\bf Global-jet calorimetric information}\\ We are interested in the extreme limit where the energy deposit of a jet is confined to a single, or only a few, calorimetric cells. We assume that the information on the total energy of the jet (possibly determined also using the track information as in a particle-flow algorithm~\cite{CMS:2009nxa}) is available, but detailed information about the energy distribution inside the jet is not.
\item[II.] {\bf Inner-jet charged track information}\\ We exploit the high angular resolution of the tracking system to define observables sensitive to the internal structure of the jet only using charged particle tracks.
\item[III.] {\bf Dynamic contamination removal}\\ Contamination from initial state radiation (ISR), underlying event (UE) and pile-up is proportional to area of the jet. In addition for a coloured particle such as the top quark, for a fixed jet radius more perturbative QCD radiation is emitted as the $p_T$ increases and is collected by the jet algorithm. Such an effect degrades the accuracy of the jet mass reconstruction and therefore the efficiency of tagging the boosted object. On the other hand, the typical angular size of a jet generated by a particle of mass $m$ scales as $m/p_T$, i.e., inversely proportional to the transverse momentum. To mitigate all these effects we propose use of a jet radius that scales inversely with the jet $p_T$. This is similar to the variable $R$ jet algorithm \cite{Krohn:2009zg}, with the important difference that in our method the clustering metric is not modified.
\end{enumerate}
To develop and test our identification strategy, we employ \delphes{} \cite{deFavereau:2013fsa,Selvaggi:2014mya}, a modular and fast detector simulation framework. With \delphes, we are able to make qualitative, and (thanks to especially designed modifications/improvements) to some extent also quantitative statements about finite resolution effects on the final discrimination power.
This paper is organised as follows. In \Sec{sec:obs_meth}, we introduce the methods and observables used for the identification of heavy state jets at very high $p_T$ explicitly applied to the case of a top quark. In addition to identifying top quarks through the jet invariant mass reconstruction, we measure $N$-subjettiness and energy correlation function observables to identify the substructure characteristic of a top quark decay. In \Sec{sec:onept}, we apply our top quark finding procedure to a single jet $p_T$ range, presenting a detailed analysis and comparison between LHC detectors and projected performance of detectors in a future collider. We also show that, even in the hyper-boosted regime, top quark identification efficiencies can be 40\%, while rejecting over 90\% of the dominant background. We draw our conclusions and discuss the outlook of tagging hyper-boosted objects in \Sec{sec:conclusions}. Appendices provide details of the \delphes{}fast detector simulation used throughout this paper and plots of top tagging results for a wide range of jet $p_T$.
\section{Observables and methodology}\label{sec:obs_meth}
In this section, we introduce the methods and observables that we will use throughout this paper to identify boosted hadronically decaying states. While the approach is quite general and, as it will be clear in the following, could be applied to tag other heavy states such as colour-singlet bosons, in this work we will focus on top quark identification.
\subsection{Jet finding and definition}\label{sec:jetdef}
For a given jet radius $R$, the angular size of the top quark decay products scales as $m_\text{top}/p_T$ and therefore significantly shrinks as the $p_T$ increases. On the other hand even in the absence of pile-up, the amount of radiation in the event, both from the initial and final state, generically increases with the jet $p_T$. Our aim will be to show that mitigating both initial- and final-state radiation effects can be efficiently achieved by dynamically scaling the jet radius by the jet $p_T$.
Because the top quark is unstable, final-state radiation (FSR) arises from two possible sources: either before it decays, or from the the daughter bottom quark after the decay.\footnote{We remind the reader that the notion of initial- and final-state radiation and that of associating emissions to individual coloured particles is an approximation valid only in the collinear limit in the narrow-width approximation. For the top quark, the notion of radiation before or after its decay is meaningful when $1/E_{\rm rad} \simeq \tau_{\rm rad} < \tau_{\rm top} = 1/\Gamma_{\rm top}$, where $E_{\rm rad}$ is the characteristic energy scale of the radiation. By contrast, for a colour-singlet like the $W$ boson, radiation from its decay products are localised about the direction of the $W$, in a region scaling like the characteristic angular size of the decay, $m_W/p_T$.} Ideally, for an optimal invariant mass reconstruction, the former type of radiation should not be clustered into the top quark jet while the latter should. At low $p_T$s, radiation from top quark is suppressed, as it must vanish when the top is at rest. This is a general property of QCD (and QED) radiation from any massive particle that often phrased in terms of a dead cone: radiation about the direction of motion of the top quark is suppressed in a cone of angular size $m_\text{top}/p_T$; see \Fig{fig:deadcone}. As the momentum of the top quark increases, the dead-cone shrinks and more phase space opens up for radiation from the top quark.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figures/dead_cone.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
Illustration of the dead-cone effect. Final-state radiation from a top quark is suppressed within an angular region scaling like $R_\text{d.c.}\sim m_\text{top}/p_T$, called the dead-cone region. As the $p_T$ of the top quark increases, the amount of radiation emitted from the top quark in a fixed angular region increases both due to the increase in energy and the decrease in size of the dead-cone region.
}
\label{fig:deadcone}
\end{figure}
The contribution from ISR (or UE) to the $p_T$ of the jet scales like $R^2$ (proportional to the area of the jet) while the effect on the squared mass scales like $R^4$ because ISR is approximately uncorrelated with final state jets. At very high transverse momenta, ISR will only distort the $p_T$ spectrum of the jets slightly, but can affect the jet mass substantially. To see this behavior, consider a top quark jet of radius $R$ with a single emission near the boundary of the jet. As long as the energy of this emission is small with respect to the energy of the top, its effect on the jet mass $m$ is approximately given by
\begin{equation}
m^2 \simeq m_\text{top}^2+p_{T}\,p_{T}^{\rm ISR} R^2 \ .
\end{equation}
Therefore, an ISR emission in the jet can contribute a mass comparable to the mass of the top quark when
\begin{equation}
p_{T}^{\rm ISR} \simeq \frac{m_{\rm top}^2} {p_{T} R^2} \ .
\end{equation}
At moderate boosts, typical of the LHC, where $p_{T}\sim\text{ few}\times m_\text{top}$, ISR of 50 GeV or so can affect the jet mass by an ${\cal O}(1)$ amount (with $R\sim 1$). While this is quite hard radiation at the LHC, its effect must be mitigated in top quark mass measurements; numerous methods have been introduced to groom jets so as to remove contaminating radiation in the jet \cite{Butterworth:2008iy,Ellis:2009su,Ellis:2009me,Krohn:2009th,Soyez:2012hv,Krohn:2013lba,Dasgupta:2013ihk,Larkoski:2014wba,Berta:2014eza,Cacciari:2014gra,Bertolini:2014bba}. However, at the ranges of $p_T$s accessible by a future collider, the jet $p_T$ can be several to tens of TeV. In this regime, even emissions of a few GeV can change the jet mass by an ${\cal O}(1)$ amount. Thus, it is absolutely necessary to consider these effects at a future collider.
One is therefore lead to consider whether grooming methods that have been successfully applied at the LHC to mitigate contamination from both FSR and ISR could be applied at higher energies and luminosities. So far the standard grooming techniques have not been studied in detail in such an extreme environment\footnote{Some studies of extreme pile-up or jet grooming at energies and luminosities beyond current LHC applications are \cite{Avetisyan:2013onh,Anderson:2013kxz,Larkoski:2014bia,CMS:2014ata,atlas_pu14}.} and so we will consider an alternative (simpler and possibly more robust) approach.
To this aim, we note that the ISR effects scale like the jet radius to a positive power and the dead-cone effect suppresses FSR in a region of angular size $m_\text{top}/p_T$. We can therefore reduce the contamination from radiation by appropriately scaling the jet radius by (the inverse of) its $p_T$. The specific procedure that we employ for boosted top quarks is the following. We first find jets with the anti-$k_T$ algorithm \cite{Cacciari:2008gp} and the Winner-Take-All (WTA) recombination scheme \cite{Bertolini:2013iqa,Larkoski:2014uqa,Larkoski:2014bia,Salambroadening} with a fixed jet radius, which we take to be $R=1.0$. We then recluster the jet with the anti-$k_T$ algorithm where we set the subjet radius to:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:scaling_radius}
R = C\frac{ m_{\rm top} }{p_{T}} \ ,
\end{equation}
where $C$ is a constant and $p_{T}$ is defined by the original, fixed-radius, jet. We then keep only the hardest subjet found with this procedure and promote it to be the boosted top quark jet. With this prescription, the resulting jet is parametrically affected by contamination from ISR as
\begin{align}
m^2 & \simeq m_{\rm top}^2+p_{T} \, p_{T}^ {\rm ISR}
\left(\frac{C \, m_{\rm top} } { p_{T} }\right)^2 \nonumber\\
&\simeq m_{\rm top}^2 \left( 1+C^2\frac{p_{T}^{\rm ISR}}{p_{T}} \right) \ ,
\end{align}
whose effects are suppressed by the (small) ratio $p_{T}^ {\rm ISR}/p_{T}$. Similarly, because we choose the jet radius to scale with jet $p_T$, the dead-cone effect suppresses contamination from FSR over a fraction of the area of the jet that is independent of jet $p_T$. To ensure that the scaled radius jet captures the decay products of the top quark, in the remainder of the paper, we will adopt $C=4$, corresponding to including above 95\% of the energy fraction of the top quark decay products.\footnote{\Ref{Han:2014iha} proposed a shrinking cone algorithm with a radius determined by the demanding that a fixed fraction of final state radiation was captured into the jet.} We note that this coefficient should be optimised in an actual analysis. However, as our aim is to illustrate the principle, we prefer to choose a conservative value so to be sure to cluster as much radiation from the top quark decay products as possible.
This approach is similar to variable $R$ jets \cite{Krohn:2009zg} in which the clustering metric for the $k_T$ class of algorithms \cite{Catani:1993hr,Ellis:1993tq,Dokshitzer:1997in,Wobisch:1998wt,Wobisch:2000dk,Cacciari:2008gp} is modified to be
\begin{align}
d_{ij}&=\min[p_{Ti}^{2n},p_{Tj}^{2n}] R_{ij}^2\,, &d_{iB} = p_{Ti}^{2n}\frac{\rho^2}{p_{Ti}^2} \ ,
\end{align}
where $\rho$ is a dimensionful constant. The beam distance $d_{iB}$ sets the effective jet radius to scale inversely with the $p_T$ of the jet. In contrast to variable $R$ jets, our procedure does not modify the jet algorithm. Because we first find a fat jet and then recluster to find the hardest subjet, our procedure effectively defines an infrared and collinear (IRC) safe seeded cone jet algorithm with a radius that scales inversely with $p_T$.
\subsection{Track-based observables}\label{sec:track}
Scaling the jet radius inversely with $p_T$ decreases the amount of contamination radiation in the jet, though it does so at the cost of reducing the number of calorimeter cells in the detector that contribute to the jet. As a consequence, the calorimetric angular resolution is also reduced, though this effect was to be expected anyway because the angular size of the decay products decreases as the $p_T$ increases. Here, we explore recovering high angular resolution by measuring jet observables from charged particle tracks. We propose to use standard calorimetric information (together with tracks in the case of particle-flow algorithms) to determine the total energy of the jet and use tracking information only for its substructure. For observables like the jet mass, when measured on tracks, this systematically biases the mass to lower values because charged particles do not contain the full energy of the jet. However, the bulk of this bias can be removed and the jet mass restored to its ``nominal'' value by simply rescaling the track-based mass by the ratio of the total jet $p_T$ to the $p_T$ of its charged tracks.\footnote{We thank Gavin Salam for suggesting this procedure. A related technique was employed in the charged-track version of the HEPTopTagger \cite{Plehn:2009rk,Plehn:2010st} of \Ref{Schaetzel:2013vka}.} That is, in this paper we define the reconstructed jet mass as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:rescaled_tracks}
m = \frac{p_{T}}{p_{T}^{\text{tracks}}} m_{{\text{tracks}}} \,,
\end{equation}
where $m_{{\text{tracks}}}$ is the mass as measured on charged tracks and $p_{T}^{\text{tracks}}$ is the transverse momentum of the tracks.
We will also compare observables measured on current and projected future calorimetry to the track-based measurements.
\begin{figure}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:mass_pt25}
\includegraphics[width=0.51\textwidth]{figures/mass_2500_5000.eps}
}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:mass_pt100}
\includegraphics[width=0.51\textwidth]{figures/mass_10000_15000.eps}
}
\caption{Distributions of the jet mass defined in three different ways in two $p_T$ bins: $2-5$ TeV (left) and $10-15$ TeV (right). The red curves are the mass of jets with radius $R=1.0$ measured on tracks; orange curves are the mass of jets with scaled radius $R= 4m_\text{top}/p_T$ measured on charged tracks; green curves are the track mass of jets rescaled by the ratio of total jet $p_T$ to the $p_T$ of tracks with the scaled jet radius $R= 4m_\text{top}/p_T$.
}
\label{fig:scaledmass}
\end{figure}
In \Fig{fig:scaledmass}, we plot the top quark jet mass distribution measured on charged tracks to illustrate the effectiveness of our procedure, for two jet energy ranges. For these plots, we have simulated $pp\to t\bar t$ at leading order at 100 TeV center-of-mass energy with the {\sc MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO 2.2.2}~\cite{Alwall:2014hca}, \pythia{6.4} \cite{Sjostrand:2006za,Sjostrand:2007gs} and \delphes{3.1.2} simulation chain. Jets are clustered with \fastjet{3.0.6}~\cite{Cacciari:2011ma} using the anti-$k_T$ algorithm and WTA recombination scheme. We identify the jet in the event with the largest $p_T$ that lies in the appropriate bin. We plot results corresponding to three different jet mass definitions: the track jet mass measured on jets with fixed jet radius $R=1.0$, the track jet mass measured on jets with radius that scales with $p_T$ as described earlier, and the rescaled track jet mass defined in \Eq{eq:rescaled_tracks}. Both bare track jet masses are, as expected, systematically smaller than the true top quark mass. As the jet $p_T$ increases from a few TeV to over 10 TeV, the track mass as measured on fixed-radius jets significantly drifts to higher values, due to the increased contamination from ISR/FSR. On the other hand, the rescaled track mass measured on the scaled-radius jet peaks around the top quark mass, independent of the jet $p_T$ bin.
While the measurement of the jet mass is certainly a key observable to successfully identify a boosted top quark, it has to be kept in mind that large masses can also be generated by perturbative soft and collinear emissions in a QCD jet initiated by light quarks or gluons at high transverse momentum. In the collinear approximation, the average squared QCD jet mass is \cite{Ellis:2007ib,Salam:2009jx}
\begin{equation}
\langle m^2 \rangle \simeq a_i\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}p_T^2 R^2 \,,
\end{equation}
where $a_i$ is a constant that depends on the jet algorithm and is proportional to the colour of the initiating parton. While this provides a rule-of-thumb for the location of the peak, the QCD jet mass distribution is very wide. Nevertheless, at sufficiently high $p_T$ with a fixed jet radius, QCD jets can have masses comparable to and even exceeding that of the top quark. This approximately occurs when
\begin{equation}
m_\text{top}^2 \lesssim a_i\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}p_T^2 R^2 \,,
\end{equation}
or when $p_T \gtrsim 600$ GeV, assuming $R\simeq a_i/\pi \simeq 1$. Using our scaled jet radius procedure, the mass of QCD jets is instead modified to
\begin{equation}
\langle m^2 \rangle \simeq a_i\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}C^2m_\text{top}^2 \,,
\end{equation}
independent of the jet $p_T$, but comparable to the mass of the top quark. Therefore a mass cut is not sufficient to efficiently reduce QCD backgrounds, and observables that are independent of the jet mass must be used.
Particularly sensitive observables for boosted top quark identification are those that measure the prongy-ness of the jet. QCD jets dominantly consist of a single hard core of radiation, while hadronically decaying top quark jets typically have a 3-prong substructure. Several such observables have been proposed and studied~\cite{Abdesselam:2010pt,Altheimer:2012mn,Altheimer:2013yza}. In this work we employ the $N$-subjettiness observables $\tau_N^{(\beta)}$ and the $n$-point energy correlation functions $\ecf{n}{\beta}$. The $N$-subjettiness observables $\tau_N^{(\beta)}$ are defined as
\begin{equation}
\tau_N^{(\beta)} = \sum_{i\in J} p_{Ti}\min \left\{
R^\beta_{i1},\dotsc,R^\beta_{iN}
\right\}\,,
\end{equation}
where the sum runs over particles in the jet $J$, $p_{Ti}$ is the transverse momentum of particle $i$ with respect to the beam, and $R_{iK}$ is the boost-invariant angle between particle $i$ and subjet axis $K$, and $\beta>0$ is an angular exponent whose value can be used to control sensitivity to wide-angle radiation. In our study, we use the exclusive $k_T$ algorithm \cite{Catani:1993hr} with the WTA recombination scheme on the jet to define the $N$ subjet axes. For the identification of 3-prong top quark jets, it has been shown \cite{Thaler:2010tr,Thaler:2011gf} that the ratio
\begin{equation}
\tau_{3,2}^{(\beta)} = \frac{\tau_3^{(\beta)}}{\tau_2^{(\beta)}} \,,
\end{equation}
is an efficient observable for top quark identification and is widely used in both ATLAS and CMS experiments. In our analysis, we will measure $\tau_{3,2}^{(\beta)}$ using only track information and on jets with a scaled jet radius, as described in \Sec{sec:jetdef}.
The (dimensionless) $n$-point energy correlation functions are defined as (for $n=2,3,4$) \cite{Larkoski:2013eya}:
\begin{align}
\ecf{2}{\beta} &=\frac{1}{p_{T}^2}\sum_{i<j \in J} p_{Ti}\, p_{Tj} R_{ij}^\beta \,, \nonumber \\
\ecf{3}{\beta} &=\frac{1}{p_{T}^3}\sum_{i<j<k \in J} p_{Ti}\, p_{Tj}\,p_{Tk} \left(R_{ij} R_{ik} R_{jk}\right)^\beta \,, \nonumber \\
\ecf{4}{\beta} &=\frac{1}{p_{T}^4}\sum_{i<j<k<l \in J} p_{Ti} \,p_{Tj}\,p_{Tk}\, p_{Tl} \left(R_{ij} R_{ik} R_{il} R_{jk} R_{jl} R_{kl}\right)^\beta \,,
\end{align}
where $R_{ij}$ is the boost invariant angle between particles $i$ and $j$. Employing power counting of the soft and collinear regions of phase space, \Ref{Larkoski:2014zma} showed that the particular combination
\begin{align}\label{eq:D3_def}
D_3^{(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)}\equiv \frac{ \ecf{4}{\gamma} \left ({\ecf{2}{\alpha}}\right)^{\frac{3\gamma}{\alpha}} }{ \left( \ecf{3}{\beta}\right )^{\frac{3\gamma}{\beta}} } +x \frac{ \ecf{4}{\gamma} \left (\ecf{2}{\alpha}\right)^{\frac{2\gamma}{\beta}-1} }{ \left (\ecf{3}{\beta}\right )^{\frac{2\gamma}{\beta}} } +y \frac{ \ecf{4}{\gamma} \left (\ecf{2}{\alpha}\right)^{\frac{2\beta}{\alpha}-\frac{\gamma}{\alpha}} }{ \left (\ecf{3}{\beta}\right )^{2} }\,,
\end{align}
for angular exponents $\alpha,\beta,\gamma$ is the optimal observable for identification of 3-prong jets formed from the energy correlation functions. Here,
\begin{equation}
x=\kappa_1 \left (\frac{(p^{\text{cut}}_T)^2}{m_{\text{top}}^2}\right )^{\left (\frac{\alpha \gamma}{\beta}-\frac{\alpha}{2} \right)},\quad y=\kappa_2 \left(\frac{(p^{\text{cut}}_T)^2}{m_{\text{top}}^2}\right )^{\left (\frac{5\gamma}{2}-2\beta \right)}\,,
\end{equation}
where $p_{T}^\text{cut}$ is a proxy for the $p_T$ bin of the jet sample of interest. We will take $\kappa_1=\kappa_2=1$ for simplicity in the following, keeping in mind that varying their values may provide improved discrimination. We will find that $\tau_{3,2}^{(\beta)}$ and $D_3^{(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)}$ are complementary observables for boosted top identification.
\section{Detailed studies at fixed $p_T$}\label{sec:onept}
In this section, we present a detailed study of the methods introduced before in a restricted jet $p_T$ range relevant for top quark identification at a future collider. The results quantify the discrimination power of our top quark tagging methods, show that projected calorimetry of a future collider is insufficient, and tracked-based information can provide the needed complementary information. \App{app:allpt} collects plots and analyses for a different set of jet $p_T$ bins demonstrating that our arguments have a wide range of validity.
Here, we consider jets in the $p_T$ range of $7.5-10$ TeV. The reason for this choice is the following.
First, the $p_T$ is sufficiently hard that standard methods show clear limitations. The angular size of the top quark decay products in this bin is approximately
\begin{equation}
R_\text{top} \sim \frac{2 m_\text{top}}{p_T} \lesssim \frac{2\cdot 175 \text{ GeV}}{7.5\text{ TeV}} \approx 0.05 \,,
\end{equation}
which is comparable to the resolution of the electromagnetic calorimeters at ATLAS and CMS. Therefore, the reconstruction of top quark jets produced in this $p_T$ bin will be very sensitive to the resolution of the detector and can provide a valuable benchmark for future collider detector resolution goals.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:mass_cms_calo_fix}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figures/CaloJetsAllFixed_CMS_Mass2_fixed_7500_10000.eps}
}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:mass_fcc_calo_fix}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figures/CaloJetsAllFixed_FCC_Mass2_fixed_7500_10000.eps}
}
\end{center}
\caption{
Distributions of the jet mass as measured on anti-$k_T$ jets with radius $R=1.0$ and $p_T \in [7.5,10]$ TeV on boosted top jets and QCD jets from light quarks and gluons. (a) Mass distribution as measured from the CMS detector's calorimeter. (b) Mass distribution as measured from a future collider detector's calorimeter.
}
\label{fig:calo_fix_mass}
\end{figure}
To do this, we will compare the efficiency to identify boosted top quark jets by using the standard calorimetric information only and by using our track-based method in a simulated CMS-like detector and in a projected future 100 TeV collider using \delphes. The parameters for the fast detector simulation are presented in \App{app:det_sim} and provide, we believe, rather conservative estimates for the resolution of detectors of a future collider. All event simulation is done with the {\sc MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO 2.2.2}, \pythia{6.4} and \delphes{3.1.2} simulation chain. We study signal samples of boosted $Z'\to t\bar t$ events, where the mass of the $Z'$ is varied depending on the $p_T$ of the top quarks, and background samples of the partonic SM processes $q\bar q \to q' \bar q'$ and $gg\to gg$ at a 100 TeV $pp$ collider. Jets are reconstructed using the anti-$k_T$ algorithm with \fastjet{3.0.6}, with either a fixed jet radius or using the jet radius that scales with $p_T$, defined in \Eq{eq:scaling_radius}. We ignore details and subtleties of defining quark flavor and gluon flavor jets, and pragmatically define them as what results from showering quark or gluon partons.
\subsection{Mass Distributions}
We begin by presenting the distribution for the jet mass in these samples as measured from calorimeter cells with a fixed jet radius $R=1.0$. Distributions of the signal and background jet masses for the CMS and future collider detectors are presented in \Fig{fig:calo_fix_mass}. Because of the large jet radius, there is a significant contamination from radiation in the jets, resulting in all mass distributions, either at CMS or a future collider, peaking at masses substantially greater than the top quark mass. Additionally, the light quark and gluon background distributions straddle the signal top quark distribution, showing that any background QCD jet sample would be essentially indistinguishable from a top quark sample from these mass distributions alone.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:mass_cms_calo_scale}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figures/CaloJetsAll_CMS_Mass_shrink_7500_10000.eps}
}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:mass_fcc_calo_scale}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figures/CaloJetsAll_FCC_Mass_shrink_7500_10000.eps}
}
\end{center}
\caption{
Distributions of the jet mass as measured on anti-$k_T$ jets with radius $R=4 m_\text{top}/p_T$ and $p_T \in [7.5,10]$ TeV on boosted top jets and QCD jets from light quarks and gluons. (a) Mass distribution as measured from the CMS detector's calorimeter. (b) Mass distribution as measured from a future collider detector's calorimeter.
}
\label{fig:calo_scale_mass}
\end{figure}
In \Fig{fig:calo_scale_mass}, we present the distributions of the jet mass as measured on calorimeter jets with a scaled jet radius $R ={4 m_\text{top}}/{p_T}$. With the scaled jet radius, the amount of contamination in the jet is greatly reduced; however, the low resolution degrades the mass distributions measured in the CMS detector. Signal and background distributions overlap and all samples have a peak at zero mass indicating that the jet consists of a single calorimeter cell. Detector resolution effects are also significant in the mass distributions measured at a future collider. While the angular resolution of the calorimeter for the future collider scenario is $\times$2 finer than for CMS (see App. \ref{appsub:calorimetry}) and so these distributions do not have a peak at zero mass, the overlap of signal and background is substantial, and a cut on the mass would only result in a marginal top quark tagging efficiency.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:mass_cms_trk_scale}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figures/PFJetsCharged_CMS_CMassCorr_shrink_7500_10000.eps}
}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:mass_fcc_trk_scale}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figures/PFJetsCharged_FCC_CMassCorr_shrink_7500_10000.eps}
}
\end{center}
\caption{
Distributions of the rescaled track-based jet mass as measured on anti-$k_T$ jets with radius $R=4 m_\text{top}/p_T$ and $p_T \in [7.5,10]$ TeV on boosted top jets and QCD jets from light quarks and gluons. (a) Distribution as measured from the CMS detector's tracking system. (b) Distribution as measured from a future collider detector's tracking system.
}
\label{fig:track_scale_mass}
\end{figure}
Finally, in \Fig{fig:track_scale_mass}, we present the distributions of the jet mass as measured from tracks with the jet radius $R ={4 m_\text{top}}/{p_T}$ and rescaling by the ratio of the total jet $p_T$ to the track $p_T$. Unlike the jet mass as measured from the calorimeter, the rescaled track mass accurately reproduces the top mass for both the CMS and future collider detectors and barely suffers from resolution effects. Additionally, the mass distributions of QCD backgrounds are pushed to small values, below the mass of the top quark for both detectors. A cut in a window around the top quark mass would therefore robustly and efficiently discriminate boosted top quark jets from the QCD background. Larger rejection of QCD background can be accomplished by measuring additional substructure observables on the jet.
\subsection{Substructure observables}
As mentioned earlier, a jet mass comparable to the mass of the top quark can be reconstructed in several ways: for signal, by the decay into hard subjets and no FSR radiation; while for background by the emission of significant amounts of soft radiation in the jet. For improved rejection of the background, in addition to the mass determination, observables on the jet that are sensitive to the 3-prong substructure of the top decay must to be measured. We therefore consider $N$-subjettiness ratio $\Nsub{3,2}{\beta}$ and the energy correlation function ratio $\Dobs{3}{\alpha,\beta,\gamma}$. While a full study of the efficiency as a function of the angular exponents and other parameters in these observables may result in improved discrimination power, we choose to use the parameters for boosted top tagging as recommended by the original investigations. That is, we consider the observables
\begin{align}
&\Nsubnobeta{3,2}\equiv \Nsub{3,2}{\beta=1}\,, &D_3\equiv \Dobs{3}{\alpha=2,\beta=0.8,\gamma=0.6} \,,
\end{align}
as measured on jets, which lie in the rescaled track-based mass window $m_J\in [120,250]$ GeV in the following. Even without optimisation of parameters, we find impressive signal to background efficiency rates for jets produced at a 100 TeV collider.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\hspace{-0.5cm}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:mass_cms_trk_r32_2}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figures/PFJetsCharged_CMS_R32_shrink_7500_10000.eps}
}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:mass_fcc_trk_r32_2}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figures/PFJetsCharged_FCC_R32_shrink_7500_10000.eps}
}
\\
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\hspace{-0.5cm}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:mass_cms_trk_d3_2}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figures/PFJetsCharged_CMS_D3l_shrink_7500_10000.eps}
}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:mass_fcc_trk_d3_2}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figures/PFJetsCharged_FCC_D3l_shrink_7500_10000.eps}
}
\end{center}
\caption{
Distributions of the jet $\tau_3 / \tau_2$ (top) and $D_3$ (bottom) as measured on anti-$k_T$ jets with radius $R=4 m_\text{top}/p_T$ and $p_T \in [7.5,10]$ TeV on boosted top jets and QCD jets from light quarks and gluons. Additionally, we require that the rescaled track-based mass lie in the window $m\in [120,250]$ GeV. (left) Distributions as measured from the CMS detector's tracking system. (right) Distributions as measured from a future collider detector's tracking system.
}
\label{fig:track_scale_r32_1}
\end{figure}
In \Fig{fig:track_scale_r32_1}, we present the distributions of $\tau_{3,2}$ and $D_3$ measured on signal and background jets. We only consider these observables as measured on tracks and with jet radius that scales inversely with $p_T$. Though we only measure on tracks, because both $\tau_{3,2}$ and $D_3$ are dimensionless, we do not rescale them by the ratio of the total jet $p_T$ to the charged track $p_T$. Both $\tau_{3,2}$ and $D_3$ provide excellent separation of signal and background jet samples, and in a complementary way. For $\tau_{3,2}$, the top quark distribution overlaps with the light quark distribution more than it does with gluons, while for $D_3$ the opposite occurs. While we do not have a complete theoretical understanding of this behaviour, this suggests that simultaneous measurement of $\tau_{3,2}$ and $D_3$ on jets would provide further discrimination power, depending on the light quark and gluon composition of the background sample.
To emphasise the discrimination power provided by $\tau_{3,2}$ and $D_3$, in \Fig{fig:roc_curves} we show signal versus background efficiency curves (ROC curves) produced by making a sliding cut in either observable. As we require jets to lie in the rescaled track mass window $m\in [120,250]$, the efficiencies in \Fig{fig:roc_curves} include the effect of the mass cut. As anticipated, measuring these observables on tracks provides significant improvement in discrimination power as compared to including calorimeter information alone. Depending on the quark or gluon composition of the background sample, $\tau_{3,2}$ or $D_3$ measured on tracks provides better discrimination power. For example, at a future collider in this $p_T$ bin at 50\% top quark jet efficiency, 83\% of gluon jets can be rejected by cuts on the mass and $\tau_{3,2}$, while 94\% of light quark jets can be rejected by a mass cut and $D_3$. Thus, these observables exhibit a nice complementarity in how they can reject QCD background.
We stress that for the distributions in \Fig{fig:track_scale_r32_1} and their corresponding ROC curves in \Fig{fig:roc_curves}, no optimisation has been performed. These observables have been applied ``out of the box'', using the values for their parameters as recommended in the original studies. Therefore, it may be possible to substantially improve boosted top quark discrimination power by optimising the free parameters that enter the definition of the observables. Nevertheless, even with this na\"ive application of a cut on the track mass and cuts on $\tau_{3,2}$ or $D_3$ impressive discrimination can be obtained. Additionally, while $\tau_{3,2}$ and $D_3$ are both sensitive to the 3-prong substructure, their relative performance rejecting gluon and light quark jets is not well understood. The motivation for constructing these observables relies on the behavior of QCD in the parametric soft and collinear limits. However, gluon and light quark jets are not parametrically different objects, and so, without detailed calculation, it may not be possible to understand the performance. Further complication for detailed theoretical understanding occurs because we only measure these observables on charged tracks. Quark and gluon partons fragment to charged hadrons differently, and this may also affect the discrimination power. A detailed study of these effects and their impact on discrimination power employing track-based methods of \Refs{Waalewijn:2012sv,Chang:2013rca,Chang:2013iba} would be certainly welcome, even though clearly beyond the scope of this paper.
\begin{figure}[t]
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\hspace{-1.5cm}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:roc_gluon_r32}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{figures/roc_gluon_7500_10000_CMS.eps}
}
\hspace{-1.2cm}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:roc_quark_r32}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{figures/roc_uds_7500_10000_CMS.eps}
}
\\
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\hspace{-1.5cm}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:roc_gluon}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{figures/roc_gluon_7500_10000_FCC.eps}
}
\hspace{-1.2cm}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:roc_quark}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{figures/roc_uds_7500_10000_FCC.eps}
}
\caption{
Signal vs.~background efficiency (ROC) curves for top quark identification from QCD background utilising $\tau_{3,2}$ and $D_3$: (left) top quarks vs.~gluon jets, (right) top quarks vs.~light quark jets. The ROC curves as measured in the calorimeter are dashed lines and as measured on tracks are solid lines for (top) the CMS detector and (bottom) the FCC detector. The cut on the jet mass of $m\in[120,250]$ GeV is included in the efficiencies.
}
\label{fig:roc_curves}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}\label{sec:conclusions}
\begin{figure}[t]
\hspace{-1cm}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:money_calo}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figures/moneyeff.eps}
}
\hspace{-0.7cm}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:money_track}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figures/moneymis.eps}
}
\caption{
Plots illustrating the efficiency for tagging top quarks and rejecting QCD background as a function of jet $p_T$ using tracking (blue, red) versus calorimetry (light blue, magenta) at a future collider. For identifying three-prong substructure the observables $\tau_{3,2}$ and $D_3$ have been used.
(a) Top tagging efficiency for a fixed light quark and gluon mistag rate of 5\%.
(b) Light quark and gluon mistag rate at fixed top quark efficiency of 50\%.
The bands represent the envelope of efficiencies spanned by the Monte Carlo simulations (\herwig{6} and \pythia{6.4}) that we use.
}
\label{fig:money}
\end{figure}
We summarize the results of this paper in \Fig{fig:money}, illustrating the potential discrimination power for identifying boosted top quarks at the detector of a future high energy proton collider modeled with \delphes. On the left, we show the hadronically-decaying top quark tagging efficiency as a function of jet $p_T$ at fixed mistag rate for jets produced from light quarks and gluons of 5\% comparing our method using tracking versus using calorimetry exclusively. The bands represent the envelope of efficiencies from using either \herwig{6} \cite{Marchesini:1991ch,Corcella:2000bw,Corcella:2002jc} or \pythia{6.4} Monte Carlo simulations. On the right, we plot the efficiency for mis-tagging jets initiated by light quarks or gluons as top quarks at fixed signal efficiency of 50\%. Our procedure enables significant rejection rates at $p_T$s approaching 20 TeV, while using calorimetry alone struggles to reject more background than signal. Exploiting tracking enables impressive signal efficiency, comparable to that of taggers used at the LHC, whose performance is relatively independent of jet $p_T$ and extends well beyond 10 TeV.
In this paper, we have presented a procedure for the identification of top quarks in the multi-TeV energy range as those that could be produced at a future 100 TeV proton collider. High-resolution tracking information was required for identification of the prongs produced in the top quark decay and contamination due to initial- and final-state radiation, underlying event, pile-up, or other sources can be reduced significantly by dynamically scaling the jet radius inversely proportional to the transverse momentum of the jets. By applying a simple jet selection on the track-based jet mass, $N$-subjettiness ratio, and energy correlation function based jet substructure observables, very high efficiency for discriminating boosted top quarks from light QCD jets can be accomplished, and with rates that are relatively independent of the boost. These results are encouraging for the prospects of precision studies of the electroweak sector at a future collider.
Though we have employed a fast detector simulation, we believe that the analysis presented here can provide a useful benchmark for performance and response of detectors at a future collider. The relatively conservative parameters in the fast detector simulation should provide a realistic goal for the resolution of a future detector. Nevertheless, there were several effects not included in this analysis. For example, we have not considered backgrounds to boosted top quarks from electroweak boson emission from light quarks. The main reason is that vector bosons in energetic jets are typically soft~\cite{Christiansen:2014kba,Krauss:2014yaa} and therefore when decaying hadronically their effect is very similar to that of QCD radiation yet subleading due to the weak coupling. However, they may be relevant in high purity (low signal efficiency) samples. In addition, while rescaling the jet radius inversely proportional to the transverse momentum and using charged tracks reduces contamination from pile-up, we did not include any simulation of pile-up in our analysis. The effects of pile-up on the efficiency for tagging top quarks would be important to understand in a dedicated analysis, but we believe that the effects would be minimal because we use a recoil-free jet algorithm as well as scaling the jet radius.
Besides these experimental issues, our procedure for tagging highly boosted top quarks raises some interesting theoretical questions. Because of our prescription for scaling the jet radius, the angular size of the jets we consider becomes very small at sufficiently high transverse momenta. By restricting the radiation in the jet to such small angular regions, non-global logarithms \cite{Dasgupta:2001sh}, clustering logarithms \cite{Banfi:2005gj}, or logarithms of the jet radius itself \cite{Seymour:1997kj,Gerwick:2012fw,Dasgupta:2014yra} could become important for a theoretical understanding. For high angular resolution, we also require measurements on charged tracks, and not on all radiation in the jet. Therefore, a model of the fragmentation of partons to charged hadrons is required to predict the distributions of the jet substructure observables on these jets. An understanding of track-based observables \cite{Waalewijn:2012sv,Chang:2013rca,Chang:2013iba} may also explain the difference that we observed between the performance of $\tau_{3,2}$ and $D_3$ on light quark or gluon jets and could potentially predict the optimal parameters of those observables for discrimination.
We also emphasize that the methods presented here apply more broadly than to top quarks alone. Studies for the identification of hyper-boosted 2-prong jets from hadronic decays of $W$, $Z$, or $H$ bosons can benefit from these techniques. Contamination radiation can be controlled using the scaled jet radius, though, because these objects are colour-singlets and narrow resonances, unlike for top quarks, there is no contaminating FSR produced. Because the masses of the electroweak bosons are smaller than the top, using the high resolution of the tracker becomes even more important, as the structure of these jets lies at smaller angular scales. For identification of 2-prong substructure, instead of $\tau_{3,2}$ and $D_3$, one would use observables such as $\tau_{2,1}$ $N$-subjettiness ratio and $D_2$ formed from the energy correlation functions \cite{Larkoski:2014gra}.
Looking forward to a future hadron collider during the era of the LHC provides context and motivation for collider physics studies in extreme environments. Additionally, analyses at the LHC itself can benefit from efforts for a future collider. For example, while the energies and luminosities at the LHC are an order of magnitude smaller than a proposed future collider, our proposal for jet radius rescaling and track-based measurements could be useful for analyses at the LHC in a high pile-up environment or over a large energy range. Looking forward to Run 2 at the LHC, a new, higher energy regime will be explored and will require the use of new techniques to push forward.
\begin{acknowledgments}
We thank Michelangelo Mangano, Gavin Salam, and Jesse Thaler for helpful discussions, and the FCC working group for a very stimulating environment. A.~L.~is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under grant Contract Number DE-SC00012567. This work is supported in part by the MISTI MIT-Belgium Program, the ERC Grant No. 291377 "LHCTheory�, by the Research Executive Agency (REA) of the European Union under the Grant Agreement number PITN-GA-2012-315877 (MCNet), and the National Fund for Scientific Research (F.R.S.-FNRS Belgium), by the IISN ``MadGraph'' convention 4.4511.10, by the IISN ``Fundamental interactions'' convention 4.4517.08, and in part by the Belgian Federal Science Policy Office through the Interuniversity Attraction Pole P7/37.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $I=\left[ -1/2,1/2\right] $. Any stationary, real, ergodic,
zero-mean, Gaussian stochastic process has a \emph{Cram\'{e}r spectral
representation}
\begin{equation*}
x(t)=\int_{I}e^{2\pi i\xi t}dZ(\xi )\text{,}
\end{equation*}
and the \emph{spectrum} $S(\xi )$, defined as
\begin{equation*}
S(\xi )d\xi =\mathbb{E}\{\left\vert dZ(\xi )\right\vert ^{2}\}\text{,}
\end{equation*}
and often called the \emph{power spectral density} of the process, yields
the periodic components of $x(t)$. The goal of spectral estimation is to
solve the highly underdetermined problem of \emph{estimating }$S(\xi )$
\emph{\ from a sample of }$N$\emph{\ contiguous observations }$x(0),...,x(N-1)$.
Embryonic approaches to the problem (Stokes 1879, Shuster 1898) used the so
called \emph{periodogram}:
\begin{equation}
\widehat{S}(\xi )=\frac{1}{N}\left\vert \sum_{t=0}^{N-1}x(t)e^{-2\pi i\xi
t}\right\vert ^{2},
\end{equation}
whose analysis has influenced harmonic analysts since
Norbert Wiener (see \cite{Benedetto}). The periodogram can also be weighted with a data window $\left\{ D_{t}\right\}
_{t=0}^{N-1}$, usually called a\emph{\ taper}, giving the estimator:
\begin{equation}
\widehat{S}_{D}(\xi )=\left\vert \sum_{t=0}^{N-1}x(t)D_{t}e^{-2\pi i\xi
t}\right\vert ^{2}\text{.} \label{direct}
\end{equation}
The choice of the taper $\left\{ D_{t}\right\} _{t=0}^{N-1}$ can have a significant effect on the
resulting spectrum estimate $\widehat{S}_{D}$. This is apparent by observing that its
expectation is the convolution of the \emph{true (nonobservable) spectrum}
$S(\xi )$ with the \emph{spectral window} $\abs{\mathcal{F}D(\xi )}^2=
\abs{\sum_{t=0}^{N-1}D_{t}e^{-2\pi i\xi t}}^2$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\label{smooth}
\mathbb{E}\left\{ \widehat{S}_{D}(\xi )\right\} =S(\xi )\ast
\abs{\mathcal{F}D(\xi )}^2.
\end{equation}
Thus, the bias of the tapered estimator, which is the difference
$S(\xi) - \mathbb{E}\{\widehat{S}_{D}(\xi )\}$, is determined by the
smoothing effect of $\left\{ D_t \right\}_{t=0}^{N-1}$ over the true
spectrum. Ideally, the function
$\mathcal{F}D(\xi )$ should be concentrated on the interval
$[-\tfrac{1}{2N},\tfrac{1}{2N}]$, but the
\emph{uncertainty principle of Fourier analysis} precludes such perfect concentration.
Inevitably, some portion of the filter $\mathcal{F}D(\xi )$ will lie outside the target
region and \emph{spectral leakage} occurs.
In \cite{Thomson}, Thomson used the sequences which minimize
spectral leakage to construct an algorithm using several tapered
estimates, whence the name \emph{multitaper}. In doing so, he was able to
reduce variance by averaging, while introducing a tolerable amount of
spectral leakage. Thomson's multitaper method has been used in a variety of scientific
applications including climate analysis (see, for instance \cite{Science1997},
or \cite{PNAS2012} for a local spherical approach), and it was used to better understand the relation between
atmospheric $CO_{2}$ and climate change (see \cite[Section 1]{Thomson2}). The method became also paramount
in statistical signal analysis \cite{PW}.
Today, Thomson's multitaper method remains an effective spectral estimation method.
It has recently found remarkable applications in electroencephalography \cite
{Neurosciences} and it is the preferred spectral sensing procedure \cite
{Cognitive} for the rapidly emerging field of cognitive radio \cite{Haykin}.
In the next paragraph we provide an outline of the essence of the method.
Thomson's method starts by selecting a target frequency smoothing band $[-W,W]$ with
$1/2N<W<1/2$, thus accepting a reduction in spectral resolution by a factor of about $2NW$. The \emph{first step} consists of obtaining a number $K=\left\lfloor 2NW\right\rfloor $ (the smallest integer not greater than
$2NW $) of estimates of the form \eqref{direct} by setting, for every $k\in
\{0,...,K-1\}$, $D_{t}=v_{t}^{(k)}(N,W)$, where the \emph{discrete prolate
spheroidal sequences} $v_{t}^{(k)}(N,W)$ are defined as the solutions of the
Toeplitz matrix eigenvalue equation
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{n=0}^{N-1}\frac{\sin 2\pi W\left( t-n\right) }{\pi \left( t-n\right) }
v_{n}^{(k)}(N,W)=\lambda _{k}(N,W)v_{t}^{(k)}(N,W)\text{.}
\end{equation*}
The resulting tapered periodogram is then denoted by $\widehat{S}_{k}(\xi )$. The \emph{second step} consists of averaging. One uses the estimator
\begin{equation}
\widehat{S}_{(K)}(\xi )=\frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\widehat{S}_{k}(\xi ),
\label{Thomson}
\end{equation}
which achieves a reduced variance (see \cite{Thomson} for an asymptotic analysis of slowly varying spectra and
\cite{WMP,liro08} for non-asymptotic expressions).
To inspect the performance of the estimator $\widehat{S}_{(K)}(\xi )$ on the spectral domain, let us consider the \emph{discrete prolate spheroidal functions}, also known as \emph{Slepians}. They
are the discrete Fourier transforms of the sequences $v_{t}^{(k)}(N,W)$,
denoted by $U_{k}(N,W;\xi )$, and satisfy the integral equation
\begin{equation}
\int_{-W}^{W}\mathbf{D}_{N}(\xi -\xi {\acute{}})U_{k}(N,W;\xi {\acute{}}
)d\xi {\acute{}}=\lambda _{k}(N,W)U_{k}(N,W;\xi )\text{,}
\label{eq_prolates}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{D}_{N}(x)=\frac{\sin N\pi x}{\sin \pi x} \label{Dirichlet}
\end{equation}
is the Dirichlet kernel. Observe that, according to (\ref{smooth}),
$\mathbb{E}\{\widehat{S}_{k}(\xi )\}$ is a smoothing average of the unobservable spectrum by the kernel $\left\vert
U_{k}(N,W;\xi )\right\vert ^{2}$. Recall that
the bias of each individual estimate in (\ref{Thomson}) is given by
\begin{equation}
Bias\left( \widehat{S}_{k}(\xi )\right) =\mathbb{E}\{\widehat{S}_{k}(\xi )\}-S(\xi )=S(\xi )\ast\left\vert U_{k}(N,W;\xi
)\right\vert ^{2}-S(\xi ). \label{bias}
\end{equation}
The optimal concentration of the first prolate function on the interval
$[-W,W]$ leads to a low bias when $k=0$. But since the amount of energy of
$U_{k}(N,W;\xi )$ inside $[-W,W]$ decreases with $k$ (because the energy is
given by the eigenvalues in (\ref{eq_prolates}) and they decrease from $1$
to $0$ as $k$ approaches $K$), the bias increases with $k$.
To explain the remarkable performance of the \emph{averaged} estimator, Thomson noted the following: the expected value of the estimator (\ref{Thomson}) is given
by
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}\{\widehat{S}_{(K)}(\xi )\}=\frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\mathbb{E}\{\widehat{S}_{k}(\xi )\}=S(\xi ) \ast \frac{1}{K}\rho _{K}(N,W;\xi )\text{,} \label{Sk}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{K}\rho _{K}(N,W;\xi )=\frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}\left\vert
U_{k}(N,W;\xi )\right\vert ^{2} \label{eq_inten}
\end{equation}
is the \emph{spectral window} of (\ref{Sk}). The bias performance is due to the fact,
numerically illustrated by Thomson, that the spectral window (\ref{eq_inten}) is very similar
to a flat function localized on $[-W,W]$ (see Figure \ref{fig}). This is an intriguing mathematical
phenomenon. Heuristically, it requires the functions in the sequence
$\{\left\vert U_{k}(N,W,\cdot )\right\vert ^{2}:k=0,\ldots, K-1\}$ to be
organized inside the interval $[-W,W]$ in a very particular way: \emph{each
function tends to fill in the empty energy spots left by the sum of the
previous ones}. This behavior is reminiscent of the Pythagorean relation for
pure frequencies: $\sin ^{2}(t)+\cos ^{2}(t)=1$. More precisely, claiming
that the spectral window in Thomson's method approximates an ideal band-pass
kernel, means that the two functions
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{K}\rho _{K}(N,W,.)\text{ \ \ \ and \ \ \ \ }\frac{1}{2W}\mathbf{1}_{[-W,W]}\text{,} \label{two}
\end{equation}
approach each other as $K$ increases. This is indeed true and we provide an
analytic bound for the $L^{1}$-distance between the functions in \eqref{two}.
\begin{theorem}[Spectral leakage estimate]
\label{th_main} Let $N\geq 2$ be an integer, $W\in (-1/2,1/2)$ and set $K:=\left\lfloor 2NW\right\rfloor $. Then
\begin{equation}
\left\Vert \frac{1}{K}\rho _{K}(N,W,\cdot )-\frac{1}{2W}\mathbf{1}_{[-W,W]}\right\Vert _{L^{1}(I)}\lesssim \frac{\log N}{K}.
\label{L1}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure[Slepians $U_k$ and their squares $\abs{U_k}^2$, for $k=1,5,9,19$.]{
\includegraphics[scale=0.23]{./prolates.png}
\label{fig_prolates}
}
\subfigure[Thomson's spectral window.]
{
\includegraphics[scale=0.20]{window.png}
}
\caption{Some Slepians and the spectral window with $N=256$ and $w=0.1$.}
\label{fig}
\end{figure}
The spectral leakage estimate (\ref{L1}) is precisely what we need in order to
quantify Thomson's asymptotic analysis of the bias
of the multitaper estimator \cite[pag. 1062]{Thomson}
and validate the bias-variance trade-off. This is explained in
the Conclusion section.
A relevant feature of the method introduced in this paper is its
flexibility. While the description of each individual solution
to the concentration problem in \eqref{eq_prolates} is very subtle, the \emph{aggregated behavior} of the critical number of solutions to \eqref{eq_prolates} displays a simple profile. A similar aggregated behavior has been investigated in \cite{AGR} and numerically illustrated in \cite{BB, SimmonsGeoph2008}.
Our analysis depends on the properties of the eigenvalues in \eqref{eq_prolates}.
Similar properties have been recognized in the
eigenvalue problem in the context of Hankel bandlimited
functions \cite{AB}. Since the problem studied in \cite{AB} includes the one considered by Slepian in his construction of $2d$ radial prolate functions, we expect our methodology to be applicable to spectral estimation problems involving $2d$ functions whose spectrum lies on a disk. This may have applications in cryo-electron microscopy, where estimation of noise stochastics is an important
consideration when applying PCA to microscopy images \cite{zhsi13}.
Other multitaper estimators include multi-window estimators for
non-stationary spectrum \cite{BB,OW} and the one based on spherical Slepians \cite{SIAMRev,SimmonsGeoph2008}.
\section{Proof of the main result}
Our proof uses tools from the Landau-Pollack-Slepian theory
\cite{Slepian,posl61,la67-1,la75-1,lapo61}. We do not rely on special properties of the interval $I$, but rather on
so-called trace / norm estimates that can be obtained in many other contexts of practical interest (e.g. \cite{AB}).
Hence the flexibility of our approach.
Let $I:=[-1/2,1/2]$ and let us denote the exponentials by $e_{\omega
}(x):=e^{2\pi ix\omega }$. We will always let $N\geq 2$ be an integer and $W\in (-1/2,1/2)$. For two
non-negative functions $f,g$, the notation $f\lesssim g$ means that there
exists a constant $C>0$ such that $f\leq Cg$. (The constant $C$, of course,
does not depend on the parameters $N,W$.)
\subsection{Trigonometric polynomials}
For notational convenience, we use a temporal normalization that is slightly
different of the one in the Introduction (this has no impact in the
announced estimates). We consider the space of trigonometric polynomials
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{P}_{N}=Span\left\{ e_{\frac{-N+1}{2}+j}:0\leq j\leq N-1\right\}
\subseteq L^{2}\left( I\right) \text{.}
\end{equation*}
This is a Hilbert space with a reproducing kernel given by the translated
Dirichlet kernel, $\mathbf{D}_{N}(x-y)$, \ $x,y\in I$,\ $N\in \mathbb{N}$,
where $\mathbf{D}_{N}$ is given by (\ref{Dirichlet}). Note that $\int_{I}\left\vert \mathbf{D}_{N}\right\vert ^{2}=N$.
\subsection{Toeplitz operators}
For $W\in (-1/2,1/2)$ the \emph{Toeplitz
operator} $H_{W}^{N}$ is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq_toep_op}
H_{W}^{N}f:=P_{{\mathcal{P}_{N}}}\left( (P_{\mathcal{P}_{N}}f)\cdot
1_{[-W,W]}\right) ,\qquad f\in L^{2}(I),
\end{equation}
where $P_{{\mathcal{P}_{N}}}$ is the orthogonal projection onto $\mathcal{P}_N$.
When $f\in \mathcal{P}_{N}$, $H_{W}^{N}f$ is simply the projection of $f\cdot 1_{[-W,W]}$ into $\mathcal{P}_{N}$. The
Slepian functions $\{U_{k}(N,W) : k=0, \ldots, N-1\}$
are the eigenfunctions of $H_{W}^{N}$ with corresponding eigenvalues $\lambda_k=\lambda_K(N,W)$:
\begin{align}
\label{eq_eigen}
\int_{-W}^W \abs{U_{k}(N,W;\xi)}^2 \, d\xi = \lambda_k,
\end{align}
ordered non-increasingly. We normalize the Slepian functions by:
$\int_I \abs{U_{k}(N,W;\xi)}^2 \, d\xi = 1$.
We will need a description of the profile of the eigenvalues of $H^N_W$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma_sum_eig}
For $N \geq 2$, $W \in (-1/2,1/2)$ and $K:=\left\lfloor 2NW\right\rfloor$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq_bound}
\abs{1 - \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \lambda_k(N,W)} \lesssim \frac{\log N}{K}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
We postpone the proof of Lemma \ref{lemma_sum_eig} to the Appendix.
The quantity on the left-hand side of \eqref{eq_bound} has been studied in
\cite{liro08} to qualitatively analyze the performance of Thomson's method. Lemma \ref{lemma_sum_eig}
refines the analysis of \cite{liro08}, giving a concrete growth estimate. (See also the remarks
after Theorem 5 in \cite{liro08}.)
\subsection{\textbf{Proof of Theorem }\protect\ref{th_main}}
We first estimate the narrow band error. Note that $\rho _{K}(N,W;\xi) = \sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \abs{U_{k}(N,W;\xi)}^2
\leq \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \abs{U_{k}(N,W;\xi)}^2 = D_N(0) = N$. Consequently,
$\tfrac{1}{K}\rho_K(N,W;\xi) \leq \tfrac{N}{K}$ and, using \eqref{eq_eigen}, we can estimate:
\begin{align*}
&\int_{-W}^W \abs{\frac{1}{K}\rho _{K}(N,W;\xi)-\frac{1}{2W}\mathbf{1}_{[-W,W]}(\xi)} \,d\xi
\\
&\qquad\leq
\int_{-W}^W \abs{\left(\frac{1}{2W}-\frac{N}{K}\right)\mathbf{1}_{[-W,W]}(\xi)} \,d\xi
+
\int_{-W}^W \abs{\frac{1}{K}\rho _{K}(N,W;\xi)-\frac{N}{K}\mathbf{1}_{[-W,W]}(\xi)} \,d\xi
\\
&\qquad=
2W\left(\frac{N}{K}-\frac{1}{2W}\right)
+
\frac{2NW}{K}-\frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \int_{-W}^W \abs{U_{k}(N,W;\xi)}^2\,d\xi
\\
&\qquad\leq \frac{2}{K} + 1-\frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \lambda_k
\lesssim \frac{\log N}{K},
\end{align*}
thanks to Lemma \ref{lemma_sum_eig}. Now we estimate the broad brand leakage:
\begin{align*}
&\int_{I\setminus [-W,W]} \abs{\frac{1}{K}\rho _{K}(N,W;\xi)-\frac{1}{2W}\mathbf{1}_{[-W,W]}(\xi)} \,d\xi
=\int_{I\setminus [-W,W]} \frac{1}{K}\rho _{K}(N,W;\xi) \,d\xi
\\
&\qquad=\frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} (1-\lambda_k)
= 1 - \frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \lambda_k,
\end{align*}
so the conclusion follows invoking again Lemma \ref{lemma_sum_eig}.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec_conclusion} In \cite[Section IV]{Thomson}, Thomson estimated $Bias(\widehat{S}_{(K)})$ by using the approximation
$\frac{1}{K}\rho _{K}(N,W,\cdot )\approx \frac{1}{2W}\mathbf{1}_{[-W,W]}$.
Besides supporting that reasoning, Theorem \ref{th_main} allows one to quantify the bias. Indeed,
\begin{equation*}
\left\vert Bias(\widehat{S}_{(K)}(\xi ))\right\vert \leq \left\vert \left| S*\frac{1}{K}\rho_{K}(N,W,\cdot) - S*\frac{1}{2W}\mathbf{1}_{[-W,W]} \right|
\right\vert_\infty +\left\vert \left| S-S*\frac{1}{2W}\mathbf{1}_{[-W,W]} \right|
\right\vert_\infty
\end{equation*}
and, if $S$ is a bounded function, then Theorem \ref{th_main} implies
that
\begin{equation*}
\left\vert \left| S*\frac{1}{K}\rho_{K}(N,W,\cdot)- S*\frac{1}{2W}\mathbf{1}_{[-W,W]} \right| \right\vert_\infty \lesssim \max_{\xi ^{\prime }\in \mathbb{R}}\left\vert S(\xi ^{\prime })\right\vert \frac{\log N}{K}.
\end{equation*}
The remaining term $\left\vert \left| S-S*\frac{1}{2W}\mathbf{1}_{[-W,W]}
\right| \right\vert_\infty $ can be bounded by assuming that $S$ is smooth. For
example, if, as in Thomson's work, $S$ is assumed to be analytic (and periodic), then $\left\vert \left| S-S*\frac{1}{2W}\mathbf{1}_{[-W,W]} \right| \right\vert
\lesssim W^{2}$, leading to the bias estimate:
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{Bias}(\widehat{S}_{(K)}(\xi ))\lesssim W^{2}+\frac{\log N}{K}.
\label{bias_estimate}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, for a slowly varying spectrum $S$, Thomson \cite{Thomson} argues that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq_var}
\mathrm{Var}\left( \widehat{S}_{(K)}(\xi )\right) \lesssim \frac{1}{K}\text{,}
\end{equation}
(see, \cite{WMP}, \cite{liro08} or \cite[Section 3.1.2]{HogLak} for precise expressions for the variance.) Given a
number of available
observations, the estimates in \eqref{bias_estimate} and \eqref{eq_var} show how much bias can be expected, in order to
bring the variance down by a factor of $1/K$. This leads to a concrete estimate for the mean squared error
\begin{align}
\label{eq_MSE}
\mathrm{MSE}(\widehat{S}_{(K)}) = \mathbb{E}(S-\widehat{S}_{(K)})^2
= \mathrm{Bias}(\widehat{S}_{(K)})^2 + \mathrm{Var}(\widehat{S}_{(K)})
\lesssim W^{4}+\frac{\log^2 N}{K^2} + \frac{1}{K},
\end{align}
that can be used to decide on the value of the bandwidth resolution parameter $W$.
We have thus obtained explicit bounds that allow us to quantify the
bias-variance trade-off in Thomson's multitaper method. Note that in the slowly varying regime, the error due to
spectral leakage is largely dominated by the variance and therefore, in agreement with Thomson's analysis, the mean
squared error is $\approx W^{4} + \frac{1}{K}$. In the case of more rapidly varying spectra, \eqref{eq_var} is no longer
a valid approximation \cite{WMP, liro08} and the contribution of the spectral leakage to the mean squared error can be more
significant.
\section{Appendix}
\subsection{Integral kernels}
The Toeplitz operator $H_{W}^{N}$ from \eqref{eq_toep_op} can be explicitly
described by the formula
\begin{equation*}
H_{W}^{N}f(x)=\int_{I}f(y)K_{W}^{N}(x,y)dy\text{,}
\end{equation*}
where the kernel $K_{W}^{N}(x,y)$ is
\begin{equation}
K_{W}^{N}(x,y)=\int_{[-W,W]}\mathbf{D}_{N}(x-z)\overline{\mathbf{D}_{N}(y-z)}dz\text{.} \label{eq_kernel1}
\end{equation}
\subsection{An approximation lemma}
\begin{lemma}
\label{MainLemma} Let $f:I\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ an integrable function, of
bounded variation, and supported on $I^{\circ }=(-1/2,1/2)$. For $N\geq 2$,
let
\begin{equation*}
f\ast \left\vert \mathbf{D}_{N}\right\vert ^{2}(x)=\int_{I}f(y)\left\vert
\mathbf{D}_{N}\left( x-y\right) \right\vert ^{2}dy,\qquad x\in I.
\end{equation*}
Then
\begin{equation}
\left\Vert f-\frac{1}{N}f\ast \left\vert \mathbf{D}_{N}\right\vert
^{2}\right\Vert _{L^{1}(I)}\lesssim Var\left( f,I\right) \frac{\log N}{N}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}
In the above estimate, $Var(f,I)$ denotes the total variation of $f$ on $I$.
If $f=1_{[-W,W]}$, with $W\in (-1/2,1/2)$, then $Var\left( f,I\right) =2$
and the estimate reads
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert \mathbf{1}_{[-W,W]}-\frac{1}{N}\mathbf{1}_{[-W,W]}\ast \left\vert
\mathbf{D}_{N}\right\vert ^{2}\right\Vert _{L^{1}(I)}\lesssim
\frac{\log N}{N}.
\end{equation*}
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
By an approximation argument, we assume without loss of generality that $f$
is smooth (see for example \cite[Lemma 3.2]{AGR}). We also extend $f$
periodically to $\mathbb{R}$. Note that this extension is still smooth because $f|I$ is
supported on $I^{\circ }$.
\textbf{Step 1}. Since $f(x+h)-f(x)=\int_{0}^{1}f^{\prime }(th+x)h\,dt$, we
can use the periodicity of $f$ to estimate
\begin{align*}
\left\Vert f(\cdot+h) - f \right\Vert _{L^{1}(I)} &\leq
\int_{0}^{1}\int_{-1/2}^{1/2}\left\vert f^{\prime }(t h +x)\right\vert
dx\left\vert h\right\vert dt =\int_{0}^{1}\int_{-1/2+th}^{1/2+th}\left\vert
f^{\prime }(x)\right\vert dx\left\vert h\right\vert dt \\
&\qquad =\int_{0}^{1}\int_{-1/2}^{1/2}\left\vert f^{\prime }(x)\right\vert
dx\left\vert h\right\vert dt=Var(f,I)\left\vert h\right\vert.
\end{align*}
Since $f$ is periodic, the previous estimate can be improved to:
\begin{equation}
\left\Vert f(\cdot+h) - f\right\Vert _{L^{1}(I)}\lesssim Var(f,I)\left\vert
\sin(\pi h)\right\vert ,\qquad h\in \mathbb{R}. \label{eq_f}
\end{equation}
\textbf{Step 2}. We use the notation $f^{N}:=f\ast \tfrac{1}{N}\left\vert
\mathbf{D}_{N}\right\vert ^{2}$. By a change of variables and periodicity,
\begin{equation*}
f(x)-f^{N}(x)=\frac{1}{N}\int_{-1/2}^{1/2}(f(x)-f(y+x))\left\vert
\mathbf{D}_{N}(-y)\right\vert ^{2}dy.
\end{equation*}
We can now finish the proof by resorting to \eqref{eq_f}:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left\Vert f-f^N\right\Vert _{L^{1}(I)} &\lesssim &Var(f,I)
\frac{1}{N}\int_{-1/2}^{1/2}\left\vert \sin (\pi y)\right\vert \left\vert
\mathbf{D}_{N}(y)\right\vert ^{2}dy \\
&\lesssim &Var(f,I)\frac{1}{N}\int_{0}^{1/2}\frac{\left\vert \sin (\pi
Ny)\right\vert }{\left\vert y\right\vert }dy \\
&\lesssim &Var(f,I)\frac{1}{N}\left[ 1+\int_{1}^{N/2}\frac{1}{\left\vert
y\right\vert }dy\right] \\
&\lesssim &Var(f,I)\frac{\log N}{N}\text{.}
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \ref{lemma_sum_eig}}
We first note from \eqref{eq_kernel1} that
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{trace}\left( H_{W}^{N}\right)
=\int_{I}K_{W}^{N}(x,x)dx=\int_{[-W,W]}\int_{I}\left\vert
\mathbf{D}_{N}(x-y)\right\vert ^{2}dydx=2NW\text{,} \label{eq_trace}
\end{equation}
since\ $\int_{I}$\ $\left\vert \mathbf{D}_{N}\right\vert ^{2}=N$. Moreover a
similar calculation gives
\begin{equation*}
\mathrm{trace}\left( H_{W}^{N}\right) ^{2}=\int_{[-W,W]}\int_{I}\mathbf{1}_{_{[-W,W]}}(y)\left\vert \mathbf{D}_{N}(x-y)\right\vert ^{2}dydx\text{.}
\end{equation*}
Hence we can use Lemma \ref{MainLemma} to conclude that
\begin{align*}
\label{eq_trn}
&\mathrm{trace}\left[ \left( H_{W}^{N}\right) -\left( H_{W}^{N}\right) ^{2}\right]
=\int_{-W}^W\left[ N\mathbf{1}_{_{[-W,W]}}(x)-\left( \mathbf{1}_{_{[-W,W]}}\ast
\left\vert \mathbf{D}_{N}\right\vert ^{2}\right) (x)\right] dx
\\
&\qquad \leq
\int_{I}\abs{ N\mathbf{1}_{_{[-W,W]}}(x)-\left( \mathbf{1}_{_{[-W,W]}}\ast
\left\vert \mathbf{D}_{N}\right\vert ^{2}\right) (x)} dx
\leq C \log N,
\end{align*}
for some constant $C$. Using this bound, we estimate:
\begin{align*}
C\log N &\geq \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \lambda_k(1-\lambda_k)
=\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \lambda_k(1-\lambda_k)
+\sum_{k=K}^{N-1} \lambda_k(1-\lambda_k)
\\
&\geq \lambda_{K-1} \sum_{k=0}^{K-1} (1-\lambda_k)
+ (1-\lambda_{K-1})\sum_{k=K}^{N-1} \lambda_k
\\
&= \lambda_{K-1} K - \lambda_{K-1}\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \lambda_k
+ (1-\lambda_{K-1})(2NW-\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \lambda_k)
\\
&= \lambda_{K-1} K
+ 2NW(1-\lambda_{K-1}) - \sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \lambda_k
\\
&= 2NW - \sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \lambda_k
+
\lambda_{K-1} (K-2NW)
\\
&\geq K - \sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \lambda_k
-1.
\end{align*}
Hence, $K - \sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \lambda_k \leq C\log N + 1$. On the other
hand $\sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \lambda_k - K \leq 2NW - K \leq 1$. Therefore,
since $N \geq 2$, $\abs{K - \sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \lambda_k} \lesssim \log N$ and the conclusion follows.
|
\section*{1. Introduction}
\par\q Let $[x]$ be the greatest integer not exceeding $x$.
For a prime $p$ let $\Bbb
Z_p$ be the set of rational numbers whose denominator is not
divisible by $p$. Let $\{P_n(x)\}$ be the Legendre polynomials given
by
$$P_0(x)=1,\ P_1(x)=x,\ (n+1)P_{n+1}(x)=(2n+1)xP_n(x)-nP_{n-1}(x)\ (n\ge
1).$$ It is well known that (see [MOS, pp.\;228-232], [B1] and [B2])
$$P_n(x)=\f
1{2^n}\sum_{k=0}^{[n/2]}\b nk(-1)^k\b{2n-2k}nx^{n-2k}
=\sum_{k=0}^n\b nk\b{n+k}k\Ls{x-1}2^k.\tag 1.1$$ From (1.1) we see
that $P_n(-x)=(-1)^nP_n(x)$.
\par Let $p>3$ be a prime. In 2003 Rodriguez-Villegas [RV] conjectured that
$$\aligned&\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k^2\b{3k}k}{108^k}\e 0\mod{p^2}\qtq{for}
p\e 2\mod 3,
\\& \sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k^2\b{4k}{2k}}{256^k} \e 0\mod{p^2}
\qtq{for} p\e 5,7\mod 8,
\\& \sum_{k=0}^{p-1} \f{\b{2k}k\b{3k}k\b{6k}{3k}}{1728^k}
\e 0\mod{p^2}\qtq{for} p\e 3\mod 4.\endaligned\tag 1.2$$ In 2005
Mortenson [M] proved these congruences modulo $p$, in 2012 Z.W. Sun
[Su3] confirmed (1.2). Motivated by Mortenson's work, in [Su1,Su2]
Z.W. Sun posed many conjectures concerning the following sums modulo
$p^2$:
$$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k^3}{m^k},\
\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k\b{3k}k}{m^k},\
\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k\b{4k}{2k}}{m^k}\qtq{and} \sum_{k=0}^{p-1}
\f{\b{2k}k\b{3k}k\b{6k}{3k}}{m^k},$$ where $m$ is an integer with
$p\nmid m$. In [S2-S5] the author solved some of his conjectures by
establishing the following congruences:
$$\align &\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k^3}{m^k}
\e P_{\f{p-1}2}\Big(\sqrt{1-\f{64}m}\Big)^2\mod {p^2},\tag 1.3
\\&\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k^2\b{3k}k(x(1-27x))^k\e\Big(
\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k\b{3k}kx^k\Big)^2\mod{p^2},\tag 1.4
\\&\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k^2\b{4k}{2k}(x(1-64x))^k\e\Big(
\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k\b{4k}{2k}x^k\Big)^2\mod{p^2},\tag 1.5
\\&\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k\b{3k}k\b{6k}{3k}(x(1-432x))^k\e\Big(
\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k\b{3k}k\b{6k}{3k}x^k\Big)^2\mod{p^2}.\tag 1.6
\endalign$$
It is easily seen that (see [S1, pp.1916-1917, 1920], [S3, p.1953] and [S5, p.182])
$$\aligned&\b{-\f 12}k^2=\f{\b{2k}k^2}{16^k},\ \b{-\f
13}k\b{-\f 23}k=\f{\b{2k}k\b{3k}k}{27^k}, \\&\ \b{-\f 14}k\b{-\f
34}k=\f{\b{2k}k\b{4k}{2k}}{64^k},\ \b{-\f 16}k\b{-\f
56}k=\f{\b{3k}k\b{6k}{3k}}{432^k}.\endaligned\tag 1.7$$ Let $p$ be
an odd prime, $a\in\Bbb Z_p$ and let $\ap\in\{0,1,\ldots,p-1\}$ be
given by $a\e \ap\mod p$. In [S6], the author proved that
$$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k\b ak\b{-1-a}k}{4^k}\e 0\mod{p^2}
\qtq{for}\ap\e 1\mod 2.$$
Let
$(a)_k=a(a+1)\cdots(a+k-1)=(-1)^kk!\b{-a}k$ and
$${}_rF_s\biggl(\begin{matrix} a_1,\ldots,a_r\\
b_1,\ldots,b_s\end{matrix}
\biggm|z\biggr)=1+\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\f{(a_1)_k\cdots(a_r)_k}
{(b_1)_k\cdots(b_s)_k}\cdot \f{z^k}{k!}.$$
After
reading the author's preprint (arXiv:1101.1050) involving
(1.4)-(1.6), in the email to the author on January 11, 2011 Wadim
Zudilin wrote: ``It's probably worth mentioning that the proofs of
Theorems 2.1, 2.4 and possibly Theorem 3.1 from your arXiv:1101.1050
can be simplified. Your congruences assume the form
$$\left( \sum_{k=0}^{p-1} \frac{(a)_k (1-a)_k}{k!^2} x^k \right)^2
\e \sum_{k=0}^{p-1} \frac{(a)_k (1-a)_k}{k!^2} \binom{2k}{k}
(x(1-x))^k \mod {p^2}, $$
where $a=1/3$, $1/4$ or $1/6$ ($1/2$ is possible as well). Note that
this follows from the identity
$$ \left( \sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{(a)_k (1-a)_k}{k!^2} x^k \right)^2
= \sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{(a)_k (1-a)_k}{k!^2} \binom{2k}{k}
(x(1-x))^k $$
truncated to $p$ terms. If $k>p/2$, then the coefficients on
both sides
are $0\mod {p^2}$ (as you already used in the proof, e.g., of Theorem
2.1)." In the email on January 15, 2011 Zudilin wrote: The
identity is a combination of the Gauss quadratic
transformation ([Ba, p.88, Eq. (2)])
$${}_2F_1\biggl(\begin{matrix} A, \, B \\ A+B+\frac12 \end{matrix}
\biggm|4z(1-z)\biggr) ={}_2F_1\biggl(\begin{matrix} 2A, \, 2B \\
A+B+\frac12 \end{matrix} \biggm|z\biggr),$$ and Clausen's original
identity ([Sl, p.75, Eq.(2.5.7)])
$${}_2F_1\biggl(\begin{matrix} a, \, b \\ a+b+\frac12 \end{matrix}
\biggm|z\biggr)^2 ={}_3F_2\biggl(\begin{matrix} 2a, \, 2b, \, a+b \\
a+b+\frac12, \, 2a+2b \end{matrix} \biggm|z\biggr).$$
\par Let $p$ be an odd prime and $a\in\Bbb Z_p$. In this note,
inspired by Zudilin's
comments we give an elementary proof of the following generalization
of (1.4)-(1.6):
$$\Big(\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b ak\b {-1-a}kx^k\Big)^2\e
\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k\b ak\b {-1-a}k(x(1-x))^k\mod{p^2}.$$ As an
application, for $m\in\Bbb Z_p$ with
$m\not\e 0\mod p$ we show that
$$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k\b ak\b{-1-a}k}{m^k}\e 0\mod p
\qtq{implies}\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k\b ak\b{-1-a}k}{m^k}\e 0\mod
{p^2}.$$
\section*{2. Main results}
\par\q\pro{Lemma 2.1 ([S3, Lemma 3.2])} For any nonnegative integer $n$
we have
$$P_n(\sqrt{1+4x})^2=\sum_{k=0}^n\b nk\b {n+k}k\b{2k}kx^k.$$
\endpro
\par As Zudilin noted, Lemma 2.1 can also be deduced from
Clausen's identity, Gauss' quadratic transformation for
hypergeometic series and (1.1).
\pro{Theorem 2.1} Let $p$ be an odd prime and
$a\in\Bbb Z_p$. Then
$$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k\b ak\b{-1-a}kx^k
\e P_{\ap}(\sqrt{1-4x})^2\e P_{p-1-\ap}(\sqrt{1-4x})^2\mod p.$$
\endpro
Proof. By Lemma 2.1,
$$\align P_{\ap}(\sqrt{1-4x})^2
&=\sum_{k=0}^{\ap}\b{2k}k\b{\ap}k\b{\ap+k}k (-x)^k
\\&=\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k\b{\ap}k\b{\ap+k}k (-x)^k
\\&\e \sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k\b ak\b{a+k}k (-x)^k
\\&=\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k\b ak\b{-1-a}k x^k\mod p.
\endalign$$
To complete the proof, we note that $P_{p-1-\ap}(t)\e P_{\ap}(t)
\mod p$ by [S4, Lemma 2.2].
\par{\bf Remark 2.1} In the cases $a=-\f 12,-\f 13,-\f 14,-\f 16$,
Theorem 2.2 was given by the author in [S2, Theorem 4.1], [S3,
Theorems 3.2 and 4.2] and [S5, Theorem 4.1].
\pro{Corollary 2.1} Let $p$ be an odd prime and $a,x\in\Bbb Z_p$.
Then $\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k\b ak\b{-1-a}kx^k\e 0\mod p$ implies
$$P_{\ap}(\sqrt{1-4x})\e P_{p-1-\ap}(\sqrt{1-4x}) \e 0\mod p.$$
\endpro
Proof. By (1.1),
$$P_n(\sqrt{1-4x})=\f 1{2^n}(\sqrt{1-4x})^{n-2[\f n2]}
\sum_{k=0}^{[n/2]}\b nk(-1)^k\b{2n-2k}n(1-4x)^{[\f n2]-k}.$$ Thus
$P_n(\sqrt{1-4x})^2\e 0\mod p$ implies $P_n(\sqrt{1-4x})\e 0\mod p$.
Now applying Theorem 2.1 we deduce the result.
\pro{Lemma 2.2} For any nonnegative integer $n$ we have
$$\sum_{k=0}^n\b ak\b{-1-a}k\b a{n-k}\b{-1-a}{n-k}
=\sum_{k=0}^n\b{2k}k\b ak\b{-1-a}k\b k{n-k}(-1)^{n-k}.$$
\endpro
Proof. Let $S_1(n)$ and $S_2(n)$ be the sums on the left and right
hands of the identity, respectively. Using Maple and the Zeilberger
algorithm we find that for $i=1,2$,
$$n^3S_i(n)=(2n-1)(n^2-n-2a(a+1))S_i(n-1)+(n-1)(2a+n)(2a+2-n)S_i(n-2)\
(n\ge 2).$$ Since $S_1(0)=1=S_2(0)$ and $S_1(1)=-2a(a+1)=S_2(1)$,
applying the above we deduce that $S_1(n)=S_2(n)$.
\par{\bf Remark 2.2} In the cases $a=-\f 13,-\f 14,-\f 16$, the
identity was given by the author in [S2,S3,S5].
\pro{Theorem 2.2} Let $p$ be an odd prime and $a\in\Bbb Z_p$. Then
$$\Big(\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b ak\b {-1-a}kx^k\Big)^2\e
\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k\b ak\b {-1-a}k(x(1-x))^k\mod{p^2}.$$
\endpro
\par Taking $a=-\f 13,-\f 14,-\f 16$ in Theorem 2.2 and
then applying (1.7) we get (1.4)-(1.6). Thus, Theorem 2.2 is a
generalization of (1.4)-(1.6). \par Proof of Theorem 2.2. For
$k\in\{\f{p+1}2,\ldots,p-1\}$ we see that $p\mid \b{2k}k$ and
$$\align \b ak\b {-1-a}k&=(-1)^k\b ak\b{a+k}k
\\&=(-1)^k\f{(a+k)(a+k-1)\cdots (a-k+1)}{k!}\e 0\mod p.\endalign$$
Thus, applying Lemma 2.2 we see that
$$\align&\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k\b ak\b {-1-a}k(x(1-x))^k
\\&\e \sum_{k=0}^{(p-1)/2}\b{2k}k\b ak\b {-1-a}k(x(1-x))^k
\\&=\sum_{k=0}^{(p-1)/2}\b{2k}k\b ak
\b {-1-a}kx^k\sum_{r=0}^k\b kr(-x)^r
\\&=\sum_{n=0}^{p-1}x^n
\sum_{k=0}^{\min\{n,\f{p-1}2\}}\b{2k}k\b ak\b{-1-a}k\b
k{n-k}(-1)^{n-k}
\\&\e\sum_{n=0}^{p-1}x^n
\sum_{k=0}^n\b{2k}k\b ak\b{-1-a}k\b k{n-k}(-1)^{n-k}
\\&=\sum_{n=0}^{p-1}x^n
\sum_{k=0}^n\b ak\b{-1-a}k\b a{n-k}\b{-1-a}{n-k}
\\&=\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b ak\b{-1-a}kx^k\sum_{n=k}^{p-1}
\b a{n-k}\b{-1-a}{n-k}x^{n-k}
\\&=\Big(\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b ak\b{-1-a}kx^k\Big)
\Big(\sum_{r=0}^{p-1} \b ar\b{-1-a}rx^r-\sum_{r=p-k}^{p-1} \b
ar\b{-1-a}rx^r\Big)\mod {p^2}.
\endalign$$
For $0\le k\le p-1$ we see that $p\mid \b ak$ for $k>\ap$. For $0\le
k\le \ap$ and $p-k\le r\le p-1$ we see that $r\ge p-k>p-1-\ap$ and
so $p\mid \b{-1-a}r$. Hence for $0\le k\le p-1$ and $p-k\le r\le
p-1$ we have $p\mid \b ak\b{-1-a}r$, $p\mid \b{-1-a}k\b ar$ and so
$p^2\mid \b ak\b{-1-a}k\b ar\b{-1-a}r$. Now combining all the above
we deduce the result.
\pro{Theorem 2.3} Let $p$ be an odd prime and $m\in\Bbb Z_p$ with
$m\not\e 0\mod p$. Then
$$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k\b ak\b{-1-a}k}{m^k}\e 0\mod p
\qtq{implies}\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k\b ak\b{-1-a}k}{m^k}\e 0\mod
{p^2}.$$
\endpro
Proof. Suppose $\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k\b ak\b{-1-a}k}{m^k}\e
0\mod p$. By Corollary 2.1, $P_{\ap}(\sqrt{1-\f 4m})\e 0\mod p$.
Thus,
$$\align &\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b ak\b{-1-a}k\Ls{1-\sqrt{4/m}}2^k
\\&\e \sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b {\ap}k\b{-1-\ap}k\Ls{1-\sqrt{4/m}}2^k
\\&=\sum_{k=0}^{\ap}\b{\ap}k\b{\ap+k}k\Ls{\sqrt{4/m}-1}2^k
\\&=P_{\ap}\Big(\sqrt{1-\f 4m}\Big)\e 0\mod p.
\endalign$$
By Theorem 2.2,
$$\Big(\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b ak\b{-1-a}k\Ls{1-\sqrt{4/m}}2^k\Big)^2\e
\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k\b ak\b{-1-a}k}{m^k}\mod {p^2}.$$ Thus the
result follows.
Taking $a=-\f 12,-\f 13,-\f 14,-\f 16$ in Theorem 2.3 and then
applying (1.7) we deduce the following result.
\pro{Corollary 2.2}
Let $p$ be an odd prime, and $m\in\Bbb Z_p$ with $m\not\e 0\mod p$.
Then
$$\align &\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k^3}{m^k}\e 0\mod p
\qtq{implies} \sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k^3}{m^k}\e 0\mod {p^2},
\\&\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k^2\b{3k}k}{m^k}\e 0\mod p
\qtq{implies} \sum_{k=0}^{p-1} \f{\b{2k}k^2\b{3k}k}{m^k}\e 0\mod
{p^2},
\\&\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k^2\b{4k}{2k}}{m^k}\e 0\mod p
\qtq{implies} \sum_{k=0}^{p-1} \f{\b{2k}k^2\b{4k}{2k}}{m^k}\e 0\mod
{p^2}\endalign$$ and
$$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k\b{3k}k\b{6k}{3k}}{m^k}\e 0\mod p
\qtq{implies} \sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k\b{3k}k\b{6k}{3k}}{m^k}\e
0\mod {p^2}.$$
\endpro
\par We remark that Corollary 2.2 can be easily deduced from [S2, Theorem
4.1], [S3, Theorems 3.2 and 4.2] and [S5, Theorem 4.1].
\pro{Theorem
2.4} Let $p$ be an odd prime and $u\in\Bbb Z_p$.
\par $(\t{\rm i})$ If $u\not\e \f 14,\f 1{16}\mod p$ and
$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k^2\b{3k}k\sls{u^2}{(1-4u)^3}^k\e 0\mod p$,
then
$$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k^2\b{3k}k\Ls{-u}{(1-16u)^3}^k \e
0\mod{p^2}.$$
\par $(\t{\rm ii})$ If
$u\not\e -\f 13,-\f 1{27}\mod p$ and
$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k^2\b{4k}{2k}\sls {u^3}{(1+3u)^4}^k\e 0\mod
p$, then
$$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\b{2k}k^2\b{4k}{2k}\Ls u{(1+27u)^4}^k\e
0\mod{p^2}.$$
\endpro
Proof. This is immediate from Corollary 2.2 and [S7, Corollaries 3.1
and 5.2].
\pro{Corollary 2.3} Let $p>3$ be a prime. Then
$$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k^2\b{3k}k}{1458^k}\e 0\mod {p^2}
\qtq{for}p\e 5\mod 6$$ and
$$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k^2\b{3k}k}{15^{3k}}\e 0\mod {p^2}
\qtq{for}p\e 11,14\mod {15}.$$
\endpro
Proof. Taking $u=-\f 12$ in Theorem 2.4(i) and then applying (1.2)
we obtain the first congruence. Taking $u=1$ in Theorem 2.4(i) and
then applying [S2, Theorems 4.6] we obtain the second congruence.
{\bf Remark 2.3} Let $p$ be a prime of the form $6k+5$. In [S7] the
author proved that $\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k^2\b{3k}k}{1458^k}\e
0\mod p$ and conjectured that
$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1}\f{\b{2k}k^2\b{3k}k}{1458^k}\e 0\mod {p^3}$.
\par\q
\newline{\bf Acknowledgment}
\par\q
\newline The author is indebted to Wadim Zudilin for his
contribution to Theorem 2.2. See comments in Section 1.
|
\section{Introduction}
The Goos-H\"anchen (GH) lateral shift is an optical phenomenon in which a spatially limited beam reflected at an interface near conditions of total internal reflection is displaced from the incident beam position. Although conjectured by Isaac Newton in the 18th century \cite{Newton1}, experimental evidence was only provided in 1943 by Hilda H\"anchen (a doctoral student at the time) and her thesis advisor Fritz Goos \cite{Hanchentesis,Goos-Hanchen1}.
The effect was theoretically explained by Artmann \cite{Artmann}, who noted that each plane wave component in the expansion of the incident beam undergoes a slightly different phase change after total internal reflection, so the sum of all the reflected components produces a lateral displacement of the reflected beam from the geometrical optics prediction. When the stationary phase approximation is used to calculate the sum of all the reflected components, the lateral beam shift is given by
\begin{equation}
\Delta = - \frac{d\varphi}{d\alpha},
\label{stationary}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ is the tangential component of the wave vector in the medium of incidence and $\varphi$ is the phase difference between the reflected and incident waves.
Incidentally, we note that Artmann's argument shows that a prerequisite for the existence of a Goos-H\"anchen shift is not the excitation of surface or evanescent waves but rather the phases of the different plane wave components in the expansion of the incident beam being shifted differently upon reflection.
The GH lateral shift and other nonspecular phenomena \cite{Nasalski2}, such as beam profile deformation, focal displacement, spatial waist modification and angular deviation, have been theoretically investigated in diverse configurations which include multilayers \cite{Tamir1} and periodic structures \cite{Zhang}.
For beams reflected from a single flat interface, the GH effect is much smaller than for beams reflected from periodically corrugated or multilayered structures, in which the shift could be of the same order of magnitude as the beam width \cite{tamirbertoni}.
Apart from the case of linear isotropic dielectric media, nonspecular phenomena have been estimated and measured for other kind of homogeneous materials, such as chiral \cite{Bonomo82}, anisotropic uniaxial \cite{Bonomo57,Bonomo73,Bonomo75} or dielectric--magnetic media with negative refraction index \cite{berman,NPVLakhtakiaSLABS,NPVLakhtakia}.
A unified linear algebra approach to study the generalized shifts for the polarization components of reflected light beams is presented in \cite{NJP-gottedennis}.
For a self-consistent description of the GH shift and related beam-shift phenomena together with an overview of their most important extensions and generalizations, the reader is referred to \cite{BliokhAiello}.
For total internal reflection from a boundary between two positive index media, the GH shift is typically the same order of magnitude as the wavelength and positive (i.e., the reflected beam is shifted to the other side of the normal from the incident beam).
On the contrary, for reflection from a metallic boundary and provided that the beam is p polarized, the GH shift may be negative (i.e., the reflected beam can be shifted towards the same side of the normal as the incident beam).
As shown in Ref. \cite{Lai}, this negative shift is due to the fact that the p polarized evanescent wave in the metal is {\em backward}, i.e., it has an energy flow opposite to the direction of the phase velocity along the interface.
For total internal reflection at the boundary between a positive index medium and a negative index medium
\cite{berman,NPVLakhtakiaSLABS,NPVLakhtakia}, the lateral shift is also negative because the evanescent wave is again backward \cite{ishimaru1}.
Although the beam shift at a single flat interface can be either positive or negative depending on the type of the surface waves (forward or backward) excited by the incoming beam, the same is not true for beam reflection from other structures. For example, it is well known (see \cite{physicalorigin} and references therein) that the excitation of a forward surface wave in a prism-waveguide coupling system can result in either a positive or a negative GH
shift. However, the erroneous belief that the excitation of a backward surface wave always results in a negative GH shift sometimes appears in the literature, particularly when multilayers with negative index materials are involved \cite{Shadrivov1,Chen,mentira}.
The purpose of this paper is twofold:
(a) to study the lateral displacement of spatially limited beams reflected from Attenuated Total Reflection (ATR) structures under conditions of resonant excitation of
backward surface plasmon polaritons (SPPs) and
(b)
to apply the phenomenological model presented in \cite{zeller_incidente}
to clearly evidence that the excitation of backward surface waves in multilayers with negative index metamaterials can lead to both negative and positive (and not exclusively negative) GH shifts,
depending on whether the thickness of the coupling layer is higher or lower than a critical value representing a real zero of the reflection coefficient.
The plan of this paper is as follows. In Section \ref{teoria} we present some technical background and two alternative methods that will be used to numerically calculate the GH lateral shift, namely the stationary phase approximation and the rigorous calculation of the field distribution of the reflected beam.
In Section \ref{zero-pole} we discuss the GH shift near conditions of resonant coupling between the incident field and backward surface waves in terms of the behavior of the complex poles and zeroes of the reflection coefficient \cite{zeller_incidente}.
We give examples that show the existence of a critical thickness of the coupling layer: above this critical value the lateral shift is positive, whereas below this critical value the lateral shift is negative.
In Section \ref{resultados} we present rigorous calculations of the transverse distribution of the reflected electric field near the resonant excitation of the backward surface plasmon polariton. We investigate the influence of the angle of incidence and the thickness of the ATR device for the optimal condition of coupling between the incident radiation and backward SPPs. Large (negative or positive) GH shifts are obtained, accompanied by a splitting of the reflected beam.
In Section \ref{conclusiones} we summarize and discuss the obtained results.
\section{GH shift calculation} \label{teoria}
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
\resizebox{0.50\textwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{figure1.eps}}
\caption{Schematic diagram of the system. It shows the lateral shift $\Delta$ of a bounded beam at an interface. The dashed lines show the boundaries of the reflected beam as predicted by geometrical optics theory.}
\label{sistema}
\end{figure}
Since the spatial periodicity associated with surface plasmon polaritons is less than the spatial periodicity which could be induced by an incident photon on the surface, surface plasmon polaritons cannot be resonantly excited by plane waves. This difficulty can be overcome by using ATR techniques, which require the introduction of a second surface, usually the base of an isosceles prism. In the Kretschmann configuration, the prism is positioned against the plasmonic medium (metal o metamaterial), while in the Otto configuration \cite{ottoNC} the prism is positioned very close to the surface of the plasmonic medium.
Figure \ref{sistema} shows an Otto--ATR structure illuminated by a spatially limited gaussian beam (width $2a$).
The beam is incident upon the base of the prism at $y=0$, the center of the beam waist is located at $x=0$ and the angle of incidence of the beam axis is $\theta_{0}$.
Medium 3 is a magnetic metamaterial with complex values of electric permittivity $\varepsilon_{3}$ and magnetic permeability $\mu_{3}$. These constitutive parameters satisfy the condition for power flow and phase velocity in opposite directions \cite{MOTL41_315AnewConditionNPV}.
Medium 1 (the prism) and medium 2 (the coupling layer, thickness $d$) are nonmagnetic ($\mu_{1}=\mu_{2}=1$) and have real and positive electric permittivities ($\varepsilon_{1}$ and $\varepsilon_{2}$ respectively).
When the values of the relative constitutive parameters $\varepsilon_{3}/\varepsilon_{2}$ and $\mu_{3}/\mu_{2}$ are properly chosen \cite{darmanyanOC}, the interface 2--3 between the coupling layer and the metamaterial can support SPPs with time-averaged Poynting vector directed opposite to the phase velocity (backward SPPs). The examples of this paper are for the case $\Re \;(\varepsilon_{3}/\varepsilon_{2}) < -1$, that corresponds to $s$-polarized backward SPPs.
When s-polarized incident radiation reaches the base of the prism with an angle $\theta_{0}$ greater than the critical angle of total reflection, the evanescent field can resonantly couple with the $s$-polarized backward SPP of the interface 2--3.
We assume that the electric field of the incident beam is given by
\begin{equation}
\textbf E_{i}= E_{i}(x,y=0)\,\hat z =\exp{[-(\frac{x}{a_{x}})^2+i\,\alpha_{0}\,x]}\,\hat z \,, \label{campoincidente1}
\end{equation}
with $\alpha_{0}=\frac{\omega}{c}\sqrt{\varepsilon_{1}\mu_{1}}\sin \theta_{0}$,
$c$ the speed of light in vacuum,
and $a_{x}=a\,\sec\,(\theta_{0})$.
An $\exp{(-i\omega t)}$ time dependence is implicit, with $\omega$ the angular frequency, $t$ the time and $i =\sqrt{-1}$.
Using a Fourier integral representation, the incident field can be written as
\begin{equation}
E_{i}(x,y=0)=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} A(\alpha)\exp{(i\,\alpha x)}\,d\alpha,
\label{campoincidente}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
A(\alpha)=\frac{a_{x}}{2\sqrt{\pi}}\exp{[-(\alpha-\alpha_{0})^{2}\,(\frac{a_{x}}{2})^{2}]}\,,
\label{espectro}
\end{equation}
is the angular spectral distribution of the incident beam.
The electric field of the reflected beam
at the interface $y=0$ is given by
\begin{equation}
E_{r}(x,y=0)
=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}R(\alpha)\,A(\alpha)\,\exp{(i\,\alpha\,x)}\,d\alpha \,
\label{ref}
\end{equation}
where $R(\alpha)=|R(\alpha)| \exp{i\varphi(\alpha)}$ is the complex reflection coefficient of the multilayer as a function of the spectral variable $\alpha=\frac{\omega}{c}\sqrt{\varepsilon_{1}\mu_{1}}\sin \theta$.
The beam shift can be obtained by finding the location where $|E_{r}(x,y=0)|$ is maximal.
Using the stationary-phase approximation and assuming a linear variation for $\varphi(\alpha)$ and that the beam experiences total
internal reflection, this location is given by equation (\ref{stationary}). However, if $\varphi$ is not a linear function of $\alpha$ or if $|R(\alpha)| \neq 1$ along the spectral width of the incident beam, the reflected beam may suffer severe distortions and the stationary-phase result given by equation (\ref{stationary}) is usually unsuitable to describe the lateral shift correctly \cite{Tamir1973}.
In such cases, it is preferable to define the GH shift using the normalized first moment of the electric field of the reflected beam \cite{Hugonin}
\begin{equation}
\Delta^{(1)}=\frac{\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}x|E_{r}(x,y=0)|^{2}dx}{\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}|E_{r}(x,y=0)|^{2}dx}\,.
\label{corrimiento}
\end{equation}
In this definition, the shift is expressed as an average of the $x$-position of the reflected beam on the surface of interest and no approximation is done over the amplitude and phase of the reflected plane wave components of the beam.
When the spectral width of the incident beam is small, it is possible to derive equation (\ref{stationary}) as a first order approximation of equation (\ref{corrimiento}) \cite{artmanDEmomento}.
\section{Zero-pole model for the GH shift} \label{zero-pole}
To numerically illustrate
the lateral displacement of spatially limited beams under conditions of resonant excitation of backward SPPs, we choose an Otto-ATR structure with $\varepsilon_{1}=2.25$, $\mu_{1}=1$, $\varepsilon_{2}=1$, $\mu_{2}=1$, $\varepsilon_{3}=-1.6+0.001\,i$ and $\mu_{3}=-0.7+0.001\,i$. For these constitutive parameters, the interface 2--3 between the coupling layer and the metamaterial supports $s$-polarized SPPs with time-averaged Poynting vector directed opposite to the phase velocity \cite{darmanyanOC}.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
\resizebox{0.50\textwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{figure2.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) Trajectories of the zero ($z_{0}$) and the pole ($z_{p}$) in the complex plane as functions of $d/\lambda$ for an Otto - ATR structure with $\varepsilon_{1}=2.25$, $\mu_{1}=1$, $\varepsilon_{2}=1$, $\mu_{2}=1$, $\varepsilon_{3}=-1.6+0.001\,i$ and $\mu_{3}=-0.7+0.001\,i$. For these constitutive parameters, the interface 2--3 supports $s$-polarized, backward SPPs.}
\label{ceroypolo}
\end{figure}
As shown by equation (\ref{ref}) the distortions of the reflected beam are ruled by the behavior of $R(\alpha)=|R(\alpha)| \exp{i\varphi(\alpha)}$. The exact form of this reflection coefficient is given for instance by equation (1) in \cite{zeller_incidente}.
However, to clearly evidence the facts that i) the excitation of backward surface waves can lead to both negative and positive (and not exclusively negative) GH shifts and that ii) the sign of the GH shift depends on wheater the value of the coupling layer thickness is higher or lower than the critical value characteristic of the ATR structure, first we choose to represent this quantity within the frame of a phenomenological model based on the properties of the complex poles and zeroes of the reflection coefficient.
According to this model, used previously for the case of Kretschmann-ATR structures with metamaterials \cite{zeller_incidente}, the reflection coefficient $R$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
R (z,d/\lambda)= \zeta(z,d/\lambda)\,\frac{z-z_{0}(d/\lambda)}{z-z_{p}(d/\lambda)},
\label{rmodelo}
\end{equation}
where $z$ is the analytic continuation of $\sin \theta$ to the complex plane, $z_{0}$ and $z_{p}$ denote respectively the complex zero and the complex pole of $R$, $\lambda$ is the wavelength in vacuum and $\zeta(z,d/\lambda)$ is a complex regular function near $z_{0}$ and $z_{p}$ that does not change significantly near $z_{p}$.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
\resizebox{0.50\textwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{figure3.eps}}
\caption{Phase $\varphi$ of the reflection coefficient for an Otto-ATR structure with $\varepsilon_{1}=2.25$, $\mu_{1}=1$, $\varepsilon_{2}=1$, $\mu_{2}=1$, $\varepsilon_{3}=-1.6+0.001\,i$, $\mu_{3}=-0.7+0.001\,i$ and $d/\lambda=0.7$.}
\label{d07}
\end{figure}
As explained in \cite{zeller_incidente} (see figures 2 and 3 therein), one of the main characteristics of using the zero-pole model to represent the optical response near the excitation of SPPs is that it provides a direct visualization of the behavior of the phase curves $\varphi(\alpha)$ in terms of the spectral variable $\alpha$.
This characteristic makes the zero-pole model particularly suited for the study of the lateral GH shift, since the quantity that fixes the sign of the GH shift in the stationary phase approximation equation (\ref{stationary}) is precisely the derivative of the phase.
The interested reader is referred to \cite{zeller_incidente} for further details, here we limit ourselves to mentioning the key result regarding the sign of the GH shift, namely that phase curves $\varphi(\alpha)$ have a very different behavior depending on the location in the complex plane of both the zero and the pole: when $\Im(z_{0})\,\Im(z_{p})<0$, the phase curve $\varphi(\alpha)$ is a monotonically increasing function, whereas when $\Im(z_{0})\,\Im(z_{p})>0$, the phase curve is a monotonically decreasing function, exhibiting first a maximum and then a minimum. In terms of the sign of the GH shift, negative GH shifts should be expected in the first case, whereas positive GH shifts should be expected in the second case.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
\resizebox{0.50\textwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{figure4.eps}}
\caption{
Phase $\varphi$ of the reflection coefficient for an Otto-ATR structure with $\varepsilon_{1}=2.25$, $\mu_{1}=1$, $\varepsilon_{2}=1$, $\mu_{2}=1$, $\varepsilon_{3}=-1.6+0.001\,i$, $\mu_{3}=-0.7+0.001\,i$ and $d/\lambda=0.9$.}
\label{d09}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{ceroypolo}, where we plot the parametric trajectories of $z_{0}(d/\lambda)$ and $z_{p}(d/\lambda)$ calculated for the values of the constitutive parameters used in this example, clearly shows that both cases ($\Im(z_{0})\,\Im(z_{p})<0$, negative GH shift, or $\Im(z_{0})\,\Im(z_{p})>0$, positive GH shift) can occur near the excitation of a backward SPP.
The pole trajectory cannot cross the real axis, (if it did, infinite reflectance would result for a real angle of incidence), but the trajectory of the zero of the reflection coefficient is not limited and in this example it crosses the real axis for a critical value of $d/\lambda \approx 0.8$.
The value of $z_{0}$ ($\approx 0.74$) at this critical thickness of the coupling layer corresponds to an angle of incidence $\theta_{0}=47.8^{\circ}$ for which a plane wave is totally absorbed by the ATR structure.
We conclude that, for values of $d/\lambda$ lower than this critical value, the zero-pole model predicts that the function $\varphi(\alpha)$ is monotonically increasing (as the curve shown in figure \ref{d07} calculated for $d/\lambda=0.7$), and according to the stationary phase approximation, negative GH shifts are to be expected. On the other hand, for values of $d/\lambda$ above this critical value, the zero-pole model predicts that the function $\varphi(\alpha)$ is monotonically decreasing (as the curve shown in figure \ref{d09}, calculated for $d/\lambda=0.9$), and according to the stationary phase approximation the GH shift will be positive.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
\resizebox{0.50\textwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{figure5.eps}}
\caption{
(Color online)
Lateral shift as a function of the angle of incidence for $d/\lambda=0.7$ and different widths of the gaussian incident wave.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
\section{Transverse structure of the reflected beam} \label{resultados}
To verify the prediction from the zero-pole model and the stationary phase approximation that the sign of the GH shift near the excitation of a backward surface wave depends critically on the thickness of the coupling layer, we compare the results of the previous section with those obtained from the rigorous calculation of the spatial structure of the reflected beam (equation (\ref{ref})). The integrals in equation (\ref{ref}) and (\ref{corrimiento}) have been numerically calculated.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
\resizebox{0.50\textwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{figure6.eps}}
\caption{(Color online)
Lateral shift as a function of the angle of incidence for $d/\lambda=0.9$ and different widths of the gaussian incident wave.}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig1} (for $d/\lambda=0.7$, a value lower than the critical value) and \ref{fig2} (for $d/\lambda=0.9$, a value higher than the critical value) show curves of $\Delta^{(1)}$, the normalized first moment of the reflected electric field given by equation (\ref{corrimiento}), as functions of the angle of incidence $\theta$ and for different values of the beam width $a$.
In all the cases, the sign of $\Delta^{(1)}$ is in complete agreement with the
zero-pole model and the stationary phase approximation.
For both values of $d/\lambda$, the larger the width of the incident beam, the greater the peak value of $|\Delta^{(1)}|$.
Due to the shift of the SPP resonance with the coupling layer thickness, peak values occur for different angles of incidence
($\theta\approx48^{\circ}$ for $d/\lambda=0.7$ and $\theta\approx47.9^{\circ}$ for $d/\lambda=0.9$).
Note that large peak values for $|\Delta^{(1)}|$ are obtained in both cases. When $d/\lambda=0.7$, the peak values of $\Delta^{(1)}/\lambda$ are $-61.18$, $-89.19$ and $-97.02$ for $a/\lambda=50, 100$ and $200$ respectively, whereas when $d/\lambda=0.9$, the peak values of $\Delta^{(1)}/\lambda$ are $8.67$, $41.18$ and $80.53$ for $a/\lambda=50$, $100$ and $200$ respectively.
Under conditions as those considered in these examples, such as total absorptions and resonant excitation of SPPs, the transverse structure of the reflected beam can have a complicated form. Particularly, the spatial distribution in the beam can be asymmetric, so that the value of the shift defined by equation (\ref{stationary}) may not coincide with the value obtained from the first moment of the spatial structure of the reflected beam.
In these cases, and following a procedure similar to that presented in a paper by Tamir and Bertoni \cite{tamirbertoni}, it is possible to obtain a description which i) accounts for the deformation of the beam, ii) agrees quantitatively with the numerical calculations, and iii) takes advantage of the phenomenological model described by equation (\ref{rmodelo}).
The advantage of using the zero-pole model to represent the reflection coefficient is that the integrals in
equation (\ref{ref}) can be evaluated explicitly in terms of the complementary error function of complex argument \cite{tamirbertoni}. In this description, the electric field of the reflected beam at the interface $y = 0$ results
\begin{equation}
E_r (x,0)=\zeta\;E_{i}(x,0)\left[1- i\;\pi^{3/2} n_1 (z_p-z_0) \frac{a_x}{\lambda}\;\exp(\gamma^2)\;\mathrm{erfc}(-\gamma)\right]\,,
\label{E-r6}
\end{equation}
where $n_1=\sqrt{\varepsilon_{1}\mu_{1}}$ and $\mathrm{erfc}$ is the complementary error function evaluated at the complex argument $\gamma$
\begin{equation}
\gamma=-\frac{x}{a_x}+i\frac{a_x}{\lambda}\pi n_1(z-z_p) \,.
\label{gama}
\end{equation}
Thus, the reflected beam is obtained as a product of two terms: one with a Gaussian form, which is multiplied by another function so that the reflected field is no longer Gaussian.
To gain a deeper understanding of the distortions of the reflected beam, we have calculated the transverse distribution of the reflected electric field as a function of the $x$-coordinate. As shown in Figures \ref{perfiles07} and \ref{perfiles09}, the results obtained using equation (\ref{ref}) (solid lines) are in very good agreement with those obtained using equation (\ref{E-r6}) (circles).
Figure \ref{perfiles07} shows $|E_{r}(x,0)|$ (equation (\ref{ref})) for $d/\lambda=0.7$, $\theta=48.01^{\circ}$ (the angle of incidence for which the peaks in $\Delta^{(1)}$ occur, see figure \ref{fig1}) and for different values of the beam width $a$. The spatial distribution of the incident electric field (dashed line) is given as a reference.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
\resizebox{0.50\textwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{figure7a.eps}}
\resizebox{0.50\textwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{figure7b.eps}}
\resizebox{0.50\textwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{figure7c.eps}}
\caption{(Color online)
Profiles of $|E_{r}(x,0)|$ calculated with equation (\ref{ref})(solid line), $|E_{r}(x,0)|$ calculated with equation
(\ref{E-r6}) (circles) and the Gaussian incident field (dashed line) for $d/\lambda=0.7$, $\theta=48.01^{\circ}$ and values of $a/\lambda$ considered in figure \ref{fig1}.}
\label{perfiles07}
\end{figure}
In these examples we observe that the spatial distributions
are always shifted toward negative values of $x$, in total agreement with the
values of $\Delta$ and $\Delta^{(1)}$ obtained for a structure with the coupling layer thickness lower than the critical value. However, the profiles of the reflected fields are distorted with respect to the Gaussian profile of the incident beam, and the more severe distortion is obtained for the smallest beam width. The profiles exhibit a splitting of the reflected beam. As explained in \cite{Tamir}, the major peak is produced by the spectral components of the incident beam which are coupled to the excited SPP, while the minor peak is produced by the spectral components of the incident beam which are not coupled with SPPs.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
\resizebox{0.50\textwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{figure8a.eps}}
\resizebox{0.50\textwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{figure8b.eps}}
\resizebox{0.50\textwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{figure8c.eps}}
\caption{(Color online)
Profiles of $|E_{r}(x,0)|$ calculated with equation (\ref{ref})(solid line), $|E_{r}(x,0)|$ calculated with equation
(\ref{E-r6}) (circles) and the Gaussian incident field (dashed line) for $d/\lambda=0.9$, $\theta=47.86^{0}$ and values of $a/\lambda$ considered in figure \ref{fig2}.}
\label{perfiles09}
\end{figure}
For a structure with the coupling layer thickness higher than the critical value, the spatial distribution of reflected electric field is expected to be shifted toward positive values of $x$. The rigorous calculation of $|E_{r}(x,y=0)|$ confirms this expectation, as shown in figure \ref{perfiles09}, analogous to figure \ref{perfiles07}, but for $d/\lambda=0.9$ and
$\theta=47.86^{\circ}$ (the angle of incidence for which the larger values for $\Delta^{(1)}$ occur, see figure \ref{fig2}).
Except for the sign of the lateral shift, the features exhibited by the profiles in figure \ref{perfiles09} are completely analogous to those in figure \ref{perfiles07}. As in the previous example, a double peak structure in the reflected field profile is present and the more severe distortions occur for the smallest beam width.
\section{Conclusions} \label{conclusiones}
We have presented an exhaustive study of the GH lateral shift in Otto-ATR systems with negative index metamaterials near conditions of resonant coupling between the incident field and backward surface waves.
Although the GH beam shift at a {\em single flat interface} can be either positive or negative depending on the type of surface waves (forward or backward) excited by the incoming beam, the erroneous belief that the excitation of a backward surface wave always results in a negative GH shift frequently appears in the literature, particularly when multilayers with negative index materials are involved. To clearly evidence that the excitation of backward surface waves in multilayers with negative index metamaterials can lead to both negative and positive (and not exclusively negative) GH shifts, we have adapted to the Otto configuration the zero-pole model presented in \cite{zeller_incidente} for the Kretschmann configuration. This model predicts the existence of a critical thickness of the coupling layer: above this critical value the lateral shift is positive whereas below this critical value the lateral shift is negative. We have presented rigorous calculations of the transverse distribution of the reflected electric field near the resonant excitation of the backward surface plasmon polariton. These calculations show the existence of large (negative or positive) Goos-H\"anchen shifts accompanied by a splitting of the reflected beam and confirm the predictions of the zero-pole model.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The authors acknowledge the financial support of Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cient\'{\i}ficas y T\'ecnicas, (CONICET, PIP 451)
and Universidad de Buenos Aires (project UBA 20020130100718BA).
\section*{References}
|
\section{Introduction}
Nonlinear optical systems play an important role in the field of optics both in classical \cite{Boyd2003, Staliunas2002} and in quantum \cite{WMbook,Scullybook,Meystre1991,Hartmann07,Brandao08} regimes. Quantum mechanical effects, in particular, which are not explainable by classical optics, have triggered substantial research, especially in connection to modern applications such as high-precission measurements \cite{Goda08,Vahlbruch05,Treps03,Treps02} and quantum information communication and processing \cite{Braunstein05,Weedbrock12}. Importantly, the nonlinear nature of these systems leads to non-Gaussian states, which typically precludes an analytic treatment and therefore requires elaborate theoretical approaches \cite{CarmichaelBook1,CarmichaelBook2}.
In a system where the dynamical degrees of freedom evolve on different time scales, approximate descriptions of reduced complexity may be found. For example, \emph{adiabatic elimination} techniques can be exploited to derive effective equations of motion \cite{Mori65,ZollerBook}. In this work, we apply the recently introduced \emph{self-consistent projection operator theory} \cite{Degenfeld14} to the \emph{degenerate optical parametric oscillator}, and exemplify how it generalizes adiabatic elimination approaches. This theory takes dynamical back-action between the degrees of freedom into account and therefore does not require any time-scale separation. We expect our method to be directly applicable to other nonlinear quantum optical \cnb{models such as those for nondegenerate or multi-mode parametric oscillation \cite{Reid88,Drummond90,Navarrete08,Navarrete09}, lasing \cite{WMbook,Scullybook,MandelWolf,Breuer07}, optomechanical parametric oscillation \cite{OMPOCarlos,Nori}, or the dissipative \emph{Dicke model} \cite{DallaTorre,Parkins,Ritsch}}.
Degenerate optical parametric oscillators (DOPOs) have been extensively studied in the past \cite{Meystre1991,CarmichaelBook2} and are one of the paradigm examples of a system subject to a driven and dissipative phase transition. \cnb{It is formulated as a bosonic problem with two modes, \emph{signal} and \emph{pump}, subject to dissipation and interacting nonlinearly}. In the adiabatic limit of a fast decaying pump mode, an effective master equation can be derived by means of standard projection operator approaches \cite{CarmichaelBook2} and due to its reduced complexity, the steady state can be found by solving the corresponding Fokker-Planck equations for the positive P distribution \cite{Wolinsky88,Drummond80}. Yet away from the adiabatic limit one has to resort to numerical simulations or perturbative treatments \cite{Gardiner80,Kinsler93,Kinsler95,Chaturvedi02,Chaturvedi99,Pope00}. Non-equilibrium many-body techniques such as the Keldysh formalism have also been employed to study steady-state properties \cite{FleischhauerKeldysh,Mertens93,Swain93}. \cnb{While the application of all these techniques has allowed to deepen our understanding of DOPOs and phase transitions in driven dissipative quantum systems enormously, it is important to note that they are naturally built to determine the evolution of observables, making the determination of the quantum state of the optical fields very challenging, if not impossible.}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{DOPO_illustration_from_Carlos.pdf}
\caption{\label{concept c-MoP} \cnb{Sketch of the self-consistent projection operator theory for the DOPO, which consists of an optical cavity containing a crystal with second-order optical nonlinearity, pumped by a laser at frequency $\omega_p=2\omega_s$ (pump mode), and capable of producing a field at the subharmonic frequency $\omega_s$ (signal mode) via down-conversion in the crystal. For the sake of illustration, we consider in the figure a doubly-resonant semi-monolithic configuration in which each face of the crystal acts as a mirror for one of the modes, but is transparent for the other, allowing to create independent cavities for the pump and signal modes via two additional partially transmitting mirrors \cite{Gigan06}. In our approach, the full problem} described by the state $\rho(t)$ and the Liouvillian $\mathcal L$ is mapped onto two coupled equations for the signal and pump modes. In one of the equations, the signal mode considered as the system is described by an effective master equation for its reduced state $\dot\rho_s(t)=\mathcal L_s(\rho_p)\rho_s(t)$ with an effective Liouvillian depending on the state of the pump, which plays here the role of an environment. The other equation considers the reversed scenario with the pump taking the role of the system while the signal is interpreted as the environment leading to the effective equation $\dot\rho_p(t)=\mathcal L_p(\rho_s)\rho_p(t)$. In this way the two equations form a closed set.}
\end{figure}
Our approach, in contrast, derives a set of coupled equations for the reduced states of the two \cnb{optical modes} of the DOPO. By numerically solving these equations, we find the reduced density matrices of both the pump and the signal modes. \cnb{We test the accuracy of our method by comparing its results with those of the full DOPO problem in regions of the parameter space where this is numerically tractable}. Our findings show that our method is remarkably close to the exact results, both for steady states and dynamics, while being less numerically demanding than the full simulation of the DOPO problem. It thus gives access to the reduced states of the cavity modes in regions of the parameters that are inaccessible to the latter.
The possibly largest reduction of complexity in nonlinear quantum optical systems, however, \cnb{comes from the application of Gaussian approximations} on the state of the system. Within a Gaussian theory one can \cnb{basically} cover the whole parameter space \cnb{efficiently to determine both steady-state and} dynamical quantities such as two-time correlation functions. The simplest and most widely used Gaussian approach is known as the \emph{linearization technique} \cnb{\cite{Drummond80,Lugiato81}, which consists in assuming that the system configuration is, on average, in its classical state, but is constantly driven out of it by some ``small'' quantum fluctuations. While this technique provides a good qualitative picture of the physics in many, albeit not all, systems, it leads to unphysical predictions close to the critical points of the classical theory, e.g., to infinite photon numbers in the case of the DOPO \cite{Collet84}. These unphysical predictions can be regularized by applying a more elaborate Gaussian state approximation where the system is not forced to stay in its classical state, but chooses instead an average configuration more consistent with the quantum fluctuations that perturb it \cite{Carlos14}}. Motivated by such an idea, we apply a \cnb{Gaussian approximation within the self-consistent projection operator theory}, and show that it gives more accurate quantitative results \cnb{than any of the usual Gaussian techniques}, as it does not assume a Gaussian state for the entire system, but only for the reduced state of one of the modes.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~\ref{Sec:theory} we \cnb{introduce the DOPO model}. We also discuss its symmetries and briefly elaborate on the standard linearization approach in Sec.~\ref{sec:symmetries}. Sec.~\ref{c-MoP theory} reviews the main concepts of the self-consistent projection operator theory and introduces the \emph{self-consistent Mori projector} (c-MoP) equations, which lie at the center of our study. Our theory provides a systematic extension of mean-field approaches as demonstrated in Sec.~\ref{sec:MF} and reproduces known results in the \emph{adiabatic} and the \emph{diabatic} limits \cnb{introduced} in Sec.~\ref{sec:ada limit}. \cnb{An efficient procedure designed to deal with the \emph{non-Markovian} structure of the c-MoP equations is provided in Sec.~\ref{sec: born terms}, which we use in Sec.~\ref{sec: full numerics} to test} the accuracy of our method for steady-state quantities and to present \cnb{quantum states of the signal mode}. \cnb{A Gaussian state approximation on the c-MoP equations is performed in Sec.~\ref{sec:GSA}, which is shown to lead} to highly accurate quantitative results as compared to \cnb{previous} linearization techniques. \cnb{As a further test, we check in Sec.~\ref{sec:dyn} that our method provides the same level of accuracy for the dynamics, as it does for steady states}. Finally, we conclude our work and present an outlook in Sec.~\ref{conclusions}.
\section{The degenerate optical parametric oscillator}\label{Sec:theory}
\cnb{A DOPO consists of a driven optical cavity containing a crystal with second order optical nonlinearity, see Fig.~\ref{concept c-MoP}. Two relevant resonances at frequencies $\omega_s$ (\emph{signal} mode) and $\omega_p=2\omega_s$ (\emph{pump} mode) exist in the cavity, which are nonlinearly coupled via \emph{parametric down-conversion} inside the crystal, capable of transforming a pump photon into a pair of signal photons, and vice versa. We assume that the external driving laser is resonant with the pump mode.}
Including damping through the partially transmitting mirrors at rates $\gamma_p$ and $\gamma_s$ for the pump and signal modes, respectively, \cnb{the equation governing the evolution of the state $\rho$ of the system in a picture rotating at the laser frequency is given by \cite{Meystre1991,CarmichaelBook2}}
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{DOPO eqs}
\dot \rho(t)&= \left[\epsilon_p (a_p^\dagger-a_p)+\frac{\chi}{2} (a_p a_s^{\dagger \,2}-a_p^\dagger a_s^2)\, , \rho(t)\right] \\
&+\sum_{j=s,p} \gamma_j [2 a_j \rho(t) a_j^\dagger-a_j^\dagger a_j \rho(t)-\rho(t) a_j^\dagger a_j],
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\cnb{where $\chi/2$ is the down-conversion rate and $\epsilon_p$ is proportional to square root of the injected laser's power. We have defined bosonic operators $a_p$ and $a_s$ for the pump and signal modes, respectively, which satisfy canonical commutation relations $[a_j,a^\dagger_l]=\delta_{jl}$ and $[a_j,a_l]=0$. Note that the} nonlinear interaction is third order in the field operators, precluding a general analytic solution of Eq.~(\ref{DOPO eqs}) to which we refer as the \emph{Liouville-von Neumann equation} or simply the full master equation of the DOPO.
\subsection{Linearization approach and symmetry breaking}\label{sec:symmetries}
The right hand side of Eq.~(\ref{DOPO eqs}) can also be written in a shorthand notation by introducing a \cnb{superoperator $\mathcal L$ (\emph{Liouvillian})}, such that $\dot \rho(t)=\mathcal L \rho(t)$. For the major part of this work, we will be interested in the steady
state $\rho_{ss}=\lim_{t\rightarrow \infty}\rho(t)$, which fullfills the equation $\mathcal L \rho_{ss}=0$. Due to the dissipation acting on both modes and because an arbitrarily large but finite truncation will always provide an arbitrarily good approximation, we expect the steady state to be unique \cite{Schirmer,Rivas12}.
We further note the invariance of the Liouvillian under a unitary transformation \cnb{$U_2$ of Ising-type $Z_2$ which transforms $a_s$ as $U_2a_sU_2^\dagger=-a_s$.
Since the steady state is unique, this implies that it has to be invariant under the $Z_2$ transformation too, i.e. $U_2\rho_{ss}U_2^\dagger=\rho_{ss}$}. This in turn leads to vanishing steady state expectation values which include odd powers of the signal field operator $a_s$. In particular $\langle a_s\rangle=0=\langle a_p a_s^\dagger\rangle$, as for example \cnb{$\langle a_s\rangle=\text{Tr}\{a_s \rho_{ss}\}=\text{Tr}\{U_2a_sU_2^\dagger U_2\rho_{ss}U_2^\dagger\}=-\langle a_s\rangle$}.
However, the most \cnb{common technique used to analyze Eq.~(\ref{DOPO eqs}), known as the \emph{linearization approach}, breaks this $Z_2$ symmetry \cite{Drummond80,Lugiato81}, which has to be restored ``by hand'' at the end of the calculation, following the procedure that we explain at the end of Sec.~\ref{sec: full numerics}. Even though this method is more naturally introduced in the Heisenberg picture using the language of quantum Langevin equations, it also admits a Schr\"odinger picture interpretation in terms of two successive approximations in the master equation.
It starts by writing the bosonic operators as $a_j = \alpha_j+\delta a_j$, with $\alpha_j = \langle a_j \rangle$ and hence $\langle \delta a_j \rangle = 0$. In the first approximation, the fluctuation operators $\delta a_j$ are neglected altogether; the evolution equations for $\langle a_j \rangle$ (Bloch equations), then provide a set of nonlinear differential equations for the amplitudes $\alpha_j$, which in the case of the DOPO read}
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{class eqs}
\dot{\alpha}_p=& \,\epsilon_p-\gamma_p \alpha_p-\frac{\chi}{2} \alpha_s^2 \\
\dot{\alpha}_s=&-\gamma_s \alpha_s+\chi \alpha_p \alpha_s^*.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
These correspond to the classical equations of the system, as they could have been obtained directly from Eq.~(\ref{DOPO eqs}) by assuming a coherent state for $\rho_{ss}$, \cnb{or simply from Maxwell's equations}. Depending on the \emph{injection parameter} $\sigma=\chi\epsilon_p/\gamma_s\gamma_p$ one finds two types of steady-state solutions of Eq.~(\ref{class eqs}). \cnb{One of them has $\alpha_s=0$ and $\alpha_p= \epsilon_p/\gamma_p$, and hence it does not break the symmetry; it is known as the \emph{below-threshold solution}, and is only stable for $\sigma < 1$. The other solution is bistable and has $\chi \alpha_s=\pm \sqrt{2 (\chi\epsilon_p-\gamma_s)}$ and $\chi \alpha_p=\gamma_s$, hence breaking the $Z_2$ symmetry; it is known as the \emph{above-threshold solution}, and exists only for $\sigma>1$.} The threshold point $\sigma=1$ marks a \emph{critical point} where the classical theory predicts a phase transition from a signal-off phase with $\alpha_s=0$ to a signal-on phase with $\alpha_s\neq0$. In the signal-off phase all injected power $\epsilon_p$ goes into the pump mode, while \cnb{after crossing the critical point all the extra injection is transferred to the signal mode}, see the gray thin solid line in Fig.~\ref{num c-MoP}.
\cnb{Once the classical solutions have been identified, the second approximation consists in coming back to the original master equation with the bosonic operators written as $a_j = \alpha_j+\delta a_j$, and neglecting any term which goes beyond quadratic order in the fluctuation operators $\delta a_j$. This leads to a so-called \emph{linearized master equation} which can be easily solved.}
\cnb{One has to keep in mind that this linearized theory can only be trustworthy when the classical solution is a strong attractor, because only then the quantum fluctuations driving the system out of equilibrium are strongly damped, and quantum noise can be treated as a small perturbation. This means that, in particular, any predictions obtained through this method cannot be trusted in the vicinities of critical points of the classical theory: points of the parameter space where one solution becomes unstable, making way for a new solution to kick in, hence creating non-analytic behaviour in some observable, that is, a classical \emph{phase transition}. Indeed, this is exactly the case for the DOPO, in which this linearized description breaks down at threshold, offering unphysical predictions such as infinite photon numbers in the signal field (as illustrated by the gray thin line in Fig.~\ref{GSA c-MoP}).}
\section{Self-consistent Mori Projector Approach}\label{c-MoP theory}
To explain the approach employed in our calculations, we will first recapitulate some basic ideas of the self-consistent projection operator theory \cite{Degenfeld14}. The first step is to divide the entire system into subsystems. In the DOPO \cnb{this naturally amounts to consider} the pump mode described by its reduced state $\rho_p(t)\equiv \text{Tr}_s \{\rho(t)\}$ and the signal mode described by $\rho_s(t)\equiv \text{Tr}_p \{\rho(t)\}$. In the spirit of \emph{open system theory} \cite{Zwanzig01,Breuer07} we will first treat the pump mode as an ``environment'' for the signal mode, which then takes the role of the open ``system''. Technically this is done by introducing the time-dependent, \emph{self-consistent Mori projector} $\mathcal{P}_t^p(\cdot)=\rho_p(t) \otimes \text{Tr}_p\{\cdot\}$ whose action on the full state $\rho(t)$ gives the factorized state $\mathcal{P}_t^p \rho(t)=\rho_p(t) \otimes \rho_s(t)$. The term ``self-consistent'' is chosen because the state of the pump in $\mathcal{P}_t^p$ is not a time-independent reference state but is rather obtained consistently from the time-evolving state $\rho(t)$ of the full dynamics. Using this projector, we derive a generalized \emph{Nakajima-Zwanzig} equation which is an exact equation for the reduced state of the signal mode \cite{Degenfeld14}. The effective Liouvillian describing such a Nakajima-Zwanzig equation will depend on the state of the pump $\rho_p(t)$. In order to obtain a closed set of equations we need to reverse the scenario and treat the pump mode as the ``system'' and the signal mode as the environment, see Fig.~\ref{concept c-MoP} for an illustration.
Again analogous to open system theory, we split the full Liouvillian $\mathcal L$ from Eq.~(\ref{DOPO eqs}) into three parts. After performing a displacement $a_p\rightarrow a_p+\tilde \alpha_p$, where $\tilde \alpha_p$ will be chosen later, see Sec.~\ref{sec:MF}, we write $\mathcal L= \mathcal L_p+\mathcal L_s+\mathcal L_I$, with
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{setup parts}
\mathcal L_p(\cdot)&= \left[ a_p^\dagger (\epsilon_p-\gamma_p \tilde \alpha_p)-a_p (\epsilon_p-\gamma_p \tilde \alpha_p^*)\,,\,\cdot\,\,\right]+\gamma_p D_{a_p}(\cdot) \\
\mathcal L_s(\cdot)&= \frac{\chi}{2} \left[ \tilde \alpha_p a_s^{\dagger \,2}-\tilde \alpha_p^* a_s^{2}\,,\,\cdot\,\,\right]+\gamma_s D_{a_s}(\cdot) \\
\mathcal L_I (\cdot)&= \frac{\chi}{2} \left[ a_p a_s^{\dagger \,2}-a_p^\dagger a_s^2\,,\,\cdot\,\,\right],
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where \cnb{we have defined the standard Lindblad superoperator $\mathcal D_{b}(\cdot)=2 b(\cdot)b^\dagger-b^\dagger b(\cdot)-(\cdot)b^\dagger b$, with $b$ being an arbitrary operator}. The displacement $a_p\rightarrow a_p+\tilde \alpha_p$ moves the large coherent background of the pump field into the free evolution of the signal $\mathcal L_s$, keeping only the pump mode's fluctuations within the nonlinear signal-pump interaction $\mathcal L_I$. Such a step is important as our theory expands in powers of the interaction Liouvillian $\mathcal L_I$ in order to solve the Nakajima-Zwanzig equation. As in reference \cite{Degenfeld14} we will expand to second order in the system-environment interaction. This approximation is known as the \emph{Born approximation} \cite{Breuer07}.
The effective equations of the signal and the pump mode then read, \cnb{
\begin{align}
\dot{\rho}_s&(t)=\mathcal{L}_s\rho_s(t)+\frac{\chi}{2}\left[a_s^{\dagger 2}\langle a_p\rangle(t)-a_s^2\langle a_p\rangle\hspace{-0.06cm}^\ast\hspace{-0.06cm}(t),\rho_s(t)\right]
\label{s c-MoP eqs}
\\
& +\left( \frac{\chi}{2}\right)^2\left\{\left[a_s^2\,,\int_{0}^{t}dt^\prime e^{\mathcal{L}_{s}(t-t^{\prime })}\mathcal{K}_s(t,t^\prime)\rho_s(t^\prime)\right]+\text{H.c.}\right\}, \nonumber
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\dot{\rho}_p&(t)=\mathcal{L}_p \rho_p(t)+\frac{\chi}{2}\left[a_p \langle a_s^2\rangle\hspace{-0.06cm}^\ast\hspace{-0.06cm}(t)-a_p^\dagger\langle a_s^2\rangle(t)\,,\rho_p(t)\right]
\label{p c-MoP eqs} \\
& +\left(\frac{\chi}{2}\right)^2\left\{\left[a_p\,,\int_0^t dt^\prime e^{\mathcal{L}_p(t-t^\prime)}\mathcal{K}_p(t,t^\prime)\rho_p(t^\prime)\right]+\text{H.c.}\right\}, \nonumber
\end{align}
where we have defined the Kernel superoperators
\begin{align}\label{Ks}
\mathcal{K}_s(t,t^\prime)(\cdot)& =\delta a_s^2(t^\prime)(\cdot
)\,d_p^+(t,t^\prime)-(\cdot)\delta a_s^2(t^\prime)\,\tilde{d}_p^+(t,t^\prime)
\\
& -\delta a_s^{\dagger 2}(t^\prime)(\cdot)\,d_p^-(t,t^\prime)+(\cdot)\delta a_s^{\dagger 2}(t^\prime)\,\tilde{d}_p^-(t,t^\prime), \nonumber
\end{align}
\begin{align}\label{Kp}
\mathcal{K}_p(t,t^\prime)(\cdot)& =\delta a_p(t^\prime)(\cdot)\,d_s^+(t,t^\prime)-(\cdot)\delta a_p(t^\prime)\,\tilde{d}_s^+(t,t^\prime)
\\
& -\delta a_p^\dagger(t^\prime)(\cdot)\,d_s^-(t,t^\prime)+(\cdot)\delta a_p^\dagger(t^\prime)\,\tilde{d}_s^-(t,t^\prime),\nonumber
\end{align}
and for any operator $A_j$ acting on the signal ($j=s$) or pump ($j=s$) subspace, we have defined the corresponding fluctuation operator $\delta A_j(t)\equiv A_j-\text{Tr}_j\{A_j\,\rho_j(t)\}$}.
The state of the pump mode $\rho_p(t)$ enters \cnb{the signal mode's dynamics, eq.~(\ref{s c-MoP eqs}),} via $\langle a_p \rangle(t)\equiv\text{Tr}_p\{a_p\rho_p(t)\}$ and the correlation functions
\begin{align}\label{p corr func first}
d_p^+(t,t')=\text{Tr}_p\{a_p^\dagger e^{\mathcal L_p(t-t')}\delta a_p^\dagger(t') \rho_p(t')\},\\
\tilde d_p^+(t,t')=\text{Tr}_p\{a_p^\dagger e^{\mathcal L_p(t-t')} \rho_p(t') \delta a_p^\dagger(t')\},\nonumber\\
d_p^-(t,t')=\text{Tr}_p\{a_p^\dagger e^{\mathcal L_p(t-t')}\delta a_p(t') \rho_p(t')\},\nonumber\\
\tilde d_p^-(t,t')=\text{Tr}_p\{a_p^\dagger e^{\mathcal L_p(t-t')} \rho_p(t')\delta a_p(t')\}\nonumber,
\end{align}
In turn, the state of the signal mode $\rho_s(t)$ enters \cnb{the pump mode's dynamics, eq.~(\ref{p c-MoP eqs}),} via the expectation value $\langle a_s^2 \rangle(t)\equiv\text{Tr}_s\{a_s^2\rho_s(t)\}$ and the correlation functions
\begin{align}\label{s corr func}
d_s^+(t,t')=\text{Tr}_s\{a_s^{\dagger\,2} e^{\mathcal L_s(t-t')} \delta a_s^{\dagger\,2}(t') \rho_s(t')\},\\
\tilde d_s^+(t,t')=\text{Tr}_s\{a_s^{\dagger\,2} e^{\mathcal L_s(t-t')} \rho_s(t') \delta a_s^{\dagger\,2}(t')\},\nonumber\\
d_s^-(t,t')=\text{Tr}_s\{a_s^{\dagger\,2} e^{\mathcal L_s(t-t')} \delta a_s^2(t') \rho_s(t')\},\nonumber\\
\tilde d_s^-(t,t')=\text{Tr}_s\{a_s^{\dagger\,2} e^{\mathcal L_s(t-t')} \rho_s(t') \delta a_s^2(t')\}\nonumber.
\end{align}
Equations~(\ref{s c-MoP eqs}) and~(\ref{p c-MoP eqs}) should be understood as two coupled equations which represent effective equations for the reduced states of the signal and the pump mode. We refer to these two equations as the \textbf{c-MoP} (\textbf{c}onsistent \textbf{Mo}ri \textbf{P}rojector) equations of the DOPO. They can be thought of as \emph{non-Markovian} and \emph{nonlinear master equations} which do not rely on any time-scale separation between the modes. We will elaborate in detail on the limits where time-scale separation is present in Sec.~\ref{sec:ada limit}.
The only assumptions made so far are the Born approximation and the assumption of an initially factorized state $\rho(0)= \rho_p(0)\otimes\rho_s(0)$. The latter seems very reasonable by considering the vacuum as the state of the two modes before the driving laser is switched on. We also emphasize,
our approach does not ignore system-environment or rather signal-pump correlations. In fact, it has been shown \cite{Degenfeld14} that the \emph{Born term}, the term second order in $\mathcal L_I$ which is here proportional to $(\chi/2)^2$, clearly takes signal-pump correlations into account. We will show the crucial importance of the Born term in several examples below. Of course, c-MoP theory or any theory based on the concept of projection operators does not give access to explicit expressions for system-environment correlation functions. An example in this context could be the cross-correlation function $\langle a_p^\dagger a_s\rangle-\langle a_p^\dagger \rangle \langle a_s\rangle$.
The most striking advantage of projection operator theories and in particular of the c-MoP theory is the reduction of the complexity of the problem. In the example of the DOPO the complexity of the Liouville-von Neumann eq.~(\ref{DOPO eqs}) scales as $\dim \mathcal H_s \times \dim \mathcal H_p$, where $\mathcal H_{s/p}$ denotes the Hilbert space of the signal/pump modes, while the complexity of the c-MoP equations scale as $\dim \mathcal H_s+\dim \mathcal H_p$.
The self-consistent Mori-projector theory thus offers a very significant reduction of complexity.
\subsection{Mean-field Approximation}\label{sec:MF}
A merely approximate but very simple way of solving the c-MoP equations is to consider all terms up to first order in the interaction $\mathcal L_I$ only. Hence we drop all terms proportional to $\chi^2$ from eqs.~(\ref{s c-MoP eqs}) and~(\ref{p c-MoP eqs}). Within this approximation it does not make a difference whether the pump field is displaced or not. For simplicity we put the displacement $\tilde \alpha_p$ from eq.~(\ref{setup parts}) to zero and obtain two coupled equations
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}\label{MF eqs}
\dot \rho_p(t) &= \left[ (\epsilon_p-\frac{\chi}{2} \langle a_s^2\rangle^*)\,a_p^\dagger-\text{H.c.}\,,\rho_p(t)\right] +\gamma_p \mathcal D_{a_p} \rho_p(t),
\\
\dot \rho_s(t) &= \frac{\chi}{2} \left[ \langle a_p\rangle a_s^{\dagger\,2}-\text{H.c.}\,,\rho_s(t)\right] +\gamma_s \mathcal D_{a_s} \rho_s(t) ,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
known as mean-field equations \cite{FleischhauerMF}. These equations are quadratic in the field operators and therefore it is straightforward to solve them either numerically for the dynamics or analytically for the fixed points \cite{FleischhauerMF,Carlos14}. The stationary state of the signal mode will be a Gaussian state \cite{Braunstein05,Weedbrock12,CarlosQI} centered around a vanishing field amplitude $\langle a_s\rangle=0$ as the mean-field equations do not break the Ising-type $Z_2$ symmetry. The steady state of the pump mode will be a coherent state with an amplitude given by $\langle a_p\rangle_{ss}^{MF}=(\epsilon_p-\frac{\chi}{2} \langle a_s^2\rangle_{ss}^{MF})/\gamma_p$.
Just like the c-MoP equations~(\ref{s c-MoP eqs}) and ~(\ref{p c-MoP eqs}), the mean-field equations are coupled nonlinear equations which have to be solved self-consistently. Within mean-field theory fluctuations of the pump mode are disregarded. Fluctuations of the signal mode, however, are (at least to some extend) taken into account \cite{FleischhauerMF,Carlos14}. This leads to the regularization of the divergences appearing in the classical theory or rather the standard linearization approach. For our purposes it is important to note that the pump field amplitude always stays below the classical \emph{above-threshold} solution, i.e. $\langle a_p\rangle_{ss}^{MF} < \gamma_s/\chi$. In the remainder of the paper we will use it as the displacement in eq.~(\ref{setup parts}), i.e. $\tilde \alpha_p=\langle a_p\rangle_{ss}^{MF}$. This will guarantee a well-behaved Liouvillian for the free system $\mathcal L_s$ as we will explain in more detail in Sec.\ref{sec: born terms}.
The mean-field equations can also be found by putting the factorized state Ansatz $\rho(t)=\rho_p(t)\otimes\rho_s(t)$ into the Liouville-von Neumann equation, here given by eq.~(\ref{DOPO eqs}), before tracing out each of the modes separately. This well-known procedure, indeed, neglects all signal-pump correlations. Within the self-consistent projection operator theory, mean-field can be understood as an approximation to linear order in the interaction $\mathcal{L}_{I}$ for the dynamics of reduced density matrices.
Our theory therefore provides a systematic generalization of mean-field approaches. It is due to the Born terms, which are second order in $\mathcal L_I$, that signal-pump correlations are taken into account. Therefore, we expect a different quality of approximation by going from first order to second order in the interaction.
\subsection{Born terms}\label{sec: born terms}
In order to solve the full c-MoP equations including the Born terms we will need to overcome two main difficulties. While the c-MoP equation~(\ref{p c-MoP eqs}) of the pump mode is quadratic in the field operators, granting us with a closed set of equations including only first and second moments of the pump field, the c-MoP equation~(\ref{s c-MoP eqs}) of the signal mode is quartic in the field operators. We will therefore either solve the equation of the signal fully numerically, see Sec.~\ref{sec: full numerics}, or apply a \emph{Gaussian state approximation} as presented in section Sec.~\ref{sec:GSA}. In any of these two approaches, we need to overcome the second difficulty which arrises due to the non-Markovian structure of our theory. In the remainder of this section we will thus show how to rewrite an integro-differential equation of first order into a set of coupled ordinary differential equations. For the present problem this step is crucial, as solving the integro-differential equations is significantly more demanding for both numerical and analytical approaches.
We start by evaluating the correlation functions of the pump. By taking derivatives of \cnb{the pump correlators $d^\pm_p(t,t')$ and $\tilde d^\pm_p(t,t')$ with respect to $t$}, see eq.~(\ref{p corr func first}), considering initial conditions at $t=t'$ (note that we understand from the c-MoP equations that $t'\leq t$), and exploiting the fact that the operator $\delta a_p^\dagger(t')\rho_p(t')$ is traceless, we find
\begin{equation}\label{p corr func}
\begin{split}
d_p^+(t,t')&=\tilde d_p^+(t,t')=[\langle a_p^{\dagger\,2}\rangle(t')-\langle a_p\rangle^{\hspace{-0.06cm}* 2\hspace{-0.04cm}}(t')] e^{-\gamma_p (t-t')},
\\
\tilde d_p^-(t,t')&=[1+\langle a_p^{\dagger} a_p\rangle(t')-|\langle a_p\rangle(t')|^2] e^{-\gamma_p (t-t')},
\\
d_p^-(t,t')&=[\langle a_p^{\dagger} a_p\rangle(t')-|\langle a_p\rangle(t')|^2] e^{-\gamma_p (t-t')}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Hence, all correlation functions of the pump can be written in a form where the $t$ dependence only enters in a simple exponential factor.
A bit more effort is needed in order to simplify the correlation functions of the signal, but the main steps are mainly identical. All the functions in eq.~(\ref{s corr func}) are of the form $f(t,t')=\text{Tr}_s\{a_s^{\dagger\,2} e^{\mathcal L_s(t-t')} A(t')\}$ with a traceless operator $A(t')$ depending solely on $t'$. Again, we take the derivative of $f(t,t')$ with respect to $t$ and find an equation of motion of the form $\partial _t \vec{v}_{t'}(t)= M \vec{v}_{t'}(t)$ with a column vector
\begin{equation}
\vec{v}_{t'}(t)= \text{col}\left(\widetilde{\langle a_s^\dagger a_s\rangle},\widetilde{\langle a_s^2\rangle},\widetilde{\langle a_s^{\dagger\,2}\rangle}\right),
\end{equation}
where the expectation values with the tilde are defined in the usual way as the trace over the signal mode but with a density matrix given by $\tilde\rho_{t'}(t)=e^{\mathcal L_s (t-t')} A(t')$. The matrix $M$ reads
\[
M=
\left( {\begin{array}{ccc}
-2 \gamma_s & \chi \tilde\alpha_p & \chi \tilde\alpha_p^* \\
2 \chi \tilde\alpha_p^* & -2 \gamma_s & 0\\
2 \chi \tilde\alpha_p & 0 & -2 \gamma_s\\
\end{array} } \right).
\]
It is straight forward to diagonalize $M$. \cnb{We write $M= U \Lambda U^{-1}$, with a similarity matrix $U$ that can be found analytically (but its expression is too lengthy to be reported here), and $\Lambda$ is the diagonal form of $M$ containing its eigenvalues $\lambda_1=-2 \gamma_s$, and $\lambda_{2,3}= -2\gamma_s\mp 2\chi |\tilde\alpha_p|$. We now solve for the vector $\vec{v}_{t'}(t)$, to find
\begin{equation}
\vec{v}_{t'}(t)=U e^{\Lambda (t-t')} U^{-1} \vec{v}_{t'}(t')\equiv \sum_{n=1}^3 M_n e^{\lambda_n (t-t')}\, \vec{u}_{A(t')}, \label{v_sol}
\end{equation}
where we have defined the initial condition vector
\begin{equation}\label{signal cf vec}
\vec{u}_{A(t')}=\vec{v}_{t'}(t')=\left(\begin{array}{c}
\text{Tr}_s\{a_s^\dagger a_s A(t')\} \\ \text{Tr}_s\{a_s^2 A(t')\} \\ \text{Tr}_s\{a_s^{\dagger \,2} A(t')\} \\
\end{array}\right),
\end{equation}
and the matrices $M_n = U \Pi_n U^{-1}$, where $\Pi_n$ is a projector in the $n$'th ``direction'', that is, a matrix with zeros everywhere but in element $(n,n)$ which is one.
Note that for the limit $\lim_{t\rightarrow \infty} \vec v _{t'}(t)$ to be uniquely defined, and therefore for $\mathcal L_s$ to be well-behaved, all the eigenvalues of $M$ must satisfy $\mathrm{Re}\{\lambda_n\} < 0$, which in turn leads to a requirement for the displacement $\chi \tilde \alpha_p < \gamma_s$}. This requirement is \cnb{indeed} fulfilled by choosing the mean-field displacement as mentioned above, see Sec.~\ref{sec:MF}. \cnb{In contrast, taking the classical solution as the displacement would lead to an ill-behaved $\mathcal L_s $ above and at the classical threshold point, that is, for $\sigma\geq1$.}
Coming back to the correlation functions in eq.~(\ref{s corr func}), the general solution (\ref{v_sol}) allows us to write them all as
\begin{equation}\label{s corr func eig}
d_s(t,t') = \sum_{n=1}^3 e^{\lambda_n(t-t')} d_{s,n}(t'),
\end{equation}
with $d_{s,n}(t)=\left[M_n\vec{u}_{A(t)}\right]_3$ (the subscript denoting the third vector component), where $d_s$ denotes any of the correlation functions $\{d_s^+,\tilde{d}_s^+,d_s^-,\tilde{d}_s^-\}$, for which $A$ is taken, respectively, as $\{\delta a_s^{\dagger 2}\rho_s,\rho_s\delta a_s^{\dagger 2},\delta a_s^2\rho_s,\rho_s\delta a_s^2\}$. Let us emphasize that, just as with the pump mode, we have been able to write all the correlation functions of the signal mode into a form where the $t$ dependence only enters in simple exponential factors.
\cnb{Finally, let us show how this form for the correlation functions allows us to turn the c-MoP equations, which are coupled integro-differential equations, into coupled ordinary differential equations. For this aim, let us rewrite eqs.~(\ref{s c-MoP eqs}) and~(\ref{p c-MoP eqs}) as
\begin{align}
\dot{\rho}_s(t)=\mathcal{L}_s\rho_s(t)+\frac{\chi}{2}&\left[a_s^{\dagger 2}\langle a_p\rangle(t)-a_s^2\langle a_p\rangle\hspace{-0.06cm}^\ast\hspace{-0.06cm}(t),\rho_s(t)\right]
\label{s c-MoP eqs TL}
\\
& +\left( \frac{\chi}{2}\right)^2\left\{\left[a_s^2\,,\,h_s(t)\right]+\text{H.c.}\right\}, \nonumber
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\dot{\rho}_p(t)=\mathcal{L}_p \rho_p&(t)+\frac{\chi}{2}\left[a_p \langle a_s^2\rangle\hspace{-0.06cm}^\ast\hspace{-0.06cm}(t)-a_p^\dagger\langle a_s^2\rangle(t)\,,\rho_p(t)\right]
\label{p c-MoP eqs TL}
\\
& +\left(\frac{\chi}{2}\right)^2\left\{\left[a_p\,,\sum_{n=1}^3 h_{p,n}(t)\right]+\text{H.c.}\right\}, \nonumber
\end{align}
where we have defined the operators
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
h_s(t) = \int_{0}^{t}dt^\prime e^{\mathcal{L}_{s}(t-t^\prime)}\mathcal{K}_s(t,t^\prime)\rho_s(t^\prime),
\\
h_{p,n}(t) = \int_{0}^{t}dt^\prime e^{\mathcal{L}_{p}(t-t^\prime)}\mathcal{K}_{p,n}(t,t^\prime)\rho_p(t^\prime),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
with the superoperator $\mathcal{K}_{p,n}$ defined as $\mathcal{K}_p$ in eq. (\ref{Kp}), but with the correlation functions $d_{s,n}(t)$ instead of $d_s(t)$. Using their definition, and the solutions found for the correlation functions, eqs. (\ref{p corr func}) and (\ref{s corr func eig}), their evolution equations are found to be}
\begin{align}
\partial _t h_s(t)&= (-\gamma_p +\mathcal L_s) h_s(t) + \mathcal K _s(t,t)\rho_s(t), \label{h s eq}
\\
\partial _t h_{p,n}(t)&= (\lambda_n +\mathcal L_p) h_{p,n}(t)+\mathcal K_{p,n}(t,t)\rho_p(t). \label{h p eq}
\end{align}
\cnb{Together with eqs. (\ref{s c-MoP eqs TL}) and (\ref{p c-MoP eqs TL}), these form a closed set of coupled nonlinear ordinary differential equations for the reduced states $\rho_s$ and $\rho_p$, and the traceless operators $h_s$ and $\{h_{p,n}\}_{n=1,2,3}$. These are the equations that we analyze in the remainder of the paper.}
Overall we have shown for the example of the DOPO that it is indeed possible to rewrite the integro-differential c-MoP equations into a set of ordinary differential equations. The steps presented here are quite general and can be pursued for all c-MoP equations describing any physical system. The complexity of the resulting set of coupled equations will depend on the complexity of the subparts of the full quantum system, here given by the complexity of $\mathcal L_p$ and $\mathcal L_s$.
Finally, we remark that the c-MoP equations preserve the trace and the hermiticity but they do not guarantee for the positivity of the density matrix. Such an issue is not unusual for projection operator theories, in fact, the same conditions can be found in the well established Redfield equations \cite{Redfield,Blum}. Obviously whenever the c-MoP equations provide a good approximation, they will yield a positive density matrix. Hence the positivity of the eigenvalues can be used as a consistency test for the approximation.
\subsection{The adiabatic and the diabiatic limit}\label{sec:ada limit}
The two dissipation rates $\gamma_p$ and $\gamma_s$ set a time scale on which the pump and the signal, respectively, relax to the steady state of their unperturbed Liouvillians $\mathcal L_p$ and $\mathcal L_s$. In standard open system theory one relies on a separation of time scales between the system dynamics and the environment correlations. A similar reasoning is applied in adiabatic elimination approaches, where for the DOPO one relies on a time scale separation between signal and pump. The c-MoP theory can, in fact, be understood as a generalization of adiabatic elimination procedures where one has to consider the back-action of the ``system'' onto the ``environment''. We will now show that the effective equations for the reduced state of the signal known in the \emph{adiabatic} \cite{CarmichaelBook2} and the \emph{diabatic} \cite{FleischhauerMF} limit can, indeed, be obtained as limiting cases of the c-MoP equations.
The adiabatic limit in which the time scale of the pump mode is much faster than the time scale of the signal mode is defined such that $\gamma_p/\gamma_s\rightarrow \infty$ while $\gamma_s \gamma_p$ \cnb{is kept finite}. The diabatic limit describes the opposite scenario where $\gamma_p/\gamma_s\rightarrow 0$. \cnb{We proceed by comparing the Born terms with the free evolution operators $\mathcal L_p$ and $\mathcal L_s$, for which we consider the scaling of $h_s/\gamma_s$ and $h_{p,n}/\gamma_p$, which can be obtained by simple inspection of eqs. (\ref{h s eq}) and (\ref{h p eq}) divided by $\gamma_s$ and $\gamma_p$, respectively.
In the adiabatic limit, we infer from eq. (\ref{h p eq})/$\gamma_p$ that $h_{p,n}(t)/\gamma_p=0$ for all $n$ and $t\geq0$. Introducing this result into eq. (\ref{p c-MoP eqs TL}), we see that the state of the pump will be coherent with a field amplitude obeying the equation of motion
\begin{equation}\label{p field amplitude}
\partial_t \langle a_p\rangle = \epsilon_p-\gamma_p(\langle a_p\rangle+\tilde\alpha_p)-\frac{\chi}{2} \langle a_s^2\rangle.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, eq. (\ref{h s eq})/$\gamma_s$ leads to $h_s(t)/\gamma_s = \mathcal{K}_s(t,t)/\gamma_s\gamma_p = \rho_s(t)\delta a_s^{\dagger2}(t)/\gamma_s\gamma_p$, where we have used eqs.~(\ref{Ks}) and~(\ref{p corr func}) and the fact that when the pump is in a coherent state all the expectation values in eq.(\ref{p corr func}) cancel. Introducing this result into eq. (\ref{s c-MoP eqs TL}), together with the steady-state solution of eq.~(\ref{p field amplitude}) for $\langle a_p\rangle$, we end up with the effective master equation of the signal mode in the adiabatic limit
\begin{equation}\label{adiabatic eq}
\gamma_s^{-1}\partial_t \rho_s=\frac{\sigma}{2}\left[a_s^{\dagger\,2}-a_s^2\,,\,\rho_s \right]+\frac{g^2}{4} \mathcal D_{a_s^2}\rho_s+\mathcal D_{a_s}\rho_s,
\end{equation}
where $\sigma=\epsilon_p \chi/\gamma_p\gamma_s$ is an injection parameter corresponding to a coherent exchange of excitations between the signal and pump modes, while $g^2=\chi^2/\gamma_p\gamma_s$ accounts for signal photon pairs that are lost to the strongly damped pump mode.} Equation~(\ref{adiabatic eq}) has been extensively studied in the literature \cite{Wolinsky88,Drummond80,Drummond91}. It can be derived via standard adiabatic elimination which in the language of projection operator theory uses a time-independent projection superoperator $\mathcal P_{\text{ad}}$ projecting out the coherent laser field \cite{CarmichaelBook2}. Its action on the full density matrix is given by $\mathcal P_{\text{ad}}\, \rho(t)\equiv |\alpha\rangle \langle \alpha| \otimes \rho_s(t)$, where $|\alpha\rangle$ is a coherent state with $\alpha=\epsilon_p/\gamma_p$. The fast exponential decay $e^{-\gamma_p (t-t')}$ of the pump correlation functions \cnb{allows in this case for a Markovian approximation in the Born terms, that is $\int_0^t dt' e^{\mathcal{L}_s(t-t^\prime)}\mathcal K_s(t,t')\rho_s(t')\approx\mathcal K_s(t,t)\rho_s(t)/\gamma_p$}.
\cnb{Let us now analyze the c-MoP equations in the diabatic limit. In this case, eq.~(\ref{h s eq})/$\gamma_s$ provides us with $h_s(t)/\gamma_s=0$, which introduced in eq. (\ref{s c-MoP eqs TL}) leads to an effective master equation}
\begin{equation}
\dot \rho_s(t) = \frac{\chi}{2} \left[ \langle a_p\rangle a_s^{\dagger\,2}-\langle a_p\rangle^* a_s^2\,,\rho_s(t)\right] +\mathcal D_{a_s} \rho_s(t) \,.
\end{equation}
for the signal state.
The pump state only enters this equation trough the amplitude $\langle a_p\rangle$ which obeys eq.~(\ref{p field amplitude}) since $h_{p,n}$ is traceless.
\cnb{Noting that this equation is equivalent to eq.~(\ref{MF eqs}), we conclude that the diabatic limit reduces the full c-MoP equations to the mean-field equations}.
We emphasize that within these limits both eqs.~(\ref{MF eqs}) and~(\ref{adiabatic eq}) become exact.
We have thus shown that the c-MoP theory provides us with exact equations of motion in the limits $\gamma_p/\gamma_s\rightarrow \infty$ (adiabatic) and $\gamma_p/\gamma_s\rightarrow 0$ (diabatic) where it therefore becomes equivalent with well established theories \cite{CarmichaelBook2,FleischhauerMF}. In the remainder of the paper we will step beyond these cases in which time-scale separation is present and use the c-MoP theory to \cnb{access the signal state in the $\gamma_p\approx\gamma_s$ scenario}.%
\begin{figure*}[tbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{DOPO_plots_full_numerics.pdf}
\caption{\label{num c-MoP} Accuracy tests of the c-MoP theory for steady-state expectation values as a function of the injection parameter $\sigma$. In all plots we set $\gamma_p=\gamma_s=1$. The cases $\chi=1$ and $\chi=0.1$ are considered in $(a)$-$(c)$ and $(d)$-$(f)$, respectively. The rescaled pump amplitude $\chi \langle a_p\rangle$ is shown in $(a)$ and $(d)$; $(b)$ and $(e)$ show the signal photon number $\langle a_s^\dagger a_s\rangle$; finally, $(c)$ and $(f)$ show the $g^{(2)}$ function of the signal, which is equal to 1 for a coherent state (or a balanced mixture of them). The gray thin solid lines show the classical prediction from eqs.~(\ref{class eqs}), showing that the classical threshold where the signal field is switched on lies at $\sigma=1$. The blue solid curves represent the results obtained from the numerical solution of the c-MoP equations~(\ref{s c-MoP eqs TL}), (\ref{p c-MoP eqs TL}), (\ref{h s eq}), and (\ref{h p eq}). The red stars show the result obtained from the full master equation~(\ref{DOPO eqs}) up to injection parameters $\sigma$ where the numerics are tractable for us. Finally, the black dashed curves represent the mean-field theory, see eq.~(\ref{MF eqs}). Apart from the classical solution, all theories conserve the $Z_2$ symmetry, i.e. $\langle a_s\rangle=0$.}
\end{figure*}
\section{Accuracy tests and full quantum states of the signal mode}\label{sec: full numerics}
In the previous section we have \cnb{shown how to deal with} the non-Markovian structure of the c-MoP equations. The only remaining difficulty is given by the quartic structure of the effective \cnb{equations of motion derived for the signal mode, eqs. (\ref{s c-MoP eqs TL}) and (\ref{h s eq})}. In this section we will treat the problem numerically in the \cnb{Fock} state basis by introducing a truncation $D_s$ for the Hilbertspace $\mathcal H_s$ of the signal, \cnb{where $D_s$ is chosen such that the results for the observables we are interested in converge up to some desired accuracy}. Thus, the reduced state $\rho_s$ and the \cnb{operator} $h_s(t)$ will be $D_s\times D_s$ dimensional matrices. Instead of treating the pump mode in an analogous manner, we exploit the fact that the c-MoP \cnb{equations of the pump mode (\ref{p c-MoP eqs TL}) and (\ref{h p eq}) are quadratic in the bosonic operators}. As a consequence we are able to describe the pump state by a set of closed equations for five variables only, \cnb{the mode amplitude $\langle a_p\rangle$ plus the fluctuations $\langle a_p \delta a_p\rangle$ and $\langle a_p^\dagger \delta a_p\rangle$ (note that the first two are complex variables)}. At the end, we are thus effectively left with two coupled differential equations for the matrices $\rho_s(t)$ and $h_s(t)$, \cnb{with the pump equations solved either in parallel numerically or analytically as a function of signal observables}.
In this section, we will compare the steady states of the classical theory from eq.~(\ref{class eqs}), the steady states of the mean-field equations~(\ref{MF eqs}), and the steady states of the c-MoP equations~(\ref{s c-MoP eqs}) and~(\ref{p c-MoP eqs}). In order to show the accuracy of the c-MoP equations we will also determine the steady state of the full Liouville-von Neumann equation~(\ref{DOPO eqs}) in parameter regimes where it is numerically tractable. \cnb{This numerical simulation is done as follows: first, we eliminate the large coherent background of the laser drive from the Liouvillian $\mathcal L$ by writing $a_p= \alpha_p+\delta a_p$, where $\alpha_p$ is taken to be the classical steady-state solution of eqs. (\ref{class eqs}); then, we use the superspace formalism, where the steady-state operator $\rho_{ss}$ and the Liouville superoperator $\mathcal{L}$ are represented, respectively, by a vector $\vec{\rho}_{ss}$ and a matrix $\mathbb{L}$, and $\vec{\rho}_{ss}$ can be found as the eigenvector with zero eigenvalue of $\mathbb{L}$ \cite{Drummond91,CarlosNumerics}. As the dimension of the matrix $\mathbb{L}$ is $(D_p\times D_s)^2$, with $D_p$ denoting the pump mode's Hilbert space dimension, this exact simulation is limited to small photon numbers.}
In all the simulations we consider cases without time-scale separation between the two modes and rescale all units to the dissipation rates, i.e. we put $\gamma_p=\gamma_s=1$. The only remaining parameters are the nonlinear coupling $\chi$ and the injection parameter $\sigma= \epsilon_p \chi$.
In Fig.~\ref{num c-MoP} we present results in parameter regimes where the full DOPO equation~(\ref{DOPO eqs}) can be solved numerically. In Figs.~\ref{num c-MoP}$(a)-(c)$ and \ref{num c-MoP}$(d)-(f)$ we show different steady-state observables for $\chi=1$ and $\chi=0.1$, respectively. It can be appreciated how the c-MoP results (blue solid line) coincide almost perfectly with the numerical results from the full master equation (red stars). The observables that we show are the pump mode's amplitude $\langle a_p\rangle$ in Figs. \ref{num c-MoP}$(a)$ and \ref{num c-MoP}$(d)$, the signal photon number $\langle a_s^\dagger a_s\rangle$ in Figs. \ref{num c-MoP}$(b)$ and \ref{num c-MoP}$(e)$, and the $g^{(2)}$ function $g_s^{(2)}(0)\equiv \langle a_s^{\dagger\,2} a_s^2\rangle/\langle a_s^\dagger a_s\rangle^2$ of the signal in Figs. \ref{num c-MoP}$(c)$ and \ref{num c-MoP}$(f)$. We also compare with the mean-field predictions of eqs.~(\ref{MF eqs}) (black dashed line), which in this context should be understood as the c-MoP theory up to first order, and with the classical steady-state solutions (gray thin solid line) given after eq.~(\ref{class eqs}). Let us remark that despite the nonlinear nature of the mean-field and the c-MoP equations, we only find one physical solution for each of them.
All four theories agree quite well far below the critical point $\sigma=1$ as the states of the signal and pump modes are close to vacuum and a coherent state induced by the external laser drive, respectively. Far above the threshold point, where the classical theory is expected to be approximately valid, we find that both the c-MoP predictions and the exact numerics agree well with the classical solutions for all observables, but with the fundamental difference that the classical theory breaks the $Z_2$ symmetry, while c-MoP and the exact solution preserve it. The mean-field solution, on the other hand, fails to describe the state of the signal above threshold as can be appreciated from the $g^{(2)}$ function in Figs. \ref{num c-MoP}$(c)$ and \ref{num c-MoP}$(f)$. As expected, mean-field theory and the classical theory break down in the vicinity of the threshold point.
Remarkably, this is not true for c-MoP which appears to give quasi exact results for all values of $\sigma$, even in cases where the interaction rate $\chi$ is comparable to all other system parameters.
\begin{figure*}[tbp]
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{WignersAll.pdf}
\caption{\label{Wigner c-MoP} Wigner functions of the c-MoP density matrix for the signal mode without (a) and with (b) the Gaussian state approximation for $\gamma_p=\gamma_s=1$, $\chi=0.1$ and for different values of $\sigma$. \cnb{In the absence of injection, $\sigma=0$, the signal state is in vacuum}. Upon approaching the threshold, it becomes squeezed, with the highest squeezing levels obtained around $\sigma=1$. Above threshold two symmetric peaks appear and the squeezing \cnb{reaches some asymptotic value as we move away from threshold. Note how above threshold the state can be approximated by a balanced mixture of two symmetry breaking states. Indeed, let us remark that while for $\sigma<1$ we are plotting the unique solution that appears when applying the Gaussian state approximation onto the c-MoP equations (which we have called below threshold solution in the text), for $\sigma>1$ we have chosen to plot the Wigner function corresponding to a balanced mixture of the two above threshold symmetry breaking solutions with opposite phase which coexist with the non-symmetry breaking Gaussian solution}.}
\end{figure*}
\cnb{For the experimentally relevant scenario with $\chi\ll 1$, the Hilbert space dimension needs to be so large that we are not able to find the numerical solution of the full master equation~(\ref{DOPO eqs}) for injection parameters close to (or above) threshold. However, we can compare the c-MoP predictions (red stars), see Fig.~(\ref{GSA c-MoP}), with the perturbative approach which Drummond et al. (dark yellow dot-dashed line) developed in the vicinities of the critical point, by making a consistent multiple-scale expansion of the system's stochastic variables within the positive $P$ representation \cite{Kinsler95,Chaturvedi02}. This procedure has the virtue of being valid for any values of $\gamma_p$ and $\gamma_s$, and close to threshold, concretely for $|\sigma-1| < \chi/\sqrt{2\gamma_p\gamma_s}$, it is expected to be quasi-exact. As shown in Figs. \ref{GSA c-MoP}$(a)$ and \ref{GSA c-MoP}$(b)$, we find perfect agreement between this approach and the c-MoP theory for $\chi=0.01$.}
Overall, we have indeed shown the drastic impact of the Born terms, which do not only lead to a quantitative improvement as compared to the classical theory or to mean-field, but to a qualitatively different state of the signal mode. The classical theory predicts a coherent state, while the mean-field theory, i.e. the c-MoP theory up to first order, predicts a Gaussian state of the signal centered around $\langle a_s\rangle =0$ \cite{Carlos14}. The c-MoP theory including the born terms, hence including signal-pump correlations within a projection operator based theory, is capable of finding the full quantum state of the signal which is neither coherent nor Gaussian as shown through the $g^{(2)}$ function in Figs. \ref{num c-MoP}$(c)$ and \ref{num c-MoP}$(f)$.
In order to illustrate the full quantum state, \cnb{we plot the Wigner function $W(x_s,p_s)$ of the signal density matrix obtained from the c-MoP equations in Fig.~\ref{Wigner c-MoP}$(a)$ for $\chi=0.1$ and different values of $\sigma$. Let us remark that in our case in which the Wigner function is positive everywhere in the phase-space formed by the quadratures $x_s=a_s^\dagger+a_s$ and $p_s=i(a_s^\dagger-a_s)$, it can be simply interpreted as the joint probability distribution describing the statistics of measurements of these observables \cite{Braunstein05,Weedbrock12,CarlosQI}. From a computational point of view, we evaluate it from the steady-state density matrix following the method detailed in \cite{Carlos14PRL}}. Far below threshold, the Wigner function shows a perfect vacuum for the signal state, see top panel of Fig.~\ref{Wigner c-MoP}$(a)$ for $\sigma=0$ as a reference. \cnb{As we cross through the critical point, two significant effects take place. First, approaching the threshold we find the well-known quadrature-noise reduction or \emph{squeezing} \cite{CarmichaelBook2,Eberle10,Mehmet08}, which is highest around the critical point $\sigma=1$ \cite{Chaturvedi02}, and reaches its asymptotic value $\langle \delta p_s^2\rangle=(\gamma_s+\gamma_p)/(2\gamma_s+\gamma_p)$ for $\sigma\rightarrow\infty$, with corresponding \emph{antisqueezing} $\langle \delta x_s^2\rangle=1+\gamma_s/\gamma_p$ \cite{Carlos14}. Second, as we cross the threshold we appreciate how the state develops two peaks centered (asymptotically) at the quadrature values predicted by the classical solution. Hence, even though the true quantum state never breaks the $Z_2$ symmetry, it does so in two qualitatively different ways depending on whether we are below or above threshold.}
In retrospect, \cnb{we see that the symmetry-breaking states predicted above threshold by the standard linearization approach correspond each to one of the} two distinct peaks appearing in the exact state. \cnb{Far above threshold} $\sigma\gg1$ the two peaks have zero overlap and \cnb{such states provide reasonable predictions} for all observables which are not sensitive to symmetry breaking, that is, all observables containing even numbers of signal field operators. \cnb{Of course, such a deficit can be corrected by simply using a balanced mixture of the symmetry-breaking states \cite{Carlos14}; this construction will guide us in the next section, where we will perform a Gaussian approximation which necessarily breaks the $Z_2$ symmetry}. It is then close to the critical point where both linearization and mean-field approaches fail, whereas c-MoP \cnb{provides an accurate description of the quantum state}.
Let us remark that we have compared the Wigner function obtained from the c-MoP theory with the reduced signal states obtained from the full master equation, which was only possible for $\sigma\leq1.2$, and found very good agreement, the differences being completely unnoticeable to the naked eye. We emphasize again that, with the numerical solution of the c-MoP equations we are able to find the full reduced density matrices of the modes away from the adiabatic limit. This is in contrast to other approaches such as stochastic simulations \cite{Kinsler95,Chaturvedi02,Chaturvedi99,Pope00} or the Keldysh formalism \cite{FleischhauerKeldysh,Mertens93,Swain93} which are naturally design to provide expectation values of the system operators.
\section{Gaussian state Approximation within the c-MoP theory}\label{sec:GSA}
Despite the fact that the complexity of solving the c-MoP equations fully numerically scales in a more favorable way than the numerical complexity of the full master equation,
it still requires to integrate a number of differential equations that scales quadratically with the dimension of the truncated Hilbert space for the signal field.
Therefore, it is very desirable to find an effective description of the underlying theory which is numerically more efficient and can thus cover the whole parameter space. In the remainder of this section, we implement such an idea by applying a \emph{Gaussian state approximation} (GSA) consistent with the c-MoP equations~(\ref{s c-MoP eqs}) and~(\ref{p c-MoP eqs}).
\cnb{Another} great advantage of a Gaussian theory, apart from reaching the whole parameter space, is the efficiency in the evaluation of both steady states and dynamical quantities such as two-time correlation functions.
The disadvantage of a Gaussian theory, however, is the lack of quantitative accuracy especially in the vicinity of the critical point. \cnb{Nonetheless, as we show in the following, a Gaussian theory consistent with the c-MoP equations offers better quantitative accuracy than any of the previously developed Gaussian methods, particularly linearization around the classical solution or the recently-developed self-consistent linearization \cite{Carlos14}}.
The general procedure for finding a GSA for the state of a certain bosonic master equation is very simple. \cnb{In a first step, we write the bosonic operators as $a_j=\alpha_j+\delta a_j$,
with $\alpha_j=\langle a_j\rangle$, such that $\langle \delta a_j\rangle=0$. In the next step we find the evolution equation for the first and second moments, which will depend on higher-order moments in general. Thus, in the final step we assume the state to be Gaussian at all times, so that all higher order moments factorize into products of first and second order moments \cite{CarmichaelBook2,Carlos14}; in particular, we will encounter third order moments such as e.g. $\langle \delta a_s^{\dagger 2} \delta a_s\rangle$ which vanish identically within the GSA, and forth order moments which factorize according to, e.g.
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\langle \delta a_s^{\dagger 4}\rangle&\approx 3 \langle \delta a_s^{\dagger 2} \rangle^2, \\
\langle \delta a_s^{\dagger 3}\delta a_s\rangle&\approx 3 \langle \delta a_s^{\dagger 2} \rangle \langle \delta a_s^{\dagger} \delta a_s \rangle, \\
\langle \delta a_s^{\dagger 2}\delta a_s^2\rangle&\approx \langle \delta a_s^{\dagger 2} \rangle \langle \delta a_s^2 \rangle+2 \langle \delta a_s^\dagger \delta a_s \rangle^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
After this final step, we are then left with a closed set of nonlinear equations for the amplitudes $\alpha_j$ and the second order moments of the fluctuations $\delta a_j$ that have to be solved self-consistently.}
\begin{figure*}[tbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{DOPO_plots_GSA.pdf}
\caption{\label{GSA c-MoP} Accuracy tests of the c-MoP theory with and without the Gaussian state approximation for steady-state observables as a function of the injection $\sigma$. In all plots we set $\gamma_p=\gamma_s=1$ and $\chi=0.01$. As in fig. \ref{num c-MoP}, we show the rescaled pump field amplitude $\chi \langle a_p\rangle$, the signal photon number $\langle a_s^\dagger a_s\rangle$, and the $g^{(2)}$ function of the signal, in $(a)$, $(b)$, and $(c)$, respectively. The red stars show the results obtained from the c-MoP eqs.~(\ref{s c-MoP eqs TL}), (\ref{p c-MoP eqs TL}), (\ref{h s eq}), and (\ref{h p eq}), up to injection parameters $\sigma$ where the numerics are tractable.
For comparison, the quasi exact method of Drummond and collaborators \cite{Kinsler95,Chaturvedi02} is shown as a dark yellow dot-dashed line. The blue solid and the green dashed curves represent the below and above threshold solutions, respectively, obtained from a Gaussian state approximation on the c-MoP equations. The black thin dotted curve displays the results of mean-field theory, see eq.~(\ref{MF eqs}), which in this context can be understood as the below threshold solution of a Gaussian state approximation on the full master equation (\ref{DOPO eqs}). Finally, the gray thin solid lines represent the prediction of the standard linearization theory in $(a)$ and $(b)$, and the coherent-state prediction $g^{(2)}=1$ of the classical equations~(\ref{class eqs}) in $(c)$.}
\end{figure*}
The standard linearization theory can be understood as a GSA on the full master equation, but with the exception that the amplitudes $\alpha_j$ are not determined self-consistently, but are obtained from the classical theory. As shown by the gray thin solid line in Fig.~\ref{GSA c-MoP}$(b)$ the complete \cnb{suppression of quantum fluctuations when determining these amplitudes} leads to unphysical results at the threshold point in the DOPO.
The \emph{self-consistent linearization method}, as it is coined in Reference \cite{Carlos14}, goes one step beyond standard linearization by consistently finding \cnb{the amplitudes $\alpha_j$ from the GSA still applied to the full master equation. Due to the nonlinear nature of the resulting equations of motion one can find several solutions in a given point of parameter space. However, it was shown that at the end only two types of solutions were physical, qualitatively similar to the solutions found from standard linearization, but quantitatively regularized in such a way that the unphysical results of the latter disappear. In particular, a \emph{below threshold} (BT) solution was found, which does not break the $Z_2$ symmetry, i.e. $\alpha_s=0$, but in contrast to the classical theory exists for all values of the injection parameter, not only for $\sigma<1$. We also found two \emph{above threshold} (AT) solutions with opposite phase which break the symmetry, that is, $\langle a_s\rangle=\pm|\alpha_s|\neq0$}, but appear only above a certain injection parameter $\sigma >1$ which is larger than the classical threshold value. Interestingly, we point out that the BT solution found through this self-consistent linearization is exactly equivalent to the mean-field theory introduced in Section \ref{sec:MF}.
Motivated by these findings, we apply a GSA to the c-MoP equations. Concretely, we calculate all first and second order moments of the pump and signal fluctuations from the c-MoP eqs.~(\ref{s c-MoP eqs TL}), (\ref{p c-MoP eqs TL}), (\ref{h s eq}), and (\ref{h p eq}), and apply the factorization of higher order moments as explained above. In strong contrast to the GSA on the full master equation, we do not need to assume a Gaussian state for the full state $\rho$ but only for the reduced state of the signal $\rho_s$. Hence, we expect similar qualitative results but with a higher quantitative accuracy.
Indeed, this is what we find and illustrate in Fig.~\ref{GSA c-MoP} for $\gamma_p=\gamma_s=1$ and $\chi=0.01$. We plot steady state expectation values for the pump amplitude $\chi \langle a_p\rangle$ in Fig.~\ref{GSA c-MoP}$(a)$, the signal photon number $\langle a_s^\dagger a_s\rangle= \langle \delta a_s^\dagger \delta a_s\rangle+|\alpha_s|^2$ in Fig.~\ref{GSA c-MoP}$(b)$, and the $g^{(2)}$ function of the signal in Fig.~\ref{GSA c-MoP}$(c)$, all as a function of the injection parameter $\sigma$.
The blue solid line in Fig.~\ref{GSA c-MoP} shows the below threshold solution of the GSA on the c-MoP equation, while the green dashed line illustrates the above threshold solution. The latter fulfills $\langle \delta a_s^\dagger \delta a_s\rangle\ll |\alpha_s|^2$ and is therefore \cnb{more likely to provide physically consistent results than the BT solution whenever they coexist}. In Fig.~\ref{GSA c-MoP}$(c)$ we show how the AT solution indeed gives the correct value for the $g^{(2)}$ function, \cnb{what indicates that each of the AT solutions corresponds to one of the peaks of the Wigner function, see Fig.~\ref{Wigner c-MoP}$(a)$, and considers Gaussian fluctuations around it. In order to illustrate this point even further, we show in Fig.~\ref{Wigner c-MoP}$(b)$ the Wigner function \cite{Braunstein05,Weedbrock12,CarlosQI} corresponding to the GSA on the c-MoP equations (as explained in the previous section, above threshold we take the balanced mixture of the two symmetry breaking solutions, such that the resulting state preserves the $Z_2$ symmetry).}
Importantly, there is an increased quantitative accuracy of the BT solution obtained from the c-MoP theory as compared with the mean-field theory (or the self-consistent linearization), see Figs.~\ref{GSA c-MoP}$(a)$ and \ref{GSA c-MoP}$(b)$, for parameters below and especially at the classical threshold point. As mentioned in Sec.~(\ref{sec: full numerics}) we test the accuracy of our method by comparing with the quasi exact method of Drummond and collaborators \cite{Kinsler95,Chaturvedi02}, illustrated by the dark yellow dot-dashed line in Figs.~\ref{GSA c-MoP}$(a)$ and \ref{GSA c-MoP}$(b)$. This increase in accuracy can be attributed to the born terms, since the mean-field equations can be understood on the one hand as the first order approximation of the c-MoP theory, and on the other hand as the below threshold solution of the GSA on the full master equation of the DOPO.
To summarize this section, we have shown that the c-MoP equations also provide a highly accurate Gaussian theory which is still as effective as every other linearized theory but, in contrast, it takes significant signal-pump correlations into account. \cnb{This is relevant because, as stated above, a Gaussian theory has the virtue that both steady-state as well as dynamical quantities such as two-time correlation functions can be found efficiently for any time and set of parameters}. To emphasize this practical aspect of the GSA, we will show in Sec.~\ref{sec:dyn} that the level of accuracy that we have found here in the evaluation of the steady states is also present in the transient time evolution.
\begin{figure*}[tbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{DOPO_plots_full_numerics_Dynamik_2.pdf}
\caption{\label{dynfig} Accuracy tests of the c-MoP theory for transient time evolution. The initial state is chosen to be the vacuum. We set $\gamma_p=\gamma_s=1$, investigate the classical threshold point $\sigma=1$, and choose $\chi=0.1$ in $(a)$ and $\chi=0.05$ in $(b)$. The plots display the signal photon number as a function of time in units of the dissipation rates, while the insets show the $g^{(2)}$ function of the signal mode. The red stars in $(a)$ show the result obtained from the numerical simulation of the full master equation~(\ref{DOPO eqs}), while the red line in $(b)$ indicates its steady-state values only. The blue solid curves represent the results obtained from the numerical integration of the c-MoP eqs.~(\ref{s c-MoP eqs TL}), (\ref{p c-MoP eqs TL}), (\ref{h s eq}), and (\ref{h p eq}). Finally, the green dashed and black dotted lines represent the time evolution obtained from a Gaussian state approximation on the c-MoP equations and the full master equation (mean-field), respectively.}
\end{figure*}
\section{Dynamics} \label{sec:dyn}
So far we have only presented steady state quantities for the various methods of our interest. In this section we will briefly elaborate on the possibility to simulate dynamical evolution as well. The steady state of the full master equation~(\ref{DOPO eqs}) can be understood as an eigenvector corresponding to the zero eigenvalue of the Liouvillian
$\mathcal L$ such that $\mathcal L \rho_{ss}=0$. The formal solution for the time evolving state which can be written as $\rho(t)=e^{\mathcal L t} \rho(0)$, on the other hand, involves all eigenvalues of the Liouvillian. Hence, it is a priori not clear whether \cnb{a given approximate method used for the evaluation of the steady state of $\mathcal L$ will provide the same degree of accuracy when used for transient time evolution.}
In order to investigate this open issue we simulate the time dynamics of the various approximate methods that we have introduced, and compare their results with an exact simulation of the full master equation~(\ref{DOPO eqs}) in regions of the parameter space where it is numerically tractable. We analyze a situation in which the input laser drives the system from the initial vacuum to its steady state. Figure~\ref{dynfig} shows the signal photon number as a function of time at the classical threshold point $\sigma=1$, for $\gamma_p=\gamma_s=1$, and for $\chi=0.1$ in Figure~\ref{dynfig}$(a)$ and $\chi=0.05$ in Figure~\ref{dynfig}$(b)$.
The red stars in Fig.~\ref{dynfig}$(a)$ illustrate the result obtained from the numerical simulation of the full master equation~(\ref{DOPO eqs}), while the red line in Fig.~\ref{dynfig}$(b)$ illustrates the steady state value of the observables only, \cnb{since the small value of $\chi$ prevented us from being able to simulate the whole dynamics in this case. On the other hand,} the blue solid curves represent the results obtained from the numerical integration of the c-MoP equations \cnb{as explained in Section \ref{sec: full numerics}. Finally,} the green dashed and black dotted lines represent the time evolution obtained from a \cnb{GSA on} the c-MoP equations and the full master equation, respectively.
\cnb{Remarkably, Fig.~\ref{dynfig}$(a)$ shows that the level of accuracy found dynamically for the various approximations is similar to the ones that we already encountered when evaluating steady-state quantities. In particular, it is apparent that, at any point in time, the GSA on the full master equation is less accurate than the GSA on the c-MoP equations, which in turn does not have the remarkable level of accuracy shown by the full c-MoP numerical simulation, which almost coincides with the numerics of the full master equation at all times. It is important to note that the evolution of the $g^{(2)}$ function shown in the inset of Fig.~\ref{dynfig}$(a)$ suggests that, indeed}, the c-MoP equations are able to map the full quantum state of the signal in the course of time.
A numerical simulation for the parameter set chosen in Fig.~\ref{dynfig}$(b)$ demands minimal Hilbert space dimensions of $\dim \mathcal H_p= 6$ and $\dim \mathcal H_s= 120$ in order to reach convergence up to an accuracy of $10^{-2}$ for the relevant observables. Thus, \cnb{while the c-MoP approach requires a simulation of a set of $28\,811$ coupled nonlinear differential equations, in the case of the full master equation one has to integrate $518\,400$ coupled linear differential equations, which has precluded us from being able to simulate the dynamics from it}. Therefore we only show steady-state observables of the full master equation for these case.
\cnb{Figs.~\ref{dynfig}$(a)$ and \ref{dynfig}$(b)$ further illustrate the scaling of various quantities with the nonlinear coupling $\chi$ at the critical point. In particular, note how both the signal photon number and the time that the system needs to reach the steady state double when $\chi$ is reduced by half. The latter is known in the literature as \emph{critical slowing down} \cite{Kinsler95}, and just as the signal photon number, it was predicted to scale with $\chi^{-1}$ \cite{Wolinsky88,Kinsler95,FleischhauerKeldysh}, in agreement with our c-MoP simulation. Hence, we can appreciate the practical use of a Gaussian theory by considering that to simulate an experimentally relevant scenario where $\chi\ll 1$, dynamical quantities would require extremely long simulation times, which, as explained before, can be efficiently handled with a GSA on the c-MoP theory, but not by its full numerical simulation. As an example, we have checked that for $\chi=0.01$ a GSA on the c-MoP equations requires a normalized time of approximately $300$ to reach the steady state, again in agreement with the $\chi^{-1}$ scaling, as it can be appreciated in Fig. \ref{dynfig}$(a)$ that such time is about 10 times smaller for $\chi=0.1$.}
\section{conclusions and outlook} \label{conclusions}
In conclusion we have exemplified the applicability of the self-consistent projection operator theory to nonlinear quantum optical systems on the case study of the degenerate optical parametric oscillator. Our theory generalizes mean-field approaches and in particular adiabatic elimination methods to settings without time-scale separation. The effective master equations can be solved efficiently despite their non-Markovian structure. We have demonstrated the high degree of accuracy of our method and revealed its capability to determine the exact quantum states below, at, and above the classical threshold for both stationary states and dynamical evolution.
In addition, we developed a linearized theory consistent with the self-consistent Mori projector equations and showed its accuracy far beyond any known linearized theories. We expect our Gaussian method to be particularly useful in the context of hybrid systems such as optomechanical parametric oscillators \cite{OMPOCarlos,Nori}, \cnb{where fields of quantum nature with no coherent background are coupled to mechanical elements}. Some intriguing tasks for future research would include applying the c-MoP approach to investigate dynamical questions, e.g. investigate tunneling times between the two symmetry breaking states in parameter regimes away from the adiabatic limit \cite{Drummond91}, simulate quantum quenches in a driven-dissipative scenario \cite{Keeling}, and investigate the effect of small symmetry breaking perturbations on both the dynamics and steady states.
\acknowledgments
The authors thank Mehdi Abdi, Johannes Lang, Tao Shi, Yue Chang, Eugenio Rold\'an, Francesco Piazza, and Peter D. Drummond for fruitful discussions and comments. This work has been supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) via the CRC 631 and the grant
HA 5593/3-1. CN-B acknowledges funding from the Alexander von Humbolt Foundation through their Fellowship for Postdoctoral Researchers.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:1}
Detection of ultracold neutrons (UCNs), or neutrons with kinetic energies less than about 300 neV (1 neV = 10$^{-9}$ eV), is much like detection of thermal neutrons. That is, the same neutron-capture reactions, such as $^3$He(n, p)$^3$H, $^6$Li(n,$\alpha$)$^3$H, $^{10}$B(n, $\alpha$)$^7$Li and $^{157}$Gd(n,$\gamma$)$^{158}$Gd, are used to turn neutrons into charged particles or $\gamma$-rays~\cite{Stedman:1960,CF:1983,Knoll:2000,Morris:1999,Salvat:2012,Jenke:2013}. The charged particles and $\gamma$-rays released from the capture reactions have kinetic energies ranging from hundreds of keV to a few MeV and can be readily detected using gas ionization chambers or scintillators.
Detection of UCNs, unlike detecting thermal neutrons, is sensitive to the surface conditions, gravity, magnetic fields and ambient gas conditions. All of these factors can modify UCN velocities and therefore alter inelastic scatterings of UCNs as well as UCN capture or absorption. Sensitivity of UCNs to gravity, magnetic fields, material structures and phases of matter provides opportunities to probe these forces or material structures with a precision that is inaccessible to methods using charged particles. On the other hand, it is a common UCN detector challenge to reduce non-UCN background in all of the measurements since a.) UCN counting rates are typically low and the UCN signals are similar to background signals, in particular background neutron signals that can come from upscattered UCNs, thermal and higher energy neutrons; b.) Production of UCNs using either nuclear reactors or accelerators also generates higher energy neutrons and $\gamma$-rays that easily outnumber the UCN population.
The UCN absorption mean free path ($\lambda_a$) is given by~\cite{LS:1965, Ignatovich:1990,Golub:1991}
\begin{equation}
\lambda_a = \tau_av_n,
\label{eq:mfp}
\end{equation}
where the neutron absorption time ($\tau_a$) in solid $^{10}$B is independent of the neutron velocity ($v_n$) and can be calculated from thermal neutron absorption cross section, $\sigma_{th} =$ 3842 barn for the (n,$\alpha$) process, $\tau_a = n_0\sigma_{th} v_{th} $ = 9.0 ns. Here $n_0$ is the solid density of $^{10}$B and $v_{th}$ the neutron thermal velocity. For UCNs at 4.4 m/s, $\lambda_a = 40$ nm. The de Broglie wavelength of UCN ($\lambda_n$) is longer than $\lambda_a$~\cite{Squires:1978},
\begin{equation}
\lambda_n =\frac{904.5}{\sqrt{E_n}} = \frac{395.6}{v_n},
\label{wvleng}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_n$ is in nm, the kinetic energy of the neutron ($E_n$) in neV and the velocity of the neutron ($v_n$) in m/s. For a UCN with a kinetic energy of 100 neV or a velocity of 4.4 m/s, $\lambda_n = 90$ nm.
We describe a multilayer surface detector for UCNs based on $^{10}$B thin-film capture of neutrons. The top $^{10}$B layer is exposed to vacuum and directly captures UCNs. The ZnS:Ag luminescent layer is beneath the $^{10}$B layer. The effective ZnS layer thickness measured using a $^{148}$Gd $\alpha$ source is a few microns thick, which is sufficient to stop the charges from the $^{10}$B(n,$\alpha$)$^7$Li neutron-capture reaction while thin enough that light due to $\alpha$ and $^7$Li escapes for detection by photomultiplier tubes. The average $^{10}$B film thickness does not exceed 300 nm.
Below we first present the working principle of the detector and some relevant material properties, followed by some details of the detector design and construction. Next, we describe detector operation, detector performance, and correlate the detector performance with $^{10}$B-film characterization. The losses of efficiency are discussed towards the end, leaving room for further efficiency improvement through better understanding of the surface texture
\section{Detection principle and material properties}
\label{princ:1}
The working principle of the detector is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:PA}. The detector design takes several lengths into account: UCN capture length ($\lambda_a$), $\alpha$ and $^7$Li ion ranges ($R^i$) in solid $^{10}$B and ZnS, and light attenuation in ZnS and light-guide. Compared with gas-based detectors, using only solid components in the detector removes the need for a material window. Compared with bulk $^7$Li- or $^{10}$B-doped scintillators for thermal neutrons, a 100-nm thick thin-film coating is sufficient since $\lambda_a$ is only 40 nm for UCNs at 4.4 m/s. An ideal UCN detection efficiency up to 95\% is expected for a film thickness of 3$\lambda_a$, or about 120 nm. When the UCN reflection from the $^{10}$B coated ZnS:Ag surface is taken into account, the efficiency can be reduced further by more than 20\% due to reflection, as shown below.
\begin{figure}[thbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.5in]{PrincipleA.jpg}
\caption{The multilayer $^{10}$B surface detector for UCNs consists of a thin $^{10}$B top layer supported by a luminescent layer of ZnS:Ag. At least one of the charged particles $\alpha$ or $^7$Li generated from the neutron capture slows down or stops in the ZnS:Ag layer and emits light. A light-guide or a transparent window is used to transmit the light to a photomultiplier tube (PMT). A $^{10}$B thickness of 100 nm and a ZnS:Ag thickness of a few microns are sufficient.}
\label{fig:PA}
\end{figure}
The ion ranges in $^{10}$B and ZnS are calculated using the Stopping and Range of Ions in Matter (SRIM) code~\cite{SRIM} and summarized in Table~\ref{Tb:range1}. Since the ion ranges are many times the $^{10}$B film thickness $\sim 3\lambda_a$, the charged particle energy losses in the $^{10}$B are small, except for ions that move at large angles with respect to the surface normal. For the 0.84 MeV $^7$Li, the full ion stopping in $^{10}$B only occurs when the angle is greater than $\theta_c = \cos^{-1} (3\lambda_a/R^i)$, or about 86 degrees for $\lambda_a=40$ nm. The corresponding loss of detection efficiency is about 3\% due to the 0.84 MeV $^7$Li loss alone. The total efficiency loss for the two branching ratios and both $\alpha$ and $^7$Li in the $^{10}$B layer is
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_{loss} (^{10}{\rm B})= \sum_iw^i \frac{T_0}{R^i}
\end{equation}
for a flat uniform $^{10}$B layer thickness $T_0$. The values of $w^i$'s are given in Table~\ref{Tb:range1}. For $T_0 = 120$ nm, $\epsilon_{loss} (^{10}{\rm B}) = 5$\%.
\begin{table}[htdp]
\caption{Maximum ion ranges ($R^i$) of the charged products from the $^{10}$B(n, $\alpha$)$^{7}$Li neutron capture process in $^{10}$B solid films and ZnS.}
\begin{center}
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{.60}
\renewcommand{\tabcolsep}{0.5 cm}
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\hline
Ion & Energy & Range in $^{10}$B & Range in ZnS \\
(probability, $w^i$)&($E_0^i$, MeV)&($R^i$, $\upmu$m) & ($R^i$, $\upmu$m) \\\hline\hline
$\alpha$ (47\%)& 1.47 & 3.5 & 4.2 \\
$\alpha$ (3\%)& 1.78 & 4.4 & 5.1 \\
${}^{7}$Li (47\%)& 0.84 & 1.8 &2.3 \\
${}^7$Li (3\%) &1.02& 2.1 & 2.5 \\\hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\label{Tb:range1}
\end{table}%
ZnS:Ag coated acrylic acetate sheets (around 120 {\textmu}m thick) were obtained commercially~\cite{Peter:Jameson} and used as the substrates for $^{10}$B thin-film coating. According to the vendor, a transparent thermo-setting adhesive is applied to the acetate surface for ZnS:Ag bonding, so the ZnS:Ag facing the $^{10}$B is not coated with any adhesive. The ZnS:Ag powder is 16 {\textmu}m on average. Scanning electron microscope measurements of a lightly $^{10}$B-coated ZnS, Fig.~\ref{fig:SEM}, indicates the size dispersion of the ZnS powder, which also determines the surface roughness of the detector.
Undoped ZnS emits light at 333 nm and 349 nm wavelengths, corresponding to the near bandgap energies at 3.55 eV and 3.72 eV respectively~\cite{Kroger:1954,Xiong:2004}. The near-bandgap emissions are strongly self-absorbed. ZnS can be doped in a variety of ways that shift the emission peaks to longer wavelengths and significantly reduce self-absorption~\cite{Feldman:2003,Li:2006}. The silver-doped ZnS emits blue light that peaks around 450 nm, with a characteristic decay time around 200 ns.
According to Knoll~\cite{Knoll:2000}, the relative light yield in ZnS:Ag due to $\alpha$ stopping is about 130\% of NaI(Tl) (3.8$\times$10$^4$ Photons/MeV), {\it i.e.}, the $\alpha$ light yield is 4.9$\times$ 10$^4$ photons/MeV. Based on the data sheets from Eljen Technology as well as Leo~\cite{Leo:1994}, the light yield of $\alpha$ is 300\% of anthracene (1.74$\times$10$^4$ photons/MeV), or 5.2$\times$10$^4$ photons/MeV. Their reports agree within 10\%. The absolute light yield for the present work is not quantified; so we use the previous data to estimate the light yield for the two different $\alpha$'s to be 7.4 $\times$ 10$^4$ photons (1.47 MeV) and 9.0 $\times$ 10$^4$ photons (1.78 MeV) respectively.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4in]{SEM1.jpg}
\caption{(left) The 100-{\textmu}m resolution image of a $^{10}$B-coated ZnS surface using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). (Right) The 10-{\textmu}m resolution of the same film. The bright spots in both images are due to electrostatic charging of the surface.}
\label{fig:SEM}
\end{figure}
\section{Detector design and construction}
Highly enriched elemental $^{10}$B ($\sim$ 99 wt\%) in powder form was obtained from Ceradyne Boron Products. The $^{10}$B powder was placed in a carbon crucible and an electron-beam melted and evaporated the $^{10}$B onto the ZnS screens. The distance between the crucible and the ZnS screen was about half a meter, sufficient to maintain the acrylic acetate sheets below 50$^o$C without any active cooling. A quartz microbalance (in-situ) and a small sapphire witness plate (offline) were used together to monitor the coating thickness.
A few examples of the $^{10}$B-coated ZnS:Ag screens are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:1}a. The darkest color one (upper right) corresponds to a thick $^{10}$B coating exceeding 200 nm. The thinner coatings are shown on the lower left and lower right. A blank ZnS:Ag screen is shown on the upper left for comparison.
Two types of detectors have been built. In Fig.~\ref{fig:1}b, one of the lightly coated screens is cut to fit within the diameter of an acrylic lightguide. The screen is glued (Dow Corning Sylgard 184 Silicone Elastomer) to the lightguide. To remove the trapped air in the glue, the freshly glued screen is vacuum pumped down at a rate of 0.6 l/s for one to two hours, until no visible bubbles exist in the silicone layer.
\begin{figure}[thbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4in]{Detector1.jpg}
\caption{(Left) Several $^{10}$B-coated ZnS:Ag screens with different coating thicknesses: the upper-right, the lower-left and the lower-right ones are compared with an uncoated blank screen (upper left). All of the screens are 10 cm $\times$ 10 cm in size. (Right) One of the $^{10}$B-coated ZnS:Ag screens is trimmed to a circle and glued to a 7.9 cm ( 3-1/8$''$) diameter acrylic lightguide (5 cm tall).}
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure}
A 7.6-cm (3$''$) diameter photomultiplier (PMT) is coupled to the ZnS-screen-covered light-guide to form a detector as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Ramsey}. A rubber O-ring about 2.5 cm from the ZnS screen provides the vacuum seal. Half of the lightguide is inside the vacuum, the other half is outside the vacuum. This type of detector has been used for UCN flux monitoring, as well as flux studies as a function of height relative to the UCN beamline.
\begin{figure}[thbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3in]{Ramsey4.jpg}
\caption{A full detector assembly consists of the part shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:1}b and a PMT. A coupler connects the detector to a UCN guide with an inner diameter of 7.6 cm.}
\label{fig:Ramsey}
\end{figure}
A second type of detector with a smaller $^{10}$B area and without an acrylic lightguide is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Mor1} (Left). The 7-cm (2-3/4$''$) diameter conflat flange with a transparent window is used to house a $^{10}$B coated ZnS screen. A smaller (2.5 cm in diameter) PMT is then attached to the window from outside the vacuum. The whole detector assemble is attached to a port on a UCN guide, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Mor1} (Right). This type of detector was used to examine UCN detection efficiency, as well as for UCN transport studies in UCN guides and flux monitoring.
\begin{figure}[thbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3in]{MorrisPic.jpg}
\caption{(Left) A $^{10}$B-coated ZnS:Ag screen sits on the vacuum side of a 7-cm conflat flange; (Right) A PMT is attached to the air side of the flange. The full detector assembly is mounted to a UCN guide for flux monitoring. }
\label{fig:Mor1}
\end{figure}
\section{Results and discussion}
\label{sec:DC}
Since there is ample light due to the $\alpha$ and $^7$Li ion stopping in ZnS:Ag, we could directly digitize the electric pulses from the PMT's. When an ORTEC 113 scintillation preamplifier was used (set to 0 input capacitance), we could reduce the PMT DC bias by up to 600 volts from -1.6 to -1.8 kV to -1.0 to -1.2 kV. Most of the data were taken using an FADC-based waveform digitizer described in a previous work~\cite{Wang:2013}.
\subsection{Pulse height spectra}
A typical pulse height spectrum (PHS) of a $^{10}$B-coated ZnS:Ag UCN detector with a lightguide is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:PHS1}a. The energy scale was calibrated using a $^{148}$Gd $\alpha$ source (3.182 MeV). The PMT bias was at -1.7 kV. No ORTEC 113 scintillator preamp was used and the PMT output was digitized directly. The $^7$Li (0.84 MeV) peak stands out because the ion has the shortest range and the width of the peak is narrow due to the small straggling. A significant fraction of the signals appears above the 1.78 MeV $\alpha$ (only about 3\% is expected). This is attributed to the surface roughness as discussed in Fig.~\ref{fig:SEM} above. The average $^{10}$B coating (film $\#$3, this number is based on the order of film deposition) was measured to be 3.40 $\pm$ 0.04 nm using an optical profilometer. Since the surface roughness is greater than the $^{10}$B coating thickness, as well as the stopping ranges of $\alpha$ and $^7$Li in ZnS, both charge particles can be stopped in ZnS simultaneously if the charge particles leave the surface at an angle.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in,angle=0]{FADCtype2M.jpg}
\caption{(a) A typical pulse height spectrum due to UCN captures. (b) Energy calibration using a $^{148}$Gd $\alpha$ (3.182 MeV) source. The characteristic energies for $^7$Li and $\alpha$ due to UCN captures are shown in (a). The calibration line corresponds to 0.9 time the $^{148}$Gd $\alpha$ energy. The $^{148}$Gd $\alpha $-peak is fitted with a skewed gaussian function.}
\label{fig:PHS1}
\end{figure}
For energy calibration, the $^{148}$Gd $\alpha$ peak was fit by a skewed Gaussian function~\cite{OhLe:1976},
\begin{equation}
f(x) = 2 c_1 \phi(x') \Phi(\alpha_s x') +c_0,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
x' = \frac{x-x_0}{\sigma},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\phi(x) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} e^{-x^2/2},
\end{equation}
and \begin{equation}
\Phi(x) = \frac{1}{2} \left[1 +{\rm erf}(\frac{x}{\sqrt{2}})\right].
\end{equation}
The fitting parameters for the 3.182 MeV $^{148}$Gd $\alpha$ are $x_0 = 1867$, $\sigma = 299.0$, $\alpha_s=-3.636$, $c_1 = 110.2$, $c_0 = 1.104$. The same skewed Gaussian function can also be used to fit the 0.84 MeV $^7$Li peak. The fitting parameters for 0.84 MeV $^7$Li are $x_0 = 430.0$, $\sigma = 162.5$, $\alpha_s=1.494$, $c_1 = 174.5$, $c_0 = 17.54$. The fact that the skewness parameter $\alpha_s$ is positive indicates that the 0.84 MeV $^7$Li pulse shape is distorted by the nearby 1.02 MeV $^7$Li and 1.47 MeV $\alpha$.
The UCN-induced signals are also separated from most of the lower-amplitude background to the left ($< $ 200 on the horizontal scale), which is attributed to the light leaks from the UCN guide side. When the detector is gated off to the UCN guide, the UCN spectrum disappears and the low-amplitude background is also reduced significantly, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:PSD}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3in,angle=90]{MultipleFADCUCNtype1M.jpg}
\caption{(Top) Background signals when the gate valve to the detector is closed; (Bottom) UCN data with background as in Fig.~\ref{fig:PHS1}a. The pulse shape measurements confirm very low neutron induced background ($< 0.1$ Hz for the $^{10}$B surface area of 39.2 cm$^2$) in the detector.}
\label{fig:PSD}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Film thickness and efficiency}
We used the second detector configuration, similar to Fig.~\ref{fig:Mor1}, to characterize the UCN detection efficiency as a function of $^{10}$B film thickness. A $^3$He gas detector~\cite{Morris:1999} was used to normalize the film signals. Since the film areas were irregular, we placed a TPX screen (Polymethylpentene, Mitsui Chemicals) with a small hole ($\sim$ 6 mm diameter) in front of each film to limit the UCN flux to the same film area. UCNs that missed the hole were absorbed or upscattered to higher energies. The normalized UCN efficiency as a function of the average $^{10}$B film thickness is summarized in Fig.~\ref{fig:thickscan}. The film thickness was measured using a Zygo 3D optical surface profiler (NewView 7300). Because of the roughness of the ZnS surfaces, we used films deposited on sapphire witness plates (wafer grade) for thickness measurements.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3in,angle=90]{FilmThicknessScanM.jpg}
\caption{Relative UCN efficiency as a function of $^{10}$B film thickness. The dash line is the fitting curve described by Eq.~(\ref{model:thick}).}.
\label{fig:thickscan}
\end{figure}
The data are fitted by
\begin{equation}
\epsilon(x) = a \left(1 - e^{-x/b}\right),
\label{model:thick}
\end{equation}
with $a = 0.23$ and $b = 29.3$ nm. Here $\epsilon(x)$ and $x$ are normalized efficiency and the corresponding film thickness respectively. The $b$ value corresponds to a mean UCN velocity of 3.2 m/s according to Eq.~(\ref{eq:mfp}) or a mean UCN wavelength of 124 nm according to Eq.~(\ref{wvleng}).
\subsection{Impurities in the $^{10}$B films}
E-beam deposition took place in an ambient pressure $>10^{-6}$ Torr, which could introduce impurities to the $^{10}$B films through physical (adsorption) and chemical (4B+3O$_2 \rightarrow$ 2B$_2$O$_3$) processes. Ar ion sputtering and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) were combined to measure the impurity concentrations as a function of film depth. Some Ar contamination was observed from the XPS spectra, Fig.~\ref{fig:XPS}. The film (\#11) has a thickness of 269.8$\pm$2.9 nm from the optical profilometer measurement.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{XPS.jpg}
\caption{X-ray photoelectron spectra at three different depths of a $^{10}$B film. }
\label{fig:XPS}
\end{figure}
The sputtering profile data indicates that a surface transition layer is $<$20 nm in thickness. XPS spectrum at $\sim$20 nm is similar to the XPS spectrum at 100 nm. The bulk of the thin film shows $>$ 95\% atomic B, $\sim$ 1\% atomic C, and about 3.5\% atomic O. The B$_2$O$_3$ layer is about 2.3 nm thick on the top of the B metal. The topmost hydrocarbon layer (paraffin equivalent) is about 0.5 nm thick. Little carbon contamination was observed for this sample. Higher carbon concentration ($> 10$\%) was observed in another sample, indicating that the crucible contamination can be controlled if the boron stock in the crucible is monitored closely during deposition.
\subsection{Detection efficiency losses}
In addition to reduced detection efficiency due to charged particle stopping in the $^{10}$B layer, $\epsilon_{loss}$ = 5\% for 120-nm thick film as discussed above, other losses of detection efficiency come from coherent and incoherent scattering of UCN in the $^{10}$B layer. Multiple scattering effects such as reabsorption of scattered UCNs are neglected. We consider two limits. In the upper limit, we neglect the interference of coherently scattered UCNs. The UCN detection efficiency ($\epsilon_u$) is given by
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_u= \frac{f_0\sigma_{a0} n_0}{\sum_i f_i \sigma_{ti} n_i} \exp(- T \sum_i f_i \sigma_{ti} n_i),
\label{eq:m1}
\end{equation}
for a film thickness of $T$. We use the subscript `$i$=0' for $^{10}$B, and $i\geq 1$ for other impurities such as $^{11}$B, $^{16}$O, {\it etc}. $f_i$ is the atomic fraction of the $i$th element and $n_i$ the corresponding number density. $n_0$ = $1.3 \times 10^{23} $ cm$^{-3}$. $\sigma_{a0}$ is the absorption cross section due to $^{10}$B. $\sigma_{ti}$ is the total cross section or the sum of absorption, coherent and incoherent scattering cross sections. In a pure $^{10}$B film, the ratio of the absorption cross section to the total cross section is 99.9\%. Therefore the scattering loss is insignificant compared to transmission loss. For sufficiently thick film $T \ge 3 \lambda_a$, above 95\% detection efficiency can be obtained. Impurities increase the scattered UCN loss. When the film is contaminated by 3.5\% of oxygen (mainly $^{16}$O with $\sigma_t$ = 4.232 barn) and 1\% of carbon ($\sigma_t$ = 5.551 barn), the ratio of $^{10}$B absorption to the total UCN attenuation is still 99.9\%.
In the lower detection limit, the interaction of UCNs with the absorbing surface is approximated by a complex Fermi potential $V_f ({\bf r}) = V({\bf r}) - iW({\bf r})$~\cite{Ignatovich:1990,Golub:1991}. Here {\bf r} indicates the position-dependence of the potential due to, for example, surface roughness and the position-dependent nuclear compositions of the surface. We follow the same sign convention for $W({\bf r})$ as in~\cite{Golub:1991}. For unpolarized UCNs interacting with an unpolarized surface, $V({\bf r}) = (2\pi\hbar^2/m) \sum_i n_i({\bf r}) b_i^{coh}$ is given by the number density of different nuclei $n_i({\bf r})$ and their corresponding bound coherent scattering length $b_i^{coh}$.
Neglecting the surface roughness, a flat pure $^{10}$B surface has $V$ = -3.4 neV, $W$ = 36.3 neV, corresponding to the coherent scattering length of $b^{coh} = -0.1-1.066i $ fm for $^{10}$B~\cite{NIST}. When the film is contaminated by 3.5\% of oxygen (mainly $^{16}$O with $b^{coh} = 5.803$ fm) and 1\% of carbon (mainly $^{12}$C wtih $b^{coh} = 6.6511$ fm), the imaginary part of the Fermi potential $W$ remains the same (assuming that the $^{10}$B density remains the same, which is likely an over estimate). The real part of the Fermi potential becomes positive, $V =$ 5.8 neV. We can estimate the single-bounce UCN loss due to reflection for a smooth flat surface using the formula given in \cite{Lekner:1987},
\begin{equation}
R = \frac{(k_0 -k_r)^2 +k_i^2}{(k_0 + k_r)^2+k_i^2},
\label{reflectivity:1}
\end{equation}
where
$k_0 = \sqrt{2m E_0/\hbar^2} \cos \theta$. $k_r$ is given by
\begin{equation}
k_r^2 =(m/\hbar^2) [ \sqrt{(E_0 \cos^2\theta -V)^2 + W^2} + (E_0 \cos^2\theta -V)],
\label{eq:kr}
\end{equation}
and $k_i k_r = mW/\hbar^2$. Here $E_0$ is the incident UCN energy, $m$ the neutron rest mass, and $\theta$ the neutron incident angle with respect to the surface normal. By using Eq.~(\ref{reflectivity:1}), we have assumed that the $^{10}$B thickness is much greater than the neutron absorption length, which is valid for film thickness $\gtrsim $ 100 nm. Otherwise, $R$ needs to be modified into a form that is algebraically more complex, which can also be found in \cite{Lekner:1987}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in,angle=0]{UCNReflectionM2.jpg}
\caption{UCN reflectivity as a function of incident angle on a flat surface. The mean UCN energy of 53.5 neV is used. The critical angle for total reflection is 70.8 degrees, corresponding to $V$ = 5.8 neV.}
\label{fig:Reflect}
\end{figure}
The reflected UCN fraction as a function of incident angle is plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:Reflect} for the mean UCN energy of 53.5 neV. The critical angle, as in the cases of non-absorbing surface, or $W = 0$, is given by $\theta_c = \cos^{-1} (\sqrt{V/E_0})$, or 70.8 degrees. For non-absorbing surfaces, $R=1$ at incident angles greater than the critical angle, $\theta > \theta_c$. For the highly absorbing $^{10}$B surface, we notice that $R < 1$ for $\theta > \theta_c$. In Eq.~(\ref{eq:kr}), $k_r$ does not vanish due to finite $W$. Because of surface roughness, however, the incident angle is not well defined. The mean reflectivity averaged over the incident angles is $\int_0^{\pi/2} R \sin \theta d\theta$. The averaged UCN reflectivity for a pure $^{10}$B surface is 26.5\%. For a slightly contaminated surface it is 29.0\%. This relatively small difference between a pure $^{10}$B surface and a slightly contaminated surface is mainly due to the reduction in $R$ for $\theta > \theta_c$. The measurements in Fig.~\ref{fig:thickscan} indicate that the UCN detection efficiency is rather insensitive to impurities of a few percent, consistent with Fig.~\ref{fig:Reflect}. The discrepancy in efficiency loss between the single-particle scattering model Eq.~(\ref{eq:m1}) and the optical model will be studied by examining the effects of surface roughness.
\section{Conclusions}
We have demonstrated a multilayer surface detector for ultracold neutrons (UCNs). No gas is used in the detector and the UCNs are directly captured by a $^{10}$B surface. The spectra measured from UCN captures on the $^{10}$B-films consist of primarily 0.84 MeV $^7$Li and 1.47 MeV $\alpha$, as well as a significant fraction of signals which are attributed to dual-charge ($^7$Li and $\alpha$ together) stopping due to the uneven ZnS surface. Ambient neutron background count rate was observed to be less than 0.1 Hz (for the $^{10}$B surface area of 39.2 cm$^2$ and the film thickness of 3.4 nm) using pulse-shape discrimination. This type of detector has been configured in several ways for UCN flux monitoring, development of UCN guides, UCN lifetime measurement~\cite{Salvat:2014} and UCN-induced fission research~\cite{Broussard:2014}. Further work is needed to understand the effects of surface roughness on the detection efficiency.
{\bf Acknowledgments} This work was funded by the LDRD program of Los Alamos National Laboratory.
\bibliographystyle{elsarticle-num}
|
\section{Introduction}
The interest in extremely heavy oxygen isotopes is very high today Ref.\
\cite{Hoffman:2008,Lunderberg:2012,Kohley:2013,Caesar:2013,Kondo:2014}. One
of the strongest motivations emanates from the structure theory
\cite{Volya:2006,Hagen:2009,Otsuka:2010,Hergert:2013}. The evolution of binding
energies along the oxygen isotopic chain appears to be highly sensitive to the
details of interactions and procedures used in the modern structure
approaches thus providing stringent test for their quality. This
field of research concentrates on the short distances and short-range
correlations. Recently it has been demonstrated that another source of an
inspiration here can be connected to the continuum properties of these systems
and, correspondingly, to the long-range correlations Ref.\
\cite{Volya:2006,Grigorenko:2011,Grigorenko:2013,Hagino:2014,Hagino:2014b}.
The question of prospects to search for neutron radioactivity has been
considered in Ref.\ \cite{Grigorenko:2011}. In contrast to at the proton
dripline, characterized by large Coulomb barriers, in the vicinity of the
neutron dripline the emission of neutrons from the particle-unstable ground
state (g.s.) can be hindered mainly by centrifugal barriers (we do not consider
the possible structural
hindrance factors, connected with many-body effects for the ground state neutron
emitters). For isotopes with odd number of neutrons such barriers appear to be
sufficient to produce long-lived (radioactivity lifetime scale) ground states
only beyond the $s$-$d$ shell. Discussion of such a remote region of the
dripline is not of a practical importance nowadays. However, a more complicated
phenomenon comes into play for the particle-unstable dripline systems with even
number of neutrons. The pairing interaction can produce specific decay energy
conditions which force a simultaneous emission of two (or even four) neutrons.
The level schemes for $^{26}$O and $^{25}$O illustrating this situation are
given in Fig.\ \ref{fig:levels}. These, so-called true three-body (five-body)
decays, are affected by the hindrance factor connected with an appearance of
specific additional barriers in the few-body dynamics [see the discussion around
Eq.\ (\ref{eq:shredl}) below]. Thus the search for novel types of a
radioactivity phenomena, namely, two- and four-neutron radioactivities, becomes
prospective.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{aa-01-levels}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Experimentally observed energy levels of $^{26}$O
\cite{Kohley:2013,Caesar:2013,Kondo:2014} and $^{25}$O. For theory results the
level scheme predicted for $^{26}$O is shown which is based on the one assumed
for $^{25}$O.}
\label{fig:levels}
\end{figure}
Among the realistic candidates for $2n$ and $4n$ radioactivity search $^{26}$O
and $^{28}$O were considered in Ref.\ \cite{Grigorenko:2011}. Since that time a
hint for the very long lifetime ($T_{1/2}=4.5^{+1.1}_{-1.5}$ ps) was obtained
for $^{26}$O in Ref.\ \cite{Kohley:2013}. Improved theoretical lifetime
estimates in Ref.\ \cite{Grigorenko:2013} indicated that an extremely low
three-body (total) decay energy, $E_T< 1$ keV, is required to produce such a
long lifetime. A realization of such a small decay energy in the nature seems
unrealistic, however, the experimental decay energy $E_T$ limit for $^{26}$O
g.s.\ was steadily decreasing towards zero in recent years. At MSU the value
$E_T=150^{+50}_{-150}$ keV was obtained \cite{Lunderberg:2012}. At GSI
$E_T<120$ keV or $E_T<40$ keV was found depending on confidence level $95 \%$ or
$68\%$, which was chosen for the analysis \cite{Caesar:2013}. In RIKEN, $^{26}$O
and $^{25}$O were also produced from $^{27}$F and $^{26}$F beams
\cite{Kondo:2014}, with much higher statistics than in Refs.\
\cite{Lunderberg:2012,Kohley:2013,Caesar:2013}. Their preliminary data also
showed the ground state just above the $^{24}$O+$2n$ threshold, in addition to
the newly observed excited state at little over 1 MeV. It should be noted that
very small decay energy ($E_T \sim 20$ keV) was predicted theoretically in Ref.\
\cite{Volya:2006}. Thus, really extreme low decay energy of this nucleus cannot
be excluded.
In recent years there were important advances in the studies of the lightest
$2p$ emitter $^{6}$Be
\cite{Grigorenko:2009,Grigorenko:2009c,Egorova:2012,Grigorenko:2012
Fomichev:2012}. Considering also the long history of studies of the $2n$ halo
system $^{6}$He in a three-cluster $\alpha$+$n$+$n$ approximation
\cite{Danilin:1991,Bang:1996,Danilin:2007,Ershov:2008,Ershov:2009}, it can be
concluded that the understanding of the three-body dynamics in $p$-shell nuclei
is reasonably developed. In contrast, for $s$-$d$ shell systems the situation is
much less advanced. Only very recently interesting results were obtained for the
two-proton emitter $^{16}$Ne \cite{Brown:2014,Grigorenko:2015}.
The continuum three-body dynamics of the neuron-rich $s$-$d$ shell nuclei also
remains poorly investigated with just few examples of such studies
\cite{Volya:2006,Grigorenko:2013,Hagino:2014,Hagino:2014b}, elaborating mainly
the ground state properties.
In previous works on $^{26}$O \cite{Grigorenko:2011,Grigorenko:2013} we
concentrated on the decay studies of the g.s.\ in quite schematic approaches
aiming first of all at qualitative understanding of the underlying physics for
long-living neutron emitters. In this work we consider the population and decays
of the $^{26}$O $0^+$ and $2^+$ continuum states using more realistic model
assumptions, in a broad energy range, and with more details provided. In this
work we report several nontrivial results concerning the three-body continuum
dynamics of the $s$-$d$ shell nuclei by example of $^{26}$O, which provides us
important general insights in this question. Among the obtained results are
(i) validity of the simple approximation to the spectrum shape in the case of
radioactive $2n$ decay, (ii) existence of extreme peripheral $0^+$ monopole
excitations in the low-lying spectrum of $^{26}$O.
\section{Theoretical model}
The model applied to $^{26}$O in this work generally follows the approach of
Ref.\ \cite{Grigorenko:2013}. To provide reasonable predictions concerning the
excitation spectrum of $^{26}$O the improvements concerning the reaction
mechanism treatment were implemented, see e.g.\
\cite{Egorova:2012,Grigorenko:2015}. For some direct reactions the problem of
population and decay of three-body states can be formulated in terms of the
three-body inhomogeneous Schr\"odingier equation
\begin{eqnarray}
(\hat{H}_3 - E_T)\Psi^{(+)}_{E_T} = \Phi_{\mathbf{q}} \,, \nonumber \\
\hat{H}_3 = \hat{T}_3 + V_{n_1\text{-}n_2} + V_{\text{core-}n_1} +
V_{\text{core-}n_2} + V_{3}(\rho)\,, \nonumber
\label{eq:shred}
\end{eqnarray}
with the source function $\Phi_{\mathbf{q}}$ depending only on one parameter
connected to the reaction mechanism: the transferred momentum $\mathbf{q}$.
The dynamics of the three-body $^{24}$O+$n$+$n$ continuum of $^{26}$O is
described by the wave function (WF) $\Psi^{(+)}$ with pure outgoing
asymptotic in the hyperspherical harmonics (HH) formalism:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Psi^{JM_J(+)}_{E_T} = \rho^{-5/2} \sum_{K\gamma}
\chi^{(+)}_{K\gamma}(\rho)\mathcal{J}^{JM_J}_{K\gamma}(\Omega_{\rho})\,,
\nonumber
\\
\chi^{(+)}_{K\gamma}(\rho) \stackrel{\rho \rightarrow \infty}{=}
\mathcal{H}^{(+)}_{K+3/2}(\varkappa \rho) \sim \exp(+i \varkappa \rho) \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathcal{H}$ denote the Riccati-Bessel functions of half-integer index
and the ``multi-index'' $\gamma$ denotes the complete set of quantum
numbers except for the principal quantum number $K$: $\gamma=\{L,S,l_x,l_y\}$.
The three-body calculations in the HH method utilize the transition from the
three-body Jakobi coordinates
$\{\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}\}=\{x,\Omega_x,y,\Omega_y\}$ to the collective
coordinates $\{\rho,\Omega_{\rho}\}=\{\rho,\theta_{\rho},\Omega_x,\Omega_y\}$.
The hyperradius $\rho$ (describing collective radial motion) and
the hyperangle $\theta_{\rho}$ (responsible for geometry of the system at given
$\rho$) are defined via the cluster coordinates $\mathbf{r}_i$ as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbf{x} &=& \sqrt{\textstyle \frac{A_1A_2}{A_1+A_2}} (\mathbf{r}_1 -
\mathbf{r}_2) , \nonumber \\
\mathbf{y} &=& \sqrt{\textstyle \frac{(A_1+A_2)A_3}{A_1+A_2+A_3}} \left(
\textstyle \frac{A_1\mathbf{r}_1+A_2\mathbf{r}_2}{A_1+A_2} - \mathbf{r}_3
\right),
\nonumber \\
\rho &=& \sqrt{x^2+y^2} \;, \quad \theta_{\rho}=\arctan(x/y) \, .
\label{eq:coord}
\end{eqnarray}
Hypermomentum $\varkappa=\sqrt{2ME_{T}}$ is the dynamic variable conjugated to
hyperradius. The mass $M$ is an average nucleon mass for the considered nucleus.
The hyperspherical harmonics $\mathcal{J}^{JM_J}_{K\gamma}$ with definite total
angular momentum $J$ and its projection $M_J$
\[
\mathcal{J}^{JM_J}_{K\gamma}(\Omega_{\rho}) =
\psi^{l_xl_y}_L(\theta_{\rho})\,\left[ [Y_{l_x}(\Omega_x) \otimes
Y_{l_y}(\Omega_y)]_L
\otimes X_S \right]_{JM_J}
\]
form a full set of orthogonal functions on the five-dimensional ``hypersphere''
$\Omega_{\rho}$. The pure hyperangular functions $\psi^{l_xly}_L$ are expressed
in terms of Jacobi polinomials.
The three-body Schr\"odinger equation (\ref{eq:shred}) in the hyperspherical
basis is reduced to the set of coupled differential equations for the functions
$\chi ^{(+)}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left[ \frac{d^{2}}{d\rho ^{2}} - \frac{\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{L}+1)}{\rho ^{2}}
+2M\left\{ E-V_{K\gamma ,K\gamma }(\rho )\right\} \right] \chi _{K\gamma
}^{(+)}(\rho ) \nonumber \\
=2M \!\!\! \sum_{K^{\prime }\gamma ^{\prime } \neq K \gamma }\!\! V_{K\gamma,
K^{\prime } \gamma ^{\prime
}}(\rho )\chi _{K^{\prime }\gamma ^{\prime }}^{(+)}(\rho ) - 2M\,\Phi
_{\mathbf{q},K\gamma }(\rho )\,, \quad
\label{eq:shredl}
\end{eqnarray}
which can be interpreted as motion of a single ``effective'' particle in a
strongly deformed field. The ``three-body potentials'' (matrix elements of the
pairwise potentials) $V_{K\gamma ,K^{\prime }\gamma ^{\prime}}(\rho )$ and the
partial source terms $\Phi_{\mathbf{q},K\gamma}$ are defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
V_{K\gamma ,K^{\prime }\gamma ^{\prime }}(\rho ) & = &
\int \!d\Omega _{\rho }\,\mathcal{J}_{K^{\prime }\gamma ^{\prime
}}^{JM_J\ast }(\Omega _{\rho}) \sum_{i<j}V_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij})
\,\mathcal{J}_{K\gamma }^{JM_J}(\Omega _{\rho})\,, \nonumber \\
\Phi_{\mathbf{q}, K\gamma }(\rho ) & = & \int \! d \Omega _{\rho }\,
\mathcal{J}_{K^{\prime} \gamma ^{\prime}}^{JM_J \ast}(\Omega _{\rho}) \,
\Phi_{\mathbf{q}}(\rho,\Omega _{\rho})\,. \nonumber
\label{eq:hhpot}
\end{eqnarray}
The details of the hyperspherical method application to various three-body
systems in different physical situations can be found in the papers
\cite{Danilin:1991,Grigorenko:1998,Grigorenko:2001,Grigorenko:2008
Grigorenko:2009c}.
The important qualitative difference between Eq.\
(\ref{eq:shredl}) and the conventional two-body situation is that the
``effective angular momentum'' $\mathcal{L}=K+3/2$ in the three-body problem is
not equal to zero even for the lowest possible quantum state with $K=0$. Thus,
there exists a three-body centrifugal barrier even for decays via $s$-wave
emission of neutral particles producing strong hindrance factors for the widths
of such low-energy decays.
The differential cross section is expressed via the flux $j$ induced by the WF
$\Psi^{(+)}$ on the remote five-dimensional surface $\Omega_{\rho}$ with
$\rho=\rho_{\max}$
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{d\sigma}{dE_T\, d\Omega_{\rho}} \sim j, \qquad j = \left. \langle
\Psi^{(+)}_{E_T} | \hat{j} | \Psi^{(+)}_{E_T} \rangle \right|_{\rho_{\max}}
\nonumber \\
= \frac{1}{M} \, \text{Im} \left. \left[ \Psi^{(+)\dagger}_{E_T} \,\rho^{5/2}
\frac{d}{d\rho}\rho^{5/2}\, \Psi^{(+)}_{E_T} \right] \right|_{\rho_{\max}}\,.
\label{eq:cross-sect}
\end{eqnarray}
The approach with inhomogeneous Schr\"odinger equation (\ref{eq:shred}) had
previously been applied to two different direct reaction mechanisms (knockout
and charge-exchange) populating the three-body continuum of the $^{6}$Be
\cite{Egorova:2012,Grigorenko:2012,Fomichev:2012}, $^{10}$He
\cite{Sharov:2014}, and $^{16}$Ne \cite{Brown:2014,Grigorenko:2015}.
The source function $\Phi_{\mathbf{q}}$ for the $0^{+}$ continuum was
approximated assuming a sudden removal of a $d$-wave proton from $^{27}$F
\begin{equation}
\Phi_{\mathbf{q}}^{(0^+)} = v_0 \int d^3 r_p e^{i\mathbf{q r}_p} \langle
\Psi_{^{24}\text{\scriptsize O}} | \Psi_{^{27}\text{\scriptsize F}} \rangle \, ,
\label{eq:sour-0p}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{r}_p$ is the radius-vector of the removed proton. The $^{27}$F
g.s.\ WF $\Psi_{^{27}\text{\scriptsize F}}$ was obtained in a three-body
$^{25}$F+$n$+$n$ cluster model and the technicalities of proton removal from
the $^{25}$F core of the $^{27}$F nucleus are the same as in calculations of
Ref.\ \cite{Sharov:2014}.
The source function $\Phi_{\mathbf{q}}$ for the $2^{+}$ continuum can not be
easily evaluated by a simple proton removal model in the framework of three-body
approach to structure of $^{27}$F. Therefore, we use the source generated by
additionally acting on the valence neutrons of the $^{27}$F g.s.\ WF by the
quadrupole operator:
\begin{equation}
\Phi_{\mathbf{q}}^{(2^+)} = v_2 \int d^3 r_n e^{i\mathbf{q r}_n} \langle
\Psi_{^{24}\text{\scriptsize
O}} |\sum_{i=1,2} r^2_i \, Y_{2m_i}(\hat{r}_i)| \Psi_{^{27}\text{\scriptsize F}}
\rangle \, .
\label{eq:sour-2p}
\end{equation}
Expressions of this type typically arise in the direct reaction studies and seem
to be sufficiently suited for exploratory studies of $2^+$ excitations in the
$^{26}$O case. The approximation is the same as used in the recent paper
\cite{Grigorenko:2015}.
The sudden removal approximation is not intended for absolute cross section
calculations, and therefore the source strength coefficients $v_i$ in Eq.\
(\ref{eq:sour-0p}) and (\ref{eq:sour-2p}) are arbitrary values providing the
source function the correct dimension of $[\text{energy}/\text{length}^{5/2}]$.
\section{Potentials}
In this work we employ for the nucleon-nucleon channel
the quasirealistic potential from Ref.\ \cite{Gogny:1970} including central,
spin-orbit, tensor, and parity-splitting terms.
In the $^{24}$O-$n$ channel we used the
potential from \cite{Grigorenko:2013} characterized as ``moderate repulsion in
$s$ and $p$ waves''. This is a Woods-Saxon potential with radius $r_0=3.5$ fm,
diffuseness $a=0.75$ fm, and depth parameters $V_s=70$ MeV and $V_p=70$ MeV for
$s$ and $p$ waves respectively. The $d$-waves component was modified by an
inclusion of the $ls$ interaction to produce realistic excitation spectrum of
$^{25}$O: $V_d=-33$ MeV, $V_{ls}=-5$ MeV. We also varied the $ls$ interaction to
check the sensitivity to this parameter, see Sections \ref{sec:monopole} and
\ref{sec:2p}.
The three-body potential $V_{3}(\rho)$ depending on $\rho$ with the Woods-Saxon
parameterization ($\rho_0=5$ fm, $a=0.9$ fm) is used to control the decay
energy $E_T$ when the fine adjustment is needed, see the discussion in
\cite{Pfutzner:2012}. This potential is very small (on the level of just a few
keV) for the $^{24}$O-$n$ potential chosen in this work and therefore $V_{3}$
does not influence the other results of the calculations on the practical level.
\section{Excitation spectrum and structure of $0^+$ states}
A calculated spectrum for $0^+$ continuum states of $^{26}$O is shown in Fig.\
\ref{fig:spec-0p}. In this particular calculation the g.s.\ is obtained at
$E_T=10$ keV. Two more states are obtained at about 1.76 and 2.6 MeV. Some hint
for a broad $0^+$ state at about 4.2 MeV can also be seen. Within the simple
reaction model used in this work the ground $0^+$ state is populated with the
relative intensity $W_{1} \sim 92\%$ indicated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:spec-0p}, while
the excited $0^+$ states are populated at a level of $W_{i>1} \sim 2-3\;\%$.
It can be expected that in more complicated reaction scenario the source
function $\Phi_{\mathbf{q}}$ should have smaller affinity to the $^{26}$O ground
state WF and we can expect up to $W_{i>1} \sim 5-15 \;\%$ population rates for
the excited $0^+$ states. The relative population intensities above are
calculated by integration of the strength function Fig.\ \ref{fig:spec-0p} in
the range $[E_{3r}(i)-\Gamma(i),E_{3r}(i)+\Gamma(i)]$ around the energy
$E_{3r}(i)$ of the $i$-th resonance which width is $\Gamma(i)$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{aa-02-0p-all}
\caption{(Color online) The $0^+$ excitation spectrum of $^{26}$O calculated by
the three-body model for proton knockout from $^{27}$F. Weights, $W_i$, of the
peaks are shown in percent.}
\label{fig:spec-0p}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[b]
\caption{The three-body structure of the g.s.\ of initial $^{27}$F nucleus and
$^{26}$O $0^+$ excitations in terms of probability $W(l^2)$ in percent of the
corresponding $[l^2_j]_0$ configuration. The energies of the states with respect
to the three-body breakup threshold are provided in the last row.}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}[c]{ccccc}
$l_j$ & $^{27}$F, g.s.\ & $^{26}$O, g.s.\ & $^{26}$O, $0^+_2$ & $^{26}$O,
$0^+_3$ \\
\hline
$s_{1/2}$ & 0.55 & 0.67 & 3.7 & 3.8 \\
$d_{3/2}$ & 84 & 79 & 80 & 86 \\
$d_{5/2}$ & 13 & 19 & 6.0 & 6.1 \\
\hline
$E_T$ (MeV) & $-3.2$ & 0.01 & 1.7 & 2.6
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\label{tab:0p-struct}
\end{table}
\section{R-matrix like phenomenology}
The ideas of using R-matrix type expressions for analysis of the three-body
excitations and decays have been discussed occasionally in the literature
\cite{Golovkov:2004,Grigorenko:2008,Grigorenko:2009} in quite a sketchy way. It
is important to understand general validity and limits of applicability of such
expressions for practical application as for theoretical estimates and as for
phenomenological analysis of experimental data.
It can be shown that for the source function normalized at given $\mathbf{q}$
value
\[
\int d \rho \, \rho^5 \, d\Omega_{\rho} \,2M \, |\Phi_{\mathbf{q}}
(\rho,\Omega_{\rho}) |^2 = 1\, ,
\]
the energy profile of flux is provided by the expression
\begin{eqnarray}
j(E_T) & = & W(E_{3r}) \, \frac{\pi}{2M^2} \,
\frac{\Gamma_K(E_T)}{(E_T-E_{3r})^2 - \Gamma(E_{3r})^2/4}\,, \nonumber \\
\Gamma_K(E_T) & = & 2 \, \gamma_{\text{\scriptsize WL}}\, \theta^2_{K \gamma} \,
\frac{(2/\pi)}{J^2_{K+2}(\varkappa \rho_{\text{ch}}) + Y^2_{K+2}(\varkappa
\rho_{\text{ch}})} \,.
\label{eq:r-matr}
\end{eqnarray}
Here the hypermomentum $\varkappa=\sqrt{2ME_{3r}}$ is defined at the three-body
resonance energy $E_{3r}$, and the ``Wigner limit'' $\gamma_{\text{\scriptsize
WL}}=1/(2M\rho^2_{\text{ch}})$ estimates the upper limit for the width. The
functions $J$ and $Y$ are cylindrical Bessel functions regular and irregular at
the origin, respectively. This expression is totally analogous to the standard
two-body R-matrix expression as it is based on the assumption that the
penetration in the three-body system is defined by the three-body channel in the
hyperspherical decomposition of the WF with the lowest possible hypermomentum
$R=K_{\min}$. For systems with zero spin of the core the latter is trivially
related to the total spin of the state: $K_{\min}=J$. The ``normalization''
$W(E_{3r})$ is connected to the affinity of the source to the inner structure of
the resonance; this value is expected to be smaller than unity, but of the order
of unity for the realistic situation. It was found to be $W(\text{g.s.}) = 0.92$
in our calculations, see also Fig.\ \ref{fig:spec-0p}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.238\textwidth]{aa-03a-rmatr}
\includegraphics[width=0.238\textwidth]{aa-03b-rmatr-zoom}
\caption{Cross section profiles for the very narrow $^{26}$O g.s.\ calculated
by the three-body model and obtained by the R-matrix-type approximation are
shown on two different scales in panels (a) and (b).}
\label{fig:r-matr}
\end{figure}
The example of application of the R-matrix expression is provided in Fig.\
\ref{fig:r-matr}. The possibility of fitting the excitation profile by the
Breit-Wigner shape in the vicinity of the resonance does not cause any doubts.
However, it can be seen that the near-perfect description is provided by the
R-matrix expression up to something like $10^5$ widths away from the resonance.
For this Figure the ``spectroscopic factor '' $\theta^2_{K\gamma}$ is fitted in
such a way that the calculated width $\Gamma_K$ for the three-body resonance
energy $E_{3r} = 9.7$ keV is exactly reproduced by the R-matrix expression [in
this specific case $\Gamma_K(E_{3r}) = 4.04 \times 10^{-3} $ keV].
It is also necessary to fix one more parameter: the ``channel radius''
$\rho_{\text{ch}}$. In the three-body case this parameter does not have such a
well defined meaning as in two-body R-matrix phenomenology and some
investigation is required here. Definition of the spectroscopic factor
$\theta^2$ for the single-channel approximation is
\[
\theta^2_{K \gamma}(\rho_{\text{ch}}) =
\frac{|\chi_{K\gamma}(\rho_{\text{ch}})|^2} {I( \rho_{\text{ch}})}\, , \;
I( \rho_{\text{ch}}) = \sum_{K \gamma} \int_0^1 \!\! dx \, |\chi_{K\gamma}( x
\rho_{\text{ch}})|^2 .
\]
The $\theta^2$ dependence on channel radius, obtained using the calculated
three-body $^{26}$O WF, is illustrated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:red-wid}. It is very
stable in a broad range of channel radii,
varying from 0.007 to 0.004 for $4<\rho_{\text{ch}}<25$ fm. The $\theta^2$
variation for the mentioned range of channel radius is in very good agreement
with the relative weight of the $[s^2]$ configuration calculated within the
whole internal region $W(s^2)=0.0067$, see also Table \ref{tab:0p-struct}. The
calculated three-body width is reproduced for
$\rho_{\text{ch}}=13$ fm and for less than $\pm 50 \%$ variation of width we
need to keep the channel radius in the range $9<\rho_{\text{ch}}<16$ fm.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{aa-04-red-wid}
\caption{(Color online) Spectroscopic factor $\theta^2$ Eq.\ (\ref{eq:r-matr})
as a function of channel radius $\rho_{\text{ch}}$. The dotted curve shows the
dependence of the ``internal normalization'' $I$ on $\rho_{\text{ch}}$.}
\label{fig:red-wid}
\end{figure}
We can see that the extension of a simple single channel R-matrix phenomenology,
Eq.\ (\ref{eq:r-matr}), to the three-body decays provides easily tractable and
very reliable results for long-lived two-neutron emitters. We can also conclude
that the use of typical R-matrix parameters, chosen according to the
prescription discussed above, can be expected to provide widths values with an
uncertainty around $50\%$, which is a quite accurate result for estimates
concerning long-living states.
\section{The monopole $0^+$ excitations}
\label{sec:monopole}
The nature of the excited $0^+$ states is very interesting and deserves a
special discussion. Table \ref{tab:0p-struct} provides the basic structure
information about the $^{26}$O $0^+$ states indicating their high similarity. It
is clear that a simple explanation for such a situation is that the predicted
excited $0^+$ states are all monopole (often called ``breathing mode'')
excitations.
To check this assumption we have studied the radial evolution and the
correlation densities of the $^{26}$O $0^+$ WFs at corresponding energies. One
can see in Fig.\ \ref{fig:wf-den-mono} that the g.s.\ WF density decreases more
or less exponentially inside the barrier. At larger distances the behavior tends
to be constant which corresponds to approaching the asymptotic behavior
$\chi^{(+)} \sim \exp(+i\varkappa \rho)$ of the three-body WF. However, for the
$0^+_2$ and $0^+_3$ state WFs there exists one and two extra humps respectively
(indicated by arrows in Fig.\ \ref{fig:wf-den-mono}) in the above-the-barrier
slope of the density before the asymptotic (constant) behavior is achieved. This
is exactly expected for the monopole states where the major WF component should
have one or more nodes in the radial WF. The extreme radial extent of the humps
is notable. E.g.\ the peak for $0^+_3$ with $\rho \sim 30$ fm corresponds to
typical single particle distances in the core-neutron channel of about 20 fm.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{aa-05-monopole-n}
\caption{(Color online) WF densities for the $^{26}$O ground state and two
excited $0^+$ states. All WFs are normalized to unity maximum value. Arrows
indicate the humps connected with monopole excitations.}
\label{fig:wf-den-mono}
\end{figure}
To understand the reasons for the monopole state formation we performed simple
width estimates for major configurations of the $^{26}$O WF.
Fig.\ \ref{fig:wid-estim} provides the estimates in a ``direct decay''
R-matrix model from Ref.\ \cite{Pfutzner:2012}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Gamma_{j_1 j_2}(E_T) = \frac{E_{T}\left \langle V_{3}\right \rangle
^{2}} {2\pi} \int_0^1 \!\! d \varepsilon \,
\frac{ \Gamma_{j_1}(\varepsilon E_{T})}
{(\varepsilon E_{T}-E_{j_1})^{2}+\Gamma_{j_1}(\varepsilon E_{T})^{2}/4}
\nonumber \\
\times \frac{\Gamma_{j_2}((1-\varepsilon)E_{T})}
{((1-\varepsilon)E_{T}-E_{j_2})^{2} + \Gamma_{j_2}
((1-\varepsilon)E_{T})^{2}/4}\;.\qquad
\label{eq:sequent}
\end{eqnarray}
This model is reasonably well approximating the true three-body decay mechanism,
and also provides a smooth transition to the sequential decay regime. The direct
decay model is constructed in the spirit of independent particle approach with
two nucleons being emitted from states with definite single-particle angular
momenta $j_1$ and $j_2$ sharing the total decay energy $E_T$, but with
interaction between nucleons neglected. The $\Gamma_{j_i}$ is the standard
R-matrix expression for the width as a function of the energy for the involved
resonances in the $^{24}$O+$n$ subsystems. It is assumed that two-body resonant
states with energies $E_{j_i}$ are present in both two-body subsystems and that
the values $\Gamma_{j_i}(E_{j_i})$ correctly describe their empirical widths.
The matrix element $\left \langle V_{3}\right \rangle$ can be well approximated
as
\[
\left \langle V_{3}\right \rangle ^{2} = D_3 [(E_T-E_{j_1}-E_{j_2})^2 +
(\Gamma_{j_1}(E_{j_1})+\Gamma_{j_2}(E_{j_2}))^2/4]\, ,
\]
where the parameter $D_3 \approx 1.0-1.5$ is a constant.
It can be seen in Fig.\ \ref{fig:wid-estim} that for low-energy decays of the
$0^+$
states the predominant contribution to the width is connected with the
$[s_{1/2}^2]_0$ configuration of $^{26}$O. Here the width associated with the
dominant $[d_{3/2}^2]_0$ configuration of the WF (see Table \ref{tab:0p-struct})
is strongly suppressed. However, for $E_T>0.77$ MeV the decay mechanism for the
$[d_{3/2}^2]_0$ configuration changes to the sequential emission via the
$d_{3/2}$ ground state of $^{25}$O. So, at higher energies the partial width for
this configuration rapidly grows and becomes approximately equal to that of
the $[s_{1/2}^2]_0$ configuration at $E_T=1.6$ MeV. This is approximately the
energy at which the second $0^+$ state appears. So, despite the simplicity of
these estimates they provide a hint that the appearance of the excited $0^+$
states could be connected with the ability of the $[d_{3/2}^2]_0$ configuration
to propagate effectively to large distances above the barrier. We can estimate
that the monopole states found, are built on interference patterns between
$[s_{1/2}^2]_0$ and $[d_{3/2}^2]_0$ components at large distances.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{aa-07-wid-estim}
\caption{(Color online) Width estimates for the $0^+$ and $2^+$ states of
$^{26}$O in the R-matrix-type approach of Eq.\ (\ref{eq:sequent}) for different
$[j_1j_2]_J$ configurations. Vertical dashed lines indicate the predicted
positions of the $0^+$ states. }
\label{fig:wid-estim}
\end{figure}
To get a deeper insight into the process we may investigate the three-body WF
correlation densities Fig.\ \ref{fig:wf-cor-den}:
\[
W(\rho, \theta_{\rho}) = \int d \Omega_x \, d \Omega_y \, | \Psi^{(+)} (\rho,
\theta_{\rho},\Omega_x,\Omega_y) |^2 .
\]
In the ``Y'' Jacobi system we should choose the mass number of the $^{24}$O
cluster as $A_1$ or $A_2$ in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:coord}) and for such a relatively
heavy core cluster we can approximate the distances between core and valence
nucleons by:
\begin{eqnarray}
r_{\text{core-}n_1} &=& \sqrt{\textstyle \frac{A_1+A_2}{A_1A_2}} \, \rho \,
\sin(\theta_{\rho}) , \nonumber \\
r_{\text{core-}n_2} & \approx & \sqrt{\textstyle
\frac{A_1+A_2+A_3}{(A_1+A_2)A_3}} \, \rho \, \cos(\theta_{\rho}). \nonumber
\label{eq:rel-dis}
\end{eqnarray}
Thus, the provided correlation densities illustrate the evolution of relative
distances in the single-particle channels.
It can be seen in Fig.\ \ref{fig:wf-cor-den} that the correlation densities for
the calculated $0^+_2$ and $0^+_3$ states have a complicated correlation pattern
in the hyperangle $\theta_{\rho}$ at large distances $10< \rho < 30$ fm. Such a
triple-peak pattern should be connected with the important contribution of the
$[d^2]$ configuration in the above-the-barrier region. The $[d^2]$ configuration
is as expected dominant in the nuclear interior $\rho < 10$ fm, but for the
ground state it is suppressed under the barrier, see Fig.\ \ref{fig:wf-cor-den}
(a). In contrast, for the $0^+_2$ and $0^+_3$ states, illustrated in Figs.\
\ref{fig:wf-cor-den} (b) and (c), the $[d^2]$ component extends also to the
peripheral region forming the triple-peak patterns.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{aa-06-fi-e001}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{aa-06-fi-e176}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{aa-06-fi-e250}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) The $^{26}$O WF correlation density $W(\rho,
\theta_{\rho})$ in the ``Y'' Jakobi system for the ground state (a) and two
excited $0^+$ states (b) and (c). Notice the change of $\rho$ scale.}
\label{fig:wf-cor-den}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:ls-evolution} demonstrates the evolution of the $0^+$
states with $V_{ls}$. This evolution provides some confirmation that the
``remnants'' of the broad monopole $0^+_4$ state is present in the spectrum
Fig.\ \ref{fig:spec-0p} at about 4 MeV. With $V_{ls}$ approaching zero,
the $0^+$ spectrum shifts downwards in energy providing a much narrower, and
thus well defined, $0^+_4$ state. For larger negative $V_{ls}$ values the
$0^+_4$ state increases in energy and is totally dissolved in the continuum.
\section{The $2^+$ states}
\label{sec:2p}
The excitation spectrum of $^{26}$O is expected to have relatively low level
density due to the simplicity of the spectrum of $^{25}$O, where only one
low-lying state is known so far ($d_{3/2}$ at 0.7 MeV). In the calculations we
obtain just two $2^+$ states where the lower one has a structure characterized
by the configuration mixing $[d^2_{3/2}]_2$-$[d^2_{5/2}]_2$, while the higher
one is based on the $[s_{1/2}d_{3/2}]_2$-$[s_{1/2}d_{5/2}]_2$ configurations.
Within the three-body model the separation between these configurations is
defined by the $ls$ splitting between the $^{25}$O g.s.\ $d_{3/2}$ and the yet
unknown $d_{5/2}$ state. Figure \ref{fig:ls-evolution} demonstrates the
dependence of the positions of the $2^+$ states on the intensity of the $ls$
interaction under the condition that the $^{25}$O $d_{3/2}$ g.s.\ position
remains fixed. The $2^+$ states naturally become degenerate for $V_{ls} = 0$.
Most of the calculations of this work are performed for $V_{ls} =-5$ MeV,
which provides the position of the $0^+$ g.s.\ to be exactly on the $2n$
threshold. Under this condition the predicted positions of the $2^+$ state are
1.6 MeV and 4.5 MeV. The calculated three-body width value for the $2^+_1$ state
is
$\Gamma=115$ keV. However, the width of the states with expected dominant
sequential decay mechanism are not reliably predicted in the HH method
calculations. For that reason we also performed estimates using the direct decay
model expression Eq.\ (\ref{eq:sequent}). The result for the
$[s_{1/2}d_{3/2}]_2$ configuration which has the most favorable penetration
conditions is provided in Fig.\ \ref{fig:wid-estim}. For the $2^+_1$ state the
value $\Gamma_{1/2,3/2} \approx 2.7$ MeV. However, it should be corrected for
the weight of the $[s_{1/2}d_{3/2}]_2$ configuration in the interior of the
three-body WF $\Psi^{(+)}$,
\[
\Gamma = \Gamma_{j_1j_2} W_{j_1j_2} \,.
\]
The value $W_{1/2,3/2}=3.6\,\%$, which is quite small, is obtained in the
three-body calculations. Then the estimate $\Gamma=96$ keV is obtained. This
value agrees well with the results of the three-body width calculations, and we
estimate that it is realistic to expect the width of the first $2^+$ state to be
in the range $100-120$ keV.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{aa-08-ls-dep}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) The systematics of the $0^+$ and $2^+$ states of
$^{26}$O as a function of the $ls$ interaction intensity $V_{ls}$ in the
$d$-wave $^{24}$O-$n$ channel under the condition that the $^{25}$O $d_{3/2}$
g.s.\ position remains fixed. The result for $V_{ls}=-5$ MeV (indicated by
vertical dots) is provided in Fig.\ \ref{fig:levels} as our main result. The
predictions of Ref.\ \cite{Volya:2006} are indicated by arrows in the left part
of the plot.}
\label{fig:ls-evolution}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion of theoretical results on $^{26}$O spectrum}
In our calculations we have chosen the calculation scheme, where the effect of
the occupied $d_{5/2}$ orbital in $^{25}$O is imitated by inverse $ls$ forces
moving the $d_{5/2}$ state to an energy higher than that of the $d_{3/2}$
state. The particular value of this interaction was fixed by reproducing the
near-threshold position of the $^{26}$O g.s. Such a computation scheme is not
free of problems, but it seems, however, to be quite successful for the $^{26}$O
nucleus. This nucleus is just two neutrons away from the $^{28}$O neutron shell
closure and the main dynamical degrees of freedom are connected just with the
motion of the two valence nucleons. This is a clear motivation for the use of
the three-body core+$n$+$n$ model.
The oxygen isotope chain was studied in details by Volya and Zelevinskiy
\cite{Volya:2006} using the continuum shell model. They predicted the $^{26}$O
ground state position to be practically exactly on the threshold with $E_T=21$
keV. Such a bold prediction was nicely confirmed by the recent experimental
studies \cite{Lunderberg:2012,Caesar:2013,Kondo:2014}. The predictions of
\cite{Volya:2006} about $2^+$ states are in reasonable agreement with our
calculations: our $2^+_1$ state position is around 100 keV lower in excitation
energy than in Ref.\ \cite{Volya:2006} and, correspondingly, the $2^+_2$ is
about 1.7 MeV lower. The $0^+_{i>1}$ low-lying excited states are absent in the
continuum shell model calculations of Ref.\ \cite{Volya:2006}. This, probably,
could be connected to the ``short range character'' of the shell model
calculations in general: in our calculations the excited $0^+$ states require
the dynamical range of tens of Fermi to be properly accounted for. Another
possible reason could be that the treatment of $^{24}$O+$n$+$n$ continuum in
Ref.\ \cite{Volya:2006} is not fully dynamical, as it relies on the simplified
three-body Green's functions not including $N$-$N$ final-state interaction. For
this reason it is a astonishing that the width obtained in the current
calculations practically coincides with results the of \cite{Volya:2006}.
According to our experience, the simplified three-body Green's function should
provide a width for the $[s^2]$ configuration decay which is $\sim 10-30$ times
smaller than that obtained if appropriately taking the final state
nucleon-nucleon interaction into account.
The $^{26}$O g.s.\ was studied in \cite{Hagino:2014}. The higher $0^+$
excitations are not discussed in that work but there are some indications of the
excited $0^+$ at about 3.4 MeV, see, Fig.\ 1 of Ref.\ \cite{Hagino:2014}. The
authors do not elaborate this result and its reliability is not known; at least
there is some indication of the possibility of an existence of the low-lying
excited $0^+$ in an alternative approach. The first $2^+$ state was obtained at
about $E_T=1.35$ MeV in the recent calculations Ref.\ \cite{Hagino:2014b}. This
value is not drastically different from our results and the results of
\cite{Volya:2006}.
The ab-initio shell model theoretical calculations of Ref.\ \cite{Bogner:2014}
provided the excitation energy of the $2^+$ state in $^{26}$O in the range
$E^*=1.2-1.7$ MeV depending on the details of calculations. The obtained results
are reasonably consistent with other theoretical predictions.
\section{Discussion of relevance to experimental data}
How could the predicted excitations of $^{26}$O in our work be related to
observations? The considerable evolution of the $^{26}$O spectrum shape with the
$V_{ls}$ parameter is shown in Figure \ref{fig:ls-evolution}.
However, it should be noted that the predicted picture of \emph{excitation
energies} is relatively stable in this plot for reasonable variation of
$V_{ls}$. In particular, the excitation energies for $0^+_{i>1}$ states and
$2^+_1$ state are practically constant.
There is some evidence for intensity at about $E_T = 2$ MeV in Refs.\
\cite{Lunderberg:2012,Kohley:2013}. A peak just above 1 MeV was observed in
Ref.\ \cite{Kondo:2014}. For this energy range we predict relatively narrow
($\Gamma \sim 0.11$ MeV) $2^+_1$ state at $E_T \sim 1.6 $ MeV. The right
``wing'' of this peak could be situated on a ``background'' formed by
$0^+_2$ and, maybe, $0^+_3$ states.
Evidence for the $^{26}$O excited state at about $E_T = 4.2$ MeV was obtained
in Ref.\ \cite{Caesar:2013}, although with marginal statistics. Within this
energy range we predict quite broad and overlapping $2^+_2$ and $0^+_4$ states.
\section{Conclusions}
We studied the $0^+$ and $2^+$ continuum properties of the $^{26}$O system in
three-cluster $^{24}$O+$n$+$n$ theoretical model. The main results obtained in
this work are:
\noindent (i) The ground state decay spectrum of the long-living $2n$ emitters
can be very well approximated in a broad energy range by a simple analytical
expression generalizing R-matrix phenomenology for use in the hyperspherical
space of three-body systems.
\noindent (ii) A number of monopole (breathing mode) excited $0^+$ states are
predicted in $^{26}$O at about 1.76, 2.6, and 4.2 MeV. These states extend to
extreme distances in radial space with typical single-particle orbital sizes
around $20$ fm. The predicted densely spaced sequence of $0+$ states in the
$^{26}$O continuum states with such radial properties resembles the Efimov
phenomenon. These states can probably be considered as the lowest Efimov states
forced into continuum by insufficient binding.
\noindent (iii) The predicted $2^+$ states in $^{26}$O at $1.6$ and $4.5$
MeV are in a reasonable agreement with continuum shell model calculations.
\noindent (iv) We suggest to identify the experimentally observed intensity in
the range $1-2$ MeV in the spectrum of $^{26}$O as a ``pileup'' of $0^+_2$ and
$2^+_1$ state contributions. The possible experimental peak at $\sim 4$ MeV in
$^{26}$O can be associated with overlapping broad $2^+_2$ and $0^+_3$ continuum
states.
\textit{Acknowledgments.}
--- We are grateful to Prof.\ G.\ Nyman for careful reading of the manuscript
and numerous useful comments. L.V.G.\ is partly supported by Russian Foundation
for Basic Research Grant No.\ 14-02-00090-a and Ministry of Education and
Science of the Russian Federation Grant No.\ NSh-932.2014.2.
\bibliographystyle{apsrev}
|
\section{Introduction}
In this paper we consider the quantum dynamics of a charged particle
evolving under the action of a constant homogeneous magnetic field, first in
the Euclidean and then in the hyperbolic setting. The goal is to construct
discrete coherent states associated with the evolution of the particle when
higher Landau levels are formed and to obtain conditions on the completeness
of such coherent states. This extends well known results of Perelomov \cite%
{Perelomov} and of Bargmann, Butera, Girardello and Klauder \cite{BargmannEt}%
. In the first part of the paper, we consider a constant magnetic field
acting on the Euclidean space realized as the complex plane $\mathbb{C}$,
leading to the formation of a discrete spectrum known as the Euclidean
Landau Levels. In the second part of the paper, we let a constant magnetic
field act on the\ open hyperbolic plane realized as the Poincar\'{e} upper
half-plane $\mathbb{C}^{+}=\{z\in \mathbb{C},\Im z>0\}$, leading to the
formation of a mixed spectrum, with a \emph{discrete part} corresponding to
\textit{bound states }(\emph{hyperbolic Landau levels}) and a continuous
part corresponding to \textit{scattering states}.
The concept of a set of states on a lattice in phase space was first
considered by J. von Neumann in the Euclidean case \cite{vonNeumann}. It
became physically very attractive because it contains the fundamental
commutation relations of quantum mechanics. Indeed, lattices have an
underlying unit cell (fundamental domain) related to the size of the Plank
constant.
\begin{center}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.60\textwidth]{Orthorhombic_Lattice_d.jpg}
\
\caption{\small{Picture 1. An Euclidean lattice and a fundamental domain. See section 2.3
}}
\end{figure}
\end{center}
In his treatment of quantum mechanics \cite{vonNeumann}, J. von Neumann
raised the question of completeness of coherent states indexed by a lattice.
The question turned out to be nontrivial from a mathematical point of view
and, so far, it has only been fully understood for some special coherent
states. This is the case of the coherent states associated with the first
Landau Level. The situation has been clarified in \cite{BargmannEt} and \cite%
{Perelomov}, because it can be related to the structure of zeros of analytic
functions, where classical methods from complex analysis can be used.
However, in higher Landau Levels, even the case of the Euclidean Landau
levels is not yet fully understood. In both the Euclidean and Hyperbolic
setting, one has to deal with spaces of polyanalytic functions \cite%
{Abreusampling}, \cite{HendHaimi}, \cite{SuperWave}. Since polyanalytic
functions have a much more complicated structure of zeros \cite{Balk},
several essential tools from complex analysis cannot be applied. However, in
recent years, important progress has been made by combining analytic
function theory with methods from time-frequency analysis \cite{CharlyYura},
\cite{Abreusampling}, \cite{Bracken}. The purpose of the first part of this
paper is to translate these results from time-frequency analysis to the
setting of coherent states attached to higher Landau Levels. This has a
twofold purpose: to bring the results to the attention of the physics
community and to motivate the results on the hyperbolic setting of the
subsequent section, where time-scale (wavelet) theory replaces
time-frequency (Gabor) analysis. Indeed, our main object of study in the
paper is the quantum dynamics of a charged particle evolving on the open
hyperbolic plane under the action of a constant magnetic field. While
previous work on this problem has been concerned with the spectral
properties of the corresponding Landau Hamiltonian \cite{Comtet}, \cite%
{Groshe} and their associated continuous coherent states \cite{Mouayn}, the
investigation of the associated discrete coherent states labeled by discrete
subgroups of $PSL(2,\mathbb{R})=SL(2,\mathbb{R})/\{\pm I\}$ seems to have
been overlooked. The discrete coherent states are relevant for the
understanding the hyperbolic setting because the nontrivial dynamics is
induced by the tesselation of the Poincar\'{e} plane by discrete subgroups
of $PSL(2,\mathbb{R})$, which are called \emph{Fuchsian groups}. Important
examples of Fuchsian groups are provided by the modular group $PSL(2,\mathbb{%
Z})$ and by the congruence groups of order $n$. Some background and examples
of Fuchsian groups are given in the last section. This is a remarkable
instance of the usefulness of analytic number theory in a physical problem.
The idea of using Fuchsian groups as a replacement for the Euclidean
lattices seems to have first been used by Perelomov, who provides a full
analysis of the first hyperbolic Landau level in \cite[Chapter 14]%
{Perelomovbook}, where the analysis is done in the disc. In the present
paper we make the corresponding analysis for the higher hyperbolic Landau
levels. As the unit cell of the model one considers a fundamental domain for
the group. For instance, the set%
\begin{equation*}
D=\left\{ z\in \mathbb{C}^{+}:\left\vert z\right\vert \geq 1\text{ and }%
\left\vert \Re z\right\vert \leq \frac{1}{2}\right\}
\end{equation*}%
is a fundamental domain for the modular group $PSL(2,\mathbb{R})$.
The shadow area in the next image represents the fundamental domain $D$.
\begin{center}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.60\textwidth]{fdm.png}
\
\caption{\small{Picture 2. The modular group $PSL(2,\mathbb{Z})$. See section 3.5
}}
\end{figure}
\end{center}
The following terminology will be used. A functional Hilbert space $\mathcal{%
H}$ has a system $\{f_{g}\}$ of coherent states, labelled by elements $g$ of
a locally compact group $G$ if:
$\left( i\right) $ There is a representation $T:g\rightarrow T_{g}$ of $G$
labelled by unitary operators $T_{g}$ on $\mathcal{H}$
$\left( ii\right) $ There is a vector $f_{0}\in \mathcal{H}$ such that for $%
f_{g}=T_{g}\left[ f_{0}\right] $ and for arbitrary $f\in \mathcal{H}$ we
have:
\begin{equation*}
\left\langle f,f\right\rangle _{\mathcal{H}}=\int_{G}\left\vert \left\langle
f,f_{g}\right\rangle \right\vert ^{2}d\nu (g)\text{,}
\end{equation*}%
where $d\nu $ stands for the left Haar measure of $G$.
The core of the paper is organized in two sections and an appendix with the more
technical proofs. Section 2 deals with Euclidean Landau levels and section 3
with their hyperbolic analogues. In each of the sections, after providing
some background on the mathematical and physical model, we first construct
the coherent states associated with the higher levels and then investigate
their discrete counterparts. We finish with a short conclusion including some remarks about the theoretical methodology, highlighting the interaction between physical and signal analysis which has made possible the investigations carried out in this paper.
\section{ Euclidean Landau levels}
\subsection{Definitions}
The Hamiltonian operator describing the dynamics of a particle of charge $e$
and mass $m_{\ast }$ on the Euclidean $xy$-plane, while interacting with a
perpendicular constant homogeneous magnetic field, is given by the operator
\begin{equation}
H:=\frac{1}{2m_{\ast }}\left( i\hbar \nabla -\frac{e}{c}\mathbf{A}\right)
^{2}\text{,} \label{2.1.1}
\end{equation}%
where $\hbar $ denotes Plank's constant, $c$ is the light speed and $i$
the imaginary unit. Denote by $B>0$ the strength of the magnetic field and
select the symmetric gauge%
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{A=-}\frac{\mathbf{r}}{2}\times \mathbf{B=}\left( -\frac{B}{2}y,\frac{%
B}{2}x\right) \text{,}
\end{equation*}%
where $\mathbf{r}=\left( x,y\right) \in \mathbb{R}^{2}$. For simplicity, we
set $m_{\ast }=e=c=\hbar =1$ in (\ref{2.1.1}), leading to the Landau
Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}
H_{B}^{L}:=\frac{1}{2}\left( \left( i\frac{\partial }{\partial x}-\frac{B}{2}%
y\right) ^{2}+\left( i\frac{\partial }{\partial y}+\frac{B}{2}x\right)
^{2}\right) \label{2.1.3}
\end{equation}%
acting on the Hilbert space $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{2},dxdy\right) $. The
spectrum of the Hamiltonian $H_{B}^{L}$ consists of infinite number of
eigenvalues with infinite multiplicity of the form
\begin{equation}
\epsilon _{n}^{B}=\left( n+\frac{1}{2}\right) B,\text{ \ \ \ \ }n=0,1,2,\cdots.
\label{2.1.4}
\end{equation}%
These eigenvalues are called \emph{Euclidean Landau levels}. Denote the
eigenspace of $H_{B}^{L}$ corresponding to the eigenvalue $\epsilon _{n}^{B}$
in (\ref{2.1.4}) by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{A}_{B,n}\left( \mathbb{R}^{2}\right) =\left\{ \varphi \in
L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{2},dxdy\right) ,H_{B}^{L}\left[ \varphi \right]
=\epsilon _{n}^{B}\varphi \right\} . \label{2.1.5}
\end{equation}%
The following functions form an orthogonal basis for $\mathcal{A}%
_{B,n}\left( \mathbb{C}\right) $ \cite{HendHaimi}:
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
e_{i,n}^{1}(z)=\sqrt{\frac{n!}{(n-i)!}}B^{\frac{i+1}{2}}z^{i}L_{n}^{\left(
i\right) }(B\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}),\text{ \ \ }0\leq i \\
e_{j,n}^{2}(z)=\sqrt{\frac{j!}{(j+n)!}}B^{\frac{n-1}{2}}\overline{z}%
^{n}L_{j}^{\left( n\right) }(B\left\vert z\right\vert ^{2}),\text{ \ \ }%
0\leq j,%
\end{array}%
\right. \text{,} \label{basis}
\end{equation}%
where the Laguerre polynomial is defined as
\begin{equation*}
L_{n}^{\left( \alpha \right) }(t)=\sum_{k=0}^{n}(-1)^{k}\binom{n+\alpha }{n-k%
}\frac{t^{k}}{k!}\text{, }\alpha >-1.
\end{equation*}
\begin{remark}
In his book \cite[pag. 35]{Perelomovbook}, Perelomov points out that the
basis (\ref{basis}) had been used by Feynman and Schwinger in a somewhat
different form in order to obtain an explicit expression for the matrix
elements of the displacement operator. The functions (\ref{basis}) are also
related to the complex Hermite polynomials \cite{Ismail}. They occur naturally in several
problems and different representations are used. For instance, they have
recently found applications in quantization \cite{ABG},\cite{BG}, \cite{CG},
time-frequency analysis \cite{Abreusampling}, partial differential equations
\cite{Goss} and planar point processes \cite{HendHaimi}. In the next section
we recall a characterization theorem of$\mathcal{\ }$the eigenspace $%
\mathcal{A}_{B,n}\left( \mathbb{R}^{2}\right) $ as the range of a suitable
coherent states transform of the Hilbert space $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}%
\right) $, originally obtained in \cite{M1}.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Coherent states for Euclidean Landau levels}
Define the Heisenberg group $\mathbb{H}$ as the Lie group whose underlying
manifold is $\mathbb{R}^{3}$ together with the group operation
\begin{equation*}
\left( x,y,r\right) \left( x\prime ,y\prime ,r\prime \right) =\left(
x+x\prime ,y+y\prime ,r+r\prime +\frac{1}{2}\left( xy\prime -x\prime
y\right) \right) \text{.}
\end{equation*}%
The continuous unitary irreducible representations of $\mathbb{H}$ are well
known \cite{Fo}. Here we consider the Schr\"{o}dinger representation $T_{B}$
of $\mathbb{H}$ on the Hilbert space $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R},dt\right) $
\cite{Ta} defined as
\begin{equation*}
T_{B,\left( x,y,t\right) }\left[ \psi \right] \left( t\right) =\exp \left(
i\left( Bt-\sqrt{B}y\xi +\frac{B}{2}xy\right) \right) \psi \left( t-\sqrt{B}%
x\right)
\end{equation*}%
for $\left( x,y,r\right) \in \mathbb{H}$, $B>0$, $\psi \in L^{2}\left(
\mathbb{R},dt\right) $ and $t\in \mathbb{R}$. This representation is square
integrable modulo the center $\mathbb{R}$ of $\mathbb{H}$ and the Borel
section $\sigma _{0}$ of $\mathbb{H}$ over $\mathbb{H}/\mathbb{R}=\mathbb{R}%
^{2}$ which is given by $\sigma _{0}\left( x,y\right) =\left( x,y,0\right) $%
. Further, the following identity holds
\begin{equation}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2}}\left\langle \psi _{1},T_{B,\sigma _{0}\left(
x,y\right) }\left[ \phi _{1}\right] \right\rangle \left\langle T_{B,\sigma
_{0}\left( x,y\right) }\left[ \phi _{2}\right] ,\psi _{2}\right\rangle d\mu
\left( x,y\right) =\left\langle \psi _{1},\psi _{2}\right\rangle
\left\langle \phi _{1},\phi _{2}\right\rangle \label{2.2.3}
\end{equation}%
for all $\psi _{1},\psi _{2},\phi _{1},\phi _{2}\in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}%
\right) $. Displacing the reference state
\begin{equation*}
\left\langle t\mid 0\right\rangle _{B,n}=\left( \sqrt{\pi }2^{n}n!\right) ^{-%
\frac{1}{2}}e^{-\frac{1}{2}t^{2}}H_{n}\left( t\right) \text{, }t\in \mathbb{R%
}\text{,}
\end{equation*}%
where $H_{n}\left( .\right) $ is the Hermite polynomial
\begin{equation*}
H_{n}\left( t\right) =\sum\limits_{k=0}^{\left[ n/2\right] }\frac{n!\left(
-1\right) ^{k}\left( 2t\right) ^{n-2k}}{k!\left( n-2k\right) !}\text{,}
\end{equation*}%
via the representation operator $T_{B,\sigma _{0}\left( x,y\right) }$, one
obtains a set of coherent states denoted by the kets vectors $\left\vert
\left( x,y\right) ,B,n\right\rangle $, with wave functions
\begin{equation}
\left\langle t\mid \left( x,y\right) ,B,n\right\rangle =\left( \sqrt{\pi }%
2^{n}n!\right) ^{-\frac{1}{2}}\exp \left( -i\sqrt{B}ty+i\frac{B}{2}xy-\frac{1%
}{2}\left( t-\sqrt{B}x\right) ^{2}\right) H_{n}\left( t-\sqrt{B}x\right) .
\label{2.2.5}
\end{equation}%
The following resolution of the identity
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{1}_{L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}\right) }=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2}}\mid \left(
x,y\right) ,B,n\left\rangle {}\right\langle \left( x,y\right) ,B,n\mid d\mu
\left( x,y\right)
\end{equation*}%
holds as a consequence of (\ref{2.2.3}). Thus the construction of coherent
states is justified by the square integrability of representation $T_{B}$
modulo the subgroup $\mathbb{R}$ and the section $\sigma _{0}$. For $n=0$
(the lowest Euclidean Landau level), the states $\left\vert \left(
x,y\right) ,B,0\right\rangle $ coincide with the canonical coherent states
of the harmonic oscillator. The coherent states (\ref{2.2.5}) are associated
with the coherent states transform
\begin{equation*}
V_{B,n}:L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}\right) \rightarrow L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}%
^{2},dxdy\right)
\end{equation*}%
such that, given $\varphi \in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}\right) $,
\begin{equation*}
V_{B,n}\left[ \varphi \right] \left( x,y\right) :=\int_{\mathbb{R}}\overline{%
\left\langle t\mid \left( x,y\right) ,B,n\right\rangle }\varphi \left(
t\right) dt\text{.}
\end{equation*}%
Thanks to the square integrability of $T_{B}$, the transform $V_{B,n}$ is an
isometrical map. Since $V_{B,n}$ maps the Hermite functions (an orthogonal
basis of $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}\right) $) to the basis (\ref{basis}) (see
\cite{Abreusampling} for details) its range is exactly the eigenspace in (%
\ref{2.1.5}):
\begin{equation*}
V_{B,n}\left[ L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}\right) \right] =\mathcal{A}_{B,n}\left(
\mathbb{R}^{2}\right) \text{.}
\end{equation*}%
Another realization of this eigenspace can be obtained by intertwining the
Landau Hamiltonian (\ref{2.1.3}) as follows
\begin{equation*}
\Delta _{B}:=e^{\frac{B}{2}z\overline{z}}\left( \frac{1}{2}H_{2B}^{L}-\frac{B%
}{2}\right) e^{-\frac{B}{2}z\overline{z}}=-\frac{\partial ^{2}}{\partial
z\partial \overline{z}}+B\overline{z}\frac{\partial }{\partial \overline{z}}.
\end{equation*}%
The space $\mathcal{A}_{B,n}\left( \mathbb{R}^{2}\right) $ then becomes
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{A}_{B,n}\left( \mathbb{C}\right) :=\left\{ \varphi \in L^{2}\left(
\mathbb{C}\text{, }e^{-Bz\overline{z}}d\mu \right) ,\Delta _{B}\varphi
=nB\varphi \right\} . \label{2.2.9}
\end{equation}
If $B=\pi $ and $n=0$ the space (\ref{2.2.9}) is precisely the Fock-Bargmann
space of entire square integrable functions with respect to the Gaussian
measure on $\mathbb{C}$. For $n>0$, the characterization takes the form
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{V}_{2\pi ,n}\left[ L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}\right) \right] =%
\mathcal{A}_{\pi ,n}\left( \mathbb{C}\right)
\end{equation*}
where the coherent state transform is given explicitly by
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{V}_{2\pi ,n}\left[ \varphi \right] \left( z\right) =e^{\frac{1}{2}%
\pi z\overline{z}}\circ V_{2\pi ,n}\left[ \varphi \right] \left( z\right)
=\left( -1\right) ^{n}B_{n}\left[ \varphi \right] \left( \sqrt{\pi }z\right)
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
B_{n}\left[ \varphi \right] \left( w\right) =\left( -1\right) ^{n}c_{n}\int_{%
\mathbb{R}}\varphi \left( t\right) \exp \left( -\frac{1}{2}t^{2}+\sqrt{2}tw-%
\frac{1}{2}w^{2}\right) H_{n}\left( t-\frac{w+\overline{w}}{\sqrt{2}}\right)
dt.
\end{equation*}
The transform $\widetilde{V}_{2\pi ,n}$ is precisely the true polyanalytic
Bargmann transform and the space $\mathcal{A}_{\pi ,n}\left( \mathbb{C}%
\right) $ is the \textit{true-polyanalytic} space of index $n$, see \cite%
{VasiFock}, \cite{Abreusampling}, \cite{HendHaimi}.
\subsection{Completeness properties}
We want to understand the completeness properties of the coherent states
constructed in the previous section once they are labeled by a lattice $%
\Lambda \subset \mathbb{C}$. The key observation is the fact that their
completeness and basis properties are equivalent to the completeness and
basis properties of Gabor systems with Hermite functions \cite{CharlyYura}
and to sampling and uniqueness sets in true-polyanalytic spaces \cite%
{Abreusampling}. Consider the lattice
\begin{equation*}
\Lambda =\Lambda (\omega _{1},\omega _{2}):=\{m_{1}\omega _{1}+m_{2}\omega
_{2};m_{1},m_{2}\in \mathbb{Z}\}\subset \mathbb{C}
\end{equation*}%
spanned by the periods $\omega _{1}$ and $\omega _{2}\in \mathbb{C}$ with $%
\Im(\omega_{1}/\omega_{2})>0$. The size of the lattice $\Lambda $ is
the area of the parallelogram spanned by $\omega _{1}$ and $\omega _{2}$.
Identifying $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ with $\mathbb{C}$ we can write $\Lambda =\Omega
\mathbb{Z}^{2}$, where $\Omega =\left[ \omega _{1},\omega _{2}\right] $ is
an invertible $2\times 2$ matrix. The size of the lattice can now be defined
as $s(\Lambda )=\left\vert \det \Omega \right\vert $. We say that $\Lambda $
is a set of sampling for the space $\mathcal{A}_{B,n}\left( \mathbb{C}%
\right) $ if there exist constants $C_{1},C_{2}>0$ such that for all $F\in
\mathcal{A}_{B,n}\left( \mathbb{C}\right) ,$%
\begin{equation*}
C_{1}\left\Vert F\right\Vert _{\mathcal{A}_{B,n}\left( \mathbb{C}\right)
}^{2}\leq \sum\limits_{\lambda \in \Lambda }\left\vert F\left( \lambda
\right) \right\vert ^{2}e^{-B\left\vert \lambda \right\vert ^{2}}\leq
C_{2}\left\Vert F\right\Vert _{\mathcal{A}_{B,n}\left( \mathbb{C}\right)
}^{2}\text{.}
\end{equation*}%
Given a point $\left( q,p\right) $ in the phase space $\mathbb{R}^{2}$, the
corresponding time-frequency shift is
\begin{equation*}
\pi _{\left( q,p\right) }\left[ f\right] \left( t\right) =e^{2\pi
ipt}f\left( t-q\right) ,t\in \mathbb{R}\text{.}
\end{equation*}%
Let $h_{n}\left( t\right) $ denote a Hermite function. The set $G\left(
h_{n},\Lambda \right) :=\left\{ \pi _{\left( q,p\right) }h_{n},\left(
q,p\right) \in \mathbb{R}\right\} $ is a Gabor frame or a Weyl-Heisenberg
frame in $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}\right) $ whenever there exist constants $%
C_{1},C_{2}>0$ such that
\begin{equation*}
C_{1}\left\Vert f\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}\right) }^{2}\leq
\sum\limits_{\left( q,p\right) \in \Lambda }\left\vert \left\langle f,\pi
_{\left( q,p\right) }\left[ h_{n}\right] \right\rangle _{L^{2}\left( \mathbb{%
R}\right) }\right\vert ^{2}\leq C_{2}\left\Vert f\right\Vert _{L^{2}\left(
\mathbb{R}\right) }^{2}.
\end{equation*}%
\ It follows from the lower inequality that if $G\left( h_{n},\Lambda
\right) $\ is a frame then $G\left( h_{n},\Lambda \right) $\ is complete.
For simplicity, we consider the square lattice $\Lambda _{\omega }:=\omega
\left( \mathbb{Z+}i\mathbb{Z}\right) $, $\omega \in \mathbb{R}$. In this
case $s(\Lambda _{\omega })=\omega ^{2}$. For $B=\pi $, it was proved that
the lattice $\Lambda _{\omega }$ is a set of sampling for $\mathcal{A}_{\pi
,n}\left( \mathbb{C}\right) $ if and only if $G\left( h_{n},\Lambda _{\omega
}\right) $ is a Gabor frame, see \cite{Abreusampling}. The following result
is a consequence of combining this identification with relatively recent
results from time-frequency analysis.
\begin{theorem}
\textit{Let }$(\left\vert \left( x,y\right) ,\pi ,n\right\rangle )_{\left(
x,y\right) \in \mathbb{R}^{2}}$\textit{\ be a system of coherent states
attached to the }$nth$\textit{\ Landau level defined in (\ref{2.2.5}). Then,
the following holds:}
\end{theorem}
$\left( i\right) $ \textit{If }$\omega ^{2}<\frac{1}{n+1}$\textit{\ then the
system }$(\left\vert \left( x,y\right) ,\pi ,n\right\rangle )_{\left(
x,y\right) \in \Lambda _{\omega }}$\textit{\ is complete.}
$\left( ii\right) $\textit{\ If }$\omega ^{2}>1$\textit{\ then the system }$%
(\left\vert \left( x,y\right) ,\pi ,n\right\rangle )_{\left( x,y\right) \in
\Lambda _{\omega }}$ \textit{is} \textit{incomplete.}
\textbf{Proof. }The completeness property (i) follows from the fact that if%
\textit{\ }$\omega ^{2}<\frac{1}{n+1}$, then $G\left( h_{n},\Lambda \right) $
is a Gabor frame \cite{CharlyYura}, therefore complete. The property (ii) is
a consequence of the fact that, if $\omega ^{2}>1$, then a Gabor system
cannot be complete \cite{RamStee}.
\begin{remark}
In the case $n=0$ it is a classical result \cite{Perelomov}, \cite%
{BargmannEt} that the systems are complete if $\omega ^{2}\leq 1$ and
incomplete if $\omega ^{2}>1$. The above result is an extension of these
results to coherent states attached to higher Euclidean Landau levels $%
\epsilon _{n}^{\pi },$ $n=1,2,3,...$ .
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
For $n>0$ there is still a considerable gap between conditions (i) and (ii).
Finding a whole description of the completeness and frame properties of
Gabor systems indexed by lattices is a highly non-trivial problem which has
been subject of study since \cite{CharlyYura}. The very recent preprint \cite%
{completeness} seems to answer the question in the case of rational lattices.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
The Landau Hamiltonian arises in the two-dimensional quantized Hall effect.
A coherent states formalism for the study of this problem has been developed
by projecting the higher order states in the lowest Landau Level, which can
be modelled by analytic functions \cite{GirvJach}. It is reasonable to
expect that the discrete coherent states associated with higher Landau
Levels may provide an alternative formalism.
\end{remark}
\section{Hyperbolic Landau levels}
\subsection{Hyperbolic Landau levels}
In the hyperbolic setting, the configuration space is now the Poincar\'{e}
upper half-plane $\mathbb{C}^{+}=\left\{ z\in \mathbb{C},\Im%
z>0\right\} $. It is a complete two-dimensional simply connected Riemannian
manifold of constant negative curvature $R=-1$, endowed with the metric $%
ds^{2}=y^{-2}\left( dx^{2}+dy^{2}\right) $, where $z=x+iy$. A constant
homogeneous magnetic field on $\mathbb{C}^{+}$ is given by a $2$-form $d\mu
_{B}$ defined as
\begin{equation*}
d\mu _{B}=\frac{2B}{y^{2}}dxdy
\end{equation*}%
where $B$ is the field intensity. The form $d\mu _{B}$ is exact and any $1$%
-form $A$ such that $d\mu _{B}=dA$ is called a vector potential related to $%
d\mu _{B}$. For our purposes it is convenient to choose $A=2By^{-1}dx.$ In
suitable units and up to an additive constant, the Schr\"{o}dinger operator
describing the dynamics of a charged particle moving on $\mathbb{C}^{+}$
under the action of the magnetic field $B$ is given by \cite{Comtet}
\begin{equation*}
H_{B}:=y^{2}\left( \frac{\partial ^{2}}{\partial x^{2}}+\frac{\partial ^{2}}{%
\partial y^{2}}\right) -2iBy\frac{\partial }{\partial x}.
\end{equation*}%
Different aspects of the spectral analysis of the operator $H_{B}$ have been
studied by many authors, (see \cite{Groshe}, \cite{Comtet} or, for a more
mathematical approach, \cite{Pa}). We list here the following important
properties.
$\left( i\right) $ $H_{B}$ is an elliptic densely defined operator on the
Hilbert space $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+},d\mu _{B}\right) $, with a unique
self-adjoint realization that we denote also by $H_{B}$.
$\left( ii\right) $ The spectrum\ of $H_{B}$ in $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{C}%
^{+},d\mu _{B}\right) $ consists of two parts:\textit{\ }a continuous part $%
\left[ 1/4,+\infty \right[ $, corresponding to \textit{scattering states}
and a finite number of eigenvalues with infinite degeneracy (\textit{%
hyperbolic Landau levels}) of the form
\begin{equation}
\epsilon _{n}^{B}:=(B-n)\left( 1-B+n\right) ,n=0,1,2,\cdots ,\lfloor B-\frac{%
1}{2}\rfloor \text{.} \label{3.1.2}
\end{equation}%
The finite part of the spectrum exists provided $2B>1$. The notation $%
\lfloor a\rfloor $ stands for the greatest integer not exceeding $a.$
$\left( iii\right) $ For each fixed eigenvalue $\epsilon _{n}^{B}$, we
denote by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{E}_{n}^{B}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) =\left\{ \Phi \in
L^{2}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+},d\mu _{B}\right) ,H_{B}\Phi =\epsilon
_{n}^{B}\Phi \right\} \label{3.1.3}
\end{equation}%
the corresponding eigenspace. Its reproducing kernel is given by
\begin{equation*}
K_{n,B}\left( z,\zeta \right) =\frac{\left( -1\right) ^{n}\Gamma \left(
2B-n\right) }{n!\Gamma \left( 2B-2n\right) }\left( \frac{\left\vert z-%
\overline{\zeta }\right\vert ^{2}}{4\Im z\Im\zeta }\right)
^{-B+m}\left( \frac{\zeta -\overline{z}}{z-\overline{\zeta }}\right) ^{B}
\end{equation*}%
\begin{equation*}
\times _{2}F_{1}\left( -2B-m,-m,2B-2m,\frac{4\Im z\Im\zeta }{%
\left\vert z-\overline{\zeta }\right\vert ^{2}}\right)
\end{equation*}%
where $_{2}F_{1}$ is the Gauss hypergeometric function.
\begin{remark}
The condition $2B>1$ ensuring the existence of the discrete eigenvalues
means that the magnetic field has to be strong enough to capture the
particle in a closed orbit. If this condition is not fulfilled the motion
will be unbounded and the particle will escape to infinity. More precisely,
the orbit of the particle will intercept the upper half-plane boundary whose
points stand for points at infinity\ \cite[pg. 189]{Comtet}.\ To the
eigenvalues in (\ref{3.1.2}) below the continuous spectrum correspond
eigenfunctions which are called \textit{bound states. This terminology is
due to the fact that} the particle in such a bound state cannot leave the
system without additional energy.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Bergman spaces}
For $n=0$, the reproducing kernel of $\mathcal{E}_{0}^{B}\left( \mathbb{C}%
^{+}\right) $ reduces to
\begin{equation*}
K_{0,B}\left( z,\zeta \right) =e^{i\pi B}4^{B}\frac{\left( \Im z\Im%
\zeta \right) ^{B}}{\left( z-\overline{\zeta }\right) ^{2B}}\text{.}
\end{equation*}%
This is the reproducing kernel for the $(2B-2)$-weighted Bergman space $%
A_{2B-1}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) $, constituted by analytic functions $f$
on the upper half-plane with finite norm%
\begin{equation*}
\left\Vert f\right\Vert _{A_{2B-1}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right)
}=\int\limits_{\mathbb{C}^{+}}\left\vert f\left( z\right) \right\vert
^{2}y^{2B-2}dxdy<+\infty.
\end{equation*}%
Thus, $\mathcal{E}_{0}^{B}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) $ coincides with $%
A_{2B-2}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) $.
An important fact to be used in the appendix proof of the main results is
the following. Note also that for a general weight $\nu $, the Bergman space
$A_{\nu }\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) $ is connected to the space $%
L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{+},t^{-1}dt\right) $\ by the integral transform
defined as
\begin{equation}
Ber_{\nu }\left[ h\right] \left( z\right) =\int\nolimits_{0}^{+\infty }t^{%
\frac{\nu +3}{2}}h\left( t\right) e^{izt}dt \label{3.1.6}
\end{equation}%
see, for instance \cite{Dau}, \cite{WavFram}. This provides an isometric
isomorphism
\begin{equation*}
Ber_{\nu }:L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{+},t^{-1}dt\right) \rightarrow A_{\nu
}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) \text{.}
\end{equation*}%
The transform is onto because one can deduce from the special function
formula%
\begin{equation}
\int_{0}^{\infty }t^{\alpha }L_{m}^{\alpha }(t)e^{-tu}dt=\frac{\Gamma
(m+1+\alpha )}{m!}\left( \frac{u-1}{u}\right) ^{m}\frac{1}{u^{\alpha +1}}
\label{intLaguerre}
\end{equation}%
that the Laguerre functions are mapped to a basis of $A_{\nu }\left( \mathbb{%
C}^{+}\right) $ formed by rational functions which are further mapped to the
unit disc by a conformal map. Some details and remarks about these
calculations are given in \cite{AbreuRemarks} and \cite{DGM}.
\subsection{The affine group acting on the Poincar\'{e} half-plane}
For our purposes we will recall a characterization theorem of $\mathcal{E}%
_{n}^{B}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) $ as the range under a suitable
coherent states transform $W_{B,n}$ defined on the Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}%
:=$ $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{+},t^{-1}dt\right) $. We start with the
identification of the Poincar\'{e} upper half-plane $\mathbb{C}^{+}$ with
the affine group $\mathbf{G}=\mathbb{R}\times \mathbb{R}^{+}$, by setting $%
z=x+iy\equiv \left( x,y\right) $. The group law of $\mathbb{G}$ is $\left(
x,y\right) .\left( x\prime ,y\prime \right) =\left( x+yx\prime ,yy\prime
\right) $. $\mathbf{G}$ is a locally compact unimodular group with the left
Haar measure $d\mu \left( x,y\right) =y^{-2}dxdy$ and modular function $%
\Delta \left( x,y\right) =y^{-1}$. By this identification the space $%
L^{2}\left( \mathbf{G},d\mu \right) $ coincides with the space $L^{2}\left(
\mathbb{C}^{+},d\mu _{B}\right) $. We shall consider one of the two
inequivalent infinite dimensional unitary irreducible representations of the
affine group $\mathbf{G}$, denoted $\pi _{+}$, realized on the Hilbert space
$\mathcal{H}$ as
\begin{equation*}
\pi _{+}\left( x,y\right) \left[ \varphi \right] \left( t\right) :=\exp
\left( ixt/2\right) \varphi \left( yt\right) ,\text{ \ }\varphi \in \mathcal{%
H},\text{ \ }t\in \mathbb{R}^{+}\text{.}
\end{equation*}%
This representation is square integrable since it is easy to find a vector $%
\phi _{0}\in \mathcal{H}$ such that the function $\left( x,y\right) \mapsto
\left\langle \pi _{+}\left( x,y\right) \left[ \phi _{0}\right] ,\phi
_{0}\right\rangle _{\mathcal{H}}$ belongs to $L^{2}\left( \mathbf{G},d\mu
\right) $. This condition can also be expressed by saying that the
self-adjoint operator $K:\mathcal{H\rightarrow H}$ defined as $K\left[ \psi %
\right] (.)=(.)^{-\frac{1}{2}}\psi \left( .\right) $ gives
\begin{equation*}
\int\limits_{\mathbf{G}}d\mu \left( x,y\right) \left\langle \varphi
_{1},\pi _{+}\left( x,y\right) \left[ \psi _{1}\right] \right\rangle
\left\langle \pi _{+}\left( x,y\right) \psi _{2},\left[ \varphi _{2}\right]
\right\rangle =\left\langle \varphi _{1},\varphi _{2}\right\rangle
\left\langle K^{\frac{1}{2}}\left[ \psi _{1}\right] ,K^{\frac{1}{2}}\left[
\psi _{2}\right] \right\rangle \text{,}
\end{equation*}%
for all $\psi _{1},\psi _{2},\varphi _{1},\varphi _{2}\in \mathcal{H}$. The
operator $K$ is unbounded because $\mathbf{G}$ is not unimodular \cite{DM}.
We will also use the notation
\begin{equation*}
\pi _{+}^{1}\left( x,y\right) \left[ \varphi \right] \left( t\right) :=y^{%
\frac{1}{2}}\exp \left( ixt/2\right) \varphi \left( yt\right) ,\text{ \ }%
\varphi \in \mathcal{H},\text{ \ }t\in \mathbb{R}^{+}
\end{equation*}%
such that
\begin{equation}
\pi _{+}\left( x,y\right) \left[ (.)^{\frac{1}{2}}\varphi \left( .\right) %
\right] (t)=t^{\frac{1}{2}}\pi _{+}^{1}\left( x,y\right) \left[ \varphi %
\right] \left( t\right) \label{1+}
\end{equation}%
and also, for functions $\Phi $ such that their Fourier transform belongs to
$L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{+}\right) $ (this is essentially the Hardy space
where the wavelet transformation is often defined),%
\begin{equation*}
\pi ^{wav}\left( x,y\right) \left[ \Phi \right] \left( t\right) =y^{-\frac{1%
}{2}}\Phi \left( y^{-1}\left( t-x\right) \right) \text{.}
\end{equation*}%
For shortness of notations, in some situations we will represent the point $%
(x,y)$ by the complex number $z=x+iy$, often with no explicit mention.
\subsection{Coherent states for higher hyperbolic Landau levels}
Now, as in \cite{Mouayn}, we consider a set of coherent states denoted by
the ket vectors $\left\vert \left( x,y\right) ,B,n\right\rangle $ and
obtained by displacing, via the representation operator $\pi _{+}\left(
x,y\right) $, the reference state vector $\left\vert 0\right\rangle _{B,n}$
in the Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}$ with wave function given by
\begin{equation*}
\left\langle t\mid 0\right\rangle _{B,n}=\left( \frac{\Gamma \left(
2B-n\right) }{n!}\right) ^{-\frac{1}{2}}t^{B-n}e^{-\frac{1}{2}%
t}L_{n}^{\left( 2B-2n-1\right) }\left( t\right) \text{.}
\end{equation*}%
Precisely,
\begin{equation}
\left\vert \left( x,y\right) ,B,n\right\rangle :=\pi _{+}\left(
x,y\right)\left|0\right\rangle _{B,n}\text{.} \label{3.2.4}
\end{equation}%
The wave functions of the coherent states $(\ref{3.2.4})$\ are given by
\begin{equation}
\left\langle t\mid \left( x,y\right) ,B,n\right\rangle =\left( \frac{\Gamma
\left( 2B-n\right) }{n!}\right) ^{-\frac{1}{2}}\left( ty\right) ^{B-n}e^{-%
\frac{1}{2}t\left( y-ix\right) }L_{n}^{\left( 2B-2n-1\right) }\left(
ty\right) \text{.} \label{3.2.5}
\end{equation}%
These coherent states are completely justified by the square integrability
of the unitary irreducible representation $\pi _{+}$ and if follows from the
special function formula (\ref{intLaguerre}) that we have a resolution of
the identity for the space $\mathcal{H=}$ $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}%
^{+},t^{-1}dt\right) $:
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}}=c_{B,n}^{-1}\int\limits_{\mathbf{G}}d\mu \left(
x,y\right) \left\vert \left( x,y\right) ,B,n\right\rangle \left\langle
\left( x,y\right) ,B,n\right\vert \text{,}
\end{equation*}%
where $c_{B,n}=\left( 2\left( B-n\right) -1\right) ^{-1}$. The coherent
states (\ref{3.2.4}) are associated with the coherent states transform
\begin{equation}
W_{B,n}\left[ \varphi \right] \left( x,y\right) =c_{B,n}^{-\frac{1}{2}%
}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}^{+}}\overline{\left\langle t\mid \left( x,y\right)
,B,n\right\rangle }\varphi \left( t\right) \frac{dt}{t}. \label{22}
\end{equation}%
The range of the map $W_{B,n}:L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{+},t^{-1}dt\right)
\rightarrow L^{2}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+},d\mu _{B}\right) $ is the eigenspace (%
\ref{3.1.3}):
\begin{equation*}
W_{B,n}\left[ L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{+},t^{-1}dt\right) \right] =\mathcal{E}%
_{n}^{B}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right)
\end{equation*}%
for every $n\in \mathbb{Z}_{+}\cap \left[ 0,B-\frac{1}{2}\right] $ provided
that $2B>1$.
\begin{remark}
Note that, for $n=0$, the lowest hyperbolic Landau level, the states $%
\left\vert \left( x,y\right) ,B,0\right\rangle $ coincide with the well
known \textit{affine} coherent states \cite{KL}.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Wavelet transforms with Laguerre functions}
In this subsection we write the coherent states of the previous section in
terms of wavelet transforms with analyzing wavelets $\Phi _{n}^{\alpha }$
defined via the Fourier transforms in terms of Laguerre polynomials $%
L_{n}^{\alpha }$\ as%
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{F}\Phi _{n}^{\alpha }(t)=t^{\frac{\alpha +1}{2}}e^{-t}L_{n}^{\alpha
}(2t)\text{.} \label{laguerre}
\end{equation}%
Some of the structural properties of $\Phi _{n}^{\alpha }$ that will be key
in our approach are a consequence of their explicit formula, which displays $%
\Phi _{n}^{\alpha }$ as linear combinations of $\{\Phi _{n}^{\alpha
+2k}\}_{k=0}^{n}$:
\begin{equation*}
\Phi _{n}^{\alpha }(t)=\sum_{k=0}^{n}\frac{(-2)^{k}}{k!}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
n+\alpha \\
n-k%
\end{array}%
\right) \Phi _{0}^{\alpha +2k}(t)\text{.}
\end{equation*}
Now, let\textbf{\ }$\varphi \in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{+},t^{-1}dt\right) $%
. Combining (\ref{22}) and (\ref{3.2.5}) gives
\begin{equation*}
W_{B,n}\left[ \varphi \right] \left( x,y\right) =c_{B,n}^{-\frac{1}{2}%
}\left( \frac{\Gamma \left( 2B-n\right) }{n!}\right) ^{-\frac{1}{2}%
}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}^{+}}\left( ty\right) ^{B-n}e^{-\frac{1}{2}t\left(
y+ix\right) }L_{n}^{\left( 2B-2n-1\right) }\left( ty\right) \varphi \left(
t\right) \frac{dt}{t}\text{.}
\end{equation*}%
With $z=x+iy,$ we have that $-\frac{1}{2}t\left( y+ix\right) =\overline{%
\frac{1}{2}\xi iz}$. Set $\gamma _{B,n}=c_{B,n}\left( n!\right) ^{-1}\Gamma
\left( 2B-n\right) $ and rewrite the above as
\begin{equation}
W_{B,n}\left[ \varphi \right] \left( x,y\right) =\gamma _{B,n}^{-\frac{1}{2}%
}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}^{+}}\varphi \left( t\right) \overline{\left( \left(
ty\right) ^{B-n}e^{\frac{1}{2}\xi iz}L_{n}^{\left( 2B-2n-1\right) }\left(
ty\right) \right) }\frac{dt}{t} \label{3.3.13}
\end{equation}%
Since $\pi _{+}\left( x,y\right) \left[ \left( .\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}%
}l_{n}^{2B-2n-1}(.)\right] \left( t\right) =\left( ty\right) ^{B-n}e^{\frac{1%
}{2}tiz}L_{n}^{\left( 2B-2n-1\right) }\left( ty\right) $, then (\ref{3.3.13}%
) becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
W_{B,n}\left[ \varphi \right] \left( x,y\right) &=&\gamma _{B,n}^{-\frac{1}{2%
}}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}^{+}}\varphi \left( t\right) \overline{\left( \pi
_{+}\left( x,y\right) \left[ \left( .\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}}l_{n}^{2B-2n-1}(.)%
\right] \right) }\left( t\right) \frac{dt}{t} \notag \\
&=&\gamma _{B,n}^{-\frac{1}{2}}\left\langle \varphi ,\pi _{+}\left(
x,y\right) \left[ \left( .\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}}l_{n}^{2B-2n-1}(.)\right]
\right\rangle _{L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{+},\frac{dt}{t}\right) }\text{.}
\label{3316}
\end{eqnarray}%
Since $\pi _{+}\left( x,y\right) \left[ \left( .\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}}\phi
\left( .\right) \right] \left( t\right) =t^{\frac{1}{2}}\pi _{+}^{1}\left(
x,y\right) \left[ \phi \left( .\right) \right] \left( t\right) $, then (\ref%
{3316}) becomes
\begin{equation*}
W_{B,n}\left[ \varphi \right] \left( x,y\right) =\gamma _{B,n}^{-\frac{1}{2}%
}\left\langle (.)^{-\frac{1}{2}}\varphi (.),\pi _{+}^{1}\left( z\right) %
\left[ l_{n}^{2B-2n-1}\right] (.)\right\rangle _{L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}%
^{+},dt\right) }\text{.}
\end{equation*}%
If $\varphi \in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{+},t^{-1}dt\right) $, then $\mathcal{%
F}^{-1}\left( t^{-\frac{1}{2}}\varphi \right) \ $is in $H^{2}\left( \mathbb{C%
}^{+}\right) $ and the scalar product above may also be written as
\begin{equation*}
\left\langle (.)^{-\frac{1}{2}}\varphi (.),\pi _{1}^{+}\left( z\right) \left[
l_{n}^{2B-2n-1}\right] (.)\right\rangle _{L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}%
^{+},dt\right) }=\mathcal{W}_{\Phi _{n}^{2\left( B-n\right) -1}}\left[
\mathcal{F}^{-1}\left( \left( .\right) ^{-\frac{1}{2}}\varphi \right) \right]
\left( z\right) \text{,}
\end{equation*}%
where $\mathcal{W}_{\Phi _{n}^{2\left( B-n\right) -1}}$ stands for the \emph{%
wavelet transformation} \cite{Dau}, defined as
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{W}_{\Phi }\left[ \varphi \right] \left( x,y\right) =\left\langle
\varphi ,\pi _{z}\Phi \right\rangle _{L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}\right) }\text{,
\ \ \ }z=x+iy\text{, \ \ }y>0\text{,}
\end{equation*}%
where $\mathcal{F}\Phi \in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{+},t^{-1}dt\right) $. The
two transforms are related as follows
\begin{equation}
W_{B,n}\left[ \varphi \right] \left( x,y\right) =\gamma _{B,n}^{-\frac{1}{2}}%
\mathcal{W}_{\Phi _{n}^{2\left( B-n\right) -1}}\left[ \mathcal{F}^{-1}\left(
\left( .\right) ^{-\frac{1}{2}}\varphi (.)\right) \right] \left( x,y\right)
\text{.} \label{3.3.22}
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}
This also means that we have another realization of the bound states space $%
\mathcal{E}_{n}^{B}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) $ in (\ref{3.1.3}) as the
image of the Hardy space $H\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) $ under the wavelet
transform $\mathcal{W}_{\Phi _{n}^{2\left( B-n\right) -1}}$.
\end{remark}
With the help of the transform $Ber_{\nu }$ in (\ref{3.1.6}), we will be
able to express the transform $W_{B,n}\left[ f\right] $ of any function $f$
in $L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{+},t^{-1}dt\right) $ as a combination of
derivatives of an analytic function.
\begin{proposition}
If\textit{\ }$f\in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{+},t^{-1}dt\right) $\textit{, then%
}
\begin{equation*}
W_{B,n}\left[ f\right] \left( z\right) =\gamma _{B,n}^{-\frac{1}{2}%
}\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\frac{\left( 2i\right) ^{k}}{k!}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
2B-n-1 \\
n-k%
\end{array}%
\right) y^{B-n-\frac{1}{2}+k}F^{\left( k\right) }\left( z\right) \text{,}
\end{equation*}%
\textit{where }$F\left( z\right) =Ber_{2\left( B-n\right) -1}\left[ f\right]
(z)$\textit{\ belongs to the weighted Bergman space }$A_{2\left( B-n\right)
-1}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) $\textit{.}
\end{proposition}
\textbf{Proof.} Take $f\in L^{2}\left( \mathbb{R}^{+},t^{-1}dt\right) $. Then the function $%
u=\mathcal{F}^{-1}\left( t^{-\frac{1}{2}}f\right) \in H^{2}\left( \mathbb{C}%
^{+}\right) $. Write $F:=Ber_{\nu }\left[ f\right] $, where $\nu =2\left(
B-n\right) -1$. In \cite[pg. 256]{WavFram}, it is shown that the wavelet
transform of $u$ decomposes in terms of derivatives of the analytic function
$F\in A_{2\left( B-n\right) -1}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) $ as
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{\mathcal{W}}_{\Phi _{n}^{2\left( B-n\right) -1}}u\left( z\right)
=\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\frac{\left( 2i\right) ^{k}}{k!}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
2B-n-1 \\
n-k%
\end{array}%
\right) y^{B-n-\frac{1}{2}+k}F^{\left( k\right) }\left( z\right) \text{.}
\label{3.3.23}
\end{equation}%
Recalling the relation (\ref{3.3.22}) between the two transforms, we may
rewrite (\ref{3.3.23}) as
\begin{equation}
W_{B,n}f\left( x,y\right) =\gamma _{B,n}^{-\frac{1}{2}}\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}%
\frac{\left( 2i\right) ^{k}}{k!}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
2B-n-1 \\
n-k%
\end{array}%
\right) y^{B-n-\frac{1}{2}+k}F^{\left( k\right) }\left( z\right) \text{.}
\tag{3.3.24}
\end{equation}%
This completes the proof.
\subsection{Fuchsian groups and their automorphic forms}
Let $I_{2}$ be the identity matrix. Since one can identify the Poincar\'{e}
half-plane $\mathbb{C}^{+}$\ with the quotient group
\begin{equation*}
PSL\left( 2,\mathbb{R}\right) :=SL\left( 2,\mathbb{R}\right) /\left\{ \pm
I_{2}\right\} \text{,}
\end{equation*}%
also known as the group of M\"{o}bius transformations, the subgroups of $%
PSL\left( 2,\mathbb{R}\right) $, known as \emph{Fuchsian groups}, describe
the isometries of the hyperbolic metric of $\mathbb{C}^{+}$. Since the
nontrivial dynamics of a particle in the upper half-plane is induced by its
tesselation by discrete subgroups, we want to understand the completeness
properties of the coherent states introduced in the previous section, once
they are labelled by Fuchsian groups. Thus, we need to recall some basic
facts about Fuchsian groups and their associated automorphic forms. Consider
the group $SL\left( 2,\mathbb{R}\right) $ of real $2\times 2$ matrices with
determinant one, acting on $\mathbb{C}^{+}$ according to the rule
\begin{equation*}
g.z=\frac{az+b}{cz+d},\text{ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }g=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
a & b \\
c & d%
\end{array}%
\right) \in SL\left( 2,\mathbb{R}\right) \text{.}
\end{equation*}%
Notice that $g$ and $-g$ have the same action on $\mathbb{C}^{+}$.
A \emph{Fuchsian group }$G$ is a discrete subgroup of $PSL\left( 2,\mathbb{R}%
\right) $. The most important example is the modular group $PSL\left( 2,%
\mathbb{Z}\right) =SL\left( 2,\mathbb{Z}\right) /\left\{ \pm I_{2}\right\} $%
, where%
\begin{equation*}
SL\left( 2,\mathbb{Z}\right) =\left\{ \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
a & b \\
c & d%
\end{array}%
\right) :a,b,c,d\in \mathbb{Z}\text{, }ad-bc=1\right\} \text{.}
\end{equation*}%
An important class is provided by the congruence groups of order $n$, $G(n)$%
,
\begin{equation*}
G\left( n\right) =\left\{ \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
a & b \\
c & d%
\end{array}%
\right) \in SL\left( 2,\mathbb{Z}\right) :\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
a & b \\
c & d%
\end{array}%
\right) =\pm I(\mod n)\right\} \text{.}
\end{equation*}%
Further terminology will be required. The $G$-orbit $Gz$ of a point $z\in
\mathbb{C}^{+}$ under the action of the group $G$ is%
\begin{equation*}
Gz=\{gz:g\in G\}\text{.}
\end{equation*}%
A \textit{fundamental domain} for a Fuchsian group $G$ is a closed set $D$ $%
\subset $ $\mathbb{C}^{+}$ such that $D$ is the closure of its interior $%
D^{0}$, no two points of $D^{0}$ lie in the same $G$-orbit and the images of
$D$ under $G$ cover $\mathbb{C}^{+}$. For instance, a fundamental domain for
$G=PSL\left( 2,\mathbb{Z}\right) $ is given by%
\begin{equation*}
D=\left\{ z\in \mathbb{C}^{+}:\left\vert z\right\vert \geq 1\text{ and }%
\left\vert \Re z\right\vert \leq \frac{1}{2}\right\} \text{.}
\end{equation*}%
In the hyperbolic model, the orbit of an element $z\in D$\ will replace the
role of the lattice $\Lambda \left( \omega _{1},\omega _{2}\right) $\ in the
Euclidean model of the previous section, while the fundamental domain $D$
replaces the role of the parallelogram spanned by $\omega _{1}\ $and $\omega
_{2}$. We will restrict to Fuchsian groups such that $D$\ has finite
hyperbolic area. In this case, $D$ can be chosen as a polygon with \emph{an
even number }$2k$\emph{\ of sides}. The sides, grouped in pairs, are
equivalent with respect to the action of $G$. The vertices of the polygon
are joined in cycles of vertices which are equivalent to each other. If the
region is a polygon with vertices lying on the boundary of $\mathbb{C}^{+}$,
the cycle is called \emph{parabolic }(often referred to in the literature as
\emph{cusps}), otherwise it is called \emph{elliptic}. Let $r$ be the total
number of cycles and $e_{1},....,e_{r}$ be the orders of the inequivalent
elliptic points of $G$. Joining equivalent vertices and cycles, leads to the
construction of the Riemann surface\ $G\setminus \mathbb{C}^{+}$, whose
\emph{genus }$\mathcal{G}$ is given by $2\mathcal{G}=1+k-r$. The set $(%
\mathcal{G},r,e_{1},....,e_{r})$ is called the signature of the group $G$.
It contains information to compute the area $S_{G}$ of the fundamental
domain $D$:%
\begin{equation}
S_{G}=2\pi \left[ 2\mathcal{G}-2+\sum_{l=1}^{r}\lfloor 1-\frac{1}{e_{l}}%
\rfloor \right] \text{.} \label{area}
\end{equation}%
Now we introduce the notion of an automorphic form associated with $G$.\ For
all $m\in \mathbb{Z}$, $z\in $ $\mathbb{C}^{+}$ and any function $f$ with
domain $\mathbb{C}^{+}$, let
\begin{equation*}
\left( f\mid _{m}g\right) \left( z\right) =\left( cz+d\right) ^{-2m}f\left(
g.z\right) \text{, \ }g=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
a & b \\
c & d%
\end{array}%
\right) \in SL\left( 2,\mathbb{R}\right) \text{.}
\end{equation*}%
An \textit{automorphic form} of weight $m$ with respect to a Fuchsian group $%
G$ is a meromorphic function $f$ on $\mathbb{C}^{+}$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\left( f\mid _{m}g\right) =f\text{,}
\end{equation*}%
for all $g\in G$. The number $N$ of zeros of $f$ inside the fundamental
domain $D$ of the group $G$\ is given by Poincar\'{e}'s formula%
\begin{equation}
N=m\frac{S_{G}}{2\pi }\text{.} \label{Poincare}
\end{equation}%
The set of all automorphic forms of weight $m$ is denoted by $\Omega
_{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) $. Consider also $\mathfrak{H}%
ol_{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) $, the set of functions $f\in \Omega
_{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) $ holomorphic on $\mathbb{C}^{+}$
(including all cusps of $G$). We write $\mathfrak{C}_{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{C}%
^{+}\right) $ for the set of functions $f\in \Omega _{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{C}%
^{+}\right) $ which are zero at all cusps of $G$ (the so-called cusp forms).
The inclusions among these spaces are the following:
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{C}_{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) \subset \mathfrak{H}%
ol_{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) \subset \Omega _{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{%
C}^{+}\right) .
\end{equation*}%
The dimension $\dim \mathfrak{H}ol_{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) $ is
known explicitly \cite[p. 46 , Theorem 2. 23]{Shimura} in terms of $m$, the
genus $\mathcal{G}$ of the Riemann surface\ $G\setminus \mathbb{C}^{+}$, the
orders of the inequivalent elliptic points of $G$. Assuming that all cusps
of $G$ are equivalent,
\begin{equation}
\dim \mathfrak{H}ol_{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) =\left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
\left( 2m-1\right) \left( \mathcal{G}-1\right) +\sum_{l=1}^{r}\lfloor
m\left( 1-\frac{1}{e_{l}}\right) \rfloor , & m>1 \\
& \\
\mathcal{G}, & m=1 \\
\text{ }1, & m=0 \\
0, & m<0%
\end{array}%
\right. \label{dim}
\end{equation}%
Here $\lfloor x\rfloor $ denotes the largest integer less or equal to $x$.
\subsection{Completeness theorem}
The next results (see the Appendix for proofs) provide necessary conditions
for the completeness of the discrete coherent states indexed by Fuchsian
groups.
\begin{theorem}
\textit{Let }$\{\left\vert z,B,n\right\rangle \}_{z\in \mathbb{C}^{+}}$%
\textit{\ be a system of coherent states attached to the }$nth$\textit{\
hyperbolic Landau level. If the subsystem }$\{\left\vert g\zeta
_{0},B,n\right\rangle \}_{g\in G}$\textit{\ indexed by the Fuchsian group }$%
G $\textit{\ associated with the }automorphic form $F_{0}$ of weight $m_{0}$%
, vanishing at one point $\zeta _{0}\in \mathbb{C}^{+}$ \textit{is complete,
then}
\begin{equation*}
m_{0}\geq \frac{1}{2}\frac{B-n}{1+n}\text{.}
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
If we can choose the automorphic form of weight $m_{0}=\frac{2\pi }{S_{G}}$,
where $S_{G}$ is the area of the fundamental domain the above theorem can be
rephrased as a necessary upper bound on $S_{G}$.
\begin{corollary}
\textit{Let }$\{\left\vert z,B,n\right\rangle \}_{z\in \mathbb{C}^{+}}$%
\textit{\ be a system of coherent states attached to the }$nth$\textit{\
hyperbolic Landau level. If the subsystem }$\{\left\vert g\zeta
_{0},B,n\right\rangle \}_{g\in G}$\textit{\ indexed by the Fuchsian group }$%
G $\textit{\ \ }vanishing at one point $\zeta _{0}\in \mathbb{C}^{+}$
\textit{is complete, then}
\begin{equation*}
S_{G}\leq 4\pi \frac{1+n}{B-n}\text{.}
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
Let's consider $\dim \mathfrak{H}ol_{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) \geq
2$. This guarantees the existence of an automorphic form of weight $m$
vanishing at a given $\zeta _{0}$, using appropriate linear combinations.
When $\mathcal{G}=0$ and $m\geq 2$, $m_{0}$ can be evaluated explicitly in
terms of the signature $(0,r,e_{1},...e_{r})$ of the group Fuchsian group $G$%
.\ \
\begin{corollary}
\textit{Let }$G\ $be a group of signature $(0,r,e_{1},...e_{r})$, with $\dim
\mathfrak{H}ol_{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) \geq 2$ and $m\geq 2$.
\textit{If the subsystem }$\{\left\vert g\zeta _{0},B,n\right\rangle
\}_{g\in G}$\textit{\ indexed by the Fuchsian group }$G$\textit{\ is
complete, then}
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{l=1}^{r}\lfloor 1-\frac{1}{e_{l}}\rfloor -2\leq 2\frac{1+n}{B-n}
\end{equation*}%
In particular, if $G=$ $PSL\left( 2,\mathbb{Z}\right) $, then
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{6}\geq 2\frac{1+n}{B-n}\text{.}
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
\textbf{Remark}. If we impose the frame condition on the coherent states, the
inequality
\begin{equation*}
m_{0}\geq \frac{1}{2}\frac{B-n}{1+n}\text{.}
\end{equation*}
is an obvious consequence of Theorem
1 because the frame property is stronger than the completeness property. In the case of the Fuchsian group of dilations, it is possible to use a standard perturbation argument
from wavelet theory \cite{AscensiBruna}, which assures that small
pseudohyperbolic perturbations of the index set of a wavelet frame keep the
wavelet frame property and obtain a strict inequality (this has been done in \cite{Seip} and \cite{WavFram}). However, it is not clear if such a perturbation argument can be adapted to the case of a general Fuchsian group. We leave the problem as a question for the interested reader.
\section{Conclusion}
We have constructed discrete coherent states associated with the evolution of a particle under the action of a constant magnetic field when higher Landau levels are formed, first in the Euclidean and in the hyperbolic model.
Both in the higher Euclidean and the hyperbolic Landau levels, one can construct discrete coherent states by indexing the continuous ones by the discrete subgroups that reflect the symmetries of the underlying geometry.
The main conclusion is that, in both cases, the completeness of the coherent states depend explicitly on the size of the fundamental domain, on the order of the Landau Level
and on the intensity of the magnetic field. The analysis of the hyperbolic case is based on the properties of the automorphic form of weight $m$ associated with the Fuchsian group $G$ of the hyperbolic plane. If $G$ admits an automorphic form of weight with a single zero inside $D$, then
$S_{G}=\frac{2\pi }{m}$ and we can choose the automorphic form of weight $m_{0}=\frac{\pi }{2S_{G}}$, where $S_{G}$ is the area of the fundamental domain. Then, the following restriction must be imposed for the completeness of the coherent states:
\begin{equation*}
m_{0}\geq \frac{1}{2}\frac{B-n}{1+n}\text{.}
\end{equation*}
In terms of the area $S_{G}$ of the fundamental domain
\begin{equation*}
S_{G}\leq 4\pi \frac{1+n}{B-n}\text{.}
\end{equation*}
The methods used in this paper have their origins in several areas of mathematics, physics and signal analysis. It is not surprising that signal analysis and physics are strongly interrelated, since time-frequency (Gabor) analysis is the counterpart of the standard coherent states and time-scale (wavelet) analysis is the counterpart of affine coherent states and affine integral quantization \cite{BG}. But the arithmetic aspects connected to the hyperbolic geometry seem to have been somehow overlooked. Among the possible subgroups, only the Fuchsian group of dilations has been used in signal analysis \cite{Seip}, leading to the standard discretization of the half plane used in wavelet theory. We speculate that the discrete coherent states introduced in this paper may be useful in the analysis of signals, due to the variety of the discrete groups of the upper half-plane. Finally, we would subscribe to the last sentence of the conclusion of \cite{BG}, since we believe it also applies to the current research:
\
\emph{(...) mutual irrigations between quantum physics and signal analysis deserve a lot more attention in future investigations.}
\begin{center}
\textbf{Appendix}
\end{center}
\textbf{Proof of Theorem 2. }Let $f\in L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{+}, t^{-1}dt)$. Then
we can use Proposition1
\begin{equation}
W_{B,n}\left[ f\right] \left( z\right) =\gamma _{B,n}^{-\frac{1}{2}%
}\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\frac{\left( 2i\right) ^{k}}{k!}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
2B-n-1 \\
n-k%
\end{array}%
\right) y^{B-n-\frac{1}{2}+k}F^{\left( k\right) }\left( z\right)
\label{wavelet}
\end{equation}%
where%
\begin{equation*}
F=Ber_{2(B-n)-1}\left[ u\right] \in A_{2(B-n)-1}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right)
\text{.}
\end{equation*}%
The idea of the proof is the following. Using the theory of automorphic
forms, we will construct a function $H\in A_{2(B-n)-1}\left( \mathbb{C}%
^{+}\right) $ vanishing at a point $\zeta _{0}\in \mathbb{C}^{+}$ and such
that, for $k=0,...n$, $H^{(k)}$ vanishes at $G\zeta _{0}$, the orbit of $%
\zeta _{0}$ under the action of $G$. Then set $F=H$ in (\ref{wavelet}); the
surjectivity of $Ber_{2(B-n)-1}$ assures the existence of $f\in L^{2}(%
\mathbb{R}^{+},t^{-1}dt)$ such that%
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
H=Ber_{2(B-n)-1}\left[ f\right] \\
W_{B,n}\left[ f\right] \left( z\right) =0\text{, if }z\in G\zeta _{0}%
\end{array}%
\right. \text{;} \label{H}
\end{equation}%
The function $H$ is constructed as follows. Let $F_{m_{0}}$ be a modular
form of weight $m_{0}$, that is, a function analytic on the upper-half plane
such that
\begin{equation}
F_{m_{0}}(z)=(cz+d)^{-2m_{0}}F_{m_{0}}\left( \frac{az+b}{cz+d}\right) \text{.%
} \label{func}
\end{equation}%
If $G$ admits an automorphic form $F_{m_{0}}(z)$ vanishing at possible cusps
and vanishing at a point $\zeta _{0}\in \mathbb{C}^{+}$, the functional
equation (\ref{func}) implies that $F_{m_{0}}(z)$ vanishes at $G\zeta _{0}$.
Since
\begin{equation*}
\left( \Im z\right) ^{-1}\left\vert \Im\left( \frac{az+b}{cz+d}%
\right) \right\vert =\left\vert cz+d\right\vert ^{-2}\text{,}
\end{equation*}%
we have
\begin{equation*}
\left\vert F_{m_{0}}(z)\right\vert =\left( \Im z\right)
^{-m_{0}}\left\vert \Im \left( \frac{az+b}{cz+d}\right) \right\vert
^{m_{0}}\left\vert F_{m_{0}}\left( \frac{az+b}{cz+d}\right) \right\vert
\text{.}
\end{equation*}%
Thus, the function%
\begin{equation*}
\left( \Im z\right) ^{m_{0}}\left\vert F_{m_{0}}(z)\right\vert
=\left\vert \Im \left( \frac{az+b}{cz+d}\right) \right\vert
^{m_{0}}\left\vert F_{m_{0}}\left( \frac{az+b}{cz+d}\right) \right\vert
\end{equation*}%
is non-negative and continuous in the fundamental region $D$. Moreover, it
tends to $0$ as $\Im z\rightarrow \infty $ (this follows from an
argument using $q$-expansions \cite[pg. 94, formula (40)]{Serre}). Hence,
due to its $G$-invariance, it is bounded in the whole upper half-plane $%
\mathbb{C}^{+}$. As a result, the\ automorphic form $F_{m_{0}}(z)$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
\left\vert F_{m_{0}}(z)\right\vert \lesssim \left\vert \Im z\right\vert
^{-m_{0}}\text{, for every }z\in \mathbb{C}^{+}\text{.} \label{3.5.6}
\end{equation}%
The above argument is well known in number theory (for instance, it is an
important step in the proof of Hecke's bound on Fourier coefficients of cusp
forms \cite[pg. 94]{Serre}). Now we argue by contradiction, supposing that $%
2m_{0}<\frac{B-n}{1+n}$. This implies the existence of $\epsilon >0$ such
that $m_{0}(n+1)=\frac{\alpha +1-\epsilon }{2}$, $\alpha =2(B-n)-1$. Define
\begin{equation*}
H(z)=(z+i)^{-\epsilon }\left[ F_{m_{0}}(z)\right] ^{n+1}(z)
\end{equation*}%
and observe that $H\neq 0$ and that the derivatives $H^{(k)}(z)$ vanish at $%
G\zeta _{0}$. The estimate (\ref{3.5.6}) then yields
\begin{equation}
\left\vert H(z)\right\vert \lesssim \left\vert z+i\right\vert ^{-\epsilon }(%
\Im z)^{\text{ }-(n+1)m_{0}}=\left\vert z+i\right\vert ^{-\epsilon }(%
\Im z)^{-\frac{\alpha +1-\epsilon }{2}}\text{.} \label{est1}
\end{equation}%
Now let $w\in \mathbb{D}$. With the change of variables $z=i\frac{w+1}{1-w}$
one can write the integral in the unit disk. The detailed calculation
follows
\begin{equation*}
z+i=\frac{2i}{1-w};\text{ \ \ }\Im z=\frac{(1-\left\vert w\right\vert
^{2})}{\left\vert 1-w\right\vert ^{2}};\text{ \ \ \ \ \ }\left( \Im %
z\right) ^{\alpha }d\mu ^{+}(z)=\frac{(1-\left\vert w\right\vert
^{2})^{\alpha }}{\left\vert 1-w\right\vert ^{2\alpha +2}}d\mu ^{D}(w)\text{,}
\end{equation*}%
where $d\mu ^{D}(w=x+iy\in \mathbb{D})=dxdy$ is the area measure in the unit
disc and $d\mu ^{+}(z)(z\in \mathbb{C}^{+})=d\left( \Re z\right)
d\left( \Im z\right) $ is the area measure in the upper-half plane.\
Thus (\ref{est1}) becomes
\begin{equation*}
\left\vert \frac{1}{(1-w)^{\alpha +1}}H\left( i\frac{w+1}{1-w}\right)
\right\vert \lesssim (1-\left\vert w\right\vert ^{2})^{-\frac{\alpha
+1-\epsilon }{2}}\text{.}
\end{equation*}%
Now, in order to show that $H\in A_{2(B-n)-1}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) $%
,\ \ the integral can be estimated as follows.
\begin{eqnarray*}
\int_{\mathbb{C}^{+}}\left\vert H(z)\right\vert ^{2}\left( \Im z\right)
^{\alpha }d\mu ^{+}(z) &=&\int_{\mathbb{D}}\left\vert \frac{1}{(1-w)^{\alpha
+1}}H(i\frac{w+1}{1-w})\right\vert ^{2}(1-\left\vert w\right\vert
^{2})^{\alpha }d\mu ^{D}(w) \\
&\lesssim &\int_{\mathbb{D}}(1-\left\vert w\right\vert ^{2})^{-\alpha
-1+\epsilon }(1-\left\vert w\right\vert ^{2})^{\alpha }d\mu ^{D}(w) \\
&=&\int_{\mathbb{D}}(1-\left\vert w\right\vert ^{2})^{-1+\epsilon }d\mu
^{D}(w)<\infty \text{.}
\end{eqnarray*}%
The last inequality can easily be verified directly by definition of area
measure or using the reproducing kernel equation for Bergman spaces in the
unit disc. Thus, $H(z)\in A_{\alpha =2(B-n)-1}(\mathbb{C}^{+})$ vanishes on $%
G\zeta _{0}$ together with its derivatives and $H(z)$ satisfies (\ref{H}).
This is enough to finish the proof, since the existence of a nonzero $f\in
L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{+},t^{-1}dt)$ such that $W_{B,n}\left[ f\right] \left(
z\right) \ $vanishes on the whole orbit $G\zeta _{0}$ leads to%
\begin{equation*}
c_{B,n}^{-\frac{1}{2}}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}^{+}}\overline{\left\langle
t\mid z,B,n\right\rangle }f\left( t\right) \frac{dt}{t}=W_{B,n}\left[ f%
\right] \left( z\right) =0\text{, }z\in G\zeta _{0}\text{,}
\end{equation*}%
and contradicts the hypothesis of $\left\{ \left\vert g\zeta
_{0},B,n\right\rangle \right\} _{g\in G}$ being complete. Thus, the
condition $2m_{0}<\frac{B-n}{1+n}$ does not hold. As a result one must have $%
m_{0}\geq \frac{1}{2}\frac{B-n}{1+n}$.
\textbf{Proof of Corollary 1 and 2}. If $\dim \mathfrak{H}ol_{G}^{m}\left(
\mathbb{C}^{+}\right) \geq 2$ one can find an automorphic form of weight $m$
vanishing at a given $\zeta _{0}$, using appropriate linear combinations.
Moreover, if $\mathcal{G}=0$ and $m\geq 2$,
\begin{equation}
\dim \mathfrak{H}ol_{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right)
=1-2m+2\sum_{l=1}^{r}\lfloor m\left( 1-\frac{1}{e_{l}}\right) \rfloor \text{.%
} \label{dim2}
\end{equation}%
Then, comparing (\ref{dim2}) with the formula (\ref{area}) for $S_{G}$\ and
using Poincar\'{e}%
\'{}%
s formula (\ref{Poincare}), gives:
\begin{equation*}
N\geq \dim \mathfrak{H}ol_{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) -1\geq 1\text{,%
}
\end{equation*}%
since $\dim \mathfrak{H}ol_{G}^{m}\left( \mathbb{C}^{+}\right) \geq 2$.\
Thus, the quantity%
\begin{equation*}
N(m_{0})=\frac{m_{0}S_{G}}{2\pi }
\end{equation*}%
is minimized when $N(m_{0})=1$, leading to the explicit value of the least
weight $m_{0}$:%
\begin{equation*}
m_{0}=\frac{2\pi }{S_{G}}=\left[ \sum_{l=1}^{r}\lfloor 1-\frac{1}{e_{l}}%
\rfloor -2\right] ^{-1}\text{.}
\end{equation*}%
The statement for $G=$ $PSL\left( 2,\mathbb{Z}\right) $ can be obtained by
using its signature $\left( 0,3;2,3,\infty \right) $\ or by showing directly
that the area of the fundamental domain is $S_{G}=\frac{\pi }{3}$.
\textbf{Acknowledgement. }The authors thank the reviewers for the carefull reading that resulted in a significant improvement of the paper. We also thank Ana Margarida Melo and Filippo Viviani for
explaining the geometric aspects of the theory of lattices and for suggesting to us that Fuchsian groups should be the proper objects to discretize objects in the hyperbolic model and Yuri Neretin for pointing to the work of Perelomov. L.D.~Abreu and P. Balazs were supported by Austrian Science Foundation (FWF)
START-project FLAME ('Frames and Linear Operators for Acoustical Modeling
and Parameter Estimation'; Y 551-N13); M. de Gosson by FWF project number P 23902-N13; Z. Mouayn has been partially supported by FCT (Portugal), through
European program COMPETE/FEDER and by FCT project PTDC/MAT/114394/2009
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a finite and simple graph. A \emph{proper edge-coloring} of $G$ is an
assignment of colors to the edges so that no two adjacent edges have same color. So it is a map
$\theta: E \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$ with $\theta(e) \neq \theta(f)$ for any adjacent edges $e,f\in E$,
where $\mathcal{C}$ is the set of colors. The \emph{chromatic index}, denoted by $\chi'(G)$,
is the least integer $k$ such that $G$ admits a proper edge-coloring using $k$ colors.
A proper coloring of $G$ is \emph{acyclic} if there is no two colored cycle in $G$.
The \emph{acyclic edge chromatic number} (also called \emph{acyclic chromatic index}),
denoted by $a'(G)$, is the least integer $k$ such that $G$ admits an acyclic edge-coloring
using $k$ colors. The notion of acyclic coloring was first introduced by Gr{\"{u}}nbaum~\cite{gru}
in~$1973$, and the concept of acyclic edge-coloring was first studied by~Fiam\u{c}\'{i}k~\cite{fl}.
Let $\Delta=\Delta(G)$ be the maximum degree of a vertex in $G$. It is obvious that
any proper edge-coloring requires at least $\Delta$ colors. Vizing~\cite{vi} proved that
there always exists a proper edge-coloring with $\Delta+1$ colors. Since any acyclic edge
coloring is proper, we must have $a'(G) \geq \chi'(G) \geq \Delta$. On the other hand,
in $1978$, Fiam\u{c}\'{i}k~\cite{fl} (also independently by Alon, Sudakov and Zaks~\cite{al2})
posed the following conjecture.
\begin{conjecture}\label{conj}
for any graph $G,\ a'(G) \leq \Delta+2$.
\end{conjecture}
In~\cite{al2} it was proved that there exists a constant $c$ such that $a'(G) \leq \Delta +2$
for any graph with girth is at least $c\Delta\log \Delta$. It was also proved in~\cite{al2} that
$a'(G) \leq \Delta+2$ for almost all $\Delta$-regular graphs. Later N{\v{e}}set{\v{r}}il
and Wormald~\cite{nw} improved
this bound and showed that $a'(G) \leq \Delta +1$ for a random regular graph $G$. In another
direction, there have been many results giving upper bounds on $a'(G)$ for an arbitrary graph $G$.
For example, Alon, McDiarmid and Reed~\cite{al} proved that $a'(G) \leq 64 \Delta$. Molloy and
Reed~\cite{mr} improved this bound and showed that $a'(G) \leq 16 \Delta$. Recently,
Ndreca~{\em et. al.} obtained $a'(G) \leq 9.62 \Delta$~\cite{ndr} which is currently the best
upper bound for an arbitrary graph $G$.
Muthu, Narayanan and Subramanian~\cite{m1,m4} obtained better bounds: $a'(G) \leq 4.52 \Delta$
for graphs with girth at least 220; $a'(G) \leq 6\Delta$ for graphs with girth at least $9$.
The acyclic edge-coloring of planar graphs has been deeply studied in recent years.
See~\cite[Section~3.3]{wb} for a nice account of recent results.
The Conjecture~\ref{conj} was shown to be true for some special classes of graphs.
Burnstein~\cite{ber} showed that $a'(G) \leq 5$ when $\Delta=3$. Hence the
conjecture is true when $\Delta\leq 3$. Muthu, Narayanan and Subramanian proved
that the conjecture holds true for grid-like graphs~\cite{m2} and outerplanner graphs~\cite{m3}.
It has been observed that determining $a'(G)$ is a hard problem from both theoretical
and algorithmic points of view~\cite[p. 2119]{wb}. In fact, we do not yet know the values of
$a'(G)$ for some simple and highly structured graphs like complete graphs and complete bipartite
graphs in general. Fortunately, we can get the exact value of $a'(G)$ for some cases of complete
bipartite graphs, thanks to the perfect $1$-factorization.
Let $K_{n,n}$ be the complete bipartite graph with $n$ vertices on each side. The complete
bipartite graph $K_{n,n}$ is said to have a perfect 1-factorization if the edges of $K_{n,n}$
can be decomposed into $n$ disjoint perfect matchings such that the union of any two
perfect matchings gives a Hamiltonian cycle and it is of length $2n$
(see Section~\ref{sec2} for more details). It is known that when $n+2 \in \{p, 2p-1,p^2\}$,
where $p$ is an odd prime, or $n+2<50$ and odd, then $K_{n+2,n+2}$ has a
perfect 1-factorization (see~\cite{br}). One can easily see that if $K_{n+2,n+2}$
has a perfect 1-factorization then $a'(K_{n,n}) \leq a'(K_{n+1,n+1}) \leq n+2$.
And also we have the following result due to Basavaraju, Chandran and Kummini~\cite{ba}.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm1}
$a'(K_{n,n}) \geq n+2=\Delta+2$, when $n$ is odd.
\end{theorem}
Hence $a'(K_{n,n})=n+2=\Delta+2$ when $n+2 \in \{p, 2p-1,p^2\}$. By a result of
Guldan~\cite[Corollary 1]{gul}, we can also get $a'(K_{n+1,n+1})=n+2=\Delta+1$
when $n+2 \in \{p, 2p-1,p^2\}$.
The main idea here is to give different colors to the edges in different $1$-factors in $K_{n+2,n+2}$,
and removal of (one) two vertices on each side and their associated edges gives the required
edge-coloring of $(K_{n+1,n+1})\,K_{n,n}$ with $n+2$ colors. But a different approach is
needed to deal with $K_{n+2,n+2}$ when $n+2 \in \{p, 2p-1, p^2\}$. In 2009, Basavaraju
and Chandran~\cite{ba2} proved that $a'(K_{p,p}) = p+2=\Delta+2$ for any odd prime $p$.
We can view their approach as follows: suitably pick one edge from each $1$-factor and partition
these edges into two groups and each group can possibly be assigned a different color to
get the required result. Following this approach, Venkateswarlu and Sarkar have recently
shown that $a'(K_{2p-1,2p-1}) = 2p+1=\Delta+2$ for any odd prime $p$~\cite{AVSS}.
In this paper we view this approach in a more general setting and propose a general
framework for the proof. The only remaining infinite class of complete bipartite graphs
that are known to have perfect $1$-factorization is $K_{p^2,p^2}$, where $p$ is odd
prime. In this general framework we provide an acyclic edge-coloring of $K_{p^2,p^2}$
using $p^2+2$ colors when $p\ge 5$. Therefore we state our main result as follows.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm2}
$a'(K_{p^2,p^2}) = p^2+2=\Delta+2$, where $p\ge 5$ is an odd prime.
\end{theorem}
Therefore the acyclic chromatic index is equal to $\Delta+2$ for all the three known infinite
classes of complete bipartite graphs having a perfect $1$-factorization, and the Conjecture~\ref{conj}
holds true for such graphs.
In the next section we discuss some preliminaries and in Section~\ref{sec3} we present
a general framework to possibly get an acyclic edge-coloring of $K_{n,n}$ which possess
a perfect $1$-factorization using $n+2$ colors. Then we present the proof of
Theorem~\ref{thm2} in this framework in Section~\ref{sec4}.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec2}
Let $n\,(\geq 2)$ be an integer. We treat elements of the ring $\mathbb{Z}_n$ as integers in
the range $\{0,1,\ldots,n-1\}$. We denote the complete bipartite graph $K_{n,n}$ as
$G = (V\cup V', E)$ with $|V| = |V'| = n$ and $E = \{(v\mapsto v') : v\in V\ \mbox{and}\ v'\in V'\}$.
We use $\mapsto$ to define edges though our graph $K_{n,n}$ is undirected.
This is only for ease of presentation in associating a perfect matching in $K_{n,n}$ with
a permutation of the label set $I (= \{0,1,\ldots,n-1\})$, which we discuss below. Accordingly,
the use of arrows in the Figures~\ref{fig1} and~\ref{fig2} below is to explicitly emphasize
the correspondence between a perfect matching and its associated permutation map.
We use the terms `composition' and `product' of permutations interchangeably.
Note also that a permutation can be decomposed as a product of disjoint cycles uniquely
(upto reorder of the cycles and cyclic rotation of the elements within a cycle) and it is called
disjoint cycle decomposition. We use $\sqcup$ (instead of the usual union notation $\cup$)
to signify union of `disjoint' sets.
\subsection{Perfect matching and Perfect $1$-factorization}\label{sec2p1}
A \emph{matching} in a graph is a set of edges without common vertices, and a \emph{perfect matching}
is a matching which matches all vertices of the graph. In the case of complete bipartite graph $K_{n,n}$,
a perfect matching $M\subset E$ is a set of $n$ edges satisfying:
\begin{itemize}
\item[-] for each vertex $v'\in V'$ there exists a vertex $v\in V$ such that $(v\mapsto v')\in M$.
\item[-] if $(v_1\mapsto v')$ and $(v_2\mapsto v')$ are in $M$ then $v_1 = v_2$.
\end{itemize}
So by labelling the vertices in both $V$ and $V'$ with elements of $I = \{0,1,\ldots,n-1\}$
(or an appropriate label set $I$ of size $n$),
we can interpret a perfect matching $M$ in $K_{n,n}$ as a permutation of the label set $I$,
say $\pi_M$. For convenience, let us illustrate this through an example. Let $n=5$ and
consider the graph $K_{5,5}$ with the same labels from $0$ to $4$ for the vertices
on the top $(V)$ and the bottom $(V')$, as depicted in the figure below.
Let $M = \{(0\mapsto 1), (1\mapsto 2),(2\mapsto 0), (3\mapsto 4),(4\mapsto 3)\}$
then $\pi_M = (012)(34)$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering{
\input{fig1.tex}
\caption{$\pi_M = (012)(34)$}\label{fig1}
}
\end{figure}
Note that the union of any two perfect matchings of $K_{n,n}$ forms a collection of disjoint
cycles. These cycles can also be seen from the disjoint cycle decomposition of the composition
of their corresponding permutations. Let $M$ be as mentioned above and
$M' = \{(0\mapsto 1), (1\mapsto 0),(2\mapsto 2), (3\mapsto 3),(4\mapsto 4) \}$.
Then $\pi_{M'} = (01)(2)(3)(4)$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering{
\input{fig2.tex}
\caption{Induced subgraph of $M \cup M'$ (in $K_{5,5}$)}\label{fig2}
}
\end{figure}
We have $\pi_M^{-1}\circ \pi_{M'} = (0) (12) (34)$ and the arrows are placed
accordingly in the figure above. The fixed element $(0)$ corresponds to the common
edge $(0\mapsto 1) \in M\cap M'$ represented by the normal line in Figure~\ref{fig2},
and the two cycles $C_1 = (12)$ and $C_2 = (34)$ correspond to the cycles
$C_1^g = \{(1\mapsto 0),(2\mapsto 0),(2\mapsto 2),(1\mapsto 2)\}$ and
$C_2^g = \{(3\mapsto 3),(4\mapsto 3),(4\mapsto 4),(3\mapsto 4)\}$ respectively in $K_{5,5}$.
By a careful observation of the example, we can see the following general result.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem01}
Let $M$ and $M'$ be two perfect matchings of $K_{n,n}$ and let $C= (i_0\,i_1\cdots i_{\ell-1}),\,\ell\geq 2,$
be a cycle of length $\ell$ in the disjoint cycle decomposition of $\pi_M^{-1}\circ \pi_{M'}$,
{\em i.e.}, $\pi_{M'}(i_j) = \pi_{M}(i_{j+1})$, where the subscripts
are taken modulo $\ell$. Then the corresponding cycle $C^g$ in $K_{n,n}$ is of length $2\ell$
and the participating edges are given by $\{(i_j\mapsto \pi_M(i_j)) : 0\le j\le \ell-1\}\subset M$ and
$\{(i_j\mapsto \pi_{M'}(i_j)) : 0\le j\le \ell-1\}\subset M'$ which appear alternatively in $C^g$
as depicted in Figure~\ref{fig3}\,: the edges of $M'$ and $M$ are represented by lines
(without arrows) with colors red and green respectively.
\end{lemma}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering{
\input{fig3.tex}
\caption{Cycle $C^g$ in the induced subgraph of $M \cup M'$ (in $K_{n,n}$)}\label{fig3}
}
\end{figure}
A perfect matching is also called a \emph{$1$-factor}, and a partitioning of the edges of a
graph into $1$-factors is a \emph{$1$-factorization}. A $1$-factorization is \emph{perfect}
if the union of any two of its $1$-factors (perfect matchings) is a Hamiltonian cycle.
As pointed out in the introduction, there are three infinite classes of complete bipartite graphs
known to have perfect $1$-factorization, namely, $n\in \{p, 2p-1, p^2\}$ with $p$
an odd prime. Let us illustrate it by considering the complete bipartite graph $K_{5,5}$.
As discussed above the $1$-factors can be described by
permutations of $I=\{0,1,2,3,4\} $. Consider the $1$-factors $M_i$ given by the permutations
$\pi_i(j) = (i+j)\bmod{5}$ for $i,j\in \mathbb{Z}_5$. In Figure~\ref{fig4} the edges of $M_1$
are the green colored lines and the edges of $M_2$ are the red colored lines and they correspond to
the permutations $\pi_1 = (01234)$ and $\pi_2 = (02413)$ respectively. The induced subgraph
formed by the edges $M_1 \sqcup M_2$ is depicted below (without arrows), and the corresponding
permutation is equal to $\sigma = \pi_1^{-1}\circ \pi_2 = (01234)$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering{
\input{fig4.tex}
\caption{Induced subgraph of $M_1 \sqcup M_2$ (in $K_{5,5}$)}\label{fig4}
}
\end{figure}
Now we can see from the above lemma that $M_0, M_1,\ldots, M_{n-1}$
is a perfect 1-factorization of the complete bipartite graph $K_{n,n}$ if and only if
the permutation $(\pi_i^{-1}\circ \pi_j)$ is a full cycle (of length $n$) for any
$0\le i, j\le(n-1)$ with $i\neq j$, where $\pi_i$ is the permutation corresponding to
$M_i$. Next we present a general framework to possibly get an acyclic edge-coloring of
$K_{n,n}$ which possess a perfect $1$-factorization using $n+2$ colors, where $n$ is odd.
\section{A general framework}\label{sec3}
Let $n\,(\ge 3)$ be an odd integer. Suppose that the complete bipartite graph $K_{n,n}$
has a perfect 1-factorization. Then there exist $n$ disjoint perfect matchings covering
all the $n^2$ edges of $K_{n,n}$, say $M_0, \ldots, M_{n-1}$, such that the union of any
two perfect matchings $M_i \sqcup M_j$ gives a Hamiltonian cycle (which is of length $2n$).
Let $M_i^*\subsetneqq M_i$ be a proper subset of $M_i$ and consider the
following partial coloring:
\begin{equation}\label{eqn01}
\mbox{assign\ color}\ c_i\ \mbox{to}\ \mbox{the\ edges\ in}\ M_i^{*}.
\end{equation}
The remaining edges to be colored is given by
\[ M = \bigsqcup_{i=0}^{n-1} (M_i\setminus M_i^*),\]
and these edges will be assigned some other colors different from the colors in $\{c_0,\ldots,c_{n-1}\}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem00}
There can not be a cycle in the induced subgraph formed by the edges from the union
$M_i^*\sqcup M_j^*$ of two color classes $c_i$ and $c_j$ for any $0\le i, j\le (n-1)$ with $i\neq j$.
\end{lemma}
Ideally, to get an acyclic edge-coloring of $K_{n,n}$, our aim should be to use only two
more colors for coloring the (uncolored) edges in $M$, and thus attaining the lower
bound on $a'(K_{n,n})$. In other words, partition $M$ into $M^{(1)}$ and $M^{(2)}$,
if possible, in such a way that the induced subgraph of $M^{(\rho)}\sqcup M_i^*$
does not contain a cycle for any $0\leq i \leq n-1$ and $\rho\in\{1,2\}$. If such a partition
of $M$ exists, then the edges of $M^{(1)}$ and $M^{(2)}$ can be assigned distinct colors,
and one can easily see that the proposed edge-coloring is proper and acyclic.
These observations and our intuition suggest that to minimize the number of edges (size of $M$)
that are yet to be assigned colors. This can be done by taking $M_i^*$ to be a (proper) maximal
subset of $M_i$, {\em i.e.}, take $M_i^* = M_i \setminus \{ e_i\}$ for some $e_i \in M_i$.
Thus the size of the set $M$ will be (near)\footnote{One can take $M_i^*= M_i$
for exactly one $i\in I$ and other $M_i^*$'s as mentioned, and observe that
Lemma~\ref{lem00} holds true in such a case as well.} minimal.
Additionally, we have to make sure that a suitable partition of $M$ exists
satisfying the other requirements mentioned above. Below we present a strategy to
choose $M$ (to be a perfect matching), so that the other requirements on $M$ can
possibly be worked out using permutations of the label set $I$.
As discussed in the previous section, we can interpret each perfect matching $M_i$
in $K_{n,n}$ as a permutation of the label set $I$ and let us denote it by $\pi_i$.
Now, if possible, select one edge $e_i : (s_i\mapsto t_i)$ from each
$M_i,\,0 \leq i \leq (n-1),$ such that the set of edges $M = \{e_0, e_1, \ldots, e_{n-1}\}$
gives a perfect matching in $K_{n,n}$. Let $\pi$ be its corresponding permutation of $I$.
Then we have $M \cap M_i = \{ e_i\}$ for $1\le i\le (n-1)$.
\begin{remark}\label{rem_trans}
A perfect $1$-factorization of complete bipartite graph $K_{n,n}$ is equivalent to
a Hamiltonian latin square of order $n$. Our choice of perfect matching $M$ with
$M \cap M_i = \{ e_i\}$ for $1\le i\le (n-1)$ is equivalent to a transversal (of length
$n$). These concepts are well studied in literature (see~\cite[p. 135--151]{CD}).
It was conjectured by Ryser that every latin square of odd order has a transversal~\cite{brua}.
Such a transversal is also said to be rainbow matching (see~\cite{aha} for details).
In fact, it is enough to take a transversal of length $n-1$ as pointed out in the footnote
below. It was conjectured by Brualdi and Stein independently that every latin square of odd
order $n$ has a transversal of length $n-1$~\cite{brua,stein}. As far as we know it is not
known that in general a Hamiltonian latin square of order $n$ has a transversal (of length $n$ or $n-1$).
In fact, we need a transversal which satisfies an additional property as discussed below.
\end{remark}
Now set $M_i^* = M_i \setminus \{ e_i\}$ and assign colors as in~(\ref{eqn01}).
As discussed our aim is to use two additional colors for coloring the remaining edges
(given by $M$) and obtain an acyclic edge-coloring of $K_{n,n}$. For this purpose,
we need to partition $M$ into $M^{(1)}$ and $M^{(2)}$, in such a way that the induced
subgraph of $M^{(\rho)} \cup M_i^*$ does not contain a cycle for any $0 \leq i \leq n-1$ and
$\rho\in\{1,2\}$. In other words, we must have edges from both $M^{(1)}$ and $M^{(2)}$
in any cycle in the induced subgraph of $M\sqcup M_i^* = M\cup M_i$. Note that by
Lemma~\ref{lem01} the cycles of the induced subgraph of $M\cup M_i$ can be obtained
from the cycles of the permutation $\pi^{-1}\circ \pi_i$ in its disjoint cycle decomposition.
So in order to see such a partition of $M$ exists or not, we analyse cycle structure
of the permutations $(\pi^{-1}\circ \pi_i)$ for $0\le i\le (n-1)$. We now see that
such a partition of $M$, if exists, can be obtained from a partition of the label set $I$, and
it is due to the one-to-one correspondence between the label set and a perfect matching.
Suppose $(\pi^{-1}\circ \pi_i) = C_{i0} C_{i1} \cdots C_{i k_i}$ as a product
of disjoint cycles. Observe that there is exactly one common edge
$M \cap M_i = \{e_i: (s_i\mapsto t_i)\}$, and so $s_i \in I$ is the only fixed element
in the permutation $\pi^{-1}\circ \pi_i$, {\em i.e.}, $(\pi^{-1}\circ \pi_i)(s_i) = s_i$
and $(\pi^{-1}\circ \pi_i)(s) \neq s$ for any $s\,(\neq s_i)\in I$.
Let us take $C_{i0} = (s_i)$ and let $\ell_{ij}$ be the length of the cycle $C_{ij},\,1\le j\le k_i$.
Then we must have $\ell_{ij} \ge 2$ for $0\le i\le n-1$ and $1\le j\le k_i$. Note that for a cycle
$C_{ij}$ in the disjoint cycle decomposition of these permutations, its corresponding cycle
$C_{ij}^g$ in $K_{n,n,}$ is of length $2\ell_{ij}$; half of the edges are from $M$ and the
other half are from $M_i^*$ (see Lemma~\ref{lem01}). We now try to partition $I$ into
$I^{(1)}$ and $I^{(2)}$ by analysing all the cycles $C_{ij},\,0\le i\le n-1\,\mbox{and}\,1\le j\le k_i$,
such that at least one element from both $I^{(1)}$ and $I^{(2)}$ appear in the representations of all
those cycles $C_{ij}$. If such a partition of $I$ exists, then the corresponding partition
of $M$ is given by $M^{(1)} = \{(m\mapsto \pi(m)) : m\in I^{(1)}\}$ and
$M^{(2)} = \{(m \mapsto \pi(m)) : m\in I^{(2)}\}$, and by Lemma~\ref{lem01} we can
see that the partition of $M$ into $M^{(1)}$ and $M^{(2)}$ gives the required result.
In general, if $K_{n,n}$ possesses a perfect $1$-factorization, the difficulty is to identify
a suitable perfect matching that can help to get an acyclic edge-coloring of $K_{n,n}$ using only $n+2$
colors. Let us illustrate the technique by considering the case $K_{p,p}$, where $p$ is an odd prime.
\subsection{The case of $K_{p,p}$ for an odd prime $p$}\label{sec3p1}
This case was studied in~\cite{ba2} and we present here a slight variant of it.
Take $M_i$ to be the perfect matching corresponding to the permutation
$\pi_i: a \mapsto a+i \pmod{p}$ for $0\leq i \leq p-1$. We can see that the decomposition
$\{M_i,\,0\le i\le p-1\}$ gives a perfect $1$-factorization of $K_{p,p}$. Now consider
$M$ to be the perfect matching given by the permutation $\pi: a \mapsto ax \pmod{p}$,
where $x$ is a generator of $\mathbb{Z}_p^{*}$. Let $y$ be the multiplicative inverse
of $x$ in $\mathbb{Z}_p^*$. Note that $order(x) = order(y) =p-1$ in $\mathbb{Z}_p^*$.
We can easily check that $M\cap M_i = \{e_i: (\frac{i}{x-1}\mapsto \frac{ix}{x-1})\}$.
We also have the following.
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)] $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_0 = \pi^{-1} = C_{00}C_{01}$, where $C_{i0} = (0)$
represents the common edge $e_0: (0\mapsto 0)$ and $C_{01} = (1\,y\,y^2\,\cdots\,y^{p-2})$
is a cycle of length $(p-1)$ containing $1$.
\item[ii)] $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_i = C_{i0}C_{i1}$ for $1\le i\le p-1$, where
$C_{i0} = (\frac{i}{x-1})$ represents the common edge $e_i : (\frac{i}{x-1}\mapsto \frac{ix}{x-1})$
and $C_{i1} = (0\ iy\ i(y^2+y)\,\cdots\,i(y^{p-3}+\cdots+y)\ -i)$ is a cycle of length
$(p-1)$ containing $0$.
\end{itemize}
Therefore we can get the required result with a partition of $I$ into $I^{(2)} = \{0,1\}$ and
$I^{(1)} = I\setminus I^{(2)}$. Then the corresponding partition of $M$ is given by
$M^{(1)}=M \setminus \{(0\mapsto 0), (1\mapsto x)\}$ and
$M^{(2)}= \{(0\mapsto 0), (1\mapsto x)\}$. Observe that the cycle $C_{i1}^g$ of $K_{n,n}$
corresponding to $C_{i1},\,1\le i\le (p-1),$ contains exactly one edge $(0 \mapsto 0)$
which belong to $M^{(2)}$ and $C_{01}^g$ contains the edge $(1\mapsto x)\in M^{(2)}$.
The other $(p-2)$ edges of the cycle $C_{i1}^g,\,0\le i\le p-1,$ belong to $M^{(1)}$.
Now the final assignment of the colors is as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] the edges in $M_i^*$ are colored with $c_i$ for $i\in I$;
\item[--] the edges in $M^{(1)}$ are colored with $c_p$;
\item[--] the edges in $M^{(2)}$ are colored with $c_{p+1}$.
\end{itemize}
From the above discussion and by Lemma~\ref{lem00}, it is clear that the proposed
edge-coloring (with $p+2$ colors) of $K_{p,p}$ is proper and acyclic.
Note that the proposal in~\cite{ba2} is $M_0^* = M_0$ and $M^{(2)} = \{(1\mapsto x)\}$
and one can easily see that the result is still valid with such a choice as well.
\section{The case of $K_{p^2,\,p^2}$ for an odd prime $p \ge 5$}\label{sec4}
In this section we provide an acyclic edge-coloring of $K_{p^2,p^2}$ with $p^2+2$ colors,
where $p$ is an odd prime $\ge 5$. We follow the general framework described in the
previous section. Accordingly we now summarize the set-up in this case.
We use elements of $\mathcal{I} = \{ (a,b) : a,b\in \mathbb{Z}_p \}$ for labelling the
vertices of $K_{p^2,p^2}$ on both sides. Let $x$ be a generator of $\mathbb{Z}_p^*$ and let $y$ be
its inverse. Observe that $order(x) = order(y) = p-1$ in $\mathbb{Z}_p^*$.
We consider the following.
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] Let $M_{(a,b)}$ be the perfect matching corresponding to the permutation $\pi_{(a,b)}$
of the label set $\mathcal{I}$ defined by
\begin{equation*}
\pi_{(a,b)}\big((c,d)\big) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
(a,a+b+d) & \mbox{if}\ c=0\ \mbox{and}\ a+b+d\neq 0\\
(a+x b,0) & \mbox{if}\ c=0\ \mbox{and}\ a+b+d= 0\\
(a+c + x b,0) & \mbox{if}\ c\neq 0\ \mbox{and}\ b+d = 0\\
(a+c,b+d) & \mbox{if}\ c\neq 0\ \mbox{and}\ b+d\neq 0
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation*}
Then from~\cite{br} (with $\alpha = 1$ and $\beta = x$), we can see that the perfect
matchings $\{ M_{(a,b)},\, (a,b)\in \mathcal{I} \}$ form a perfect $1$-factorization of $K_{p^2,\,p^2}$.
\item[--] We choose the perfect matching $M$ corresponding to the permutation defined by
\begin{equation*}
\pi \big((c,d)\big) = (yc,xd);
\end{equation*}
\item[--] We choose the following partition of the label set $\mathcal{I}$:
\[\mathcal{I}^{(2)} = \{(0,1),(1,0),(z,z),(z,zx)\ \mbox{for}\ z\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*\}\
\mbox{and}\ \mathcal{I}^{(1)} = \mathcal{I} \setminus \mathcal{I}^{(2)}\]
Then the corresponding partition of
$M= M^{(1)} \sqcup M^{(2)}$ is given by
\begin{align*}
M^{(1)} &= \{ (c,d) \mapsto (yc,xd) : (c,d) \in \mathcal{I}^{(1)}\},\\
M^{(2)} &= \{ (c,d) \mapsto (yc,xd) : (c,d) \in \mathcal{I}^{(2)}\}.
\end{align*}
We have $| \mathcal{I}^{(2)} | = |M^{(2)}| = 2p$ and $|\mathcal{I}^{(1)}| = |M^{(1)}| = p^2-2p$.
\end{itemize}
Let $M_{(a,b)}^* = M_{(a,b)} \setminus M$ for $(a,b) \in \mathcal{I}$.
The edge-coloring of $K_{p^2,p^2}$ that we consider is as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] the edges in $M_{(a,b)}^*$ are colored with $c_{ap+b}$ for $(a,b) \in \mathcal{I}$;
\item[--] the edges in $M^{(1)}$ are colored with $c_{p^2}$ ;
\item[--] the edges in $M^{(2)}$ are colored with $c_{p^2+1}$.
\end{itemize}
According to the general framework discussed in the previous section, the two requirements that need to
be satisfied to establish the above edge-coloring of $K_{p^2,p^2}$ is proper and acyclic are as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] for $(a,b)\in \mathcal{I}$, there is exactly one fixed element in the permutation $\pi^{-1}\circ \pi_{(a,b)}$.
That is there is exactly one edge common to both $M$ and $M_{(a,b)}$;
\item[--] for $(a,b)\in \mathcal{I}$,
elements from both $ \mathcal{I}^{(1)}$ and $\mathcal{I}^{(2)}$ must appear in the representation of the cycles
of length $\ge 2$ in the disjoint cycle decomposition of the permutation $\pi^{-1}\circ \pi_{(a,b)}$.
\end{itemize}
Let us now prove that the above two requirements are satisfied in our set-up.
For brevity of expression, we sometimes use the following notation.
\begin{align*}
x' &= \frac{1}{x-1} = \frac{y}{1-y}\ \mbox{and}\ x_i = x+x^2 +\cdots + x^i\ \mbox{for}\ i = 1, 2,\ldots,p-2,\\
y' &= \frac{1}{y-1} = \frac{x}{1-x}\ \mbox{and}\ \,y_i = y+y^2 +\cdots + y^i\ \mbox{for}\ i = 1, 2,\ldots,p-2.
\end{align*}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop41}
For $(a,b)\in \mathcal{I}$, we have $ | M\cap M_{(a,b)} |=1$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
An edge $(c,d) \mapsto (c',d')$ is common to both $M$ and $M_{(a,b)}$ if and only if
$(c',d') = \pi_{(a,b)}\big( (c,d)\big) = \pi\big( (c,d)\big)$. Therefore by checking the four cases
\begin{align*}
(a,a+b+d) &= (0,xd)\ \quad \mbox{if}\ c=0\ \mbox{and}\ a+b+d\neq 0\\
(a+x b,0) &= (0,xd) \ \quad \mbox{if}\ c=0\ \mbox{and}\ a+b+d= 0\\
(a+c + x b,0) &= (yc,xd) \quad \mbox{if}\ c\neq 0\ \mbox{and}\ b+d = 0\\
(a+c,b+d) &= (yc,xd) \quad \mbox{if}\ c\neq 0\ \mbox{and}\ b+d\neq 0
\end{align*}
for $(a,b)\in \mathcal{I}$, we get
\[M\cap M_{(a,b)} = \{ (ay',bx') \mapsto (-ax',-by' )\}\]
and hence the proof.\hfill $\Box$\\
\end{proof}
The above proposition shows that the first requirement is satisfied in our set-up. In what follows we
prove that the other requirement is also satisfied. For this purpose, we now analyse cycle structure
of the permutations $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(a,b)}$ for $(a,b)\in \mathcal{I}$.
The inverse permutation of $\pi$ is given by $\pi^{-1}\big((c,d)\big) = (xc,yd)$. So we get
\begin{equation*}
\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(a,b)} \big((c,d)\big) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
(xa,y(a+b+d)) & \mbox{if}\ c=0\ \mbox{and}\ a+b+d\neq 0\\
(xa+x^2 b,0) & \mbox{if}\ c=0\ \mbox{and}\ a+b+d= 0\\
(x(a+c) + x^2 b,0) & \mbox{if}\ c\neq 0\ \mbox{and}\ b+d = 0\\
(x(a+c),y(b+d)) & \mbox{if}\ c\neq 0\ \mbox{and}\ b+d\neq 0
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation*}
The above permutation can be decomposed into the following three permutations.
\begin{equation*}
\pi_{(a,b)}^{(0)} \big((c,d)\big) = (x(a+c),y(b+d))
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\pi_{(a,b)}^{(1)} \big((c,d)\big) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
(c,ya+d) & \mbox{if}\ c=xa\\
(c,d) & \mbox{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\pi_{(a,b)}^{(2)} \big((c,d)\big) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
(c+x^2 b,d) & \mbox{if}\ d=0\\
(c,d) & \mbox{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation*}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop42}
For $(a,b)\in \mathcal{I}$, we have
\[ \pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(a,b)} = \pi_{(a,b)}^{(2)}\circ \pi_{(a,b)}^{(1)}\circ \pi_{(a,b)}^{(0)}\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Note that
\[ \pi_{(a,b)}^{(1)}\big( \pi_{(a,b)}^{(0)} \big((c,d)\big) \big) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
(x(a+c),ya+y(b+d)) & \mbox{if}\ x(a+c) =xa\ ( \Leftrightarrow c = 0)\\
(x(a+c),y(b+d)) & \mbox{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.
\]
and $\pi_{(a,b)}^{(2)}$ splits each of above two cases into two subcases depending on whether the
second component is zero or not. Thus we get
\[ \pi_{(a,b)}^{(2)}\big( \pi_{(a,b)}^{(1)}\circ \pi_{(a,b)}^{(0)} \big((c,d)\big) \big)
= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
(xa,ya+y(b+d)) & \mbox{if}\ c=0\ \mbox{and}\ a+b+d\neq 0\\
(xa+x^2 b,0) & \mbox{if}\ c=0\ \mbox{and}\ a+b+d= 0\\
(x(a+c) + x^2 b,0) & \mbox{if}\ c\neq 0\ \mbox{and}\ b+d = 0\\
(x(a+c),y(b+d)) & \mbox{if}\ c\neq 0\ \mbox{and}\ b+d\neq 0
\end{array}\right.\]
and hence the proof.
\hfill $\Box$\\
\end{proof}
With the above decomposition and the following result, analysis of the cycle structures can be
simplified which we will see later.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop43}
Let $\sigma \big((c,d)\big) = (yc,yd)$, then we have
\[\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(xa,xb)} = \sigma^{-1} \circ ( \pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(a,b)}) \circ \sigma.\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We have
\[ \pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(a,b)} \big(\sigma \big((c,d)\big)\big) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
(xa,y(a+b+yd)) & \mbox{if}\ c=0\ \mbox{and}\ a+b+yd\neq 0\\
(xa+x^2 b,0) & \mbox{if}\ c=0\ \mbox{and}\ a+b+yd= 0\\
(x(a+yc) + x^2 b,0) & \mbox{if}\ c\neq 0\ \mbox{and}\ b+yd = 0\\
(x(a+yc),y(b+yd)) & \mbox{if}\ c\neq 0\ \mbox{and}\ b+yd\neq 0
\end{array}\right.\]
and so we get
\[ \sigma^{-1} \big( \pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(a,b)}\circ \sigma \big((c,d)\big)\big) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
(x^2 a,y(xa+xb+d) & \mbox{if}\ c=0\ \mbox{and}\ xa+xb+d\neq 0\\
(x^2 a+x^3 b,0) & \mbox{if}\ c=0\ \mbox{and}\ xa+xb+d= 0\\
(x^2a+c + x^3 b,0) & \mbox{if}\ c\neq 0\ \mbox{and}\ xb+d = 0\\
(x^2 a+c,y(xb+d)) & \mbox{if}\ c\neq 0\ \mbox{and}\ xb+d\neq 0
\end{array}\right.\]
Now one can check that this is equal to $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(xa,xb)}$.
\hfill $\Box$\\
\end{proof}
Thus for $(a,b)\in \mathcal{I}$, the permutations $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(x^i a,x^i b)},\, i\in \{0,1,\ldots,p-2\},$
are all conjugates of each other, and so they all have same cycle structure. In fact we
get the disjoint cycle decomposition of $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(x^i a,x^i b)}$ by the symbol
transformation $\sigma^i$, {\em i.e.}, replacing the symbols $(c,d)$
by $(y^ic,y^id)$ in the disjoint cycle decomposition of $\pi_{(a,b)}$.
Therefore it is enough to study the cycle structure of $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(a',b')}$
for $(a',b') \in \mathcal{I}' = \{(0,0),(0,1),(1,0),(1,b)\ \mbox{for}\ b\in\mathbb{Z}_p^*\}$.
We now analyse the cycle structure of $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(a,b)}$ for $(a,b)\in \mathcal{I}$
by dividing into four cases: $(0,0),(*,0),(0,*),(*,*)$, where $*$ represents nonzero
elements of $\mathbb{Z}_p$. We discuss these cases one by one and we show that elements
from both $ \mathcal{I}^{(1)}$ and $ \mathcal{I}^{(2)}$ appear in the representation of the cycles
(of length $\ge 2$) in the disjoint cycle decomposition of $\pi^{-1}\circ \pi_{(a,b)}$
for elements $(a,b)$ in each of these four cases.
In Section~\ref{sec3} we have mentioned cycles with single element explicitly to
emphasize that there is exactly one fixed element. As we have already proved it in
Proposition~\ref{prop41}, for convenience we follow the convention and in
the discussion below we do not explicitly mention cycles with single element
in the disjoint cycle decomposition of permutations. Accordingly we count only
the cycles of length $\ge 2$ in the disjoint cycle decomposition. For simplicity,
we also use some common notation in presenting the disjoint cycle decomposition
in each of these cases.\\
\noindent{\bf Case}: $a=0\ \mbox{and}\ b=0$
The permutation $ \pi_{(0,0)}$ is the identity map, and so
$\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(0,0)} = \pi^{-1}$.
We can see from the definition that the disjoint cycle decomposition of $\pi^{-1}$ can be given by
\[ \pi^{-1} = C_0 C_1 \cdots C_{p-1} C_p,\]
where the $p+1$ cycles are given by
\begin{align*}
C_j &= \big( (j,1)\, (jx,y)\, (jx^2,y^2)\cdots (jx^{p-2},y^{p-2}) \big)\quad
\mbox{for}\ j\in \mathbb{Z}_p\\
C_p &= \big( (1,0)\, (x,0)\, (x^2,0)\cdots (x^{p-2},0) \big)
\end{align*}
and it is evident that they are of length $p-1$.
The missing element $(0,0)$ is fixed by $\pi^{-1}$.
Note that the cycle $C_0$ contains exactly one element $(0,1)\in \mathcal{I}^{(2)}$
and other elements belong to $\mathcal{I}^{(1)}$, and also the cycle $C_p$ contains exactly
one element $(1,0)\in \mathcal{I}^{(2)}$ and other elements belong to $\mathcal{I}^{(1)}$.
For $j\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$, the elements of the cycle $C_j$ are of the form $(jx^i,y^i)$
for $i=0,1,\ldots,p-2$. Since $y$ is also a generator of $\mathbb{Z}_p^*$ we have either
$j = y^{2s}$ or $j = y^{2s+1}$ for some $s \in \{0,1,\ldots,\frac{p-1}{2}-1\}$.
Note that $x^\frac{p-1}{2} = y^\frac{p-1}{2} = -1$.
\begin{itemize}
\item[--] If $j=y^{2s}$ (is a square),
then we have $jx^s = y^s$ and $jx^{s+\frac{p-1}{2}} = y^{s+\frac{p-1}{2}}$,
and observe that $(jx^s,y^s)$ and $(jx^{s+\frac{p-1}{2}},y^{s+\frac{p-1}{2}})$
are the only elements of $C_j$ which belong to $\mathcal{I}^{(2)}$ and they are of the form $(z,z)$.
The remaining $(p-3)$ elements of $C_j$ belong to $\mathcal{I}^{(1)}$.
\item[--] If $j=y^{2s+1}$ (is a non-square), then we have
$jx^s = y\cdot y^s$ and $jx^{s+\frac{p-1}{2}} = y \cdot y^{s+\frac{p-1}{2}}$,
and observe that $(jx^s,y^s)$ and $(jx^{s+\frac{p-1}{2}},y^{s+\frac{p-1}{2}})$
are the only elements of $C_j$ which belong to $\mathcal{I}^{(2)}$ and they are of the form $(z,zx)$.
The remaining $(p-3)$ elements of $C_j$ belong to $\mathcal{I}^{(1)}$.
\end{itemize}
\noindent{\bf Case}: $a=0\ \mbox{and}\ b\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$
By Proposition~\ref{prop43} it is enough to study the cycle structure of $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(0,1)}$.
For $b\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$, the disjoint cycle decomposition of $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(0,b)}$ can be obtained
by the symbol transformation: replacing $(c,d)$ by $(bc,bd)$ in the disjoint cycle decomposition of
$\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(0,1)}$.
We have \[ \pi_{(0,1)}^{(0)} \big((c,d)\big) = (xc,y(1+d)).\]
Then we can see that
\[ \pi_{(0,1)}^{(0)} = C_0 C_1 \cdots C_{p-1} C_p,\]
where the $p+1$ cycles are given by
\begin{align}\label{eqnae0b}
C_j &= \big( (jx^2,0)\, (jx^3,y)\, (jx^4,y+y^2)\cdots (jx,y+\cdots+y^{p-2}) \big)\quad
\mbox{for}\ j\in \mathbb{Z}_p\nonumber\\
C_p &= \big( (1,x')\, (x,x')\, (x^2,x')\cdots (x^{p-2},x') \big),
\end{align}
and it is evident that they are of length $p-1$.
The missing element $(0,x')$ is fixed by $\pi_{(0,1)}^{(0)}$.
We get $\pi_{(0,1)}^{(1)} \big((c,d)\big) = (c,d)$ since $a=0$, and so $\pi_{(0,1)}^{(1)}$
is the identity map. We have
\[\pi_{(0,1)}^{(2)} \big((c,d)\big) = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
(c+x^2,0) & \mbox{if}\ d=0\\
(c,d) & \mbox{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.\]
So it has only one cycle given by
\[ \pi_{(0,1)}^{(2)} = C^{(2)} = \big( (0,0)\,(x^2,0)\,(2x^2,0)\cdots ((p-1)x^2,0))\big),\]
it is of length $p$ and all other elements are fixed.
Therefore we have
\[ \pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(0,1)} = \pi_{(0,1)}^{(2)}\circ \pi_{(0,1)}^{(1)}\circ \pi_{(0,1)}^{(0)}
= C^{(2)} C_0 C_1 \cdots C_{p-1} C_p.\]
Observe that an element $(kx^2,0)$ of the cycle $C^{(2)}$ appears exactly in one cycle $C_j$
(when $j = k$). So the product $C^{(2)} C_0 C_1 \ldots C_{p-1}$ will form a single cycle of length
$p(p-1)$, and Figure~\ref{fig5} shows how the cycles are joined together to form a single cycle.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering{
\input{fig5.tex}
\caption{The cycle formed by the product $C^{(2)} C_0 C_1 \cdots C_{p-1}$}\label{fig5}
}
\end{figure}
Let $F_1$ denote the cycle formed by the product $C^{(2)} C_0 C_1 \ldots C_{p-1}$
and let $F_2 = C_p$. Thus we have \[\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(0,1)} = F_1 F_2\]
is a product of two disjoint cycles. Therefore for $b\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$, the disjoint cycle
decomposition of $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(0,b)}$ can be given by
\[\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(0,b)} = \bar{F_1} \bar{F_2},\]
where the cycles $\bar{F_1}$ and $\bar{F_2}$ are obtained by the symbol transformation:
replacing $(c,d)$ by $(bc,bd)$ in $F_1$ and $F_2$ respectively. From~(\ref{eqnae0b}) we
can see that the cycle $\bar{F_2}$ can be given by
\[\bar{F_2} = \big( (b,bx')\, (bx,bx')\, (bx^2,bx')\cdots (bx^{p-2},bx') \big) =
\big( (1,bx')\, (x,bx')\, (x^2,bx')\cdots (x^{p-2},bx')\big)\]
Let $bx' = x^s$ for some $s\in \{0,1,\ldots,p-2\}$ and observe that the
cycle $\bar{F_2}$ contains exactly two elements of $\mathcal{I}^{(2)}$, namely,
$(x^s,bx')$ of the form $(z,z)$ and $(x^{s-1},bx')$ of the form $(z,zx)$.
The other $(p-3)$ elements of $\bar{F_2}$ belong to $\mathcal{I}^{(1)}$. Evidently,
elements from both $\mathcal{I}^{(1)}$ and $\mathcal{I}^{(2)}$ appear in the cycle $\bar{F_1}$.\\
\noindent{\bf Case}: $a\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*\ \mbox{and}\ b=0$
By Proposition~\ref{prop43} it is enough to study the cycle structure of $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(1,0)}$.
For $a\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$, the disjoint cycle decomposition of $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(a,0)}$ can be obtained
by the symbol transformation: replacing $(c,d)$ by $(ac,ad)$ in the disjoint cycle decomposition of
$\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(1,0)}$.
We have \[ \pi_{(1,0)}^{(0)} \big((c,d)\big) = (x(1+c),yd).\]
Then we can see that
\[\pi_{(1,0)}^{(0)} = C_0 C_1 \cdots C_{p-1} C_p.\]
where the $p+1$ cycles are given by
\begin{align}\label{eqnabe0}
C_j &= \big((x,jy)\, (x+x^2,jy^2)\cdots (x+\cdots+x^{p-2},jy^{p-2})\, (0,j)\big)
\quad \mbox{for}\ j\in \mathbb{Z}_p\nonumber\\
C_p &= \big( (y',1)\, (y',y)\, (y',y^2)\cdots (y',y^{p-2}) \big),
\end{align}
and it is evident that they all are of length $p-1$.
The missing element $(y',0)$ is fixed by $\pi_{(1,0)}^{(0)}$.
We have \[\pi_{(1,0)}^{(1)} \big((c,d)\big) = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
(c,y+d) & \mbox{if}\ c=x\\
(c,d) & \mbox{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.\]
So it has only one cycle given by
\[\pi_{(1,0)}^{(1)}= C^{(1)} = \big( (x,0)\,(x,y)\,(x,2y)\cdots (x,(p-1)y))\big),\]
it is of length $p$ and all other elements are fixed.
We get $\pi_{(1,0)}^{(2)} \big((c,d)\big) = (c,d)$ since $b=0$, and so
$\pi_{(1,0)}^{(2)}$ is the identity map.
Therefore we have
\[ \pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(1,0)} = \pi_{(1,0)}^{(2)}\circ \pi_{(1,0)}^{(1)}\circ \pi_{(1,0)}^{(0)}
= C^{(1)} C_0 C_1 \cdots C_{p-1} C_p.\]
Observe that an element $(x,ky)$ of the cycle $C^{(1)}$ appears exactly in one cycle $C_j$
(when $j = k$). So the product $C^{(1)} C_0 C_1 \ldots C_{p-1}$ will form a single cycle of
length $p(p-1)$, and Figure~\ref{fig6} shows how the cycles are joined together to form a single cycle.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering{
\input{fig6.tex}
\caption{The cycle formed by the product $C^{(1)} C_0 C_1 \cdots C_{p-1}$}\label{fig6}
}
\end{figure}
Let $F_1$ denote the cycle formed by the product $C^{(1)} C_0 C_1 \ldots C_{p-1}$ and let $F_2 = C_p$.
Thus we have \[ \pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(1,0)} = F_1 F_2\]
is a product of two disjoint cycles. Therefore for $a\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$, the disjoint cycle decomposition of
$\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(a,0)}$ can be given by
\[\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(a,0)} = \bar{F_1} \bar{F_2},\]
where the cycles $\bar{F_1}$ and $\bar{F_2}$ are obtained by the symbol transformation:
replacing $(c,d)$ by $(ac,ad)$ in $F_1$ and $F_2$ respectively. From~(\ref{eqnabe0}) we
can see that the cycle $\bar{F_2}$ can be given by
\[\bar{F_2} = \big( (ay',a)\, (ay',ay)\, (ay',ay^2)\cdots (ay',ay^{p-2})\big) =
\big( (ay',1)\, (ay',y)\, (ay',y^2)\cdots (ay',y^{p-2}) \big)\]
Let $ay' = y^s$ for some $s\in \{0,1,\ldots,p-2\}$ and observe that the
cycle $\bar{F_2}$ contains exactly two elements of $\mathcal{I}^{(2)}$, namely, $(ay', y^s)$
of the form $(z,z)$ and $(ay',y^{s-1})$ of the form $(z,zx)$. The other $(p-3)$ elements
of $\bar{F_2}$ belong to $\mathcal{I}^{(1)}$. Evidently,
elements from both $\mathcal{I}^{(1)}$ and $\mathcal{I}^{(2)}$ appear in the cycle $\bar{F_1}$.\\
\noindent{\bf Case}: $a\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*\ \mbox{and}\ b\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$
By Proposition~\ref{prop43} it is enough to study the cycle structure of $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(1,b)}$
for $ b\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$. For $a\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$, the disjoint cycle decomposition of
$\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(a,ab)}$ (observe that all the elements of this
case are covered) can be obtained by the symbol transformation: replacing $(c,d)$ by $(ac,ad)$ in
the disjoint cycle decomposition of $\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(1,b)}$.
We have \[ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(0)} \big((c,d)\big) = (x(1+c),y(b+d)).\]
Then we can see that
\[ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(0)} = C_0 C_1 \cdots C_{p-1} C_p.\]
where the $p+1$ cycles are given by
\begin{align}\label{eqnab}
C_j &= \big((x,(b+j)y)\, (x+x^2,(y+y^2)b+jy^2)\cdots (x_{p-2},y_{p-2}b+jy^{p-2})\, (0,j)\big)
\ \ \mbox{for}\ j\in \mathbb{Z}_p\nonumber\\
C_p &= \big( (y',0)\, (y',yb)\, (y',(y+y^2)b)\cdots (y',y_{p-2}b \big),
\end{align}
and it is evident that they all are of length $p-1$.
The missing element $(y',bx')$ is fixed by $\pi_{(1,b)}^{(0)}$.
Note that the cycle $C_j$ for $j = bx'$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eqnbxp}
C_{bx'} =\big((x_1,bx')\, (x_2,bx')\cdots (x_{p-2},bx')\, (0,bx')\big)
\end{equation}
and all the elements of $C_{bx'}$ are of the form $(c,bx')$, where $c\,(\neq y')\in \mathbb{Z}_p$,
and also all the elements of $C_p$ are of the form $(y',d)$, where $d\,(\neq bx')\in \mathbb{Z}_p$.
As in the previous two cases, we will show that the permutation
\[\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(1,b)} = \pi_{(1,b)}^{(2)}\circ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(1)}\circ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(0)} = F_1 F_2\]
can be written as a product of two disjoint cycles. Moreover, we will show that all the
elements of the cycle $C_{bx'}$ appear in $F_1$ and all the elements of the cycle $C_p$ appear
in $F_2$, which is the crucial point in our proof.
We have \[\pi_{(1,b)}^{(1)} \big((c,d)\big) = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
(x,y+d) & \mbox{if}\ c=x\\
(c,d) & \mbox{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.\]
So it has only one cycle given by
\[ C^{(1)} = \big( (x,0)\,(x,y)\,(x,2y)\cdots (x,(p-1)y))\big),\]
it is of length $p$ and all other elements are fixed.
Observe that an element $(x,ky)$ of the cycle $C^{(1)}$ appears exactly in one cycle $C_j$
(when $b+j = k$). So the product $C^{(1)} C_0 C_1 \cdots C_{p-1}$ will form a single cycle of
length $p(p-1)$ as shown in Figure~\ref{fig7}, and let us denote it by $\hat{C}$. Then we get
\begin{equation*}\label{cycleprod0}
\pi_{(1,b)}^{(1)}\circ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(0)}
=C^{(1)} C_0 C_1 \cdots C_{p-1} C_p = \hat{C} C_p.
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering{
\input{fig7.tex}
\caption{The cycle formed by the product $C^{(1)} C_0 C_1 \cdots C_{p-1}$}\label{fig7}
}
\end{figure}
We have \[\pi_{(1,b)}^{(2)} \big((c,d)\big) = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
(c+x^2b,0) & \mbox{if}\ d=0\\
(c,d) & \mbox{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.\]
So it has only one cycle given by
\[ C^{(2)} = \big( (0,0)\,(bx^2,0)\,(2bx^2,0)\cdots ((p-1)bx^2,0))\big),\]
it is of length $p$ and all other elements are fixed. Therefore we have
\begin{equation*}\label{cycleprod1}
\pi^{-1} \circ \pi_{(1,b)} = \pi_{(1,b)}^{(2)}\circ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(1)}\circ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(0)}
=C^{(2)} C^{(1)} C_0 C_1 \cdots C_{p-1} C_p = C^{(2)} \hat{C}C_p.
\end{equation*}
Observe that the cycle $C^{(2)}$ contains all the elements of the form $(c,0)$,
where $c\in \mathbb{Z}_p$. Note also that the cycle $C_j$ for $j (\neq bx')\in \mathbb{Z}_p$
contains exactly one element of the form $(c,0)$ given by $(-\frac{jx}{b},0)$
(see that for some $i\in \{1,2,\ldots,p-2\}$, if the second component satisfies
$(b y_i + j y^i)=0$ then the first component $x_i = -\frac{jx}{b}$),
and the other element $(-x'x,0)=(y',0)$ appears in the cycle $C_p$. So all the elements of
$C^{(2)}$ except $(y',0)$ appear in the cycle $\hat{C} = C_0 C_1 \cdots C_{p-1}$,
and the order in which they appear can also be seen from the figure below.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering{
\input{fig8.tex}
\caption{Order of the elements of the form $(z,0)$ in $\hat{C}$}\label{fig8}
}
\end{figure}
Looking at only the elements of the form $(c,0)$ in the representation of $\hat{C}$,
observe that the element
$(-\frac{jx}{b},0)$ for $j (\neq bx')\in \mathbb{Z}_p$ is followed by $(-\frac{(j+1)x}{b},0)$
when $j \neq bx'-1$, and in the case when $j = bx'-1$, {\em i.e.}, $(-\frac{(bx'-1)x}{b},0)$
is followed by $(-\frac{(bx'+1)x}{b},0)$, a jump of $-\frac{2x}{b}$ in the
first component. Keeping in view how the composition is worked out,
we can see the following: suppose that an element $(c',d')$ is mapped
to $(c,0)$ in $\pi_{(1,b)}^{(1)}\circ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(0)} = \hat{C} C_p$,
then the element $(c',d')$ will be mapped to $(c+x^2 b,0)$ in
$\pi_{(1,b)}^{(2)}\circ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(1)}\circ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(0)} = C^{(2)} \hat{C}C_p$;
the product by $C^{(2)}$ on the left with $\hat{C}C_p$ does not effect the mapping of
other elements that are not mapped to elements of the form $(c,0)$ in $\hat{C}C_p$.
Intuitively, the product by $C^{(2)}$ on the left with $\hat{C}C_p$ permutes the expressions:
from an element of the form $(c,0)$ to the next first element $(c',d')$ that is mapped to an element
of the form $(c,0)$ in the representation of $\hat{C}$ and $C_p$.
Having this in mind, let us now look at the cycles in the disjoint cycle decomposition of
$\pi_{(1,b)}^{(2)}\circ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(1)}\circ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(0)} = C^{(2)} \hat{C}C_p$.
The following summations in~(\ref{eqnt}) are useful to check the cycles
of the product $C^{(2)} \hat{C}C_p$.
Note that $x^2 b \neq \frac{x}{b}$ for any $b\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$ since otherwise $xb^2 = 1$,
a contradiction to the fact that $x$ is a generator of $\mathbb{Z}_p^*$ and it can not be a square.
Let $t, 1\le t\le p-1,$ be the inverse of $(x b^2 -1)$ in $\mathbb{Z}_p^*$. Then we can see that $t$
is the smallest positive integer satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{eqnt}
t x^2 b - (t+1) \frac{x}{b} = 0\quad \mbox{and}\quad (p-t) x^2 b - (p-t-1) \frac{x}{b} = 0.
\end{equation}
Let $F_1$ be the cycle containing the element $(-\frac{(bx'-1)x}{b},0) = (y'+\frac{x}{b},0)$ in the
product $C^{(2)} \hat{C}C_p$ and it can be seen from the figure below. Clearly, the cycle $F_1$
contains $t$ elements of the form $(c,0)$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering{
\input{fig9.tex}
\caption{The cycle $F_1$ containing the element $(y'+\frac{x}{b},0)$ in the product
$C^{(2)} \hat{C}C_p$}\label{fig9}
}
\end{figure}
Let $F_2$ be the cycle containing the element $(y',0)$ in the product $C^{(2)} \hat{C}C_p$
and it can be seen from the figure below. Clearly, the cycle $F_2$ contains the other $(p-t)$
elements of the form $(c,0)$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering{
\input{fig10.tex}
\caption{The cycle $F_2$ containing the element $(y',0)$ in the product
$C^{(2)} \hat{C}C_p$}\label{fig10}
}
\end{figure}
Note that all the elements of the form $(c,0)$ appear in the two cycles $F_1$ and $F_2$,
and so these cycles must contain all the elements of $\mathcal{I}$ except $(y',bx')$ which is the fixed
element in $\pi_{(1,b)}^{(1)}\circ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(0)} = \hat{C} C_p$. The element $(y',bx')$
is also fixed by $\pi_{(1,b)}^{(2)}$. Therefore we get
\[\pi_{(1,b)}^{(2)}\circ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(1)}\circ \pi_{(1,b)}^{(0)}
= C^{(2)} \hat{C}C_p = F_1 F_2.\]
Note also that $F_1$ contains all the elements of $C_{bx'}$ and $F_2$ contains all
the elements of $C_p$. Finally, for $a\in \mathbb{Z}_p^*$, we get that \[\pi^{-1}\circ \pi_{(a,ab)} =
\pi_{(a,ab)}^{(2)}\circ \pi_{(a,ab)}^{(1)}\circ \pi_{(a,ab)}^{(0)} = \bar{F}_1 \bar{F}_2,\]
where the cycles $\bar{F}_1$ and $\bar{F}_2$ are obtained by the symbol transformation:
replacing $(c,d)$ by $(ac,ad)$ in the cycles $F_1$ and $F_2$ respectively.
From (\ref{eqnab}) we can see that the cycle $\bar{F}_2$ contains elements of the
form $(ay',d)$ for all $d\in \mathbb{Z}_p$ except may be $d = abx'$. So it must contain at least
one element of the form $(z,z)$ or $(z,zx)$ which belong to $\mathcal{I}^{(2)}$.
Since $F_2$ contains all the elements of $C_p$ in the order as mentioned in~(\ref{eqnab}),
in the corresponding part of the cycle $\bar{F}_2$, at most three elements of $\mathcal{I}^{(2)}$
can appear; the other elements (at least $p-3$) belong to $\mathcal{I}^{(1)}$.
Evidently, the cycle $\bar{F}_1$ contains elements from both $\mathcal{I}^{(1)}$
and $\mathcal{I}^{(2)}$. Hence the proof is completed.\\
\noindent{\bf Acknowledgement}: The first author would like to thank Dr. T. Karthick, ISI-Chennai Centre
for suggesting the topic and helpful discussions.
|
\section{Introduction}
Quiet sun magnetic structures are much less organized and have less intense magnetic field compared to sunspots \citep{SanchezAlmeida2011}. At the same time, quiet Sun covers at least about 90\% of the solar surface \citep{Sheeley1967, Lites+etal1996,Lin+Rimmele1999, Khomenko+etal2003_2,TrujilloBueno+etal2004} independently of the activity level, which makes quiet Sun magnetic structures to be important contributors to the solar magnetism. These weak structures are very dynamic, constantly perturbed by convection and propagating waves \citep[see][to name a few]{Muller+etal1994, Berger+Title1996, Krijer+etal2001, DePontieu+etal2003, Vecchio+etal2007, Vecchio2009, Centeno+etal2009, FujTsun09, Kontogiannis2010a, Kontogiannis2010b, Kontogiannis2011, MartinezGonzalez2011, Chitta2012}.
Waves are stochastically excited by turbulent convection at the base of the photosphere \citep{Goldreich+Keeley1977, Balmforth1992, Nordlund+Stein2001}. The magnetic field concentrations embedded in the intergranular lanes suffer foot point motions and this drives waves in these structures through the solar atmosphere \citep{Hasan+etal2000, Kato+etal2011}. Depending on the foot point motion, different waves are going to be excited. There is a large number of works on numerical simulations that reproduce these different scenaria: horizontal motions producing transverse kink waves; pressure fluctuations producing longitudinal waves; twisting motions generating torsional Alfv\'{e}n waves; observationally-driven or impulsive motions \citep{Ulmschneider+etal1991, Choudhur+etal1993,Rosenthal+etal2002, Bogdan+etal2003, Hasan+etal2003, Hasan+etal2005, DePontieu+etal2004, DePontieu+etal2005, Khomenko+etal2008,Vigeesh2009,Heegland+etal2009, Khomenko+Cally2011,Fedun+etal2011a, Fedun+etal2011b, Nutto+etal2012}. With some exceptions \citep{Choudhur+etal1993, DePontieu+etal2005, Fedun+etal2011b}, these works model the wave propagation in the photospheric and chromospheric layers.
The dominant oscillations observed in the quiet Sun photosphere are acoustic-gravity waves with a period of 5-minute \citep{Leighton+etal1962, Ulrich1970}. As these waves propagate upwards the frequency distribution changes. Essentially 3-minute period waves are observed in the quite chromosphere inside super granular lanes \citep{Deubner+Fleck1990, Lou1995, Hoekzema+Rutten1998, Rutten+Uitenbroek1991, Lites1993}, and 5-minute oscillations are detected in and around magnetic elements in facular regions \citep{DePontieu+etal2004, DePontieu+etal2005, Hansteen2006, Jefferies+etal2006, McIntosh+Jefferies2006, Centeno+etal2006, Kostik+Khomenko2013} and network regions \citep{Lites1993, Krijer+etal2001, DePontieu+etal2003, Bloomfield+etal2006, Tritschler2007, Vecchio+etal2007}, with some differences in behaviour, see recent review by \citet{Khomenko+CalvoSantamaria2013}. Both 3- and 5-minute oscillations appear in the corona \citep{DeMoortel+Nakariakov2012}. The distribution of the dominant frequency of oscillations along the atmosphere appears to be different inside the quiet network cells and network borders and facular regions, containing stronger magnetic fields. There are observations of the 5-min waves channelled along the inclined magnetic field lines to the chromosphere in facular regions (via so-called ``ramp-effect'' or ``magnetoacoustic-portals''), which have been explained by the reduction of the acoustic cut-off frequency in inclined magnetic fields \citep{Michalitsanos1973, Suematsu1990, DePontieu+etal2005, Jefferies+etal2006, Heggland2007, Heggland2011}. \citet{Centeno+etal2009} and \citet{Khomenko+etal2008} proposed that radiative losses in thin flux tubes can also help propagating long-period oscillations vertically upward \citep[see][]{Roberts1983}. The latter mechanism, however, was not found to be dominant in the simulations by \citet{Heggland2011}, with a complex treatment of radiative transfer.
\parskip 0pt
As the waves propagate upwards they find obstacles, such as the equipartition layer where plasma $\beta=1$, the layer where the local acoustic cut-off frequency is equal to the wave frequency, the steep temperature gradient at the transition region, etc. In these regions waves suffer transformations, refraction, and reflection. Since the atmospheric properties change as we move from one layer to another, and even from one column to another, these effects can appear at different horizontal and vertical positions. For instance while in the photosphere the gas pressure dominates, the magnetic pressure becomes dominant from the middle chromosphere upwards.
\parskip 0pt
Particularly interesting is the question of how, and in which amount, the energy of waves excited in sub-photospheric layers can reach the chromosphere and corona, and whether the wave modes reaching there can be dissipated to convert their energy into heat, i.e. how the solar atmospheric layers are magnetically and energetically connected by means of waves. Only few numerical studies perform simulations of waves in the whole domain from the photosphere to the chromosphere, transition region and corona. \citet{Fedun+etal2011b}, in their 2D simulations of high-frequency wave propagation, find that magneto-acoustic waves in a wide range of frequencies can effectively leak energy into the corona. These authors considered an isolated magnetic flux tube that becomes vertical in the chromosphere. In the present work we study how the energy reaches the chromosphere and corona by exciting waves below the photosphere with different perturbations. We choose a complex magnetic field that consists of vertical flux tubes of the same polarity separated by an arcade-shaped magnetic field, resembling a network and internetwork regions, with wave periodicities in the 3-5 min regime. We discuss in detail the behaviour of different wave modes in such complex situation. The length of our simulated time series allows us to reach the stationary regime in two of the three considered cases and quantify the energy flux reaching the corona, as well as the frequency distribution of waves with height and horizontal distance.
\section{Numerical Method}
We solve the two-dimensional ideal magnetohydrodynamic equations of conservation of mass, momentum, energy, and the induction equation for the magnetic field:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:den}
\frac{\partial\rho}{\partial t}+\nabla(\rho{\bf v})= \Big [ \frac{\partial\rho}{\partial t} \Big ]_{\rm diff} \,,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:mom}
\frac{\partial (\rho{\bf v})}{\partial t}+\nabla\Big [\rho{\bf vv}+\Big (p+\frac{{\bf B}^2}{2 \mu_0}\Big ){\bf I}-\frac{{\bf B}{\bf B}}{\mu_0}\Big ]=\rho{\bf g} + \Big [ \frac{\partial (\rho{\bf v})}{\partial t} \Big ]_{\rm diff} \,,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ei}
\frac{\partial p}{\partial t}+\textbf{v} \nabla p + \gamma p \nabla\textbf{v} = \Big [\frac{\partial p}{\partial t} \Big]_{\rm diff} \,,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ind}
\frac{\partial {\bf B}}{\partial t}=\nabla\times ({\bf v} \times {\bf B}) + \Big [ \frac{\partial {\bf B}}{\partial t}\Big ]_{\rm diff} \,,
\end{equation}
\noindent where all the notations are standard. We use an ideal equation of state and $\gamma = 5/3$. The terms with subscript ``diff'' are the artificial hyper-diffusive terms required for the code's numerical stability, see \citet{Felipe2010}. After removing the equilibrium condition (see below), we solve these non-linear equations by means of the code {\sc mancha} which is described in detail in \citet{Khomenko+Collados2006} and \citet{Felipe2010}. The numerical code solves the equations for perturbations. Through the present study we keep the amplitude of the perturbations small enough to concentrate on the linear regime. The non-linear effects will be reported in a forthcoming study.
\subsection{MHS model}
For simplicity, we have chosen a potential magnetic field structure. Such magnetic field does not interact with the equilibrium atmosphere. This allows us to compute the hydrostatic equilibrium model separately from the magneto-static equilibrium.
\subsubsection{Hydrostatic model}
To get the hydrostatic equilibrium we start by defining the temperature structure as a function of the vertical coordinate $z=\{-5,10\}$ Mm. For that, we join three models. The sub-photospheric layers are described by the convectively stabilized model by \citet{Parchevsky+Kosovichev2007}. The main reason to choose this model is because no convective instability is developed in response to the perturbation, allowing to study waves separate from convection \citep[see][]{Khomenko+etal2009}. The photosphere and chromosphere are described by VALC \citep{Vernazza+Avrett+Loeser1981} model for quiet Sun regions. Finally we choose an isothermal corona with a temperature of one million Kelvin. The complete temperature distribution is shown in Figure \ref{fig:temperature} (green line). Once the temperature stratification is established we calculate the scale height $H$, and then integrate the equation for pressure and recover the density distributions, as follows:
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:HS}
&&H=\frac{R_{\rm gas}T_0}{g\mu} \\
&&\frac{dp_{0}(z)}{dz} + \frac{p_0}{H} =0 \\% \nonumber
&&\rho_0= \frac{p_0}{gH}
\end{eqnarray}
using the ideal gas equation. With this, we ensure that the atmosphere is in hydrostatic equilibrium. The resulting distributions of pressure and density are given in Fig. \ref{fig:temperature}. A plane-parallel atmosphere is built by replicating the obtained vertical stratifications. In the above equations we denote the equilibrium variables by a subscript ``0''; R$_{\rm gas}$ is the gas constant and $\mu$ is the mean atomic weight. We set $\mu$=1 at the lower layers of the atmosphere where we can consider that the gas is made of neutral hydrogen, and $\mu$=1/2 at higher layers where the plasma is fully ionized.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{stratifications}
\caption{Temperature (green line), density(blue line) and pressure (red line) distributions. The left vertical axis gives us the values for temperature and pressure, and the vertical axis on the right is the density scale.}
\label{fig:temperature}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Magnetostatic model}
The magnetostatic model is given by an arcade shaped magnetic field plus a constant component:
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:mag_field}
B_{0x} &=& B_{00}\exp(-kz)\sin(kx) \\
B_{0z} &= &B_{u}+B_{00}\exp(-kz)\cos(kx)
\end{eqnarray}
where B$_{00}$ and B$_{u}$ are the magnetic field strengths in the photosphere and corona, respectively, $k$ defines the spatial (horizontal and vertical) scales and $x$ and $z$ are the horizontal and vertical directions, respectively. We choose B$_{00}$ = 100 G and B$_{u}$=10 G, so we are working with a weak magnetic field region. Equations \ref{eq:mag_field} defines a magnetic field configuration composed by two vertical flux tubes separated by an arcade-shaped magnetic field, as drawn in Figure \ref{fig:magfield}. Choosing higher values for the photospheric and coronal magnetic field has the disadvantage of significantly reducing the computational time steps due to the high values of the Alfv\'en speed in the computational domain. Higher values of $B_{00}$ and $B_u$ would lower the eventual position of the $\beta=1$ contour, but would not change the overall picture of the wave propagation and conversion. Table \ref{tab:velocities} gives sound and Alfv\'{e}n speeds for the different layers in the equilibrium atmosphere.
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption[]{\label{tab:velocities}
{ Alfv\'{e}n and sound speeds in the different layers of the equilibrium atmosphere.}}
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\hline
& Photosphere & Chromosphere & Corona \\
\hline
c$_{s0}$ & 8 km/s & 10 km/s & 100 km/s \\
v$_{a0}$ & 2 km/s & 100 km/s & 1000 km/s \\
\hline
\end{tabular} \label{tab:velocities}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{campo_V}
\caption{Magnetic field strength distribution from below the photosphere ($-5$ Mm) to the corona (10 Mm). The vertical axis gives the height in Mm and the horizontal axis gives the horizontal size in Mm. Height z=0 represents the base of the photosphere. The red lines are the magnetic field lines and the yellow dashed lines are the $\beta$ =1 contours (one on the photosphere and the other one around the null point). } \label{fig:magfield}
\end{figure}
Our field configuration includes a null point in the corona. In this point the magnetic field strength is mathematically zero and the plasma $\beta$ goes to infinity. This null point changes drastically the behaviour of the waves as they propagate near it. As the magnetic field strength is zero, the Alfv\'{e}n speed is null, and therefore, only the acoustic waves can physically pass through it.
\subsection{Simulations setup}
We analyse three simulation runs, performed with the same model for the equilibrium atmosphere, but with a different driving of the waves. The cases include: (1) vertical driving, when the analytical solution for an acoustic wave with a period of 200 sec (fast mode) is applied at the lower boundary of the simulation domain; (2) horizontal driving, when the analytical solution for the slow magnetic wave with a period of 300 sec is applied at the lower boundary; (3) instantaneous pressure pulse below the photosphere. Table \ref{tab:setup} gives a summary for these runs, including the section and the figures where the results are presented. We choose the periodicities of 200 and 300 sec to study the behaviour of waves with frequencies below and above the cut-off frequency, typical for the solar conditions. The cut-off frequency layer for 300 sec period waves is located below the photosphere, those for 200 sec waves is at the temperature minimum.
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption[]{\label{tab:simulations}
{ Summary of the simulation runs}}
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
\hline
Section & Driving & Amplitude & Period & dx/dz/Duration & Figures \\
\hline
3.1 & vertical, harmonic & 10$^{-2}$\hbox{m$\;$s$^{-1}$}\ & 200 s & 75 km / 50 km / 3000 s & 3--6 \\
3.2 & horizontal, harmonic & 0.2 \hbox{m$\;$s$^{-1}$}\ & 300 s & 75 km / 50 km / 3000 s & 7--10 \\
3.3 & pressure pulse & 10$^{-5}$p$_{0}$ & $-$ & 75 km / 50 km / 3000 s & 11--13 \\
\hline
\end{tabular} \label{tab:setup}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Boundary conditions}
To avoid spurious reflections of waves at the upper boundaries of the domain, we add a Perfectly Matched Layers \citep[PML][]{Berenger1994} of 20 grid points, see \citet{Felipe+etal2010} for details. The PML is specially designed to absorb the perturbations that reach the borders of the domain, and was shown to successfully perform in the simulations of MHD waves \citep[see][]{Parchevsky+Kosovichev2008, Khomenko+etal2008, Felipe+etal2010, Hanasoge+etal2010}. In the simulations with a periodic driver, the lower boundary is replaced by the analytical solution for a given type of wave. In the simulations with an instantaneous pulse, the lower boundary contains the PML layer as well. In the horizontal direction, boundary conditions for periodic variations are used.
\section{Driving waves with linear perturbations}
This section presents the results of the different simulation runs. Despite the code can handle non-linearities, the amplitude of the perturbation is sufficiently small and the wave propagation is kept in the linear regime in all the cases, so no shocks are formed. This is done on purpose because our intention is to study the wave propagation, conversion, refraction and reflection in the linear regime. To better understand the results of the simulations, we briefly summarize the nomenclature, and some basics of the mode conversion theory.
\subsection{Wave transformation}
Dashed-dotted curves in Figure \ref{fig:magfield} show the $\beta =1$ contours in our equilibrium model, one in the photosphere and another one around the null point. The plasma $\beta$ gives us the information of whether the atmosphere is magnetically dominated or not. Strictly speaking, the plasma $\beta$ is defined as $\beta=P_{\rm gas}/ P_{\rm mag}$, but from the point of view of the wave propagation, it is more convenient to define it as a squared ratio of the characteristic speeds, i.e. $\beta=c_s^{2}/ v_a^2$. The difference between both definitions is a factor $\gamma/2$, which in our case is given by 5/6. This value is close to unity and, therefore, almost imperceptible in the figure or in wave effects. We will use the latter definition through the paper. In the layer with $\beta \approx 1$ (equipartition layer), transformation of different wave modes can occur. Since our simulations are 2D, the only possible wave modes are fast and slow magneto-acoustic-gravity modes, so we exclude the conversion to Alfv\'{e}n mode from our current analysis.
The propagation of the fast and slow magneto-acoustic-gravity modes is in general rather complex, except in cases with very simple magnetic topologies. Under a mathematical point of view, the analysis of the behaviour of waves comes in a natural way if done according to the fast or slow nature of their propagation speed, regardless of their acoustic or magnetic properties. However, for the interpretation of observations, it is in general more convenient to take into account the physical nature of the main restoring force. It is unfortunate that the terms wave {\it transmission} and {\it conversion} have different meanings in these two descriptions. Since this paper focusses on the interpretation of numerical simulations, we have preferred to follow the physical convention. This way, we will consider that a wave is transmitted when the nature of its main restoring force does not change when crossing a given layer, keeping its mainly acoustic/magnetic nature (independently of whether in the mathematical description it may change from fast to slow or viceversa). Similarly, we will use the term wave conversion when the nature of the main restoring force changes from acoustic/magnetic to magnetic/acoustic (keeping the fast or slow character or the wave).
Depending on the magnetic field inclination, the conversion and transmission are usually only partial \citep{Zhugzhda+Dzhalilov1982, Cally2005, Cally2006, Schunker+Cally2006, Khomenko+Collados2006, Khomenko+Cally2012}, hence part of the wave keeps its acoustic/magnetic nature and part of it changes. The transmission efficiency depends on the attack angle, i.e., the angle between the magnetic field lines and the wave vector in the layer of $\beta =1$ \citep{Cally2006}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:convers}
T = \exp \Big [- \frac{K \pi \sin^{2}\alpha}{\mid (d/ds) (c_{s}^{2}/v_{a}^{2}) \mid}\Big]_{c_{s}=v_{a}} \,,
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ is the attack angle and $s$ is the distance along the direction of $\vec{k}$ and $K=|\vec{k}|$. $c_{s}/v_{a}$ is the ratio of the speed of sound and the Alfv\'{e}n speed. The transmission is complete when the magnetic field and the direction of the wave propagation are aligned, $\alpha=0$.
In this case, the conversion coefficient, $1-T$, is zero. When $\alpha$ $\neq$ 0, then the transmission decreases with increasing k, that is, with increasing wave frequency.
\subsection{Vertical periodic driver of 200 seconds}
In this run we drive waves by applying a vertical periodic perturbation in velocity and thermodynamic variables at the bottom of the domain and let the perturbation propagate a total duration of 3000 seconds. This duration is long enough for the waves to fill the full domain and reach a stationary motion. The direction of propagation of the perturbation in this case is nearly parallel to the magnetic field lines, so acoustic like fast mode waves are mostly generated. We use an analytical solution for an acoustic-gravity wave in an isothermal atmosphere, see \citet{Mihalas+Mihalas1984}. The perturbations are given by:
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:initial}
\delta v_{z} & =& V_0 \exp\left( \frac{z}{2H}+k_{zi}z \right)\sin(\omega t - k_{zr} z) \\
\frac{\delta p}{p_0} & =& V_0|P| \exp\left( \frac{z}{2H}+k_{zi}z \right)\sin(\omega t - k_{zr} z + \phi_P) \\
\frac{\delta\rho}{\rho_0} & =& V_0 |R| \exp\left( \frac{z}{2H}+k_{zi}z \right)\sin(\omega t - k_{zr} z + \phi_R)
\end{eqnarray}
where $V_0=10^{-2}$ \hbox{m$\;$s$^{-1}$}\ is the amplitude of the velocity, see Table \ref{tab:setup}, and $H$ is the pressure scale height. Perturbations in the horizontal velocity and the magnetic field are null. k$_{zr}$ and k$_{zi}$ are the real and complex parts of the vertical wave number,respectively. Given the wave frequency $\omega$, this is found from the dispersion relation:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:kz}
k_{z} = k_{zr} + i k_{zi} = \frac{\sqrt{\omega^{2} - \omega_{c}^{2}}}{c_{s}}
\end{equation}
where $\omega_{c} = \gamma g / 2 c_{s} $ is the isothermal acoustic cut-off frequency.
The relative amplitudes and phase shifts between the perturbations are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
|P| &=& \frac{\gamma}{\omega}\sqrt{k_{zr}^2 + \left( k_{zi} + \frac{1}{2H}\frac{(\gamma - 2)}{\gamma} \right)^2}\\
|R| &=& \frac{1}{\omega}\sqrt{k_{zr}^2 + \left( k_{zi} - \frac{1}{2H} \right)^2}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\phi_P &=& \arctan\left( \frac{k_{zi}}{k_{zr}} + \frac{1}{2Hk_{zr}}\frac{(\gamma - 2)}{\gamma} \right)\\
\phi_R &=&\arctan\left( \frac{k_{zi}}{k_{zr}} - \frac{1}{2Hk_{zr}} \right)
\end{eqnarray}
The perturbation is imposed in the interval $z=\{-5,-4.65\}$ Mm, i.e. occupies 7 grid points.
As is frequently done in MHD wave studies, to distinguish between the modes in the simulations, we project the velocities into the directions parallel and perpendicular to the local magnetic field, defined as:
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:projections}
e_{\rm long}&=& \sin \theta e_x + \cos \theta e_z \\
e_{\rm trans}&=& -\cos \theta e_x + \sin \theta e_z
\end{eqnarray}
where $\theta$ is the inclination of the magnetic field. This way, in the $\beta \ll 1$ atmosphere, the acoustic slow mode is visible in the longitudinal velocity (propagation parallel to the magnetic field); and the fast magnetic mode is essentially transverse to the magnetic field. Note that the projections do not help to distinguish between the modes in the $\beta \gg 1$ region.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.9cm]{v1_vert}
\includegraphics[width=6.9cm]{v2_vert}
\includegraphics[width=6.9cm]{v3_vert}
\includegraphics[width=6.9cm]{v5_vert}
\includegraphics[width=6.9cm]{v6_vert}
\includegraphics[width=6.9cm]{v7_vert}
\includegraphics[width=7.0cm]{bars_vertical}
\caption{Longitudinal (left) and transverse (right) velocities multiplied by $\sqrt{\rho_{0}c_{s0}}$ and $\sqrt{\rho_{0}v_{A0}}$, respectively, for the simulation run with a vertical periodic driver. The black solid line is the location of the cut-off frequency for the 200 second period waves, the dashed black lines are the $\beta $=1 contours and the red line shows the transition region. The magnetic field lines are inclined black lines. Positive velocity (red color) is an upflow. Note that the horizontal variations in the longitudinal and transverse velocities in the bottom layers where the driver is imposed, despite the velocity perturbation is constant in the horizontal direction (see Eq. \ref{eq:initial}). These changes are caused by the projection of the velocity on the directions parallel and perpendicular to the magnetic field, which has a varying inclination. The movie of the wave propagation is available in the online version of the paper.} \label{fig:vlvt}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Wave propagation}
Figure \ref{fig:vlvt} shows the longitudinal (left panels) and transverse (right panels) velocity projections, scaled with the factors $\sqrt{\rho_{0}c_{s}}$ and $\sqrt{\rho_{0}v_{a}}$, respectively. Such scaling gives an approximation for the energies contained in the different wave components. Some important layers are also indicated in each panel of this figure: $\beta$=1 contours (dashed black lines), the transition region (red line) and the location of the cut-off layer with a period of 200 seconds (black solid line), the same period as that of the driver.
The magneto-acoustic fast and slow waves start propagating upwards through the layers below the photosphere, where plasma $\beta \gg 1$ (see the rows $t=210$ s and $t=360$ s). As the driver is parallel to the magnetic field at the foot points, the amplitude of the longitudinal velocity is larger than the transverse one.
As the waves reach the equipartition layer at $t=450$ s, fast acoustic-like waves are partially converted into fast magnetic-like waves and partially transmitted into longitudinal slow acoustic waves. These can be seen comparing the second (360 s) and third (450 s) rows of Fig. \ref{fig:vlvt}: in the second row the transverse component crosses the equipartition layer with a very small amplitude, but once the longitudinal component reaches the layer where $\beta = 1$ at 450 s, the amplitude of the transverse component grows considerably while the amplitude of the longitudinal waves decreases.
These waves continue propagating upwards until they reach the transition region (before 600 s). At this point, part of the wave energy is reflected and part is transmitted into the corona. The transverse velocity component suffers significant reflection from the transition region (right panels from 750 s to the end). The energy of the transverse component is mostly concentrated between the equipartition layer and the transition region.
Some of the energy of the longitudinal waves is transmitted to the corona through the transition region. The behaviour of these waves, once they pass the transition region, depends on whether they propagate near the null point or far from it (see left panels of Fig. \ref{fig:vlvt} from t=750 s to the end). The waves propagating near the lateral borders of the domain, inside the almost vertical flux tubes, are longitudinal and continue propagating upwards along the field lines up to the upper corona. Waves propagating outside the vertical flux tubes reach the null point and this changes drastically their behaviour. These waves suffer partial conversion, from magnetic to acoustic and vice versa, and transmission, from fast to slow and vice versa, at the equipartition layer around the null point. The Alfv\'en speed is zero at the null, and therefore, only acoustic fast waves (inside the circle marked by the coronal $\beta=1$ contour) are able to cross it. The movie of the simulations available in the online version of the paper) makes apparent how the null point ``absorbs'' the waves and then ``ejects'' them away in all directions. This effect is mainly caused by the refraction of the fast magnetic waves due to the large gradient of the Alfv\'{e}n speed. Part of these fast waves propagate downward again through the transition region and equipartition layer to the lower atmosphere. The null point acts as a re-feeding of the atmosphere.
Few minutes after the waves reach the upper boundary, the simulation enters into the stationary stage. This property will be used for the calculation of the mean wave energy fluxes, done in the section below.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{vcorte2_vert}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{vcorte50_vert}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{vcorte100_vert}
\caption{Time-height diagram of $\sqrt{\rho_0 c_{s}}v_{\rm long}$ (left) and $\sqrt{\rho_0 v_{a}}v_{\rm trans}$ (right) for three selected horizontal positions in the vertical periodic driver simulations. Upper row: $x=150$ km, where the magnetic field is nearly vertical. Middle row: $x= 3750$ km, close to the center of the left arcade with nearly horizontal magnetic field. Bottom row: $x=7500$ km close to the null point location. The color scale is the same as in Figure \ref{fig:vlvt}. We notice how the simulation reaches a stationary stage after about 1000 s. } \label{fig:periodic200td}
\end{figure}
Time-height diagrams allow to appreciate more clearly the behaviour of waves described above, see Figure \ref{fig:periodic200td}.
There we plot the quantities $\sqrt{\rho_0 c_{s}}v_{\rm long}$ (left) and $\sqrt{\rho_0 v_{a}}v_{\rm trans}$ (right) at three different horizontal locations in the domain. The cuts are located at $x=150$ km inside the flux tube, where the magnetic field is nearly vertical, at $x= 3750$ km in the center of the left arcade and where the magnetic field is nearly horizontal, and at $x=7500$ km, in the middle of the domain where the null point is located. The inclination of ridges on this diagram reflects the wave propagation speed (more vertical means faster). Fig. \ref{fig:periodic200td} shows how the picture of wave interference changes at different magnetic field inclinations.
The left panels demonstrate that waves propagating parallel to the nearly vertical magnetic field at $x=150$ km and at $x=7500$ km travel almost undisturbed up to the transition region, where reflection is produced and an interference pattern is formed between the upward and downward propagating waves. As the attack angle is small at the $\beta = 1$ contour at these locations, the transmission from fast acoustic to slow longitudinal acoustic waves is almost total. Once the waves at $x=150$ km reach the transition region at about 600 s of the simulation time, they continue propagating with significant amplitude upwards (top left panel of Fig. \ref{fig:periodic200td}). Unlike that, waves propagating at $x=7500$ km are affected by the null point. One may appreciate at the bottom left panel, how the waves propagating downward, due to the refraction suffered near the null point, meet the waves going upwards and their amplitudes cancel out.
The behaviour of waves propagating at $x=3750$ km (middle panels of Fig. \ref{fig:periodic200td}), where the magnetic field is nearly horizontal below the transition region, is different from above. One can observe several small-scale wave components, with their energy located essentially between the $\beta=1$ contour and the transition region (middle left panel). These small-scale waves are a result of the mode conversion into slow modes propagating along the inclined field (their propagation speed is apparently small because of the longer distance they have to cross in the inclined fields). Fast magnetic modes have much larger propagation speeds and can be seen at the middle right panel as nearly vertical lines with a maximum power concentrated again in the chromosphere below the transition region. The reflection of longitudinal slow waves from the null point is also apparent at the middle left panel from the opposite inclination of the ridges above the transition region and below the null point.
\subsubsection{Energy fluxes}
We calculate the mean acoustic and magnetic energy fluxes as follows (Bray \& Loughhead, 1974):
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:fluxes}
{\vec{F}_{\rm ac}} & = &\langle \delta p\,{\delta\vec{v}} \rangle \,,\\
{\vec{F}_{\rm mag}} & = & \langle \delta\vec{B} \times ( \delta\vec{v} \times \vec{B}_0 ) \rangle /\mu_0\,.
\end{eqnarray}
In order to obtain the meaningful averages of the flux one needs to include at least several periods of the stationary regime of the simulations. For the simulations presented above, we considered that the stationary regime is maintained from 1000 to 3000 s of the simulation time.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9.0cm]{fluxes_vert}
\caption{Mean energy fluxes for the simulation with the vertical periodic driver. Top: horizontal and vertical mean acoustic energy fluxes. Bottom: horizontal and vertical magnetic mean energy fluxes. The lower black line is the acoustic cut-off frequency layer for 200 second period, the dashed lines are the $\beta =1$ contour, the red line is the transition region. The magnetic field lines are inclined black lines. The units of the bar are 10$^6$ [erg/s/cm$^2$].} \label{fig:periodic200flux}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:periodic200flux} shows the spatial distribution in the domain of the magnetic and acoustic, vertical and horizontal mean energy fluxes. It can be seen that almost all the magnetic energy (lower panels) is concentrated between the photosphere ($z=0$ km) and transition region ($z= 2100$ km), while the upward acoustic energy flux is significant in the corona inside the vertical flux tubes. The only significant upward energy flux in the corona is due to upward propagating longitudinal slow acoustic waves. No wave energy flux is present around the null point. This is happening because waves propagate in all directions around the null point and cancel out when waves with opposite directions meet.
In Figure \ref{fig:periodic200fz} three different cuts of the mean vertical energy fluxes are shown in more detail. As before, we made cuts at three horizontal locations: inside the flux tubes at $x=150$ km; at the middle of the arcades where the magnetic field is horizontal at $x=3750$ km and at $x=7500$ km where the null point is located. The bottom panel of Fig. \ref{fig:periodic200fz} clearly shows that all the magnetic energy is concentrated between the photosphere ($z=0$ km) and the transition region, as a consequence of the mode conversion in the inclined magnetic field of the arcades (green line). The sign of the energy flux is negative meaning that waves essentially propagate down, which is explained by the influence of the null point. The magnetic energy flux in our experiment is unable to cross the transition region.
The upper panel of Fig. \ref{fig:periodic200fz} shows that the acoustic energy in the photosphere propagates upwards in the nearly vertical magnetic concentrations (blue and red lines), and downwards at the locations of the arcade. This acoustic energy flux is significantly larger in the photosphere and in the coronal part, compared to the magnetic flux (the latter is almost zero in these regions). The largest upward acoustic energy flux reach the corona in the nearly vertical flux tubes at the sides of the domain and makes less than 10--20\% of the original energy flux of acoustic waves below the photosphere.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{facz_corte_v}
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{fmagz_corte_v}
\caption{Vertical cut of the vertical component of the acoustic (top) and magnetic (bottom) mean fluxes for three different horizontal positions, as indicated in each panel. The vertical black lines are the locations of the cut-off frequency for 200 seconds period waves, $\beta=1$ contours (dashed), transition region and the null point (from left to right). } \label{fig:periodic200fz}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Horizontal periodic driver of 300 seconds}
In this run, a horizontal periodic motion with a period of 300 seconds is applied at the lower boundary of the simulation domain at heights $z=\{-5, -4.65\}$ Mm, same as for the vertical driver.
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:hor_driver}
\delta v_x &=& V _0 \sin (\omega t) \\
\frac{\delta B_x}{B_0} &=& \frac{k_z}{\omega} V_0 \sin (\omega t)
\end{eqnarray}
where the horizontal wavelength is infinite, so $k_x=0$, and \begin{math} k_{z}=\omega /v_{a} \end{math}.The perturbation in the rest of the variables is null. The value of the magnetic field strength $B_0 = \sqrt{B_{0x}^2 + B_{0z}^2}$ is taken at the boundary. The horizontal velocity amplitude is chosen to be of $V_0= 0.2$ \hbox{m$\;$s$^{-1}$}, see Tab. \ref{tab:setup}. Such driving generates essentially no acoustic waves in vertical magnetic fields where the motion of the driver is completely transverse. This can be seen in some points of the edges of the domain and in the middle, between the two arcades. However there appear acoustic-like waves in almost the rest of the domain, where the magnetic field is more inclined \citep[see][]{Hasan+etal2005, Hasan+Ballegooijen2008}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{v1_horiz}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{v2_horiz}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{v3_horiz}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{v4_horiz}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{v6_horiz}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{v7_horiz}
\includegraphics[width=7.0cm]{bars_horizontal}
\caption{Same as Fig. \ref{fig:vlvt} but for the simulation run with a horizontal periodic driving of 300 s. The black solid line is the layer where the cut-off period is 300 s. The movie is vailable online.} \label{fig:vlvt_horiz}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Wave propagation}
Figure \ref{fig:vlvt_horiz} shows the propagation of waves generated by the horizontal periodic driver. The driver excites magnetic slow waves seen as a small wavelength pattern at the bottom of the domain at all times. The pattern due to these waves disappears after some height around $-3$ Mm since these small-wavelength perturbations are affected by the numerical diffusion effects and are not fully resolved. At the locations with inclined field, fast acoustic waves are also excited. These can be appreciated as a large-scale disturbance propagating from the bottom boundary upwards at the two upper panes and at later times as well. These fast waves reach the equipartition layer at $t=300$ s, and they get partially converted and transmitted. The perturbation seen in longitudinal velocity (left panels) remains almost completely below the equipartition layer at all posterior time moments. The only exception are the vertical flux tubes at the domain sides where again, similar to the case of the vertical driving, some perturbation propagates upwards through the transition region to the corona.
Perturbations seen in the transverse velocity (right panels) above the equipartition layer and below the transition region at later times ($t>450$ s) correspond to fast magnetic waves. Neither these fast magnetic waves, nor slow acoustic waves (small-scale perturbations between the layer where $\beta=1$ and the transition region at the left panels), pass through the transition region with large amplitudes, and their energy remains essentially below it. The amplitudes of waves reaching the corona are smaller than in the case of the vertical driver.
Unlike the longitudinal slow waves in vertical flux tubes, fast magnetic transverse waves reach the corona in the whole domain. When passing through the null point, they are partially converted into acoustic-like waves in the equipartition layer around it. The simulation reaches a stationary state after about $t=1200$ seconds of the simulation.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{vcorte2_horiz}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{vcorte50_horiz}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{vcorte100_horiz}
\caption{Same as Fig. \ref{fig:periodic200td} but for the simulation run with a horizontal periodic driving of 300 s.} \label{fig:periodic300td}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:periodic300td} shows the time-height diagrams of $\sqrt{\rho_0 c_{s}}v_{\rm long}$ (left) and $\sqrt{\rho_0 v_{a}}v_{\rm trans}$ (right) at three different horizontal positions of the domain. The top and bottom rows of this figure (horizontal positions $x=150$ km and $x=7500$ km) show waves propagating in the nearly vertical magnetic field. One can appreciate how the behaviour of these waves changes at the equipartition layer (dashed-dotted line) and at the transition region. The influence of the cut-off layer is not so clear in these diagrams. The transverse velocity propagation at these two positions of the domain is very similar. The mode conversion results in an increase of the transverse wave component as the waves cross the equipartition layer in the downward direction.
The ridges on the diagram show the opposite inclination indicating downward propagation produced by the reflection at the transition region.
In the corona, the ridges are vertical, indicating that waves propagate with Alfv\'en speed, so their nature is magnetic. As these fast waves cross the null point, they are converted at the equipartition layer around it (bottom right panel of Fig. \ref{fig:periodic300td}). The propagation speed of the waves is altered, which results in a shift of the position of the ridges at heights around the null point.
The longitudinal velocity behaviour at $x=150$ km and at $x=7500$ km is quite similar, except of the amplitude of the waves. Some weak longitudinal slow waves appear above the transition region at $x=150$ km, generated by horizontally propagating perturbations in the corona.
The middle panel of Fig. \ref{fig:periodic300td} shows the wave propagation at the location of the inclined field of the arcade. There, the transverse waves propagate undisturbed up to the transition region where they are reflected. Conversion from fast acoustic into fast magnetic waves occur at the equipartition level as can be seen from the smooth transition in the inclination of the ridges at that location.
Some weak acoustic slow waves are also generated there (middle left panel). These waves propagate up to the transition region and are reflected there and form an interference pattern around 2 Mm height.
\subsubsection{Energy fluxes}
Same as for the simulations with a vertical driver we calculated the mean acoustic and magnetic fluxes, see Eqs. \ref{eq:fluxes}, averaging over the stationary state of the simulations, from $t= 1200$ s to $t= 3000$ s (6 periods of 300 s waves).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9.0cm]{fluxes_hotiz}
\caption{Same as Fig. \ref{fig:periodic200flux} but for the simulation run with a horizontal periodic driving of 300 s. The units of the bar are [erg/s/cm$^2$].} \label{fig:periodic300flux}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{facz_corte_h}
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{fmagz_corte_h}
\caption{Same as Fig. \ref{fig:periodic200fz} but for the simulation run with a horizontal periodic driving of 300 s.} \label{fig:periodic300fz}
\end{figure}
In the case of the horizontal driver the energy fluxes are very small, see Figure \ref{fig:periodic300flux}. This figure shows the spatial distribution of the mean energy fluxes. The upward acoustic energy flux is essentially concentrated below the arcades at heights below the transition region (upper right panel) and does not reach the corona. Curiously, the average upward acoustic flux is negative inside the vertical tubes on the sides, opposite to the case of the vertical driving. This might be related to the fact that in the simulations with the horizontal driver these waves are excited by horizontally propagating disturbances in the corona after the waves are refracted downward around the null point. The vertical magnetic energy flux (bottom right panel) is mostly positive and is much higher above the photosphere than below.
Figure \ref{fig:periodic300fz} shows the vertical magnetic and acoustic fluxes at three different horizontal locations. This figure reveals that the largest acoustic energy flux in this simulation run is concentrated below the arcades (green line at the upper panel). The magnetic flux is very small except at heights around the equipartition region. The values of the flux are much lower than in the vertical driving case, despite the its larger driving amplitude.
\subsection{Instantaneous pressure pulse}
In this run we exerted a localized instantaneous force at the base of the arcade, in the middle of the domain, that consists of a pressure pulse of a gaussian shape, as follows:
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:pulse_p}
\frac{\delta p_{1}}{p_0} = A \gamma \exp \Big [-\Big( \frac{(x-x_{0})^{2}}{2\sigma_{x}^{2}} + \frac{(z-z_{0})^{2}}{2\sigma_{z}^{2}} \Big) \Big] \\
\frac{\delta \rho_{1}}{\rho_0} = A \exp \Big [-\Big( \frac{(x-x_{0})^{2}}{2\sigma_{x}^{2}} + \frac{(z-z_{0})^{2}}{2\sigma_{z}^{2}} \Big) \Big]
\end{eqnarray}
where A=10$^{-5}$ is the relative amplitude given to the pulse, $[x_0,z_0]=[7500,-3500 ]$ km are the coordinates at which the pulse is located and, $\sigma_{x}=1500$ km and $\sigma_{z}=1000$ km are the widths of the two-dimensional Gaussian profile, see Tab. \ref{tab:setup}. Such a pulse generates a superposition of waves in a broad range of frequencies.
Unlike the simulations with the vertical and horizontal driving, we locate a PML boundary condition at both, top and bottom, boundaries of our simulation domain.
\begin{figure} \label{fig:vlvt_pulse}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{v1_pulse}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{v3_pulse}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{v4_pulse}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{v6_pulse}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{v7_pulse}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{v8_pulse}
\includegraphics[width=7.0cm]{bars_pulse}
\caption{Same as Fig. \ref{fig:vlvt} but for the simulations with an instantaneous pressure pulse. The movie of the wave propagation is available in the online version of the paper. } \label{fig:vlvt_pulse}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Wave propagation}
The time evolution of the scaled longitudinal and transverse velocity components of the pulse simulation are given in Figure \ref{fig:vlvt_pulse}. The pulse starts expanding in all the directions (two upper panels). Like in the other runs, the waves get partially converted and transmitted when reaching the equipartition layer around $t=300$ s. The acoustic fast component of the pulse is partially converted and transmitted into magnetic fast and acoustic slow waves, respectively.
The acoustic slow waves continue propagating upward and reach the transition region before $t=450$ s. Part of these waves is transmitted into the corona and they reach the null point, where they become trapped and are sent again in all directions, except those waves inside the vertical flux tubes that continue propagating to upper layers along the field lines (left panels of Fig. \ref{fig:vlvt_pulse}).
Acoustic waves reflected from the transition region reach equipartition layer again on their downward propagation, and they suffer another partial transmission. Fast acoustic waves produced after this secondary transmission propagate down back to the lower boundary of the domain, where they get refracted due to the gradients of the acoustic speed and are finally reflected up around $-4$ Mm at the lower turning point. Therefore, these waves start propagating upwards again (see left and right panels of Fig. \ref{fig:vlvt_pulse} at $t=750$ s at the lower part of the domain) suffering the same phenomena as before. Thus, despite our driver is not periodic, the atmosphere keeps oscillating reaching a nearly stationary regime without a significant decrease of the wave power during all 3000 s of the simulation time (only waves reaching the upper and lower PML boundaries are removed from the system). The null point together with the transition region and the lower turning point below the photosphere act as a re-feeding of the atmosphere, and the waves are trapped between these layers.
The variations of the transverse velocity (right panels of Fig. \ref{fig:vlvt_pulse}) reveal that fast magnetic waves are produced after the mode conversion around 300 s, and then reach the transition region and are partially transmitted to the corona before $t=450$ s. These fast magnetic waves get refracted and reflected due to the gradients of the Alfv\'en speed, and cross again the equipartition layer on their way back. On their way back, the fast magnetic waves are partially transmitted into slow magnetic waves with small wavelengths, that propagate downwards and their energy gets lost due to the numerical diffusion. At the moments posterior to $t=750$ s, no perturbations in the transverse velocity can be appreciated.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{vcorte2_p}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{vcorte50_p}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{vcorte100_p}
\caption{Same as Fig. \ref{fig:periodic200td} but for the simulations with an instantaneous pressure pulse.} \label{fig:pulse_td}
\end{figure}
Same as for the other cases, Figure \ref{fig:pulse_td} shows the time-height diagrams of the scaled longitudinal and transverse velocities at three representative horizontal locations of the domain. It is clearly seen from this figure that, indeed, the atmosphere keeps oscillating during all the simulation time, but the stationary regime is not reached since the variations in time are not strictly periodic, as was for the case of harmonic driving. There are few strong initial wavefronts that can be appreciated in the corona for $t<1000$ s. Then, the amplitude of the coronal oscillations becomes gradually smaller. The dominant waves propagating in the corona are acoustic-like slow waves, and those with largest amplitudes are observed inside the vertical flux tubes (upper left panel for $x=150$ km), consistent with the simulations of periodic driving. No appreciable fast magnetic waves are present after about $t=1000$ of the simulation time, due to the reasons explained above. Fast acoustic waves propagating upwards from the lower turning point can also be appreciated at the left panels of Fig. \ref{fig:pulse_td} at the bottom part of the domain.
Since the pulse simulation does not reach the stationary regime, we are not able to calculate and analyze the average wave fluxes, as was done for the periodic driver simulations.
\subsubsection{Frequency distribution}
The pressure pulse generates waves in a wide frequency range. The length of the simulation time series allowed us to perform the Fourier analysis of the simulations in order to determine the dominant period of the oscillations. For that, we Fourier-transformed the vertical velocity oscillations at each $(x,z)$ location of the simulation domain and calculated the frequency corresponding to the maximum power in the spectrum. These frequencies are shown in Figure \ref{fig:periods}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{freqs_z}
\caption{Spatial distribution of the dominant frequencies of the vertically propagating waves for simulations with pressure pulse. Dashed-dotted black line marks $\beta=1$ contours, white solid line marks the transition region.} \label{fig:periods}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:periods} reveals that the dominant frequencies of oscillations below the photosphere lie in the 3--4 mHz range, almost independently of the magnetic structure. In particular, 3--4 mHz oscillations are the dominant ones at the photosphere, $z=0$ km. The distribution of the dominant frequencies in the chromosphere is highly dependent on the magnetic structure. Oscillations reaching the chromosphere and corona are mostly in the 5--7 mHz frequency regime, or higher. One observes that some 3--4 mHz power reaches the chromosphere at the locations of the inclined arcades. Lower frequency oscillations also reach the corona along the external part of the flux tubes where the magnetic field is more inclined. At the internal part of the flux tubes, oscillations of 6 mHz dominate. Curiously, the highest frequencies up to 10 mHz are observed above the transition region at the top parts of the inclined arcades and around the null point.
\section{Discussion and conclusions}
In this work, we have presented 2D numerical simulations for the study of the behaviour of MHD waves as they propagate from layers below the photosphere to the corona (up to 10 Mm). Our magnetic configuration (vertical flux tubes separated by an arcade-shaped structure) can be considered as representative of a quiet sun region, in terms of the weak field strength and the varying orientation. In addition, a null point exists where the magnetic field vanishes.
\\
\\
After studying the wave behaviour at each atmospheric layer and different magnetic field inclinations, we conclude that, in a two-dimensional atmosphere, waves pass through the TR more preferably along vertical field lines. As the corona is a low-$\beta$ plasma we have mainly acoustic energy propagating into it. Part of the magnetic energy stays concentrated in the lower corona just above the arcades. The lack of magnetic energy found higher up in the corona can be explained by the large refraction that the fast magnetic waves suffer in the TR, due to the strong gradient in the Alfv\'en velocity generated by the strong density jump.
Similar results were found by \citet{Rosenthal+etal2002}, whose work is one of the first studies of wave propagation by means of MHD simulations. These authors find that the fast magnetic waves are refracted downwards by inclined magnetic fields while those waves propagating along the field lines in almost vertical magnetic fields continue propagating upwards unaffected by the field. In a three-dimensional atmosphere, Alfv\'en waves may start to dominate the magnetic energy transport into the corona \citep[see e.g.][]{vanBallegooijen+etal2011,Khomenko+Cally2012} and the magnetic energy may become of greater importance. Non-linear effects may also influence the amount of energy transported by the waves into the corona.
\\
\\
We have also obtained that a large amount of energy propagates back downwards and upwards again in the atmosphere. On the one hand, there is the strong refraction of magnetic waves near the TR mentioned above. On the other hand, the strong gradient of the Alfv\'en velocity in the vicinity of the null point also gives rise to a strong refraction of the waves around it, capable of sending waves downwards when propagating near it. These phenomena, together with the conversion of these waves into downward acoustic waves at the $\beta=1$ layer and the turning point of these acoustic waves below the photosphere caused by the temperature gradient, lead to a continuously oscillating atmosphere, even if an instantaneous force is exerted. It is interesting to note that no periodical drivers are needed for this continuous oscillation. It must also be remarked that only the energy propagating inside the vertical flux tubes escape from the domain. This phenomenon was also suggested by \citet{Rosenthal+etal2002}, who stated that at some moment the downward propagating waves, due to the refraction in the TR, must eventually be reflected upward again, resulting in a resonant cavity.
\\
\\
A frequency-dependent behaviour has also been obtained (see figure \ref{fig:periods}). Five-minute oscillations are channeled into the chromosphere and corona at the edges of the flux tubes where the magnetic field is more inclined, while three-minute oscillations penetrate into the higher layers in the more vertical magnetic fields. High-frequency waves can pass through the TR into the corona outside the vertical flux tubes and through the arcade. High-frequency transverse magnetic fast waves are the dominant ones in that region, even though their contribution to the magnetic energy is very small. This last result is similar to that of \citet{Fedun+etal2011b}, who also find an efficient transmission of high frequency waves into the corona inside a flux tube. Thus, it seems that waves with varying frequency may reach the corona under different conditions and magnetic field configurations.
\begin{acknowledgements}
This work is partially supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science through projects AYA2010-18029 and AYA2011-24808.
This work contributes to the deliverables identified in FP7 European Research Council grant agreement 277829, ``Magnetic connectivity through the Solar Partially Ionized Atmosphere''.
\end{acknowledgements}
\input{ms.bbl}
\end{document}
|
\section*{Introduction}
A generic system, that is in thermal equilibrium at a temperature $T$, will be found in the neighbourhood of a configuration of energy $E$ with a probability density given by the the Boltzmann factor $\exp[-E/k_B T]$ \cite{StatLect,StatMechBooks}.
As an example, two Brownian colloidal particles, interacting through a conservative attractive force, will show an increased probability density for the low energy bound state. A quite different behaviour is observed in active particle systems~\cite{ReviewsActive}.
Generally speaking, active matter is composed by biological or synthetic objects that are capable of absorbing energy from the environment and convert it into different kinds of persistent motions. Even when stationary states are reached, the probability distributions can display large deviations from their equilibrium Boltzmann counterparts. Those deviations are not just a matter of quantity, but a radically different qualitative behaviour may be observed, like the widespread tendency to accumulate around repulsive objects. This ``attraction for repulsion'' is responsible for phenomena like, particle accumulation at solid walls~\cite{Walls2} or the formation of bound states between repulsive objects~\cite{ActiveDepletion,Ivo}. Our intuitive notion that particles like to stay where external forces attract them to is biased by our familiarity with equilibrium statistical mechanics and needs to be replaced by novel statistical mechanics concepts that are capable to describe the stationary probability distributions in systems of interacting active particles.
In this context some schematic models have been proposed to model the dynamics of active particles as, for example, the ``run and tumble" (RnT) model. The RnT dynamics is appropriate to describe the motion of bacteria such as \textit{E. coli}~\cite{Berg,Schnitzer,CatesEPL,CatesPRL} that swim along almost straight runs interrupted by random reorientations. In the case of colloids propelled by chemical reactions the ``active Brownian" model describes the motion of particles pushed by a force of constant magnitude that gradually reorient by rotational Brownian motion~\cite{Janus1,Janus2,Janus3,Bocquet}.
However, despite the simplicity of the dynamics of these systems, it is hardly possible to find the {analogue} of the Boltzmann distribution. Indeed, the Boltzmann {prescription} assigns a precise {weight} to a given configuration of positions and momenta of particles at equilibrium. These particles are {embedded} in a space of dimensionality $d$, {are subject} to arbitrary external fields and mutually interact via whatsoever potential~\cite{StatLect,StatMechBooks}.
{On the contrary, in the case of active particles the exact stationary probability distribution is known only in rare instances} as, for example, in the 1-dimensional RnT model in an external force field~\cite{CatesEPL}. The impossibility of writing explicitly the stationary probability density prevents one from applying the standard methods of statistical mechanics.
A Gaussian colored-noise model (GCN) can be used to reproduce the dynamics of passive colloidal particles immersed in a bath of dense swimming bacteria~\cite{StructSim,Capillars}. This model has been intensively studied in the past as the simplest model that could elucidate the basic physics of systems subject to time-correlated noise. Interestingly GCN was originally used to interpret the behaviour of very different physical systems such as noisy electronic circuits~\cite{Circuits} and dye-laser radiation~\cite{Dye}. The analytical study of GCN-driven systems resulted very challenging and led to the development of different approximation schemes aimed to reduce the complexity of the GCN-model to a tractable level~\cite{HanggiRev,HanggiUcna}. Among these approaches one emerges by having a number of advantages with respect to the others. This is the \emph{Unified Colored Noise Approximation} (UCNA) developed by H\"{a}nggi and Jung~\cite{HanggiUcna} that, under certain conditions, describes both the small and the large correlation-time regimes, both in the high and low-friction limit~\cite{Inertia}. More importantly for the present work the UCNA scheme can be generalized to a phase space of {arbitrary} dimensionality~\cite{UcnaD}.
In this work we report, for the first time, the explicit formula of the stationary probability
(obtained within the UCNA) for a system that is subject to a generic conservative potential and that is composed by an arbitrary number of degrees of freedom. We name this ``multidimensional unified colored noise approximated stationary probability" {(MUCNASP)}. The MUCNASP plays basically the same role {as} the Boltzmann distribution for the approximated GCN-driven system. We show how the MUCNASP allows to predict several non-equilibrium properties of the active system in experimentally relevant cases where a simple external potential acts on a small number of degrees of freedom.
We focus on the case of steep repulsive interactions and spherically symmetric external potentials. In all these situations we use numerical simulation to test the quality of the approximation {and find that the GCN-driven
and the RnT particles display a strikingly similar behavior}.
In particular we show how our approximated probability density captures very well the accumulation of the active particles around repulsive obstacles.
Moreover the theory describes well the dependence on dimensionality of the probability density function when the active particles are confined by a circular repulsive wall.
Understanding how the concept of pressure generalizes to active matter has become recently the subject of intense theoretical research~\cite{Brady,CatesPressure,CatesPressure2}.
In this context we show how our theoretical probability density allows us to derive the pressure that the active particles exert on the repulsive walls and leads to the derivation of equations of state for the non-interacting active particle system.
Finally we discuss the most relevant limitations of the present theory and suggest new routes to follow in the theoretical study of active matter.
\section*{Results}
We consider the {following} set of stochastic differential equations:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sys2}
\dot{\textbf{x}}
= -\nabla
\Phi+
\bm{\eta}
\end{equation}
\noindent where the {position} variables $\mathbf{x}=(x_1,...,x_N)$
are determined by the deterministic velocity $-\nabla \Phi$ generated by a
conservative potential $\Phi(\mathbf{x})$ and by a set of stochastic processes
$\bm{\eta}=(\eta_1,...,\eta_N)$. We assume that these are $N$ independent
Gaussian processes with zero mean $\langle \eta_j \rangle=0$ and exponential time-correlation:
$\langle \eta_i(t) \eta_j(s) \rangle = \delta_{ij} \frac{D}{\tau} e^{-|t-s|/\tau}$.
Here $D$ is the diffusion coefficient characterizing the amplitude of the noise and
$\tau$ is its relaxation time. Note that here we absorb the mobility $\mu$ in
the velocity field $-\nabla \Phi=\mu \mathbf{f}$, where $\mathbf{f}=-\nabla U $
is the deterministic force generated by the potential energy function $U(\mathbf{x})= \Phi(\mathbf{x})/\mu $.
By using the UCNA Eq.~(\ref{eq:sys2})
reduces to the (Stratonovich) Langevin equation~\cite{UcnaD}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ucnad}
[\mathbb{I}+\tau \mathbb{H}(\mathbf{x})] \, \dot{\mathbf{x}} =
-\nabla \Phi(\mathbf{x})+D^{1/2}\bm{\Gamma}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\mathbb{I}=\delta_{ij}$ is the identity matrix, $\mathbb{H}(\mathbf{x})~=~\partial_{x_i}\partial_{x_j} \Phi(\mathbf{x})$ is the Hessian associated with the potential $\Phi$, and $\bm{\Gamma}$ is a set of independent
white-noise sources having $\langle \Gamma_j \rangle=0$ and $\langle \Gamma_i(t) \Gamma_j(s) \rangle = 2 \delta_{ij} \delta(t-s)$.
We have found that, in the flow-free case, the {steady state} probability of finding the dynamical system of Eq.~(\ref{eq:ucnad}) in a specific configuration $\mathbf{x}$ is always proportional to the weight:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ucnas}
\Omega(\mathbf{x}) = \exp \left[ -\frac{\Phi(\mathbf{x})}{D} -\frac{\tau}{2 D}|\nabla \Phi(\mathbf{x})|^2 \right]
|| \mathbb{I} + \tau \mathbb{\mathbb{H}} (\mathbf{x}) ||
\end{equation}
\noindent where $|...|$ represents the norm of a vector
and $||...||$ indicates the absolute value of the determinant of a matrix.
We have demonstrated the validity of Eq.~(\ref{eq:ucnas}) by deriving the
corresponding Fokker-Planck equation from Eq.~(\ref{eq:ucnad})~\cite{Risken} and solving
it in the zero-current case by using the Jacobi's formula~\cite{Jacobi} (see Supplemental Material).
\subsection*{One single degree of freedom}
As Eq.~(\ref{eq:ucnas}) is used for specific choices of the potential it reveals several interesting non-equilibrium properties of the active system under study. {We initially focus on a simple one-dimensional case and study GCN-driven
particles} when they are subject to a steep repulsive potential of the form
$\Phi(x)=A x^{-12}$ setting $A=1$.
Such a potential can be thought as a repulsive obstacle that perturbs the dynamics of the particles~\cite{NumericalBacteria}.
To verify the quality of the UCNA,
we integrate numerically the stochastic equation of motion (\ref{eq:sys2}) in the presence of such a potential.
To this aim we have implemented a code for Euler integration of Eq.~(\ref{eq:sys2}), to be executed on GPU {where} the dynamics of many independent particles can be simulated in parallel~\cite{GPU}.
We consider several different values of $0.1\leq \tau \leq 1 \, \mathrm{s}$ and $0.1\leq D \leq 100 \, \mathrm{\mu m^2 /s}$, {ranges that} cover the typical persistence times and diffusivities of colloids in bacterial baths, swimming bacteria such as \textit{E. coli}~\cite{DDMpoon,Centrifugation} and of chemically self-propelled Janus-type particles~\cite{Janus3}. The size of the simulation box is chosen to be $L=20~\mu$m (with periodic boundaries located at $\pm L/2$).
Fig.~\ref{fig:f1}(a) shows that in equilibrium ($\tau=0$) the probability density decreases rapidly before the core of the repulsive potential is reached, whereas in the GCN the distribution peaks substantially in a region where the potential is very high before vanishing at the core. Note that the specific choice of the constant $A=1$ defines the size of the repulsive ``wall'' created by the external potential. The thickness of this impenetrable region is about $2 \, \mathrm{\mu m}$ and it depends very little on the values of $D$ and $\tau$ considered since the potential is steeply repulsive.
In the GCN-driven system the exact probability distribution is unknown but it can
be approximated by Eq.~(\ref{eq:ucnas}) that reduces, for a single
degree of freedom, to the known form~\cite{HanggiRev}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:u1d}
\Omega(x) =
\exp \left[-\frac{\Phi(x)}{D}-\frac{\tau }{2 D}| \Phi '(x)|^2 \right] |1+\tau \Phi ''(x)|
\end{equation}
\noindent where the prime indicates differentiation with respect to $x$.
{The approximate probability, obtained by normalizing Eq.~(\ref{eq:u1d})
$P(x)=\Omega(x) / \int dx \Omega(x)$, is plotted} in Fig.~\ref{fig:f1}(a)
as a dashed line and it is found to {reproduce} well the numerical distribution at two well
separated values of $D$ and $\tau$.
{Knowing the probability we can also compute all the average quantities of interest, such as
the average value of the modulus of the velocity
$\langle |\Phi '| \rangle = \int dx P(x) |\Phi'(x)|$. The theoretical (approximated)
$\langle |\Phi '| \rangle$ is compared with the numerical value in Fig.~\ref{fig:f1}(b)
where one sees that the $\langle |\Phi '| \rangle$ UCNA prediction is very close to the numerically result at all values of $D$ and $\tau$ here investigated. }
The behaviour of the $P(x)$ and of $\langle |\Phi ' | \rangle$ can be qualitatively understood by considering the strong peaking of the $\Omega(x)$ close to the repulsive barrier. When the potential is very steep, as in the case of $\Phi = x^{-12}$, the maxima of $\Omega(x)$ are found at $x=x^\ast$ where $|\Phi'(x^\ast)| \approx \sqrt{D/\tau}$. It is clear that the probability peaks where the external potential balances the root mean-squared velocity of the particle induced by GCN $\sqrt{\langle \eta^2 \rangle}=\sqrt{D/\tau}$. In this hard-wall limit is possible to approximate $\Omega(x)$ in the neighborhood of $x^\ast$ by a {strongly peaked function $k(x)$ whose integral is $\approx \sqrt{D \tau}$, as found by a saddle-point approximation, while far away from $x^\ast$ Eq.~(\ref{eq:u1d}) reduces to unity (see Supplemental Material) and we can write: $\Omega(x) \approx k(x-x^\ast)+k(x+x^\ast)+1$.}
Note that $\sqrt{D \tau}$ corresponds to the typical correlation length of the active motion.
{Integrating from $-L/2$ to $L/2$ we find the average velocity $ \langle |\Phi ' | \rangle = 2 D/(L^\ast+2\sqrt{D \tau}) $, where $L^\ast = L-2 x^\ast$ is the overall length available to the particles
and report this result as a dashed line in Fig.~\ref{fig:f1}(b) where it captures the trend of $\langle |\Phi ' | \rangle$ obtained in simulations with the potential }
$\Phi = x^{-12}$. By considering the force exerted by the particles located only on the right-hand side of the potential ($x>0$) we find the force $f_{x>0}$:
$\langle f_{x>0} \rangle = {\mu^{-1}}D/(L^\ast + 2\sqrt{D \tau})$,
{which corresponds to an equation} of state being $f_{x>0}$ the 1-dimensional pressure that the particles exert on the ``wall" represented by the external potential.
Note that if we consider $N$ independent particles, in the limit $\tau \rightarrow 0$, and set $D=\mu \, k_B T$ we arrive to the ideal gas law in 1\textit{d}: $\langle f_{x>0} \rangle = N k_B T/L^\ast$ and that this equilibrium value constitute an upper bound for the pressure of the active system (see dashed-dotted line in Fig.~\ref{fig:f1}(b)). Interestingly these results can be derived exactly for the RnT model, in particular the stationary probability distribution of the RnT model in presence of two hard walls is composed by two Dirac deltas plus a constant and the expression of $\langle |\Phi'| \rangle$ has the same form of the one found in the UCNA (see Supplemental Material).
\subsection*{Two interacting particles in one dimension.}
Up to this point we have derived results from the known formula (\ref{eq:u1d}) considering only one degree of freedom. We now use Eq.~(\ref{eq:ucnad}) to characterize the steady state properties of two interacting GCN-driven particles moving in $1d$. We consider the positions $x_1$ and $x_2$ of two particles interacting via a pair potential that is a function of the distance
$\Delta x = |x_1-x_2|$ between the particles: $\Phi (x_1,x_2) = \Phi(\Delta x)$. We further assume that the particles are free to move in a 1$d$ space of extension $L$ with periodic boundaries located at $\pm L/2$. In this case Eq.~(\ref{eq:ucnad}) can be used to compute the probability of finding the two particles separated by $\Delta x$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:u2p}
\Omega(\Delta x) =
\exp \left[-\frac{\Phi(\Delta x)}{D}-
\frac{2 \tau}{2 D} |\Phi '(\Delta x)|^2 \right]
|1+2 \tau \Phi''(\Delta x)|
\end{equation}
\noindent which is identical { to Eq.~(\ref{eq:u1d}) with $\tau$ replaced by $2 \tau$. This is at variance} with equilibrium statistical mechanics in which the probability of finding two particles at a given distance does not vary if one of the two particles is pinned at some fixed position~\cite{RandomPinning1,RandomPinning2,RandomPinning3}.
To be more specific let us consider a repulsive potential of the form $\Phi(x_1,x_2)=(x_1-x_2)^{-12}$. In this case again the probability
is well described by the MUCNASP as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:f1}(b). Similarly the deterministic velocity component experienced by one particle $\langle |\Phi'| \rangle$ resulting from simulations is well approximated by the theory (see Fig.~\ref{fig:f1}(c)). Again, in the limit of an infinitely steep potential (see Supplemental Material), we find that the area of the peak of $\Omega(\Delta x)$ is approximated by $\sqrt{2 D \tau}$ and $ \langle |\Phi ' | \rangle = 2 D/(L^\ast+2\sqrt{2 D \tau})$ which is plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:f1}(c) as a dashed line.
This can be physically interpreted as follows: when both particles are free to move they can be more often found in contact since they move {coherently} in the same direction, this happens without the particles pushing onto each other, yielding a lower value of the average interaction force. It is important to note that these theoretical results cannot
be derived {analytically in the RnT model since the coupled dynamics of more particles} makes the problem far too complicated. Nevertheless we have found that the MUCNASP produces results for the average $\langle | \Phi' |\rangle$ that are very similar those found numerically for the RnT model despite the stationary probability density has a very different form (see Supplemental Material). This suggests that the MUCNASP can be used as a convenient approximation also for calculating the averages in RnT dynamics at least in the case of steeply repulsive potentials. Note also that such a scenario is in agreement with the findings of Ref.~\cite{ActiveDepletion} where it was demonstrated, by combining experiments and simulations, that two colloids suspended in a bacterial bath tend to stay in contact because of the colored-noise forces induced by swimming bacteria.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{f1.jpg}
\caption{\textbf{(a)}
Probability density function of the position of a single GCN-driven particle in presence of the external potential $\Phi=x^{-12}$ (shaded area).
Full lines: simulations, dashed lines: theory, dashed-dotted line: Boltzmann distribution. The curve with the higher peak corresponds to $D=100 \, \mathrm{\mu m^2/s}$, $\tau=1 \, \mathrm{s}$ and the one with the lower peak to $D=0.4 \, \mathrm{\mu m^2/s}$, $\tau=0.1 \, \mathrm{s}$ (zoomed in the inset)
\textbf{(b)}
Average value of $|\Phi'|$ as a function of $D$ for three different values of $\tau=0.1,0.325,1$ s from top to bottom respectively. Points: simulations, full lines: theory, dashed lines: theory in the limit of a hard potential, dashed dotted line: white noise case with a hard potential.
\textbf{(c)}
Probability density function of the distance between two GCN-driven particles
interacting via the potential $\Phi={\Delta x}^{-12}$, same legend as Fig.~(a).
\textbf{(d)}
Average value of $|\Phi'|$ as a function of $D$ for three different values of
$\tau=0.1,0.325,1$ s from top to bottom respectively, same legend as as Fig.~(b).}
\label{fig:f1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{f2.jpg}
\caption{\textbf{(a)}
Probability density function of the radial distance of one GCN-driven particle in presence of the spherically symmetric external potential $\Phi=(r-R)^{-12}$ in $2d$ (shaded area).
Full lines: simulations, dashed lines: theory, dashed-dotted line: Boltzmann distribution. The curve with the higher peak corresponds to $D=100 \, \mathrm{\mu m^2/s}$, $\tau=1 \, \mathrm{s}$ and the one with the lower peak to $D=0.4 \, \mathrm{\mu m^2/s}$, $\tau=0.1 \, \mathrm{s}$ (zoomed in the inset)
\textbf{(b)}
Average value of $|\Phi'|$ as a function of $D$ for three different values of $\tau=0.1,0.325,1$ s from top to bottom respectively. Points: simulations, full lines: theory, dashed lines: theory in the limit of a hard potential, dashed dotted line: white noise case with a hard potential.}
\label{fig:f2}
\end{figure}
\subsection*{Radially symmetric potentials.}
When the $d$-dimensional potential is spherically symmetric, i.e.
$\Phi(\mathbf{x})=\Phi(r)$, Eq.~(\ref{eq:ucnas}) simplifies to
\begin{eqnarray}
\Omega(r) = & &
\Theta \, \exp \left[-\frac{\Phi(r)}{D}-
\frac{\tau}{2 D} |\Phi '(r)|^2 \right]
|1+ \tau \Phi''(r)| \nonumber\\
& & |r+ \tau \Phi'(r)|^{d-1} \label{eq:rad}
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where $r^2=\sum_{i=1}^d {x_i}^2$ and $\Theta$ is the d-dimensional solid angle.
Note that the Boltzmann distribution, obtained by setting $\tau=0$ in
Eq.~(\ref{eq:rad}), depends on the dimensionality only via the trivial term $r^{d-1}$
while in the GCN-case this dependence is more complicated. {To understand this issue, we consider GCN-driven particles in $d=2$ in the presence of a circular repulsive potential of radius $R$ of the form $\Phi(r)=(r-R)^{-12}$ where $r=\sqrt{x^2+y^2}$ and $R=5 \, \mathrm{\mu m}$. Simulation results
show that particles accumulate near the ring at $r=R$} and the theoretical probability reproduces well this behaviour (see Fig.~\ref{fig:f2}(a)).
From Eq.~(\ref{eq:rad}) we can compute the averages of interest as the radial component of the velocity field $\langle | \Phi' | \rangle$ and compare it with simulation results in Fig.~\ref{fig:f2}(d) showing a good agreement.
In the limit of an infinitely steep potential we have that $\Omega(r)$ strongly peaks where
$|\Phi '| \approx \sqrt{D / \tau}$ and reduces to unity elsewhere. The area of the peak can be approximated by $2 \pi \sqrt{D \tau} |R^\ast+\sqrt{D \tau}|$ (see Supplemental Material), where $ R^\ast = R-r^\ast $
is the radial coordinate of the peak with $ r^\ast \approx 1$ in the $D$-$\tau$ range considered. For the average radial velocity component we get
$\langle | \Phi '| \rangle =
2 D (R^\ast+\sqrt{D \tau})/({R^\ast}^2+2 D \tau +2 R^\ast \sqrt{D \tau})$
which is plotted as dashed lines in Fig.~\ref{fig:f2}(d) and follows nicely the trend displayed by the numerical data. This is practically a colored-noise version of the ideal gas law in a circular container. This is clear if we set $\tau = 0$ to obtain $\langle | \Phi' | \rangle = 2 D/R^\ast$ which is proportional to the average radial force $\langle f \rangle = 2 D/(R^\ast \mu)$. Dividing this by the 2$d$ ``surface" $2 \pi R^\ast $ we get the ideal gas pressure
$p=N \langle f \rangle /(2 \pi R^\ast) = N k_B T /(\pi {R^\ast}^2)$ for $N$ independent particles and $D=\mu k_B T$. The unperturbed dynamics of the RnT model in $2d$ is well understood~\cite{RnT2d}, while the problem of a 2$d$ symmetric potential is not tractable analytically. However we have found that the simulation results for the $\langle |\Phi'| \rangle$ in RnT model are very similar to those produced by the MUCNASP (see Supplemental Material) suggesting that MUCNASP could actually describe the behaviour of a wider class of active particles. An experimental situation, that is close to the spherically symmetric case treated here, has been recently studied~\cite{Drop}. In these experiments it was observed a marked accumulation of swimming bacteria at the border of spherical liquid droplets. In this kind of experiment it would be interesting to check whether, in the dilute regime, the number of bacteria found in contact with the border scales with the droplet radius and the characteristic run length as predicted by the MUCNASP (Eq.~(\ref{eq:rad})) in the spherical case.
\section*{Discussion}
By using the unified colored noise approximation, we have derived the explicit formula for the non-equilibrium stationary probability (MUCNASP, Eq.~(\ref{eq:ucnas})) of a system composed by an arbitrary number of degrees of freedom subject to GCN.
We have focused onto the case of steep repulsive potentials where the probability distribution of one single active particle tends to concentrate on the repulsive part of the potential oppositely to the case of a Brownian particle.
Moreover we have verified that, as predicted by the MUCNASP, two active particles interacting repulsively behave differently with respect to equilibrium and are found in contact more often than if one particle is fixed. Finally the MUCNASP predicts that, when active particles are confined inside a repulsive ring-shaped barrier, the probability peaks on the boundary and the area of this peak increases with increasing radius and with increasing persistence length.
Surprisingly the results obtained by the MUCNASP are very close to those obtained for RnT particles for which an analytical solution is not available.
As discussed before~\cite{HanggiRev,HanggiUcna,UcnaD}, the UCNA is accurate in those
portions of phase space where the all the eigenvalues of the Hessian matrix are positive.
This restriction defines where Eq.~(\ref{eq:ucnas}) can be used as a valid approximation for the probability of GCN-driven system. Moreover it appears difficult to derive an explicitly formula for probability including also Brownian fluctuations. Nevertheless, to our knowledge, the MUCNASP is the only available explicit probability formula accounting for multiple active degrees of freedom and, provided that all eigenvalues are positive, becomes exact both in the limit of $\tau \to 0$ and $\tau \to \infty$. This makes the MUCNASP a valuable schematic model for tackling the many-body problem in active matter. For example it would be interesting to check whether, at the mean-field level, the MUCNASP can predict a motility-induced phase separation~\cite{CatesPRL,Pago,BerthierMI} or the colored-noise induced shift in the synchronization threshold of the noisy Kuramoto model~\cite{Kuramoto}.
|
\section{Lower Bound for all universal protocols}
In this section, we exhibit metric spaces for which no universal
cost-sharing protocol admits a PoA better than $\Omega (\log k)$. Due
to the characterization of \cite{CRV10}, we can restrict ourselves in
generalized weighted Shapley protocols (GWSPs). We follow the notation
of \cite{CRV10}, and for the sake of self-containment we include here
the most related definitions and lemmas.
\subsection{Cost-Sharing Preliminaries}
A strictly positive function $f:2^{N} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{+}$ is
an {\em edge potential} on $N$, if it is strictly increasing, i.e. for
every $R \subset S \subseteq N$, $f(R) < f(S)$, and for every $S
\subseteq N$, $\sum_{i \in S} \frac{f(S)-f(S\setminus
\{i\})}{f(\{i\})}=1.$
For simplicity, instead of $f(\{i\})$, we write $f(i)$. A cost-sharing
protocol is called {\em potential-based}, if it is defined by
assigning to each edge of cost $c$, the cost-sharing method $\xi$,
where for every $S \subseteq N$ and $i \in S$, $\xi(i,S) = c\cdot
\frac{f(S)-f(S\setminus \{i\})}{f({i})}.$
Let $\Xi_1$ and $\Xi_2$ be two cost-sharing protocols for {\em disjoint} sets of vertices
$U_1$ and $U_2$, with methods $\xi_1$ and $\xi_2$, respectively.
The {\em concatenation} of $\Xi_1$ and $\Xi_2$
is the cost sharing protocol $\Xi$
of the set $U_1 \cup U_2$, with method $\xi$ defined as
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{l}
$\xi(i,S) = \left\{
\begin{array}{l l}
\xi_1(i,S \cap U_1) & \text{if } \;\; i \in U_1 \\
\xi_2(i,S) & \mbox{if } \;\; S \subseteq U_2\\
0 & \mbox{otherwise} \\
\end{array} \right.$
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
Note that the concatenation of two protocols for disjoint sets of
vertices defines an order among these two sets. The GWSPs are
concatenations of potential-based protocols.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:proximity}
(Lemma $4.10$ of \cite{CRV10}). Let $f$ be an edge potential on $N$ and
$\xi$ the induced (by $f$) cost-sharing method, for unit costs.
For $k \geq 1$ and a constant $\alpha$, with $1 \leq \alpha^{2k} \leq 1+k^{-3}$,
let $S \subseteq N$ be a subset of vertices with $f(i) \leq \alpha f(j)$,
for every $i,j \in S$. If $|S| \leq k$, then for any $i,j \in S$,
$\xi(i,S) \leq \alpha (\xi(j,S)+2k^{-2}).$
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:separation}
(Lemma $4.11$ of \cite{CRV10}). Let $f$ be an edge potential on $N$,
and $\xi$ be the cost-sharing method induced by $f$, for unit cost.
For any two vertices $i,j \in N$, such that $f(i) \geq \beta f(j)$:
$\xi (i,\{i,j\}) \geq \beta/(\beta+1)$ and for every
$S\supseteq\{i,j\}$, $\xi (j,S) \leq 1/(\beta+1).$
\end{lemma}
\subsection{Lower Bound}
The following two technical lemmas will be used in our main theorem.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:matching-s}
Let $X$ be a finite set of size $msr^2$, and $X_1, \ldots, X_m$ be a
partition of $X$, with $|X_i|=sr^2$, for all $i\in [m]$. Then, for any
coloring $\chi$ of $X$ such that {\em no more} than $r$ elements have
the same color, there exists a {\em rainbow} subset $S \subset X$
(i.e. $\chi(v)\neq\chi(u)$ for all $v,u \in S$),
with $|S \cap X_i|=s$ for every $i \in [m]$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Given the partition $X_1,\ldots, X_m$ of $X$ and the coloring
$\chi$, we construct a bipartite graph $G=(A,B,E)$, where $A$ is the
set of colors used in $\chi$. For every $X_i$ we create a set $B_i$
of size $s$; then $B=\cup B_i$. If color $j$ is used in $X_i$,
we add an edge $(j,l)$ for all $l\in B_i$.
Each color $j \in A$ appears in at most $r$ distinct $X_i$ sets, and since for each
$X_i$ there are $s$ vertices ($B_i$), the degree of $j$ is
at most $rs$. On the other hand, each $X_i$ has size $r^2 s$
and hence, it has at least $rs$ different colors. Therefore, the degree
of each vertex of $B$ is at least $rs$.
Consider any set $R\subseteq B$, and let $E(R)$ be the set of edges with at least
one endpoint in $R$. If $N(R)$ denotes
the set of neighbors of $R$, observe that $E(R) \subseteq E(N(R))$.
By using the degree bound on vertices of
$B$, $|E(R)| \geq rs |R|$ and by using the
degree bound on vertices of $A$, $|E(N(R))| \leq rs|N(R)|$.
Therefore, $|R| \leq |N(R)|$. By Hall's Theorem there exists
a matching which covers every vertex in $B$.
Each vertex in $B_i$ is matched with a distinct color and therefore in each
$X_i$ there exists a subset with at least
$s$ elements with distinct colors; let $W_i$ be such a subset with exactly $s$ elements.
In addition the colors in different $W_i$ subsets should be distinct by the matching.
Then, $S=\cup W_i$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:nonconsequent}
Let $X = (X_1,\ldots, X_m)$ be a partition of $[m^2]$, with $|X_i|=m$, for all $i \in
[m]$. Then, there exists a subset $S \subset [m^2]$ with exactly one
element from each subset $X_i$, such no two distinct
$x,y\in S$ are consecutive, i.e. for every $x,y \in S$, $|x - y| \geq 2$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For every $i$, let $X_i=\{x_{i1}, \ldots, x_{im}\}$. W.l.o.g we can
assume that the $x_{ij}$'s are in increasing order with respect to
$j$ and in addition that $X_i$'s are sorted such that $x_{ii} <
x_{ji}$, for all $j>i$ (otherwise rename the elements recursively to
fulfill the requirement). Then, it is not hard to see that $S =
\{x_{kk}|k\in [m]\}$ can serve as the required set.
\end{proof}
Now we proceed with the main theorem of this section. We create a
graph where every GWSP has high PoA. At a high level, we construct a
high dimensional hypercube with sufficiently large number of potential
players at each vertex (by adding many copies of each vertex connected
via zero-cost edges). Moreover, we add shortcuts among the vertices of
suitable costs and we connect each vertex with $t$ via two parallel
links with costs that differ by a large factor (see Figure
\ref{fig:allProtConstr}). If the protocol induces a large enough set
of potential players with {\em Shapley-like} values in some vertex,
then it is a NE that all these players follow the most costly link to
$t$. Otherwise, by using Lemmas~\ref{lem:matching-s}
and~\ref{lem:nonconsequent} we show that there exists a set of
potential players $B$, with {\em ordered-like} values, one at each
vertex of the hypercube. Then, by using the results of Section
\ref{generalLB}, there exists a path where the vertices are {\em
zig-zag}-ordered.
The separation into these two extreme cases was first used in
\cite{CRV10}. The crucial difference, is that for their problem the
protocol is specified independently of the underlying graph, and
therefore the adversary knows the case distinction (ordered or
shapley) and bases the lower bound construction on that. However, our
problem requires more work as the graph should be constructed {\em in
advance}, and should work for both cases.
\begin{theorem}
There exist graph metrics, such that the PoA of
any universal cost-sharing protocol is at least $\Omega(\log k)$, where
$k$ is the number of activated vertices.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $k=2^{r-1}+1$ be the number of activated vertices with $r \geq 4$, (hence $k \geq 9$).
\noindent\textbf{Graph Construction.}
We use as a base of our lower bound construction, a hypercube
$Q:=Q_{n}$, with edge costs equal to $1$ and $n=n(r)$ as in
Theorem~\ref{thm:badPath}. Based on $Q$, for $M =16k^{12} 2^{3n}$ we
construct the following network with $N = 2^{n} M $ vertices, plus the
designated root $t$. We add to $Q$ direct edges/shortcuts as follows:
for every two vertices $v,u$ of distance $2^j$, for $j\in [r]$, we add
an edge/shortcut, $(v,u)$, with cost equal to $\hat{c}_j =
2^j\left(\frac{k-1}{k}\right)^{j} = \Omega(2^j)$. Moreover, for every
vertex $v_q$ of $Q$, we create $M-1$ new vertices, each of which we
connect with $v_q$ via a zero-cost edge. Let $V_q$ be the set of these
vertices (including $v_q$). Finally, we add a root $t$, which we
connect with every vertex $v_q$ of $Q$, via two edges $e_{q1}$ and
$e_{q2}$, with costs $2k$ and $2k\cdot k/6$, respectively. We denote
this new network by $Q^*$ (see Figure \ref{fig:allProtConstr}).
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{gwspLB.png}
\caption{An example of $Q^*$ for $Q_2$ as the base hypercube.}
\label{fig:allProtConstr}
\end{figure}
We will show that any GWSP for $Q^*$
has PoA $\Omega (\log k)$. Any GWSP can be described by concatenations
of potential-based cost-sharing protocols $\Xi_1, \ldots, \Xi_h$ for a
partition of the $V(Q^*)$ into $h$ subsets $U_1, \ldots , U_h$, where
$\Xi_j$ is induced by some edge potential $f_j$. Following the
analysis of Chen, Roughgarden and Valiant~\cite{CRV10}, we scale the
$f_j$'s such that for every $i,j$, $f_j(i) \geq 1$. For nonnegative
integers $s$ and for $\alpha = \left(1+k^{-3}\right)^{\frac{1}{2k}}$,
we form subgroups of vertices $A_{js}$, for each $U_j$, as
$A_{js}=\{i\in U_j: f_j(i) \in \left[\alpha^s, \alpha^{s+1}\right]\}$
(note that some of $A_{js}$'s may be empty).
The adversary proceeds in two cases, depending on the
intersection of the $A_{js}$'s with the $V_q$'s.
\noindent\textbf{Shapley-like cost-sharing.} Suppose first that there exist $A_{js}$ and $V_q$
such that $|A_{js} \cap V_q|\geq k$, and take a subset $R\subseteq
A_{js} \cap V_q$ with exactly $k$ vertices. The adversary will request
precisely the set $R$. Budget-balance implies that there exists some
vertex $i^*\in R$ which is charged at most $1/k$ proportion of the
cost. Moreover, Lemma~\ref{lem:proximity} implies that, all $i \in R$
are charged at most $\alpha (1/k+2k^{-2}) \leq 2\cdot (3/k) = 6/k$
proportion of the cost.
Note that there is a NE where all players follow the edge $e_{q2}$, with
cost $2k \cdot k/6$; no player's share is more than $2k$ and any
alternative path would cost at least $2k$. However, the optimum
solution is to use the parallel link $e_{q1}$ of cost $2k$. Therefore,
the PoA is $\Omega(k)$ for this case.
\noindent\textbf{Ordered-like cost-sharing.} If there is no such $R$
with at least $k$ vertices, then $|A_{js}\cap V_q|\leq k$ for all
$j,s$ and $q$, which means that each $A_{js}$ has size of at most $k
2^{n}$.
For every $j \in [h]$, we group consecutive sets $A_{js}$ (starting
from $A_{j0}$) into sets $B_{jl}$, such that each $B_{jl}$, (except
perhaps from the last one), contains {\em exactly} $4k^5$ {\em
nonempty} $A_{js}$'s. The last $B_{jl}$ contains at most $4k^5$ {\em
nonempty} $A_{js}$ sets. Consider the lexicographic order among
$B_{jl}$'s, i.e. $B_{jl} < B_{j'l'}$ if either $j < j'$ or $j = j'$
and $l<l'$. Rename these sets based on their total order as
$B_i$'s. The size of each $B_i$ is at most $4k^6 2^{n}$.
Now we apply Lemma \ref{lem:matching-s} on the set $N$, for $r =4k^6
2^{n}$ and $s=m=2^{n}$, by considering the subsets $V_q$ as the
partition of $N$ (recall that $|V_q| = M = r^2 s$). As a coloring
scheme, we color all the vertices of each $B_i$ with the same color
and use different colors among the sets $B_i$. Lemma
\ref{lem:matching-s} guarantees that for each $V_q$ there exists $V'_q
\subset V_q$ of size $2^{n}$, such that every $v\in V' = \cup_qV'_q$
belongs to a distinct $B_i$.
The order of $B_i$'s suggests an order of the vertices of $V'$. Since
the $V'_q$'s form a partition of $V'$, Lemma~\ref{lem:nonconsequent}
guarantees the existence of a subset $C \subset V'$, such that $C$
contains exactly one vertex from each $V'_q$ and there are no
consecutive vertices in $C$. This means that $C$ contains exactly one
vertex from each set $V_q$ and all these vertices belong to {\em
different} and {\em non-consecutive} sets $B_{i}$.
To summarize, so far we know that:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item for any pair of vertices $v,u \in C$, either $v$ and $u$ come
from different $U_j$'s or their $f_j(v)$ and $f_j(u)$ values differ
by a factor of at least $\alpha^{4k^5} \geq 8k+1$ (since there exist
at least $4k^5$ nonempty sets $A_{js}$ between the ones that $v$ and
$u$ belong to).
\item $C$ is a copy of $Q_{n}$ (by ignoring zero-cost edges).
\end{enumerate}
Let $\pi$ be the order of vertices of $C$ (recall that they are ordered according to the $B_i$'s they belong to).
Theorem \ref{thm:badPath} guarantees that there always exists at least one
distance preserving path $P_{r}(\pi)$ (see Definition \ref{def:badOrder}). Let $S$ be the
vertices of $P_{r}(\pi)$ excluding the last class $D_{r}$ (see
Definition~\ref{def:badOrderSets}).
The adversary will activate this set $S$ ($|S| = k$). It remains to
show that there exists a NE, the cost of which is a factor of
$\Omega(\log k)$ away from optimum.
We will refer to these vertices as $S = \{s_1, s_2, \ldots, s_k\}$,
based on their order $\pi$, from smaller label to larger, and let player $i$ be associated with
$s_i$.
Let $\mathcal{P'}$ be the class of strategy profiles $\mathbf{P}=(P_1,\ldots,
P_k)$ which are defined as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item $P_1=e_{11}$ and $P_2 = (s_1,s_2) \cup P_1$,
where $(s_1,s_2)$ is the shortcut edge between $s_1$ and $s_2$.
\item From $i=3$ to $k$, let $s_{\ell} \in \Pi(s_i)$
be one of $s_i$'s parents in the class hierarchy
(we refer the reader to the beginning of Section~\ref{generalLB});
then $P_i = (s_i,s_{\ell}) \cup P_{\ell}$,
where $(s_i,s_{\ell})$ is the shortcut edge between $s_i$ and $s_{\ell}$.
\end{itemize}
We show in Claim \ref{cl:PNEbestProtocol}
that there exists a strategy profile $\mathbf{P}^* \in \mathcal{P'}$ which is a NE.
$\mathbf{P}^*$ has cost:
$$c(\mathbf{P}^*)={c}({e_{11}}) + \hat{c}_r+\sum_{j=1}^{r-1} |D_j|\cdot \hat{c}_{r-j} =
\Omega(2^{r}) + \Omega(2^{r})+\sum_{j=1}^{r-1} 2^{j-1}\cdot \Omega(2^{r-j}) =
\Omega(r2^r).$$
However, there exists the solution
$P_{r}(\pi) \cup e_{11}$, which has cost of $O(2^r)$.
Therefore, the PoA is $\Omega(r) = \Omega(\log k)$.
\begin{claim}
\label{cl:PNEbestProtocol}
There exists $\mathbf{P}^* \in \mathcal{P'}$ which is a Nash equilibrium.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
We prove the claim by using better-response dynamics. Note that any
GWSP induces a potential game for which better-response dynamics
always converge to a NE (see \cite{CRV10, GMW13}). We start
with some $\mathbf{P}_1 \in \mathcal{P'}$ and we prove that, after a sequence
of players' {\em best}-responses, we end up in $\mathbf{P}_2 \in
\mathcal{P'}$. Proceeding in a similar way we eventually converge to
$\mathbf{P}^*$, which is the required NE.
We next argue that for any $\mathbf{P} \in \mathcal{P'}$, players $1$ and
$2$, have no incentive to deviate from $P_1$ (argument (a)) and
$P_2$ (arguments (b)), respectively. We further show that, given
any strategy profile $\hat{\mathbf{P}}$, there exists some $\mathbf{P} \in
\mathcal{G}$ such that: for every player $i \notin \{1,2\}$, if
$\mathbf{P}^i = (P_1,\ldots,P_{i-1},\hat{P}_{i+1},\ldots,\hat{P}_k)$ are
the strategies of the other players, $i$ prefers
$P_i$ to $\hat{P}_{i}$ (arguments (c)-(e)).
We define the desired $\mathbf{P}$ recursively as follows: $P_1=e_{11}$, $P_2 = (s_1,s_2) \cup P_1$ and
from $i=3$ to $k$, $P_i \in A=\arg \min_{P'_i} \{c_{i}(\mathbf{P}^i,P'_i)|\exists (P'_{i+1},\ldots,P'_k)
\mbox{ s.t. } (P_1,\ldots,P_{i-1},P'_i,\ldots,P'_k)\in \mathcal{G}\}$.
If $\hat{P}_{i} \in A$ then we set $P_i = \hat{P}_{i}$, otherwise we choose a path from $A$ arbitrarily.
We first give some bounds on players' shares.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Let $R \subseteq S$ be any set of players that use some edge $e$
of cost $c_e$ and let $i$ be the one with the smallest
label.
The total share of players $R\setminus\{i\}$ is upper bounded by
$\sum_{i=1}^{|R|-1} \frac 1{(8k+1)^i+1} \cdot c_e < \frac {c_e}{8k}$
(Lemma~\ref{lem:separation}). Moreover, $i$'s share is at least
$\frac{8k-1}{8k} c_e$.
\item
The total cost of any $P_i$ under $\mathbf{P}^i$, is at most $8k$.
This is true because, for every player ${i'}$ with $i' \leq i$,
the first edge of $P_{i'}$ is a shortcut to reach one of $s_{i'}$'s parents, with cost at most
$2^{r-j}$, where $D_j$ is the class that $s_{i'}$ belongs to. Therefore,
the cost of $P_i$
is at most $2k + \sum_{l=0}^{r-1} 2^{r-l} < 8k$.
\item
By combining the above two arguments, under $\mathbf{P}^i$, the total share of player $i$ for the edges of $P_i$ at which
she is not the first according to $\pi$, is at most $\frac 1{8k} \cdot 8k \leq 1$.
\end{enumerate}
Here, we give the arguments for players $1$ and $2$.
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\alph*)]
\item
The share of player $1$ under $\mathbf{P}$ is at most $2k$ and any other path
would incur a cost strictly greater than $2k$.
\item
The share of player $2$ under $\mathbf{P}$ is at most
$2^r + 1 = 2k - 1$ (argument $3$), whereas if she doesn't connect through $s_1$, her
share would be at least $2k$. Moreover, if she connects to $t$ through $s_1$ but by using
any other path rather than the shortcut $(s_1,s_2)$, the total cost of that path is
at least $2^{r}\left(\frac{k-1}{k}\right)^{r-1}$. Player $2$ is first according to $\pi$ at that path
and by argument $1$, her share is at least $2^{r}\frac{8k-1}{8k}\left(\frac{k-1}{k}\right)^{r-1} < \hat{c}_{r}$.
\end{enumerate}
We next give the required arguments in order to show that $P_i$ is a best response for
player $i \neq \{1,2\}$ under $\mathbf{P}^i$. In the following, let $s_i \in D_j$ and let $s_{\ell}$
be the parent of $s_i$ such that $P_i = (s_i,s_\ell)\cup P_{\ell}$.
Also let $s_{i'}$ be the predecessor of $s_i$, according to $\pi$, that is first met by following $\hat{P}_{i}$
from $s_i$ to $t$.
\begin{enumerate}[resume,label=(\alph*)]
\item
Suppose that $s_{i'} = s_{\ell}$.
\begin{itemize}
\item Assume that $\hat{P}_{i}$ doesn't use the shortcut $(s_i,s_\ell)$. The subpath
of $\hat{P}_{i}$ from $s_i$ to $s_\ell$ contains edges at which $i$ is first
according to $\pi$ of total cost at least
$2^{r-j}\left(\frac{k-1}{k}\right)^{r-j-1}$. By argument $1$, her share is at least
$2^{r-j}\frac{8k-1}{8k}\left(\frac{k-1}{k}\right)^{r-j-1} < \hat{c}_{r-j}$.
\item Assume that $\hat{P}_{i}$ doesn't use $P_{\ell}$. The subpath
of $\hat{P}_{i}$ from $s_\ell$ to $t$ contains edges at which $i$ is first
according to $\pi$ of total cost at least $2$ (the minimum distance between two activated vertices).
By argument $1$, her share is at least $2\frac{8k-1}{8k} > 1$, where $1$ is at most her share for
$P_{\ell}$ (argument $3$).
\end{itemize}
\item
Suppose that $s_{i'}$ is $s_i$'s other parent.
If $\hat{P}_{i} \neq (s_i,s_{i'})\cup P_{i'}$, the above arguments
still hold and so $c_{i}(\mathbf{P}^i,P_i) < c_{i}(\mathbf{P}^i,\hat{P}_{i})$.
Otherwise, by the definition of $P_i$, either $P_i = \hat{P}_{i}$, or
$c_{i}(\mathbf{P}^i,P_i) < c_{i}(\mathbf{P}^i,\hat{P}_{i})$.
\item
Suppose that $s_{i'}$ is not a parent of $s_i$.
Player $i$'s share in $P_i$ is at most $\hat{c}_{r-j}$
for her first edge/shortcut and at most $1$ for the rest of her path (argument $3$).
However, all edges that are used by players that
precedes $i$ in $\pi$ have cost at least $\hat{c}_{r-j}$.
Therefore, in $\hat{P}_{i}$, player $i$ is the first according to $\pi$ for edges of total cost at least
$\hat{c}_{r-j+1}$. This implies a cost-share of at least $\frac{8k-1}{8k}
\hat{c}_{r-j+1}$ (argument $1$). But for $k \geq 6$ and $j < r$, $\frac{8k-1}{8k}
\hat{c}_{r-j+1} > \hat{c}_{r-j} + 1$.
\end{enumerate}
We now describe a sequence of best-responses from some $\hat{\mathbf{P}} \in \mathcal{P'}$ to $\mathbf{P}$
($\mathbf{P}$ is constructed based on $\hat{\mathbf{P}}$ as described above).
We follow the $\pi$ order of the players and for each player we apply her best response.
First note that players $1$ and $2$ have no better response, so $P_1 = \hat{P}_1$ and $P_2 = \hat{P}_2$.
When we process any other player $i$, we have already processed all her predecessors in $\pi$ and so,
the strategies of the other players are $\mathbf{P}^i$.
Therefore, $P_i$ is the best response for $i$ (it may be that $P_i=\hat{P}_i$, where no better response exists for $i$).
The order that we process the vertices guarantees that $\mathbf{P} \in \mathcal{P'}$.
\end{proof}
\end{proof}
\section{Introduction}
\paragraph{Network Cost-Sharing Games.}
We study a {\em multicast game} in a rooted undirected graph $G=(V,E)$
with a nonnegative cost $c_e$ on each edge $e\in E$. A set of $k$ {\em
terminal vertices} or {\em players} $s_1,\ldots, s_k$ need to
establish connectivity with the root $t$. Each player selects a path
$P_i$ and the outcome produced is the graph $H=\cup_iP_i$. The global
objective is to minimize the cost $\sum_{e\in H}c_e$ of this graph,
which is the {\em Minimum Steiner Tree}.
The cost of an edge may represent infrastructure cost for establishing
connectivity or renting expense, and needs to be covered by the
players that use that edge in the solution. There are several ways to
split the edge costs among the users and this is dictated by a {\em
cost-sharing protocol}. Naturally, it is in the players best
interest to choose paths that charge them with small cost, and
therefore the solution will be a Nash equilibrium (NE).
Algorithmic Game
Theory provides tools to analyze the quality of the equilibrium
solutions; this can be measured with the Price of Anarchy
(PoA)~\cite{KP99} (or Price of Stability (PoS)~\cite{ADKTWR08}) that
compares the worst-case (or the best-case) cost in a Nash equilibrium
with the cost of the minimum Steiner tree.
This is a fundamental network design game that was originated by
Anshelevich et al.~\cite{ADKTWR08} and has been extensively studied
since. \cite{ADKTWR08} studied the {\em Shapley} cost-sharing protocol,
where the cost of each edge is equally split among its users. They
showed that the quality of equilibria can be really poor\footnote{Even for simple
networks the PoA grows linearly with the number of players, $k$. The
PoS is not well-understood. It is a big open question to determine its
exact value that is between constant and
$O(\log/\log\log k)$~\cite{Li09}.}.
\paragraph{Cost-Sharing Protocol Design.}
Different cost-sharing protocols result in different quality of
equilibria. In this work, we are interested in the design of protocols
that induce good equilibrium solutions in the {\em worst-case},
therefore we focus on protocols that guarantee low PoA.
Chen, Roughgarden and Valiant~\cite{CRV10} were the first to
address design questions for network cost-sharing games. They gave a
characterization of protocols that satisfy some natural axioms and
they thoroughly studied their PoA for the following two classes of
protocols, that use different informational assumptions from the
perspective of the designer.
\vspace{-1mm}
\begin{description}
\item{\em Non-uniform protocols}. The designer has full knowledge of
the instance, that is, she knows both the network topology given by
$G$ and the costs $c_e$, and in addition the set of players'
requests $s_1, \ldots, s_k$. They showed that a simple priority protocol has a
constant PoA; the Nash equilibria induced by the protocol simulate
Prim's algorithm for the Minimum Spanning Tree (MST) problem, and
therefore achieve constant approximation.
\item{\em Uniform protocols}. The designer needs to decide how to
split the edge cost among the users {\em without knowledge of the
underlying graph}. They showed that the PoA is $\Theta(\log k)$;
both upper and lower bound comes from the analysis of the Greedy
Algorithm for the Online Steiner Tree problem (OSTP).
\end{description}
\paragraph{Cost-Sharing Design under Uncertainty.}
Arguably, there are situations where the former assumption is too
optimistic while the latter is too pessimistic.
We propose a model that lies in the middle-ground, as a framework to
design network cost-sharing protocols with good equilibria, when the
designer has {\em incomplete information}.
We assume that the designer has prior knowledge of the underlying
metric, (given by the graph $G$ and the shortest path metric induced
by the costs $c_e$), but is {\em uncertain} about the requested subset
of players. We consider two different models, the {\em adversarial
model} and the {\em stochastic model}. In the former, the designer
{\em knows nothing} about the number or the positions of the $s_i$'s
and has as goal to process the graph and choose a single, {\em
universal} cost-sharing protocol that has low PoA against {\em all
possible} requested subsets. Here, no distributional assumptions are
made about arrivals of players, and take the worst-case approach similarly to
Competitive Analysis. Once the designer selects the protocol, then an
adversary will choose the requested subset of players and their
positions in the graph (the $s_i$'s), in a way that {\em maximizes}
the PoA of the induced game. In the stochastic model, the
players/vertices are activated according to some probability
distribution which is given to the designer. The goal is now to choose
a universal protocol where the expected worst-case cost in the Nash
equilibrium is not far from the expected optimal cost.
\begin{example}{\bf (Ordered protocols)}. An important special class
with interesting properties is that of {\em ordered protocols}. The
designer decides a total order of the users, and when a subset of
players uses some edge, the full cost is covered by the player who
comes first in the order. Any NE of the induced game corresponds to
the solution produced by the Greedy Algorithm for the MST: each
player is connected, via a shortest path, with the component of the
players that come before him in the order. The analysis of the PoA
in the uniform model boils down to the analysis of the Greedy
Algorithm for the OSTP, where the worst-case order is considered.
The following example demonstrates that even this special class of
ordered protocols becomes very rich, once the designer has prior
knowledge of the underlying metric space. Uniform protocols throw
away this crucial component, the structure of the underlying metric,
that universal protocols can use in their favor to come up with
better PoA guarantees.
{\footnotesize
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c c c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{line.png} &
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{diamond.png} &
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{square.png}\\
$(a)$&$(b)$&$(c)$
\end{tabular}
\caption{\footnotesize In $(a)$ and $(b)$ we assume two orders on the vertices,
denoted by $q_i$ or $p_i$. The $q$-order is adversarially chosen and
simulates the adversary for the OSTP~\cite{IW91}, that
results to high PoA of $\Omega(\log k)$. The $p$-order results to
constant PoA. $(c)$ shows an example where both the {\em best}
ordered protocol and the Shapley protocol have PoA $\geq 5/4$,
whereas there is an {\em intermediate} protocol with PoA $1$. In edges
with no written cost, we consider the unit cost; we take $\varepsilon > 0$
arbitrarily small.}
\label{fig:line_diam_sq}
\end{figure}
}
\vspace{-1mm}
\begin{description}
\item{Uniform protocols}. The designer chooses an order of the players
$1,\ldots, k$ without prior knowledge of the graph. The adversary
constructs a worst-case graph, by simulating the adversary for the
Greedy Algorithm of the OSTP~\cite{IW91}, and places the players accordingly
(see for example Figure~\ref{fig:line_diam_sq}(a),(b), the $q$
labels). Therefore the PoA of uniform ordered protocol is $\Omega
(\log k)$~\cite{CRV10}.
\item{Universal protocols}. The designer takes into account the graph;
consider the worst-case graph for the Greedy Algorithm of the OSTP
(illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:line_diam_sq}(a),(b) for a small
number of players). For the graph of
Figure~\ref{fig:line_diam_sq}(a), choose the linear order dictated
from the path $p_1,\ldots, p_9$ (say from left to right). For the
graph of Figure~\ref{fig:line_diam_sq}(b) order the vertices
according to their distance from $t$, $p_1,\ldots, p_{11}$. The
adversary will choose $k$ and the positions of the players
($s_1,\ldots, s_k$). In both cases, it is not hard to see that, {\em
no matter which subset of players the adversary chooses}, the PoA
remains constant as $k$ grows.
\end{description}
\vspace{-2mm}
\label{ex:order}
\end{example}
\begin{example}{\bf (Generalized weighted Shapley).}
In \cite{CRV10}, it was shown that ordered protocols are essentially
optimal among uniform protocols. In our model, the choice of the
optimal method may depend on the underlying graph metric. Take the
example in Figure~\ref{fig:line_diam_sq}(c). By using Shapley cost sharing
the adversary can choose $v_1,v_2,v_3$ and in the Nash equilibrium $v_1$,
$v_3$ connect directly to $t$ and $v_2$ connects through $v_1$. Regarding
{\em any} ordered protocol, the square defined by the $v_i$'s
contains a path of length $2$ where the middle vertex comes {\em
last} in the order. The adversary will select this triplet of
players, say $v_1,v_2,v_3$. In the Nash equilibrium, $v_1$ connects
directly to $t$, $v_3$ and $v_2$ connect through $v_1$.
In both cases, the cost of the Nash equilibria is $5$ and the minimum Steiner tree
that connects those vertices with $t$ has cost $4$ (by ignoring $\varepsilon$)
and therefore, PoA $\geq 5/4$.
However the following (generalized Shapley) protocol, has
$PoA=1$. Partition the players into two sets
$S_1=\{v_1,v_2\},S_2=\{v_3,v_4\}$. If players from both
partitions appear on some edge, then the cost is charged only
to players from $S_1$. Players that belong to the same
partition share the cost equally. One can verify that for all
possible subsets of players this protocol produces only
optimal equilibria.
\label{ex:GWS}
\end{example}
\paragraph{Results.}
We propose a framework for the design of (universal) network
cost-sharing protocols with good equilibria, in situations where the
designer has incomplete information about the input. We consider two
different models, the {\em adversarial} and the {\em stochastic}. In
both models, the designer has prior knowledge of the underlying metric
but the requested subset of the players is {\em not known} and is
activated either in an adversarial manner (adversarial model) or is
drawn from a known probability distribution (stochastic model). The
central question we address is: {\em to what extent does prior
knowledge of the metric help in good network design under
uncertainty?}
For the adversarial model, we first demonstrate that there exist
classes of graph metrics where prior knowledge of the underlying
metric can dramatically improve the performance of good network
cost-sharing design. For {\em outerplanar} graph metrics, we provide a
universal ordered cost-sharing protocol with constant PoA, against any
choice of the adversary. This is in contrast to uniform protocols
that ignore the graph and cannot achieve PoA better than $\Omega (\log
k)$ in outerplanar metrics.
Our main technical result shows that there exist graph metrics, for
which knowing the underlying metric does not help the designer, and
{\em any universal} protocol has PoA of $\Omega(\log k)$. This matches
the upper bound of $O(\log k)$ that can be achieved without prior
knowledge of the metric~\cite{IW91,CRV10}.
Then we switch to the stochastic model, where each player is
independently activated according to some probability that is known to
the designer. We show that there exists a {\em randomized} ordered
protocol that achieves constant PoA. By using standard
derandomization techniques~\cite{WZ07,ST08}, we produce a {\em
deterministic} ordered protocol that achieves constant PoA. We
remark, that the first result holds also for the {\em black-box}
model, where the probabilities are not known to the designer, but is
allowed to draw independent (polynomially many) samples.
Our results for the adversarial model motivate the following question
that is left open.
\noindent {\bf Open Question:} For which metric spaces can one design
universal protocols with constant PoA? What sort of structural graph
properties are needed to obtain good guarantees?
\vspace{5pt}
\paragraph{Techniques.}
We prove our main lower bound for the adversarial model in two parts. In the first part
(Section~\ref{generalLB}) we bound the PoA achieved by
{\em any ordered} protocol.
Our origin is a well-known ``zig-zag'' {\em ordered} structure that
has been used to show a lower bound on the Greedy Algorithm of the
OSTP (see the labeled path $(q_1,q_6,q_4,\ldots,q_2)$ in
Figure~\ref{fig:line_diam_sq}(a)). The challenge is to show that high
dimensional hypercubes exhibit such a distance preserving structure
{\em no matter how the vertices are ordered}. Section~\ref{generalLB} is devoted to this and we believe that this is
of independent interest.
We show the existence proof by employing powerful tools from Extremal
Combinatorics and in particular Ramsey Theory~\cite{Ram90}. We are
inspired by a Ramsey-type result due to Alon et al.~\cite{AlonRSV06},
in which they show that for any given length $\ell\geq 5$, any
$r$-edge coloring of a high dimensional hypercube contains a
monochromatic cycle of length $2\ell$. Unfortunately, we cannot
immediately use their results, but we show a similar Ramsey-type
result for a different, carefully constructed structure; we assert
that every 2-edge coloring of high dimensional hypercubes $Q_n$
contains a monochromatic copy of that structure. Then, we prescribe a
special $2$-edge-coloring that depends on the ordering of $Q_n$, so
that the special subgraph preserves some nice labeling
properties.
A suitable subset of the subgraph's vertices can be 1-embedded into a
hypercube of lower dimension. Recursively, we show existence of the
desired {\em distance preserving} structure.
In the second part (Section~4), we extend the lower bound to {\em all
universal} cost-sharing protocols, by using the characterization of
\cite{CRV10}. At a high level, we use as basis the construction for
the ordered protocol and create ``multiple copies"\footnote{Note that
the standard complexity measure, to analyze the inefficiency of
equilibria, is the number of participants, $k$, and not the total
number of vertices in the graph (see for example
\cite{ADKTWR08,CRV10}).}. The adversary will choose different
subsets of players, depending on whether the designer chose protocols
``closer'' to Shapley or to ordered. In the latter case, we use
arguments from Matching Theory to guarantee existence of ordered-like
players in one of the hypercubes.
For the stochastic model (Section~\ref{sec:stochastic}), we construct
an approximate minimum Steiner tree over a subset of vertices which
are drawn from the known probability distribution. This tree is used
as a base to construct a spanning tree, which determines a total order
over the vertices. We finally produce a deterministic order by
applying standard derandomization techniques~\cite{WZ07,ST08}.
\section{Lower Bound of Ordered Protocols}
\label{generalLB}
The main result of this section is that the PoA of {\em any} ordered
protocol is $\Omega(\log k)$ which is tight. We formally define
(Definition~\ref{def:badOrder}) the `zig-zag' pattern of the lower
bounds of the Greedy Algorithm of the OSTP (see
Example~\ref{ex:order}(a) and Figure~\ref{fig:badPath}). Then the main
technical challenge is to show that {\em for any} ordering of the
vertices of high dimensional hypercubes, there always exists a {\em
distance preserving} path, such that the order of its vertices
follows that zig-zag pattern. Finally, by connecting any two vertices
of the hypercube with a direct edge of suitable cost, similar to the
example in Figure\ref{fig:line_diam_sq}(a), we get the final lower
bound construction.
\begin{definition}[Classes]
\label{def:badOrderSets}
For $r>0$, and for a path graph $P=(v_0,\ldots, v_{2^{r}})$ of $2^r+1$
vertices, we define a partition of the vertices into $r+1$ {\em
classes}, $D_0,D_1,\ldots, D_r$, as follows:
Class $0$ contains the endpoints of $P$, $D_0 = \{v_0,v_{2^r}\}$. For
every $j\in [r]$, $D_j=\{v_i|\left(i \mod 2^{r-j}\right) = 0 \mbox{
and } \left(i \mod 2^{r-j+1}\right) \neq 0\}$. For $v \in D_j$, $w
\in D_{j'}$ and $ j < j'$, we say that $v$ belongs to a {\em lower}
class than $w$ (and $w$ belongs to a {\em higher} class than $v$).
\end{definition}
As an example, consider the path $P=
(v_0,v_1,v_2,v_3,v_4,v_5,v_6,v_7,v_8)$, where $r=3$. Then, $D_0 =
\{v_0,v_8\}$, $D_1 = \{v_4\}$, $D_2 = \{v_2,v_6\}$ and $D_3 =
\{v_1,v_3,v_5,v_7\}$. Note that always $|D_0 |=2$ and for $j \neq 0$,
$|D_j|=2^{j-1}$.
For $j > 0$ and $v_i \in D_j$, we define the {\em parents} of $v_i$ as
$\Pi(v_i) = \{ w| d_P(v_i,w)=2^{r-j}\}$, i.e. the closest vertices
that belong to lower classes. Remark that for all $v\notin \{v_0,
v_{2^{r}}\}$ i) the cardinality of $\Pi(v)$ is $2$, ii) the vertices
of $\Pi(v)$ belong to lower classes than $v$, iii) all vertices
between $v$ and any vertex of $\Pi(v)$ belong to higher classes than
$v$. We are now ready to define the ``zig-zag" pattern.
\begin{definition}[Zig-zag pattern]
\label{def:badOrder}
We call a path graph $P=(v_0,v_1, \ldots, v_{2^{r}})$, with distinct integer labels $\pi$, {\em
zig-zag}, and we denote it by $P_r(\pi)$, if for every $i \notin \{0,{2^{r}}\}$, $\pi(w) <\pi(v_i)$ for all $w \in \Pi(v_i)$.
\end{definition}
An example of such a path for $r=3$ is shown in
Figure~\ref{fig:badPath}. Our main result of this section is that
there exist graphs, high dimensional hypercubes, such that for any
order $\pi$, $P_r(\pi)$ always appears as a {\em distance preserving}
subgraph. Our proof is existential and uses Ramsey theory.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[xscale=1.9,yscale=0.2,decoration={markings, mark=between positions 0 and 1 step 10pt with { \draw [fill] (0,0) circle [radius=1.5pt];}}]
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue!20,minimum width =0.5 cm] at (0,0) (v0) {\small{$\mathbf{1}$}} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue!20,minimum width =0.5 cm] at (1,0) (v1) {\small{$\mathbf{8}$}} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue!20,minimum width =0.5 cm] at (2,0) (v2) {\small{$\mathbf{6}$}} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue!20,minimum width =0.5 cm] at (3,0) (v3) {\small{$\mathbf{7}$}} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue!20,minimum width =0.5 cm] at (4,0) (v4) {\small{$\mathbf{3}$}} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue!20,minimum width =0.5 cm] at (5,0) (v5) {\small{$\mathbf{5}$}} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue!20,minimum width =0.5 cm] at (6,0) (v6) {\small{$\mathbf{4}$}} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue!20,minimum width =0.5 cm] at (7,0) (v7) {\small{$\mathbf{9}$}} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue!20,minimum width =0.5 cm] at (8,0) (v8) {\small{$\mathbf{2}$}} ;
\path[draw, thick,-]
(v0) edge (v1)
(v1) edge (v2)
(v2) edge (v3)
(v3) edge (v4)
(v4) edge (v5)
(v5) edge (v6)
(v6) edge (v7)
(v7) edge (v8);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{An example of a $P_3(\pi)$ path. The numbers correspond to the labels.}
\label{fig:badPath}
\end{figure}
\vspace{5pt} \noindent{\bf Proof Overview:} The proof is by induction
and in the inductive step our starting point is the $n$-th dimensional
hypercube $Q_n$. Given an ordering/labeling $\pi$ of the vertices of
$Q_n$ we first show that $Q_n$ contains a subgraph $W$ which is
isomorphic to a `pseudo-hypercube' $Q^2_m$ ($m<n$) where the labeling
of its vertices satisfies a special property (to be described
shortly). $Q^2_m$ is defined by replacing each edge of $Q_m$ by a
2-edge path (of length two)\footnote{See $Q_m^2$ of
Definition~\ref{def:Qn,s} and Figure~\ref{fig:Q2,4}a for an
illustration}.
{\em Labeling property}: For the subgraph $W$ we require that all such
newly formed 2-edge paths, are $P_1(\pi)$ paths, i.e. the label
of the middle vertex is greater than the labels of the endpoints
(Figure~\ref{fig:Q2,4}(a) shows such a labeling).
Next, we contract all such 2-edge paths of $Q^2_m$ into single edges,
resulting in a graph isomorphic to $Q_m$; this is the hypercube used
for the next step. Note that each contracted edge still corresponds to
a path in $Q_n$. Therefore, after $r$ recursive steps, each edge
corresponds to a $2^r$ path of $Q_n$. Further, note that such a path
is a $P_r(\pi)$ path, due to the labeling property that we preserve at
each step. We require that, at the end of the last inductive step,
$Q_m=Q_1$ (a single edge), and (by unfolding it) we show that this edge
corresponds to a distance preserving subgraph of the original
graph/hupercube. At each step, $m<n$; the relation between $n$ and $m$
is determined by a Ramsey-type argument.
We next describe the basic ingredients that we use to show existence of
$W$.
We apply a coloring scheme to the edges of $Q_n$ that depends on the
order of the vertices.
{\em Coloring Scheme}: Consider $Q_n$ as a bipartite $Q_n=(A,B,E)$.
For any edge $(v,u)$, with $v\in A$ and $u \in B$, if the $v$'s label
is smaller than $u$'s, we paint the edge blue, otherwise we paint it red.
By a Ramsey-type argument we show that $Q_n$
has a {\em monochromatic} subgraph isomorphic to a specially defined
graph $G_m$; $G_m$ is carefully specified in such a way that it
contains at least two subgraphs isomorphic to pseudo-hypercubes
$Q^2_m$. The special property of those two subgraphs is described
next.
Let $H_1$ and $H_2$ be the two half cubes\footnote{The two half-cubes
of order $n$ are formed from $Q_n$ by connecting all pairs of
vertices with distance exactly two and dropping all other edges.}
of $Q_n$ and let $V(H_1) = A$ and $V(H_2)=B$. Observe that if $Q^2_m$
is a subgraph of $Q_n$ then the corresponding $Q_m$ is an induced
subgraph of either $H_1$ or $H_2$. We carefully construct $G_m$ such
that it contains subgraphs $W_1$ and $W_2$ isomorphic to $Q^2_m$,
whose corresponding $Q_m$'s are induced subgraphs of $H_1$ and $H_2$,
respectively. The color of $G_m$ determines which of the $W_1$ and
$W_2$ will serve as the desired $W$.
In particular, if the color is
blue, then for every edge $(v,u)$, with $v \in V(H_1)$ and $u \in
V(H_2)$, it should hold that $v$'s label
is smaller than $u$'s and therefore the
labeling property is satisfied for $W_1$; similarly, if the color is
red, $W_2$ serves as $W$.
\vspace{5pt}
\noindent{\bf Proof Roadmap.} The whole proof of the lower bound
proceeds in several steps in the following sections. In
Section~\ref{sec:Gm} we give the formal definition of the subgraph
$G_m$ of a hypercube $Q_n$. Section~\ref{sec:ramsey} is devoted to
show that every $2$-edge coloring of a (suitably) high dimensional
hypercube contains a monochromatic copy of $G_m$
(Lemma~\ref{lem:monochrGm}), by using Ramsey theory. Then, in
Section~\ref{sec:coloring} we show that, for any ordering of the
vertices of $Q_n$, we can define a special $2$-edge-coloring
, so that there exists a $Q^2_m$
subgraph of $G_m$ that preserves the Labeling property
(Lemma~\ref{lem:isomToQ_m^2}).
At last, in Section~\ref{sec:LBconstruction}, by a recursive
application of the combination of the Ramsey-type result and the
coloring, we prove the existence of the {\em zig-zag} path in high
dimensional hypercubes (Theorem~\ref{thm:badPath}). We then show how
to construct a graph that serves as lower bound for all ordered
protocols (Theorem~\ref{thm:LBOrdered}). This is done by connecting
any two edges of the hypercube with a direct edge of appropriate cost,
similar to the example in
Figure~\ref{fig:line_diam_sq}(a).
\paragraph{Definitions and notation on Hypercubes.} We denote by
$[r,s]$ (for $r\leq s$) the set of integers $\{r,r+1,\ldots, s-1,s\}$,
but when $r=1$, we simply write $[s]$. We follow definitions and
notation of \cite{AlonRSV06}. Let $Q_n$ be the graph of the
$n$-dimensional hypercube whose vertex set is $\{0,1\}^n$. We
represent a vertex $v$ of $V(Q_n)$ by an $n$-bit string $x=\<
x_1\ldots x_n\> $, where $x_i\in \{0,1\}$. By $\< xy\> $ or $xy$ we
denote the concatenation of an $r$-bit string $x$ with an $s$-bit
string $y$, i.e. $xy=\< x_1\ldots x_r y_1\ldots x_s\> $. $x=\< x_j\>
_{j=1}^r$ is the concatenation of its $r$ bits. An edge is defined
between any two vertices that differ only in a single bit. We call
this bit, {\em flip-bit}, and we denote it by `$*$'. For example,
$x=\< 11100\> , y=\< 11000\> $ are two vertices of $Q_5$ and $(x,y)=\<
11*00\> $ is the edge that connects them. The distance between two
vertices $x,y$ is defined by their Hamming distance,
$d(v,u)=|\{j:x_j\neq y_j\}|$. For a fixed subset of coordinates
$R\subseteq [n]$, we extend the definition of the distance as follows,
\begin{center}
$d(x,y,R) = \left\{
\begin{array}{l l}
d(x,y), & \quad \mbox{if } \forall j\in [n] \setminus R,\; x_j=y_j \\
\infty, & \quad \mbox{otherwise.} \\
\end{array} \right.$
\end{center}
We define the {\em level} of a vertex $x$ by the number of `ones' it
contains, $\sum_{i=1}^nx_i$. We denote by $L_i$ the set of
vertices of level $i\in [0,n]$. We define the {\em prefix sum} of an
edge $e=(x,y)$, where the flip-bit is in the $j$-th coordinate, by
$p(e)=\sum_{i=1}^{j-1}x_i$. We represent any ordering $\pi$ of
$V(Q_n)$, by labeling the vertices with labels $1,\ldots, 2^n$, where
label $i$ corresponds to ranking $i$ in
$\pi$.
\subsection{Description of $G_m$}
\label{sec:Gm}
For a positive integer $m$, we define a graph $G_m=(V_m,E_m)$ that is
a restriction of $Q_{4m}$ on $V_m=V_1\cup V_2 \cup V_3 \subseteq
V(Q_{4m})$. A vertex of $V_1$ is defined by $2m-1$ concatenations of
pairs $\< 01\> $ and $\< 10\> $ and a single pair $\< 00\> $ that
appears in the {\em second} half of the string. A vertex of $V_2$ is
defined by $2m$ concatenations of $\< 01\> $ and $\< 10\> $. A vertex
of $V_3$ is defined by $2m-2$ concatenations of $\< 01\> $ and $\<
10\> $, one pair $\< 11\> $ that appears on the first half of the
string, and one pair $\< 00\> $ that appears on the second half. For
example, for $m=2$, $\< 01\;10\;00\;10\> \in V_1$, $\<
01\;10\;10\;10\> \in V_2$, $\< 01\;11\;10\;00\> \in V_3$. More
formally, let $A = \{\< 01\> ,\< 10\> \}$, then the subsets $V_1, V_2,
V_3$ are defined as follows:
\begin{eqnarray*}
V_1:=V_1(m) =& \{\< a_j b_j\> _{j=1}^{2m}|& \exists i \in [m+1,2m] \mbox{ s.t. } \< a_i b_i\> = \< 00\>
\mbox{ and } \forall j\neq i, \< a_j b_j\> \in A \},\\
V_2:=V_2(m) =& \{\< a_j b_j\> _{j=1}^{2m}|&\forall j, \< a_j b_j\> \in A \},\\
V_3:=V_3(m) = &\{\< a_j b_j\> _{j=1}^{2m}| & \exists i_1 \in [m], \exists i_2 \in [m+1,2m] \mbox{ s.t. } \\
&& \< a_{i_1} b_{i_1}\> = \< 11\> , \; \< a_{i_2} b_{i_2}\> = \< 00\> \mbox{ and } \forall j\neq i_1,i_2, \< a_j b_j\> \in A\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Observe that $G_m$ is bipartite with vertex partitions $V_1$ and
$V_2\cup V_3$, as vertices of $V_1$ belong to level $2m-1$, while vertices of
$V_2\cup V_3$ to level $2m$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:1ConnectionofHd}
Every pair of vertices $x,x' \in V_1(m)$ with $d(x,x',[2m])=2$, have a
unique common neighbor $y \in V_3(m)$. Also, every pair of vertices $x,x'
\in V_2(m)$, with $d(x,x',[2m+1,4m])=2$, have a unique common neighbor $y \in
V_1(m)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that (by definition) if $d(x,x',R)\neq \infty$ then $x,x'$ should coincide in
{\em all but} the $R$ coordinates. For the first statement, observe
that the premises of the Lemma hold only if there exists $s \in [m]$
such that $x_{2s-1}x_{2s}=\< 10\> $ and $x'_{2s-1}x'_{2s}=\< 01\> $
(or the other way around), in which case the required vertex $y$
from $V_3(m)$ has $y_{2s-1}y_{2s}=\< 11\> $; the rest of the bits
are the same among $x,x',y$. For the second statement, the premises
of the Lemma hold only if there exists an $s \in [m+1,2m]$ such that
$x_{2s-1}x_{2s}=\< 10\> $ and $x'_{2s-1}x'_{2s}=\< 01\> $ (or the
other way around), in which case the required vertex $y$ from $V_1(m)$
has $y_{2s-1}y_{2s}=\< 00\> $ and the rest of the bits are the same among $x,x',y$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Ramsey-type Theorem}
\label{sec:ramsey}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:monochrGm}
For any positive integer $m$, and for sufficiently large $n \geq
n_0=g(m)$, any 2-edge coloring $\chi$ of $Q_n$, contains a
monochromatic copy of $G_{m}$\footnote{The result could be extended to
any (fixed) number of colors, but we need only two for our application.}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof follows ideas of Alon et al.~\cite{AlonRSV06}. Consider a
hypercube $Q_n$, with sufficiently large $n > 6m$ to be determined
later, and some arbitrary $2$-edge-coloring
$\chi:E(Q_n)\rightarrow\{1,2\}$. Let $E^*$ be the set of edges
between vertices of $L_{4m-1}$ and $L_{4m}$ (recall that $L_i = \{
v| w(v) = i\}$).
Each edge $e \in E^*$ contains $4m-1$ 1's, a flip-bit represented by $*$ and
the rest of the coordinates are $0$. Moreover, $e$ is uniquely
determined by its $4m$ non-zero coordinates $R_e\subseteq [n]$
and its prefix sum $p(e)\in [0,4m-1]$ (number of $1'$s before the flip-bit).
Therefore, the color $\chi(e)$ defines a coloring of the pair
$(R_e,p(e))$, i.e. $\chi(e) = \chi(R_e,p(e))$. For each subset
$R\subset [n]$ of
$4m$ coordinates, we denote by $c(R)=(\chi(R,0),...,\chi(R,4m-1))$ the
color induced by the edge coloring. The coloring of all subsets $R$
defines a coloring of the complete $4m$-uniform hypergraph of $[n]$
using $2^{4m}$ colors.
By Ramsey's Theorem for hypergraphs~\cite{Ram90}, there exists
$n_0=g(m)$ such that for any $n\geq n_0$ there exists some subset $U
\subset [n]$ of size $6m$ such that all $4m$-subsets $R \subset U$
have the same color $c(R) = c^*$. Therefore, for every $R_1, R_2
\subset U$ and $p \in [0,4m-1]$, it is
$\chi(R_1,p)=\chi(R_2,p)=c_p$. Since $p$ takes $4m$ values and there
are only two different colors, there must exist $2m$ indices
$p_0,\ldots, p_{2m-1} \in [0,4m-1]$ with the same color $\chi(R,p_i)
= \chi^*$, for all $R \subset U$, $|R| = 4m$ and $i \in [0,2m-1]$.
It remains to show that the graph formed with the edges that are
determined by those prefix sums, contains a monochromatic copy of
$G_m$. We will show this by constructing those edges from $E_{m}$ (the
set of edges of $G_{m}$). By inserting blocks of $1$'s
of suitable length among the bits of the edges of $E_m$, we
construct the bits at the coordinates of $U$. The rest of the bits ($n-|U|$) are set to
zero.
Let $1^{r}$ be a string of $r$ 1's and define $\beta_i =
1^{p_i-p_{i-1}-1}$ for $i \in [2m-1]$, $\beta_0=1^{p_0}$ and
$\beta_{2m} = 1^{4m-1-p_{2m-1}}$. For any edge $e = \< a_jb_j\> _j \in
E_m$, we insert $\beta _0$ at the beginning of the string, for $j \in
[m]$ we insert $\beta_{j}$ between $a_j$ and $b_j$ and for $j \in
[m+1,2m]$ we insert the string $\beta_{j}$ after $b_j$.
Recall that each edge of $E_m$ contains exactly $2m$ zero bits. Also
notice that $\sum_j |\beta_j| = p_0 +
\sum_{i=1}^{2m-1}\left(p_i-p_{i-1}-1\right)+ 4m-1-p_{2m-1} =
-(2m-1)+4m-1=2m.$ Therefore, in total we have $6m$ bits (same as the
size of $U$) and $4m$ non-zero bits (same as the size of $R$). These
$6m$ bits are put precisely at the coordinates of $U$. The rest $n-6m$
of the coordinates are filled with zeros.
It remains to show that for such edges the prefix of the flip-bit is
{\em always} one of the $p_0, \ldots , p_{2m-1}$. This would imply
that all these edges are monochromatic. Furthermore, all but $4m$
coordinates are fixed and the $4m$ coordinates form exactly the sets
$V_1(m), V_2(m), V_3(m)$; therefore, the monochromatic subgraph is
isomorphic to $G_m$.
For any edge $e = \< a_jb_j\> _j \in E_m$, let the flip-bit be at position:
\begin{itemize}
\item $a_j$ for $j \in [m]$. Its prefix is $\sum_{i=0}^{j-1}\beta_i +
(j-1) = p_{j-1}$, where the term $j-1$ corresponds to the number of
pairs $\< a_sb_s\> $ with $s < j$, each of which contributes to the
prefix with a single $1$.
\item $b_j$ for $j \in [m]$. Since $j \leq m$, $a_j = 1$. Then the
prefix equals to $\sum_{i=0}^{j}\beta_i + (j-1) +1 = p_j$.
\item $a_j$ or $b_j$ for $j \in [m+1,2m]$. For such $j$, $\< a_jb_j\>
\in \{ \< 0* \> , \< *0 \> \}$ and all other pairs belong to $A$.
Therefore, the prefix is equal to $\sum_{i=0}^{j-1}\beta_i + (j-1) =
p_{j-1}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
\subsection{Coloring based on the labels}
\label{sec:coloring}
This part of the proof shows that for any ordering of the vertices of
a hypercube $Q_n$, there is a $2$-edge coloring with the following
property: {\em in the monochromatic $G_m$, either all the vertices of $V_1$
or all the vertices of $V_2$ have neighbors in $G_m$ with only higher
label.} This implies a desired labeling property for a $Q_m^2$
subgraph of $Q_n$, the structure of which is defined next.
\begin{definition}
\label{def:Qn,s}
We define $Q_n^s$ to be a subdivision of $Q_n$, by replacing each edge
by a path of length $s$. $Q_n^1$ is simply $Q_n$.
We denote by $Z(Q^s_n)$ the set of all pairs of vertices $(x,x')$,
which correspond to edges of $Q_n$; $P(x,x')$ is the corresponding
path in $Q^s_n$. For every $(x,x') \in Z(Q_m^2)$, we denote by
$\theta(x,x')$ the middle vertex of $P(x,x')$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c c}
\begin{tikzpicture}[xscale=0.25,yscale=0.25,decoration={markings, mark=between positions 0 and 1 step 10pt with { \draw [fill] (0,0) circle [radius=1.5pt];}}]
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=black,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-4pt]below left:\scriptsize{$1$}}] at (2,0) (v1) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=black,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-4pt]below left:\scriptsize{$4$}}] at (2,8) (v2) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=black,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-4pt]below right:\scriptsize{$12$}}] at (10,8) (v3) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=black,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-4pt]below right:\scriptsize{$8$}}] at (10,0) (v4) {};
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=black,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-4pt]above left:\scriptsize{$11$}}] at (0,2) (v5) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=black,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-4pt]above left:\scriptsize{$2$}}] at (0,10) (v6) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=black,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-4pt]above right:\scriptsize{$5$}}] at (8,10) (v7) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=black,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-4pt]above right:\scriptsize{$3$}}] at (8,2) (v8) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]left:\scriptsize{$19$}}] at (2,4) (v12) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]below:\scriptsize{$13$}}] at (6,8) (v23) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]right:\scriptsize{$20$}}] at (10,4) (v34) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]below:\scriptsize{$10$}}] at (6,0) (v41) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-4pt]below left:\scriptsize{$15$}}] at (1,1) (v15) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-5pt]below left:\scriptsize{$6$}}] at (1,9) (v26) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-4pt]above right:\scriptsize{$14$}}] at (9,9) (v37) {};
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-5pt]above right:\scriptsize{$9$}}] at (9,1) (v48) {};
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]left:\scriptsize{$18$}}] at (0,6) (v56) {};
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]above:\scriptsize{$17$}}] at (4,10) (v67) {};
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]right:\scriptsize{$7$}}] at (8,6) (v78) {};
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.25pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]above:\scriptsize{$16$}}] at (4,2) (v85) {} ;
\path[postaction={decorate}] (2.5,0) to (3.5,0);
\path[draw, thick,-]
(v12) edge (v1)
(v12) edge (v2)
(v23) edge (v2)
(v23) edge (v3)
(v34) edge (v3)
(v34) edge (v4)
(v41) edge (v4)
(v41) edge (v1)
(v15) edge (v1)
(v15) edge (v5)
(v26) edge (v2)
(v26) edge (v6)
(v37) edge (v3)
(v37) edge (v7)
(v48) edge (v4)
(v48) edge (v8)
(v56) edge (v5)
(v56) edge (v6)
(v67) edge (v6)
(v67) edge (v7)
(v78) edge (v7)
(v78) edge (v8)
(v85) edge (v8)
(v85) edge (v5);
\end{tikzpicture}
\qquad\qquad
&
\qquad\qquad
\begin{tikzpicture}[xscale=0.3,yscale=0.3,decoration={markings, mark=between positions 0 and 1 step 10pt with { \draw [fill] (0,0) circle [radius=1.5pt];}}]
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=black,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]left:\scriptsize{$1$}}] at (0,0) (v0) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]left:\scriptsize{$12$}}] at (0,2) (v1) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]left:\scriptsize{$5$}}] at (0,4) (v2) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]left:\scriptsize{$6$}}] at (0,6) (v3) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=black,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]left:\scriptsize{$2$}}] at (0,8) (v4) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]below:\scriptsize{$7$}}] at (2,8) (v5) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]below:\scriptsize{$4$}}] at (4,8) (v6) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]below:\scriptsize{$9$}}] at (6,8) (v7) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=black,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]right:\scriptsize{$3$}}] at (8,8) (v8) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]right:\scriptsize{$14$}}] at (8,6) (v9) {} ;
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]right:\scriptsize{$13$}}] at (8,4) (v10) {};
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]right:\scriptsize{$16$}}] at (8,2) (v11) {};
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=black,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]right:\scriptsize{$8$}}] at (8,0) (v12) {};
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]above:\scriptsize{$15$}}] at (6,0) (v13) {};
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]above:\scriptsize{$10$}}] at (4,0) (v14) {};
\node[draw,circle,thick,fill=blue,inner sep=1.4pt,radius=0.5pt,label={[label distance=-2pt]above:\scriptsize{$11$}}] at (2,0) (v15) {};
\path[draw, thick,-]
(v0) edge (v1)
(v1) edge (v2)
(v2) edge (v3)
(v3) edge (v4)
(v4) edge (v5)
(v5) edge (v6)
(v6) edge (v7)
(v7) edge (v8)
(v8) edge (v9)
(v9) edge (v10)
(v10) edge (v11)
(v11) edge (v12)
(v12) edge (v13)
(v13) edge (v14)
(v14) edge (v15)
(v15) edge (v0);
\end{tikzpicture}\\
(a)\qquad\qquad & \qquad\qquad(b)
\end{tabular}
\caption{Examples of (a) $Q_3^2$ and (b) $Q_2^4$. The labels on the nodes are examples of the labeling
property, (a) after one inductive step, (b) after two inductive steps.}
\label{fig:Q2,4}
\end{figure}
\end{definition}
In the next lemma we show that for any ordering of the vertices of
$Q_n$, there exists a subgraph isomorphic to $Q_m^2$, such that the `middle'
vertices have higher label than their neighbors (Labeling Property).
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:isomToQ_m^2}
For any positive integer $m$, for all $n\geq n_0=g(m)$ and for any
ordering $\pi$ of $V(Q_n)$, there exists a subgraph $W$ of $Q_n$
that is isomorphic to $Q_m^2$, such that for every $(x,x') \in Z(W)$,
it is $\pi(\theta(x,x')) >\max\{ \pi(x),\pi(x')\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Choose a sufficiently large $n\geq n_0=g(m)$ as in
Lemma~\ref{lem:monochrGm}. Partition the vertices of $Q_{n}$ into
sets $\mathcal{O}, \mathcal{E}$ of vertices of odd and even level,
respectively.
We color the edges of $Q_n$ as follows. For every edge $e=(z,z')$
with $z\in \mathcal{O}$ and $z'\in \mathcal{E}$, if $\pi(z) <
\pi(z')$, then paint $e$ blue. Otherwise paint it red. Therefore,
for every blue edge, the endpoint in $\mathcal{O}$ has smaller label
than the endpoint in $\mathcal{E}$. The opposite holds for any red
edge.
Lemma~\ref{lem:monochrGm} implies that $Q_n$ contains a
monochromatic copy (blue or red) of $G_{m}$. Recall that $G_m$ is
bipartite between vertices of levels $L_{4m-1}$ and $L_{4m}$ and
that $V_1 \subset L_{4m-1} \subset \mathcal{O} $ and $V_2 \cup V_3
\subset L_{4m} \subset \mathcal{E}$.
Let $R\subset [n]$ be the subset of the $4m$ coordinates that
correspond to vertices of $G_m$. Also let $R_1$ and $R_2$ be the
subsets of the first $2m$ and the last $2m$ coordinates of $R$,
respectively.
First suppose that $G_m$ is blue. An immediate implication of our
coloring is that for every edge $(z,z') \in E_m$ with $z \in V_1$,
$z' \in V_2 \cup V_3$ it must be $\pi(z) < \pi(z')$. Fix a $2m$-bit
string $s$ that corresponds to a permissible bit assignment to the
$R_2$ coordinates of some vertex in $V_1$ (see Section
\ref{sec:Gm}). Define $W_s$ as the subset of vertices of $V_1$ where
the $R_2$ coordinates are set to $s$.
Recall that each of the first $m$ pairs $\< a_jb_j\> $, $j \in [m]$,
of a vertex $z\in W_s$, may take any of the two bit assignments $\<
01\> $ and $\< 10\> $. Hence, $|W_s|=2^m$.
Observe that we can embed $W_s$ into $Q_m$ with distortion 1 and
scaling factor $1/2$, by mapping the first $m$ pairs of bits into
single bits; map $\< 01\> $ to $0$ and $\< 10\> $ to $1$. Every two
vertices with distance $d$ in $Q_m$, have distance $2d$ in $Q_n$.
For every $x,x' \in W_s\subset V_1$ with $d(x,x')=2$,
Lemma~\ref{lem:1ConnectionofHd} implies that there exists
$y=\theta(x,x')\in V_3$, such that $d(x,y) = d(x',y) = 1$. Therefore,
$\pi(y) > \max\{\pi(x),\pi(x')\}$. Take the union $Y=\cup_y$ of
all such vertices $y$, then $W_s\cup Y$ induces a subgraph $W$
isomorphic to $Q_m^2$, that fulfills the labeling requirements.
The case of $G_m$ being red is similar. We focus only on vertices
$V_2$. Fix now a $2m$-bit string $s$ that corresponds to a
permissible bit assignment of the $R_1$ coordinates of a vertex in
$V_2$. Define $W_s$ as the subset of vertices of $V_2$ where the
$R_1$ coordinates are set to $s$. Similarly, we can embed $W_s$ into
$Q_m$ with distortion 1 and scaling factor $1/2$.
For every $x,x' \in W_s\subset V_2$ with $d(x,x')=2$, where the $R_1$
coordinates are fixed to $s$, Lemma~\ref{lem:1ConnectionofHd} implies
that there exists $y=\theta(x,x')\in V_1$, such that $d(x,y) = d(x',y)
= 1$. Therefore, $\pi(y) > \max\{\pi(x),\pi(x')\}$. Take the union
$Y=\cup_y$ of all such vertices $y$, then $W_s\cup Y$ induces a
subgraph $W$ isomorphic to $Q_m^2$, that fulfills the labeling
requirements.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Lower Bound Construction}
\label{sec:LBconstruction}
Now we are ready to prove the main theorem of this section.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:badPath}
For every positive integer $r$, and for sufficiently large $n\geq
n(r)$, there exists a graph $Q_n$ such that, for {\em every} ordering $\pi$
of its vertices, it contains a zig-zag {\em distance preserving} path
$P_r(\pi)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $g$ be a function as in Lemma~\ref{lem:monochrGm}. We
recursively define the sequence $n_0, n_1, \ldots, n_r$, such that
$n_r = 1$ and $n_{i-1} = g(n_{i})$, for $i \in [r]$.
We will show that $Q_{n_0}$ is the graph we are looking for.
\begin{claim}
\label{cl:mathInduction}
For every $i \in [0,r]$, and for any vertex ordering $\pi$ of
$Q_{n_0}$, it contains a subgraph isomorphic to $Q_{n_i}^{2^i}$, such
that for every $(x,x') \in Z(Q_{n_i}^{2^i})$, $P(x,x')$ is a distance
preserving path isomorphic to $P_i(\pi)$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
The proof is by induction on $i$. As a base case, $Q_{n_0}^{2^0} =
Q_{n_0}$ is the graph itself. An edge is trivially a path
$P_0(\pi)$, for any $\pi$.
Suppose now that $Q_{n_0}$ contains a subgraph isomorphic to
$Q_{n_i}^{2^i}$, for some $i<r$, such that for every $q \in
Z(Q_{n_i}^{2^i})$, $P(q)$ is a path $P_i(\pi)$. It is sufficient to
show that $Q_{n_i}^{2^i}$ contains a subgraph isomorphic to
$Q_{n_{i+1}}^{2^{i+1}}$, such that for every $q \in
Z(Q_{n_{i+1}}^{2^{i+1}})$, $P(q)$ is a path $P_{i+1}(\pi)$.
For every $(x,x')\in Z(Q_{n_i}^{2^i})$, if we replace $P(x,x')$ with
a direct edge $e=(x,x')$, the resulting graph is a copy of
$Q_{n_i}$. Applying Lemma~\ref{lem:isomToQ_m^2} on $Q_{n_i}$,
guarantees the existence of a subgraph $W$ isomorphic to
$Q_{n_{i+1}}^2$ ($n_i = g(n_{i+1})$), where for every $(y,y') \in
Z(W)$, $\pi(\theta(y,y')) > \max\{\pi(y),\pi(y')\}$. Each of the
edges $(y,\theta(y,y'))$ and $(y',\theta(y,y'))$ of $Q_{n_{i+1}}^2$
are replaced by a path $P_i(\pi)$ in $Q_{n_i}^{2^i}$. Therefore, $W$
is a copy of $Q_{n_{i+1}}^{2^{i+1}}$, with $P(y,y')$ being a path
$P_{i+1}(\pi)$.
\end{proof}
We now argue that the resulting $P_r(\pi)$ is a distance preserving
path. Our analysis indicate a sequence of hypercubes $Q_{n_0},
Q_{n_1}, \ldots, Q_{n_r}$. Recall that in Lemma
\ref{lem:isomToQ_m^2}, in order to get $Q_{n_{i+1}}$ from $Q_{n_{i}}$
we mapped $\< 01\> $ to $0$ and $\< 10\> $ to $1$ and the vertices of
$Q_{n_{i+1}}$ did not differ in any other bit but the ones we mapped.
Consider now the two vertices $x,x'$ of $Q_{n_r}=Q_1$ with bit-strings
$\< 0\> $ and $\< 1\> $, respectively. Their Hamming distance in their
original bit representation (in $Q_{n_0}$) should be $2^{r}$, the same
with their distance in $P_{r}(\pi)$. Moreover, if any two vertices of
$P_{r}(\pi)$ are closer in $Q_{n_0}$ than in $P_{r}(\pi)$, then this
would contradict the fact that $d_{Q_{n_0}}(x,x')=2^r$.
\end{proof}
Finally we extend $Q_n$ so that for any order $\pi$ of its vertices, a path $P_r(\pi)$ exists
along with the shortcuts as shown in the example in Figure~\ref{fig:line_diam_sq}(a).
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:LBOrdered}
Any ordered universal
cost-sharing protocol on undirected graphs admits a PoA of
$\Omega(\log k)$, where $k$ is the number of activated vertices.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $k=2^r+1$ for some positive integer $r$. From
Theorem~\ref{thm:badPath}, we know that for any vertex ordering
$\pi$ of $Q_{n(r)}$ there is a distance preserving path $P_r(\pi)$.
We use $Q_{n(r)}$ as a basis to construct the weighted graph
$\tilde{Q}_{n(r)}$ with vertex set $V(\tilde{Q}_{n(r)})=Q_{n(r)}\cup
\{t\}$, where $t$ is the designated root. We connect every pair of
vertices $x,y$ with a direct edge of cost $c_e=2^k$, if $t$ is one
of its endpoints, otherwise its cost is $c_e=d_{Q_{n(r)}}(x,y)$
(similar to Figure~\ref{fig:line_diam_sq}(a)).
The adversary selects to activate the vertices of $P_r(\pi)$, and
the lower bound follows; in the NE the players choose their direct
edges to connect with one of their parents (see
at the beginning of Section \ref{generalLB} for the term ``parent").
\end{proof}
\section{Outerplanar Graphs}
In this section we show that there exists a class of graph metrics,
prior knowledge of which can dramatically improve the performance of
good network cost-sharing design. For {\em outerplanar} graphs, we
provide a universal cost-sharing protocol with constant PoA. In
contrast, we stress that uniform protocols cannot achieve PoA better
than $\Omega (\log k)$, because the lower bound for the greedy
algorithm of the OSTP can be embedded in an outerplanar graph (see
Figure \ref{fig:circle}(a) for an illustration).
We next define an ordered universal cost-sharing protocol $\Xi_{tour}$, and
we show that it has constant PoA. W.l.o.g. we assume that the metric
space is defined by a given {\em biconnected} outerplanar
graph\footnote{If it is not already biconnected, we turn it into an
{\em equivalent} biconnected graph, by appropriately adding edges of
infinity cost. By {\em equivalent} we mean that any NE outcome and
the minimum Steiner tree solution remain unchanged after the
transformation. Equivalence is obvious since we only add edges of
infinity costs that cannot be used in neither any NE nor the minimum
Steiner tree outcome.}. Every biconnected graph admits a {\em
unique} Hamiltonian cycle~\cite{Sys79} that can be found in linear
time~\cite{CFN85}. $\Xi_{tour}$ orders the vertices according to the cyclic
order in which they appear in the Hamiltonian tour, starting from $t$
and proceeding in a clockwise order $\pi$. In Figure
\ref{fig:circle}(a), $\pi(q_8) < \pi(q_4) < \pi(q_9) <
\ldots<\pi(q_{15})$.
{\footnotesize
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{circle.png} \qquad & \qquad
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{proofUBouter.png} \\
$(a)$&$(b)$
\end{tabular}
\caption{\footnotesize $(a)$ shows an example of an outerplanar graph
where the order $q_i < q_{i+1}$ gives PoA of $\Omega(\log k)$. $(b)$
illustrates some elements from the proof of
Theorem~\ref{thm:UBouter}, focusing on cycle $C_2$. The dashed
components represent the optimum tree $T^*$.}
\label{fig:circle}
\end{figure}
}
As a warm-up, we first bound from above the PoA of $\Xi_{tour}$ for cycle
graphs, and then extend it to all outerplanar graphs.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:cycle}
The PoA of $\Xi_{tour}$ in cycle graphs is at most $2$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider a cycle graph $C = (V,E,t)$ and let $S\subseteq V$ be the
set of the activated vertices. Let $T^*$ be the minimum Steiner
tree (path) that connects $S\cup\{t\}$, and $a$, $b$ be its two
endpoints. Note that minimality of $T^*$ implies that $a, b \in S
\cup \{t\}$. $a$ and $b$ partition $C$ into two paths
$(T^*,C\setminus T^*)$
and $t$ divides further $T^*$ into two paths $P'_1$,
$P'_2$.
Let $S_1 = \{u_1, \ldots, u_{r}=a\}$ and $S_2=\{w_1, \ldots, w_{s}=b\}$ be
the activated vertices of $P'_1$ and $P'_2$, respectively. W.l.o.g., assume that
$\pi(u_i) < \pi(u_{i+1})$ and $\pi(w_{j+1}) <\pi(w_j)$, for all $i,j$.
Consider any NE, $\mathbf{P}=(P_i)_{i\in N}$. We bound from above the share of
each player $v \neq w_{s}$, by its distance from their immediate
predecessor in $\pi$, as follows. By adopting the convention that
$u_0=t$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
c_{u_i}(\mathbf{P}) \leq d(u_i,u_{i-1}), \;\;\forall i \in [r],
\qquad\qquad c_{w_j}(\mathbf{P}) \leq d(w_j,w_{j+1}), \;\;\forall j \in [s - 1].
\end{eqnarray*}
Also $c_{w_{s}}(\mathbf{P}) \leq d(w_{s},t)$. Overall,
\begin{eqnarray*}
c(\mathbf{P}) &=& \sum_{v \in S} c_v(\mathbf{P}) \leq
\sum_{u_i \in S_1} d(u_i,u_{i-1}) + \sum_{w_j \in S_2 - \{w_{s}\}} d(w_j,w_{j+1})+ d(w_{s},t)\\
& \leq& c(P'_1) + c(P'_2) + c(P'_2) \leq 2c(T^*).
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:UBouter}
The PoA of $\Xi_{tour}$ in outerplanar graphs is at most $8$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Based on the previous discussion, it is sufficient to consider only
biconnected outerplanar graphs with non-negative costs, including
infinity. Let $G=(V,E,t)$ be any such graph with $S$ being the set
of activated vertices.
Let $T^*$ be the minimum Steiner tree that connects $S \cup \{t\}$,
and $C$ be the unique Hamiltonian tour of $G$, forming its outer
face. Let $E^*=E(T^*)\setminus E(C)$ be the set of non-crossing
chords of $C$ that belong to $T^*$.
Then $C\cup E^*$ forms $|E^*| +1 = r$ cycles $C_1, \ldots, C_r$,
where every pair $C_i$, $C_j$ are either edge-disjoint or they have
a single common edge belonging to $E^*$. On the other hand, each
edge of $C$ belongs to exactly one $C_i$ and each edge of $E^*$
belongs to exactly two $C_i$'s. Figure \ref{fig:circle}(b) provides
an illustration.
For every $i\in [r]$, let $S_i = (S \cup \{t\}) \cap V(C_i)$ be the
activated vertices that lie in $C_i$ and $t_i$ be the vertex that is
first in $\pi$ among $S_i$. W.l.o.g. assume that, for all $i \in
[r-1]$, $\pi(t_i) \leq \pi(t_{i+1})$ (then $t_1=t$). Also let
$T^*_i$ be the subgraph of $T^*$ that intersects with $C_i$. Then
$T^*_i$ should be a path connecting $S_i$.
Consider any NE, $\mathbf{P}=(P_i)_{i\in S}$. We show separately that the
shares of all $S_i \setminus \{t_i\}$ are bounded by $4 c(T^*)$ and
the shares of all $t_i$'s are bounded by $4 c(T^*)$.
For the first case we use Lemma~\ref{lem:cycle}. For any cycle $C_i$,
by considering $t_i$ as the root, Lemma~\ref{lem:cycle}
provides a bound on the shares of $S_i \setminus \{t_i\}$. So, $\sum_{v\in S_i \setminus
\{t_i\}} c_v(\mathbf{P}) \leq 2c(T^*_i)$. Recall, that each edge of $E(T^*)$
belongs to at most two $C_i$'s, so by summing over all $i \in [r]$,
$$ \sum_{i \in [r]}\sum_{v\in S_i \setminus \{t_i\}} c_v(\mathbf{P})
\leq 2\sum_{i \in [r]} c(T^*_i) \leq 4c(T^*).$$
The second case requires more careful treatment. The endpoints
of the edges of $E^*$
divide $C$ into a partition of nonzero-length arcs, $A_1, \ldots,
A_n$, named based on their clockwise appearance in $C$, starting from
an arc containing $t$. For every $j \in [n]$, let $a_j$ and $b_j$ be
the two endpoints of $A_j$.
The share of each $t_i$ can be bounded by its distance from $t_{i-1}$, for $i >1$ (recall
that $t_1=t$).
Let $A_{s_i}$ be an arc that $t_i$ lies, then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_{i\in [2,r]} c_{t_i}(\mathbf{P}) \leq \sum_{i\in [2,r]}d(t_i, t_{i-1}) \leq \sum_{i\in [r]}( d(a_{s_i}, t_i) + d(t_{i},b_{s_i})) +
\sum_{j \in [n]\setminus\{s_1,\ldots,s_r\}} d(a_{j},b_{j})=F.
\end{eqnarray*}
We next upper bound $F$ by $\sum_{i\in [r]}2c(T_i^*)$.
Note that each arc $A_j$ belongs to exactly one $C_i$ and every $C_i$ contains at least one such arc
(otherwise $T^*$ would have a cycle).
We concentrate to a specific $C_i$ and show that the portion of $F$ associated with
$C_i$'s arcs is upper bounded by $2c(T_i^*)$.
Let $A_{i1},...,A_{i{n_i}}$ be the arcs belonging
to $C_i$ and $a_{ij}$, $b_{ij}$ be the endpoints of $A_{ij}$.
Also let $A_{is}$ be an arc containing $t_i$.
Recall that $T^*_i$ is a path and every edge of $E(C_i)\cap E^*$ belongs to
$T^*_i$. Therefore, $T^*_i$ contains entirely all but one $A_{ij}$, say $A_{im}$
(see also Figure~\ref{fig:circle}(b)).
We examine the two cases of $m=s$ and $m\neq s$ separately.
\noindent\textbf{Case 1: }$\mathbf{m=s}.$ $a_{is}$, $b_{is}$ (as endpoints of edges of $E^*$)
and $t_i$ are vertices of the path $T_i^*$. Therefore, either some path from $t_i$ to $a_{is}$
or some path from $t_i$ to $b_{is}$ belongs to $T_i^*$; w.l.o.g. assume that it is some path from $t_i$ to $a_{is}$.
Then $\sum_{j\in [n_i],j\neq s} d(a_{ij},b_{ij}) + d(t_i,a_{is}) \leq c(T^*_i)$. Moreover,
since $b_{is}$ and $t_i$ are vertices of $T_i^*$, $d(t_i,b_{is}) \leq c(T^*_i)$.
\noindent\textbf{Case 2: }$\mathbf{m\neq s}.$
Similarly, $\sum_{j\in [n_i],j\neq m,s} d(a_{ij},b_{ij}) + d(t_i,a_{is}) + d(t_i,b_{is}) \leq c(T^*_i)$.
Also $a_{im}$ and $b_{im}$ are vertices of $T^*_i$ and hence, $d(a_{im},b_{im})\leq c(T^*_i)$.
To sum up, in both cases it holds that
$$\sum_{j\in [n_i],j\neq s} d(a_{ij},b_{ij}) + d(t_i,a_{is}) + d(t_i,b_{is}) \leq 2c(T^*_i).$$
By summing over all $i$,
$F \leq \sum_{i\in [r]}2c(T_i^*) \leq 4 c(T^*).$
Finally, by summing over the whole $S$, $c(\mathbf{P}) = \sum_{v\in S} c_v(\mathbf{P}) \leq 8c(T^*)$.
\end{proof}
\section{Model and definitions}
\label{sec:prel}
\paragraph{Universal Cost-Sharing Protocols.}
A {\em multicast network cost-sharing game}, is specified by a
connected undirected graph $G=(V,E)$, with a designated root $t$ and
nonnegative weight $c_e$ for every edge $e$, a set of players
$S=\{1,\ldots, k\}$ and a cost-sharing protocol. Each player $i$ is
associated with a {\em terminal\footnote{We abuse notation and use $S$
to refer both to the players and their associated vertices.}}
$s_i$, which she needs to connect with $t$. We say that a vertex is
{\em activated} if there exists some requested player associated with
it. In the {\em adversarial model} the designer {\em knows nothing}
about the set $S$ of activated vertices, while in the {\em stochastic
model}, the vertices are activated according to some probability
distribution $\Pi$ which is known to the designer.
For any set $N$ of players, a {\em cost-sharing method}
$\xi:2^N\rightarrow \mathbb{R}_+^{|N|}$ decides, for every subset $R
\subseteq N$, the cost-share $\xi(i,R)$ for each player $i\in R$. A
natural rule is that the shares for players not included in $R$ should
always be $0$, i.e. if $i \notin R$, $\xi(i,R) = 0$. W.l.o.g. each
player is associated with a distinct vertex\footnote{ To see this, if
there are two players with $s_1= s_2 = v$, for some $v\in V$, we
modify the graph by connecting a new vertex $v'$ with $v$ via a
zero-cost edge and then we set $s_1= v$ and $s_2 = v'$. Neither the
optimum solution, nor any Nash equilibrium are affected by this
modification.}. For any graph $G$ and any set of players $N$, a
{\em cost-sharing protocol} $\Xi$ assigns, for every $e \in E$, some
cost-sharing method $\xi_e$ on $N$.
Following previous work~\cite{CRV10,FH13}, we focus on cost-sharing
protocols that satisfy the following natural properties:
\begin{enumerate}[label={(\arabic*)}]
\item {\em Budget-balance:} For every network
game induced by the cost sharing protocol $\Xi$, and
every outcome of it,
$\sum_{i \in R}\xi_e(i,R) = c_e$, for every edge $e$ with cost $c_e$.
\item {\em Separability:} For every network
game induced by the cost sharing protocol $\Xi$, the cost shares of each edge
are completely determined by the set of players using it.
\item {\em Stability:} In every network game induced by the cost-sharing
protocol $\Xi$, there exists at least one pure Nash equilibrium, regardless of the graph structure.
\end{enumerate}
We call a cost-sharing protocol $\Xi$ {\em universal}, if it satisfies
the above properties for any graph $G$, and it assigns the
cost-sharing method $\xi_e:2^V \rightarrow \mathbb{R}_+^{|V|}$ to edge $e$
based only on knowledge of $G$ (without knowledge of $S$\footnote{The methods should be defined on $V$, since every vertex
is potentially associated with some player.}) for the adversarial
model, while in the stochastic the method can in addition depend on
$\Pi$. Due to the characterization in \cite{CRV10}, we restrict
ourselves to the family of generalized weighted Shapley
protocols\footnote{\cite{CRV10} characterizes the linear protocols
(for every edge $e$ of cost $c_e \geq 0$, it assigns the method $c_e
\cdot \xi$, where $\xi$ is the method it assigns to any edge of unit
cost) to be the generalized weighted Shapley protocols. They further
showed that for any non-linear protocol, there exists a linear one
with at most the same PoA.}.
\paragraph{Generalized Weighted Shapley Protocol (GWSP).}
The {\em generalized weighted Shapley protocol} ({\em GWSP}) is defined by
the players' weights (parameters) $\{w_1,\ldots,w_n\}$
and an {\em ordered} partition of the players $\boldsymbol\Sigma = (U_1, \ldots, U_h)$.
An interpretation of $\boldsymbol\Sigma$ is that for $i<j$, players from $U_i$ ``arrives" before players from $U_j$.
More formally, for every edge $e$ of cost $c_e$, every set of players $R_e$ that uses $e$ and
for $s=\arg \min_j\{U_j|U_j \cap R_e \neq \emptyset\}$, the GWSP assigns the following method to $e$:
\[\xi_e(i,R_e)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{w_i}{\sum_{j \in U_s \cap R_e} w_j} c_e, \;\; & \mbox{if } i \in U_s \cap R_e \\
0,\;\; & \mbox{otherwise }
\end{array}
\right.\]
In the special case that each $U_i$
contains exactly one player, the protocol is called {\em ordered}. The order of the $U_i$ sets
indicates a permutation of the players, denoted by $\pi$.
\paragraph{(Pure) Nash Equilibrium (NE).} We denote by $\mathcal{P}_i$ the
strategy space of player $i$, i.e. the set of all the paths connecting
$s_i$ to $t$. $\mathbf{P} = (P_1, \ldots, P_k)$ denotes an {\em outcome} or a
{\em strategy profile}, where $P_i \in \mathcal{P}_i$ for all $i \in S$. As
usual, $\mathbf{P}_{-i}$ denotes the strategies of all players but
$i$.
Let $R_e$ be the set of players using edge $e \in E$ under $\mathbf{P}$. The
cost share of player $i$ induced by $\xi_e$'s is equal to $c_i(\mathbf{P}) =
\sum_{e \in P_i} \xi_e(i,R_e)$. The players' objective is to minimize
their cost share $c_i(\mathbf{P})$. A strategy profile $\mathbf{P} = (P_1, \ldots,
P_k)$ is a {\em Nash equilibrium (NE)} if for every player $i \in S$
and every strategy $P'_i \in \mathcal{P}_i$, $c_i(\mathbf{P}) \leq c_i(\mathbf{P}_{-i},P'_i).$
\paragraph{Price of Anarchy (PoA).}
The cost of an outcome
$\mathbf{P}=(P_1,\ldots,P_k)$ is defined as $c(\mathbf{P}) = \sum_{e \in \cup_i P_i}
c_e$, while $\mathbf{O}=(O_1,\ldots,O_k) \in \arg \min_{\mathbf{P}} c(\mathbf{P})$ is the
optimum solution.
The {\em Price of Anarchy (PoA)} is defined as the worst-case ratio of
the cost in a NE over the optimal cost in the game induced by $S$. In
the adversarial model the {\em worst-case} $S$ is chosen, while
in the stochastic model $S$ is drawn from a known distribution
$\Pi$. Formally, in the adversarial model we define the PoA of a
protocol $\Xi$ on $G$ as
$$PoA(G,\Xi) = \max_{\substack{S\subseteq V\setminus\{t\}}} \frac{\max_{\mathbf{P} \in
\;\mathcal{N}} c(\mathbf{P})}{c(\mathbf{O})}, $$
where $\mathcal{N}$ is the
set of all NE of the game induced by $\Xi$ and $S$ on $G$.
In the stochastic model, the PoA of $\Xi$, given $G$ and
$\Pi$ is
$$ PoA(G,\Xi, \Pi) = \frac{\E_{S\sim \Pi} \left[\max_{\mathbf{P} \in \;\mathcal{N}}
c(\mathbf{P})\right]}{\E_{S\sim \Pi}[c(\mathbf{O})]}. $$
In both models the objective of the designer is to come up with
protocols that {\em minimize} the above ratios.
Finally, the Price of Anarchy for a class of graph metrics $\mathcal{G}$,
is defined as
$$PoA(\mathcal{G}) = \max_{G\in \mathcal{G}} \min_{\Xi(G)} PoA(G,\Xi); \qquad
PoA(\mathcal{G}) = \max_{\substack{G \in \mathcal{G}}} \min_{\Xi(G,\Pi)} \max_{\Pi}PoA(G,\Xi, \Pi). $$
\paragraph{Graph Theory.} For every graph $G$, we denote by $V(G)$ and $E(G)$
the set of vertices and edges of $G$, respectively. For any $v,u \in V(G)$,
$(v,u)$ denotes an edge between $v$ and $u$ and $d_G(v,u)$ denotes the shortest distance
between $v$ and $u$ in $G$; if $G$ is clear from the context, we simply write $d(v,u)$.
A graph $G$ is an {\em induced}
subgraph of $H$, if $G$ is a subgraph of $H$ and for every $v,u \in V(G)$, $(v,u) \in E(G)$
if and only if $(v,u) \in E(H)$.
$G$ is a {\em distance preserving} ({\em isometric})
subgraph of $H$, if $G$ is a subgraph of $H$ and for every $v,u \in V(G)$, $d_G(v,u) = d_H(v,u)$.
\section{Stochastic Network Design}
\label{sec:stochastic}
In this section we study the {\em stochastic} model, where the set of active vertices is drawn
from some probability distribution $\Pi$.
Each vertex $v$ is activated independently
with probability $p_v$;
the set of the activated vertices are no longer
picked adversarially, but it is sampled based on the probabilities $p_v$'s, i.e.,
the probability that set $S$ is active is $\Pi(S) = \prod_{v\in S} p_v \cdot \prod_{v \notin S} (1-p_v)$.
On the other hand, the probabilities $p_v$'s (and therefore $\Pi$), are chosen adversarially.
The cost sharing protocol is decided by the designer without the knowledge of the activated set
and the designer may have knowledge of $\Pi$ or access to some oracle of $\Pi$.
We show that there exists a {\em randomized} ordered protocol that achieves
constant PoA. This result holds even for the
{\em black-box} model \cite{ST08}, meaning that
the probabilities are not known to the designer, however she is allowed to draw
independent (polynomially many) samples.
On the other hand, if we assume that the probabilities $p_v$'s are known to the designer,
there exists a {\em deterministic} ordered protocol that achieves
constant PoA. We note that both protocols can be determined in polynomial time.
The result for the randomized protocol depends on
approximation ratios of the minimum Steiner tree problem. More precisely, given
an $\alpha$-approximate minimum Steiner tree, we show an upper bound of $2(\alpha+2)$.
The approximate tree is used in our algorithm as a base in order to construct a spanning tree,
which finally determines an order of all vertices; the detailed algorithm is given in
Algorithm \ref{alg:stochastic}. This algorithm and its slight variants have been used in
different contexts: rend-or-buy problem \cite{GKPR07}, a priori TSP \cite{ST08}
and, stochastic Steiner tree problem \cite{GGLS08}.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\SetAlgorithmName{Algorithm}{algorithm}{List of Algorithms}
\KwIn{A rooted graph $G=(V,E,t)$ and an oracle for the probability distribution $\Pi$.}
\KwOut{$\Xi_{{rand}}$.}
\begin{itemize}
\item Choose a random set of vertices $R$ by drawing from distribution $\Pi$
and construct an $\alpha$-approximate minimum Steiner tree,
$T_{\alpha}(R)$, over $R\cup\{t\}$.
\item Connect all other vertices
$V \setminus V(T_{\alpha}(R))$ with their nearest neighbor in $V(T_{\alpha}(R))$ (by breaking ties arbitrarily).
\item Double the edges of that tree and traverse some Eulerian tour starting from $t$. Order
the vertices based on their first appearance in the tour.
\end{itemize}
\caption{Randomized order protocol $\Xi_{{rand}}$}
\label{alg:stochastic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:stochasticRandomized}
Given an $\alpha$-approximate solution of the minimum Steiner tree
problem, $\Xi_{{rand}}$ has PoA at most $2(\alpha+2)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\pi$ be the order of all vertices $V$, defined by $\Xi_{{rand}}$, and $S$ be the random set of activated vertices
that require connectivity with $t$. For the rest of the proof we denote by $MST(S)$
a minimum spanning tree over $S\cup\{t\}$.
Let $s_1, \ldots, s_r$ be the vertices of $S$ as appeared in $\pi$ and the strategy profile $\mathbf{P}_R(S)=(P_1,\ldots,P_r)$
be a NE of set $S$. Under the convention that $s_0 = t$, $c_{s_i}(\mathbf{P}_R(S)) \leq d_G(s_i,s_{i-1})$ for all $s_i \in S$.
We construct a tree $T_{R,S}$
from the $T_{\alpha}(R)$ of Algorithm \ref{alg:stochastic}, by connecting only all vertices of
$S \setminus V(T_{\alpha}(R))$ with their nearest neighbor in $V(T_{\alpha}(R))$
(by breaking ties in accordance to Algorithm \ref{alg:stochastic}). Note that, by doubling the edges of $T_{R,S}$,
there exists an Eulerian tour starting from $t$, where the order of
the vertices $S$ (based on their first appearance in the tour) is $\pi$
restricted to the set $S$. Therefore,
$\sum_{s_i \in S} d_{T_{R,S}}(s_i,s_{i-1}) +d_{T_{R,S}}(s_0,s_r)= 2 c(T_{R,S})$. By combining the above,
\begin{eqnarray}
c(\mathbf{P}_R(S)) = \sum_{s_i\in S} c_{s_i}(\mathbf{P}_R(S)) \leq \sum_{s_i\in S} d_G(s_i,s_{i-1}) \leq \sum_{s_i\in S} d_{T_{R,S}}(s_i,s_{i-1}) \leq 2 c(T_{R,S}). \label{boundStrategies}
\end{eqnarray}
Let $D_v(R)$ be the distance of $v$ from its nearest neighbor in $(R\cup\{t\})\setminus\{v\}$.
In the special case that $v=t$, we define $D_v(R)=0$
Then,
\begin{eqnarray}
c(T_{R,S}) = c(T_{\alpha}(R))+\sum_{v\in S\setminus V(T_{\alpha}(R))} D_v(V(T_{\alpha}(R))) \leq c(T_{\alpha}(R))+\sum_{v\in S} D_v(R). \label{T_RA}
\end{eqnarray}
We use an indicator $I(v\in S)$ which is $1$ when $v \in S$ and $0$ otherwise; then
$\sum_{v\in S} D_v(R) = \sum_{v}I(v\in S)D_v(R)$. By taking the expectation over $R$ and $S$,
$$ \E_R[\E_S[c(T_{R,S})]] \leq \E_R\left[c(T_{\alpha}(R))\right]+\E_R\left[\E_S\left[\sum_{v \in V}I(v\in S)D_v(R)\right]\right].$$
Since $S$ and $R$ are independent samples we can bound the second term as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\E_R\left[\E_S\left[\sum_{v \in V}I(v\in S)D_v(R)\right]\right]
&=& \sum_{v \in V}\E_S[I(v\in S)]\E_R[D_v(R)]
= \sum_{v \in V}\E_S[I(v\in S)]\E_S[D_v(S)] \notag\\
&=& \E_S\left[\sum_{v \in V}I(v\in S)D_v(S)\right]
\leq \E_S[c(MST(S))]. \label{indExp}
\end{eqnarray}
The last equality holds since $D_v(S)$ is the distance of $v$ from its nearest neighbor in $(S\cup\{t\})\setminus\{v\}$
and it is independent of the event $I(v\in S)$. For the inequality, $D_v(S)$ is upper bounded by
the minimum distance of $v$ from its parent in the $MST(S)$.
Let $T^*_S$ be the minimum Steiner tree over $S\cup\{t\}$,
then it is well known that $c(MST(S))\leq 2c(T^*_S)$. Overall,
$$ \E_R[\E_S[c(\mathbf{P}_R(S))]] \leq 2\E_R[\E_S[c(T_{R,S})]]\leq 2 (\E_S[c(T_{\alpha}(S))] + \E_S[c(MST(S))]) \leq 2(\alpha +2) \E_S[c(T^*_S)].$$
\end{proof}
By applying the $1.39$-approximation algorithm of \cite{BGRS10} we get the following.
\begin{corollary}
$\Xi_{{rand}}$ has PoA at most $6.78$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:stochasticDeterministic}
There exists a deterministic ordered protocol
with PoA at most $16$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We use derandomization techniques similar to \cite{WZ07,ST08} and for completeness we give the full proof here.
First we discuss how we can get a PoA of $6.78$, if we drop the requirement of determining the protocol in polynomial time.
Similar to the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:stochasticRandomized} we define the tree $T_{R,S}$ for the random activated set $S$
as follows: we construct $T_{R,S}$
from the $T_{\alpha}(S)$ of Algorithm \ref{alg:stochastic}, by connecting only all vertices of
$S \setminus V(T_{\alpha}(R))$ with their nearest neighbor in $V(T_{\alpha}(R))$
(by breaking ties in accordance to Algorithm \ref{alg:stochastic}).
We apply the standard derandomization approach of {\em conditional expectation method} on $T_{R,S}$.
More precisely, we construct a deterministic set $Q_1$ to replace the random $R$ in Algorithm~\ref{alg:stochastic},
by deciding for each vertex of $V\setminus \{t\}$, one by one, whether it belongs
to $R$ or not. Assume that we have already processed the set $Q \subset V$ and we have decided that
for its partition $(Q_1,Q_2)$, $Q_1 \subseteq R$ and $Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset$ (starting from $Q_1=\{t\}$ and $Q_2=\emptyset$). Let $v$ be the next vertex to be processed.
From the conditional expectations and the independent activations we know that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\E_{S,R}[c(T_{R,S})| Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset]
&=& \E_{S,R}[c(T_{R,S})| Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset,v \in R]p_v\\
&&+\E_{S,R}[c(T_{R,S})| Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset,v\notin R](1-p_v),
\end{eqnarray*}
meaning that
\begin{eqnarray*}
&\mbox{either} &\E_{S,R}[c(T_{R,S})| Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset,v \in R] \leq \E_{S,R}[c(T_{R,S})| Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset],\\
&\mbox{or}&\E_{S,R}[c(T_{R,S})| Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset,v\notin R] \leq \E_{S,R}[c(T_{R,S})| Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset].
\end{eqnarray*}
In the first case we add $v$ in $Q_1$ and in the second case we add $v$ in $Q_2$.
Therefore, after processing all vertices, $E_S[c(T_{Q_1,S})] \leq \E_{S,R}[c(T_{R,S})]$. If we replace the sampled $R$ of Algorithm \ref{alg:stochastic}
with the deterministic set $Q_1$, we can get the same bound on the PoA with the randomized protocol of Theorem \ref{thm:stochasticRandomized}.
However, the value of $\E_{S,R}[c(T_{R,S})| Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset]$ seems difficult to be computed in polynomial time;
the reason is that it involves the computation of $\E_{R}[c(T_{\alpha}(R))| Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset]$
which seems hard to be handled.
To overcome this problem we use an estimator $EST(Q_1,Q_2)$ of $\E_{S,R}[c(T_{R,S})| Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset]$,
which is constant away from the optimum $\E_S[c(T^*_S)]$,
where $T^*_S$ is the minimum Steiner
tree over $S\cup\{t\}$.
Following \cite{WZ07,ST08}, we use the optimum solution of the relaxed Connected Facility Location Problem (CFLP) on $G$ in order
to construct a feasible solution $\bar{\mathbf{y}}$ of the relaxed Steiner Tree Problem (STP) for a given set $R$. We show that
the objective's value of the fractional STP for $\bar{\mathbf{y}}$ is constant away from $\E_S[c(T^*_S)]$ and
that its (conditional) expectation over $R$ can be efficiently computed.
This quantity is used in order to construct the estimator $EST(Q_1,Q_2)$.
We apply the method of conditional expectations on $EST(Q_1,Q_2)$ and after processing all vertices, by using
the primal-dual algorithm \cite{GW95}, we compute a Steiner tree on $Q_1$ with cost no more than twice the cost of the fractional solution.
In the rooted CFLP, a rooted graph $G=(V,E,t)$ is given and the designer should select some facilities to open,
including $t$, and connects them via some Steiner tree $T$. Every other vertex is assigned to some facility.
The cost of the solution is $M$ ($M>1)$ times the cost of $T$, plus the distance of every other vertex
from its assigned facility. Our analysis requires to consider a slightly different cost of the solution,
which is the cost of $T$, plus the distance of every other vertex $v$ from its assigned facility multiplied by $p_v$.
In the following LP relaxation of the CFLP, $z_{e}$ and $x_{ij}$ are $0$-$1$ variables indicate, respectively, if
$e \in E(T)$ and whether the vertex $j$ is assigned to facility $i$.
$\delta(U)$ denotes the set of edges with one endpoint in $U$ and the other in $V\setminus U$,
$d(i,j)$ denotes the minimum distance between vertices $i$ and $j$ in $G$ and $c_e$ is the cost of edge $e$.
\vspace{10pt}
\begin{tabular}{|l r l r|}
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{|l|}{LP1: CFLP}
\\\hline
&$\min$ &$B+C$ &\\
subject to & $\sum_{i \in V} x_{ij}$ =& 1& $\forall j \in V $\\
&$\sum_{e \in \delta(U)}z_e\geq$&$\sum_{i\in U}x_{ij}$&$\forall j\in V, \forall U \subseteq V\setminus\{t\}$\\
&$B=$&$\sum_{e \in E}c_e z_{e}$&\\
&$C=$&$\sum_{j\in V} p_j\sum_{i \in V}d{(i,j)}x_{ij}$&$$\\
&$z_{e},x_{ij}\geq$&$0$&$\forall i,j \in V$ and $\forall e\in E$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{10pt}
Let $(\mathbf{z}^*=(z^*_{e})_{e},\mathbf{x}^*=(x^*_{ij})_{ij},B^*,C^*)$ be the optimum solution of LP1.
\begin{claim}
\label{B+C<3Opt}
$B^*+C^* \leq 3\E_S[c(T_S^*)]$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
Given a set $S \subseteq V$, for every edge $e \in T^*_S$ ($T^*_S$ is the minimum Steiner tree over
$S\cup\{t\}$) let $z_e = 1$ and for $e \notin T^*_S$ let $z_e = 0$.
For every $j \in V$ let $x_{ij} = 1$ if $i$ is $j$'s
nearest neighbor in $(S\cup\{t\})\setminus \{j\}$.
Set the rest of $x_{ij}$ equal to $0$. Note that this is a feasible solution of LP1
with objective value $B_S+C_S \leq c(T^*_S)+\sum_{v\in V} p_v D_v(S)$. By taking the expectation
over $S$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
B^*+C^* &\leq& \E_S[B_S+C_S] \leq \E_S[c(T^*_S)]+\sum_{v\in V} \E_S[I(v\in S)] \E_S[D_v(S)] = \E_S[c(T^*_S)]+ \E_S\left[\sum_{v\in S} D_v(S)\right]\\
&\leq& \E_S[c(T^*_S)]+\E_S[c(MST(S))]\leq 3\E_S[c(T^*_S)],
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
By using the solution $(\mathbf{z}^*=(z^*_{e})_{e},\mathbf{x}^*=(x^*_{ij})_{ij},B^*,C^*)$, we construct a feasible solution for the
following LP relaxation of the STP over some set $R\cup\{t\}$.
\vspace{10pt}
\begin{tabular}{|l r l r|}
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{|l|}{LP2: STP over $R\cup \{t\}$}
\\\hline
&$\min$ &$\sum_{e \in E}c_{e}y_{e}$ &\\
subject to & $\sum_{e \in \delta(U)}y_{e}\geq$&$1$& $\forall U \subseteq V\setminus\{t\}:R\cap U \neq \emptyset$\\
&$y_{e}\geq$&$0$&$\forall e \in E$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{10pt}
We define $a_{ij}(e)=1$ if $e$ lies in the shortest path between $i$ and $j$ and it is $0$ otherwise.
For every edge $e$ we set $\bar{y}_{e}=z^*_{e}+\sum_{j\in R} \sum_{i \in V} a_{ij}(e)x^*_{ij}$.
\begin{claim}
$\bar{\mathbf{y}} = (\bar{y}_{e})_{e}$ is a feasible solution for LP2.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
The proof is identical with the one in \cite{WZ07} but we give it here for completeness.
Consider any set $U\subseteq V\setminus\{t\}$ such that $R\cap U \neq \emptyset$ and let $\ell \in R\cap U$. It follows that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_{e \in \delta(U)}\bar{y}_{e} &\geq& \sum_{e \in \delta(U)}z^*_{e} + \sum_{e \in \delta(U)}\sum_{j \in R} \sum_{i \in V} a_{ij}(e) x^*_{ij}
\geq \sum_{i \in U}x^*_{i\ell} + \sum_{e \in \delta(U)} \sum_{i \in V} a_{i\ell}(e) x^*_{i\ell} \\
&\geq& \sum_{i \in U}x^*_{i\ell} + \sum_{i \notin U} x^*_{i\ell} \sum_{e \in \delta(U)}a_{i\ell}(e)
\geq \sum_{i \in U}x^*_{i\ell} + \sum_{i \notin U} x^*_{i\ell} = 1.
\end{eqnarray*}
For the last inequality, note that $a_{i\ell}(e)$ should be $1$ for at least one $e \in \delta(U)$ since $i \notin U$ and $\ell \in U$.
\end{proof}
\begin{claim}
\label{est<B+C}
Let $\bar{c}_{ST}(R)$ be the cost of the objective of LP2 induced by the solution $\bar{\mathbf{y}}$.
Then $\E_R[\bar{c}_{ST}(R)] = B^*+C^*$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\E_R\left[\bar{c}_{ST}(R)\right] &=& \E_R\left[\sum_{e\in E} c_e (z^*_{e}+\sum_{j\in R} \sum_{i \in V} a_{ij}(e)x^*_{ij})\right]
= B^* +\E_R\left[\sum_{j\in R} \sum_{i \in V} \sum_{e\in E} c_e a_{ij}(e)x^*_{ij}\right] \\
&=& B^* +\E_R\left[\sum_{j\in R} \sum_{i \in V} d(i,j)x^*_{ij}\right]
= B^* +\sum_{j\in V} p_j \sum_{i \in V} d(i,j)x^*_{ij}
= B^* + C^*.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
Observe that due to the expression of $\bar{\mathbf{y}}$ we can efficiently
compute any conditional expectation $\E[\bar{c}_{ST}(R)| Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset]$;
this is because
$$\E_R\left[\sum_{j\in R} \sum_{i \in V} a_{ij}(e)x^*_{ij}|Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset\right] =
\sum_{j\in Q_1} \sum_{i \in V} a_{ij}(e)x^*_{ij} + \sum_{j\notin Q_1\cup Q_2} p_j\sum_{i \in V} a_{ij}(e)x^*_{ij}.$$
We further define $c_{C}(R) = \sum_{v\in V} p_v D_v(R)$. We can also efficiently compute any conditional
expectation $\E[c_{C}(R)| Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset]$ (Claim 2.1 of \cite{WZ07}).
We are ready to define our estimator:
$$EST(Q_1,Q_2)=2\E_R[\bar{c}_{ST}(R)|Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset]+\E_R[\bar{c}_{C}(R)|Q_1 \subseteq R, Q_2 \cap R=\emptyset].$$
Our goal is to define a deterministic set $R^*$ to replace the sampled $R$ of Algorithm \ref{alg:stochastic}.
We process the vertices one by one and we decide if they belong to $R^*$ by using the model conditional expectations on $EST(Q_1,Q_2)$.
More specifically, assume that we have already processed the sets $Q_1$ and $Q_2$ (starting from $Q_1=\{t\}$ and $Q_2=\emptyset$)
such that $Q_1 \subseteq R^*$ and
$Q_2 \cap R^* = \emptyset$. Let $v$ be the next vertex to be processed.
From the conditional expectations and the independent activations we know that
$EST(Q_1,Q_2)=p_v EST(Q_1\cup\{v\},Q_2)+(1-p_v)EST(Q_1,Q_2\cup\{v\}).$
If $EST(Q_1\cup\{v\},Q_2) \leq EST(Q_1,Q_2)$ we add $v$ to $Q_1$, otherwise we add $v$ to $Q_2$.
After processing all vertices and by using Claims \ref{B+C<3Opt} and \ref{est<B+C},
\begin{eqnarray*}
EST(R^*,V\setminus R^*) &\leq& EST(\{t\},\emptyset) \leq 6\E_S[c(T_S^*)] + \sum_{v\in V} p_v E_R[D_v(R)] \\
&=&6\E_S[c(T_S^*)] + E_R\left[\sum_{v\in V} I(v\in R) D_v(R)\right] \\
&\leq& 6\E_S[c(T_S^*)] + E_R[c(MST(R))] \leq 8\E_S[c(T_S^*)].
\end{eqnarray*}
Let $T_{PD}(R^*)$ be the Steiner tree over $R^*\cup \{t\}$ computed by the primal-dual algorithm \cite{GW95}. Then,
$$EST(R^*,V\setminus R^*) = 2\bar{c}_{ST}(R^*) + \sum_{v\in V} p_v D_v(R^*)\geq c(T_{PD}(R^*)) +
\E_S\left[\sum_{v\in S} D_v(R^*)\right].$$
By combining inequalities \eqref{boundStrategies} and \eqref{T_RA} (after replacing $R$ by $R^*$ and $T_{\alpha}(R^*)$ by $T_{PD}(R^*)$) with all the above, we have that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\E_S[c(\mathbf{P}_{R^*}(S))] \leq 2 \left(c(T_{PD}(R^*)) + \E_S\left[\sum_{v\in S} D_v(R^*)\right]\right) \leq 2EST(R^*,V\setminus R^*) \leq 16\E_S[c(T_S^*)].
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
|
\section*{Abstract}
We provide a description of the structure of $\aleph_0$-categorical trees and cycle-free partial orders. First the maximal branches of $\aleph_0$-categorical tree are examined, followed by the configuration of the ramification orders, which are then combined to provided necessary and sufficient conditions for a tree to be $\aleph_0$-categorical in terms of these two things. The classification of the $\aleph_0$-categorical cycle-free partial orders is found as a corollary.
\section{Introduction}
A countable structure is said to be $\aleph_0$-categorical (also known as countably categorical, or $\omega$-categorical) if it is the only countable model of its first order theory. The Ryll-Nardzewski Theorem shows that this is equivalent to the automorphism group of the structure being oligomorphic. This property is important in so many ways other than its intrinsic interest that it would be futile to give a good account of its importance here.
A tree, sometimes called a semi-linear order, is a partial order where initial sections are linear, but we can `split' as we go up the order. A formal definition is given in Definition \ref{dfn:trees}. A partial answer to the natural question `Which trees are $\aleph_{0}$-categorical?' can be found in Manfred Droste's memoir on transitive partially ordered sets \cite{Droste1985} which shows that there are no 4-transitive trees, no 3-homogeneous trees and classifies the 2- or 3- transitive and 2-homogeneous countable trees. While all the 2 or 3-transitive trees are $\aleph_{0}$-categorical, this list is far from exhaustive. For example, adding a root to any 2-transitive tree will result in something not 2-transitive, yet still $\aleph_{0}$-categorical.
Other studies of the automorphism groups of trees include Chicot's thesis, where she classifies the 1-transitive trees \cite{Chicot2004}, and the work of Droste, Holland and Macpherson, where the properties of these groups are studied in great detail \cite{DHM1989no1}, \cite{DHM1989no2}, \cite{DHM1989no3}.
An extremely elegant description of the $\aleph_{0}$-categorical linear orders was published by Joseph Rosenstein in 1969, which can be found in either \cite{Rosenstein1969} or \cite{Rosenstein1982}, and this result is instrumental for the work of this paper.
Since the proof of the main result of this paper adds colour predicates to the language of trees to ensure that some of the definable structure of a tree is respected by certain non-definable substructures, extending the result to the coloured trees is an easy corollary. The $\aleph_0$-categorical coloured linear orders were classified by Mwesigye and Truss in \cite{MwesigyeTruss2010}, who extended and made good use of one of Rosenstein's Propositions, namely Proposition 8.35 of \cite{Rosenstein1982}. This lemma shows that in linear orders the $n$-orbits are determined by the 2-orbits of adjacent pairs by patching automorphisms together, and this method is at the heart of this paper.
Cycle-free partial orders (CFPOs) are a generalisation of trees, where you are allowed to branch as you move down the order, as well as up. They were first proposed as objects of study by Rubin in \cite{Rubin91}. The answer to various transitivity questions about CFPOs can be found in \cite{Warren1997}.
I would like to thank my Ph.D. supervisor, John Truss, for his extremely valuable advice and kind support.
\begin{dfn}\label{dfn:trees}
A tree is a partial order that satisfies the two additional axioms:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\forall x , y, z (x,y \leq z \rightarrow (x \leq y \:\mathrm{or}\: y \leq x))$
\item $\forall x, y \exists z (z \leq x,y)$
\end{itemize}
\end{dfn}
\begin{dfn}
A $\lambda$-coloured tree is a structure $\langle T, \leq, C_i \: : \: i \leq \lambda \rangle$ such that $\langle T, \leq \rangle$ is a tree, while the $C_i$ are mutually exclusive unary predicates.
\end{dfn}
\begin{definition}
If $x,y$ are elements of a partial order $T$ then the \textbf{meet} of $x$ and $y$ is written and defined as:
$$x \wedge y := \mathrm{sup} \lbrace t \in T \: : \: t \leq x,y \rbrace $$
\end{definition}
Note that $x \wedge y$ might not be an element of $T$, but in Section 2 we will show that there are always extensions of the tree in which these points exist.
\begin{definition}
A \textbf{cone} above a point $t$ is a maximal set $C$ such that
$$\forall c \in C \; t <c \quad \mathrm{and} \quad \forall c_0, c_1 \in C \; c_0 \wedge c_1 > t$$
Essentially the points strictly above $t$ should form a collection of trees, and a cone is one of the trees in this collection.
The \textbf{ramification order} of a point $t$ is the number of cones above $t$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}\label{def:irrational}
A tree $T$ is said to be \textbf{ramification complete} if it contains the meet of any two points, i.e. $x \wedge y \in T$ for every $x,y \in T$.
The \textbf{ramification completion} of a tree $T$ is the intersection of all ramification complete trees $S$ such that $T \subseteq S$ and is written as $T^+$.
The elements of $T^+ \setminus T$ are called \textbf{irrational}.
\end{definition}
The ramification completion of a countable tree is always countable.
\begin{dfn}\label{definition:almosttransitive}
Let $T$ be a tree. The \textbf{$n$-orbits} of $T$ are the following sets
$$\lbrace \phi(\bar{x}) \in T^n \: : \: \phi \in \textnormal{Aut}(T) \rbrace$$
where $\bar{x} \in T^n$. A tree is said to be \textbf{almost $n$-transitive} if it has only finitely many $n$-orbits.
\end{dfn}
\begin{theorem}
A tree $T$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical if and only if it is almost $n$-transitive for all $n$.
\end{theorem}
This is a reformulation of the Ryll-Nardzewski Theorem. A proof for this context can be found in \cite{Hodges1993}, Theorem 7.3.1.
The next few lemmas and definitions allow us to reduce to the case $n=2$ when considering almost $n$-transitivity.
\begin{dfn}
The \textbf{completion of an $n$-tuple $p$} is a tuple of least length which contains $p$ and is closed under $\wedge$.
A \textbf{complete $n$-orbit} of $T$ is the orbit of some complete $n$-tuple.
$T$ is said to be \textbf{almost $n$-complete transitive} if it has finitely many complete $n$-orbits.
\end{dfn}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:complete}
A complete tree $T$ is almost $n$-complete transitive for every $n \geq 2$ if and only if $T$ is almost $m$-transitive for each $m \geq 2$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If $T$ is almost $m$-transitive for each $m \geq 2$ then it is automatically almost $n$-complete transitive for every $n \geq 2$. In the other direction, note that for each $n$-complete tuple there are only finitely many tuples whose completion is that tuple.
\end{proof}
The following theorem is a variant of Proposition 4.5 in Simon's paper, \cite{Simon2011}.
\begin{theorem}\label{Thm:2impliesn}
Let $T$ be a tree with $T=T^+$. If $T$ is almost 2-transitive then $T$ is almost $n$-transitive for each $n \geq 2$.
\end{theorem}
\section{Linear Orders and Maximal Chains}
Since trees are built up from linear orders, this section will deal with the properties of linear orders and what kinds of linear orders can occur in an $\aleph_{0}$-categorical tree.
\begin{dfn}
If $\langle L_0 , <_0 \rangle$ and $\langle L_1 , <_1 \rangle$ are linear orders then their \textbf{concatenation}, denoted by $L_0 \,^{\wedge} L_1$ is the linear order $\langle L_0 \cup L_1 , < \rangle$, where
$$x< y \quad \mathrm{iff} \quad \left\lbrace
\begin{array}{r c c r}
(x,y \in L_0 & \mathrm{and} & x <_0 y) & \quad\mathrm{or} \\
(x,y \in L_1 & \mathrm{and} & x <_1 y) & \quad\mathrm{or} \\
(x \in L_0 & \mathrm{and} & y \in L_1)
\end{array} \right. $$
\end{dfn}
\begin{dfn}
$\langle \mathbb{Q}_n, <_{\mathbb{Q}_n}, C_1 \ldots C_n \rangle$ a countable dense linear order where the colours occur interdensely, i.e. for all $x$ and $y$ there are $z_1, \ldots z_n$ between $x$ and $y$ such that $C_i(z_i)$ holds for each $i$.
\end{dfn}
$\mathbb{Q}_n$ is the Fra\"iss\'e limit of $n$-coloured linear orders, and hence is $\aleph_0$-categorical.
\begin{dfn}
Let $\langle L_1 , <_1 \rangle, \ldots, \langle L_n , <_n \rangle$ be linear orders. For each $q \in \mathbb{Q}_n$ we define $L(q)$ to be a copy of $\langle L_i , <_i \rangle$ if $C_i(q)$. The $\mathbb{Q}_n$-\textbf{shuffle} of $$\langle L_1 , <_1 \rangle, \ldots, \langle L_n , <_n \rangle$$ denoted by $\mathbb{Q}_n(L_1, \ldots L_n)$, is the linear order $\langle \bigcup_{q \in \mathbb{Q}_n} L(q), < \rangle $, where
$$x< y \quad \mathrm{iff} \quad \left\lbrace
\begin{array}{c c c c}
x,y \in L(q) & \mathrm{and} & x <_i y & \mathrm{or}\\
x \in L(q) \, , \, y \in L(p) & \mathrm{and} & q <_{\mathbb{Q}_n} p
\end{array} \right. $$
\end{dfn}
\begin{theorem} [Rosenstein \cite{Rosenstein1969}, \cite{Rosenstein1982}] \label{theorem:rosenstein}
If $L$ is an $\aleph_{0}$-categorical linear order then $L$ is built up from singletons by a finite number of concatenations or shuffles.
\end{theorem}
This result was extended to the coloured linear orders by Mwesigye and Truss in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}[Mwesigye, Truss \cite{MwesigyeTruss2010}]
A finite or countable coloured linear order $(A,\leq,C_0, \ldots)$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical if and only if it can be built up in finitely many steps from coloured singletons using concatenations or shuffles.
\end{theorem}
Rosenstein's theorem leads to a natural method of describing the countably categorical linear orders.
\begin{dfn}
A \textbf{term} is built as follows:
\begin{tabular}{r l}
\textbf{Singleton} & The singleton 1 is a term. \\
\textbf{Concatenation} & If $t_0, t_1$ are terms then $t_0 \, ^\wedge \, t_1$ is a term. \\
\textbf{$\mathbb{Q}_n$-shuffle} & If $t_0, \ldots t_{n-1}$ are terms then $\mathbb{Q}_n (t_0, \ldots, t_{n-1})$ is a term.
\end{tabular}
$\mathbb{Q}_n$-shuffle is allowed for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$. A \textbf{finite term} is a term that represents a finite linear order. Similarly, an \textbf{infinite term} is one that represents an infinite linear order. \end{dfn}
The terms correspond to linear orders in the obvious way, and I will not be particularly careful about distinguishing the two. That every $\aleph_{0}$-categorical linear order is represented by a term is Theorem \ref{theorem:rosenstein}, however it is possible for a linear order to have many different representations.
\begin{facts}\label{lemma:nfrep} \label{lemma:nfperm} \label{lemma:nfnest} \label{lemma:nfconc}
Let $t_0, \ldots, t_{n-1}$ be terms, let $m \leq n$ and let $f$ be a permutation of $n$. We also let $\tau$ be either the empty set or one of the $t_i$. Then the following are isomorphic to $\mathbb{Q}_n(t_0, t_1, \ldots t_{n-1})$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\mathbb{Q}_n(t_{f(0)}, t_{f(1)}, \ldots t_{f(n-1)})$;
\item $\mathbb{Q}_{n+1} (t_0, \ldots, t_{n-1},t_m)$;
\item $\mathbb{Q}_{m+1}(t_0, \ldots t_{m-1}, \mathbb{Q}_n(t_0, \ldots t_{n-1}))$; and
\item $\mathbb{Q}_{m}(t_0, \ldots ,t_{m-1}) ^\wedge \tau ^\wedge \mathbb{Q}_{m}(t_0, \ldots ,t_{m-1})$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{facts}
Using this lemma it is possible to derive a unique representation of not only $\aleph_{0}$-categorical linear orders, but also $\aleph_{0}$-categorical coloured linear orders (by allowing coloured singletons to occur in our terms) and infinite concatenations of $\aleph_{0}$-categorical linear orders. Such representations have certain properties that facilitate a proof regarding the maximal chains of trees.
\begin{dfn}
We use induction over the formation of terms to define when a term is in \textbf{normal form} (n.f.).
\begin{enumerate}
\item All finite terms are in n.f..
\item A term of the form $\mathbb{Q}_{m}(t_0, \ldots ,t_{m-1})$ is in n.f. if:
\begin{enumerate}
\item all the $t_i$ are in n.f.; and
\item Number 2 and 3 of Facts \ref{lemma:nfrep} do not apply.
\end{enumerate}
If the $t_i$ are permuted then the term is unaltered.
\item A term of the form $t_0 \,^\wedge \ldots \,^\wedge t_{n-1}$ is in n.f. if all the $t_i$ are in n.f. and no $t_{i-1} \,^\wedge t_i \,^\wedge t_{i+1}$ or $t_{i} \,^\wedge \emptyset \,^\wedge t_{i+1}$ satisfy Number 4 of Facts \ref{lemma:nfconc}.
\end{enumerate}
A possibly infinite sequence of terms $(s_i)$ is said to be in \textbf{normal form} if:
\begin{enumerate}
\item each $s_i$ is in normal form;
\item no $s_{i-1} \,^\wedge s_i \,^\wedge s_{i+1}$ or $s_{i} \,^\wedge \emptyset \,^\wedge s_{i+1}$ satisfy Number 4 of Facts \ref{lemma:nfconc};
\item if $s_j$ is finite either:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $s_{j+1}$ is infinite; or
\item $(s_i)$ is an infinite sequence and $s_j = s_k = 1$ for all $k \geq j$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
\end{dfn}
The process of showing that such representations are unique and can describe every $\aleph_{0}$-categorical linear order is long and uninformative, so we shall not provide the proof, and simply state the pertinent facts about normal form representations:
\begin{facts} \label{facts:nf}
\textcolor{white}{gap}
\begin{enumerate}
\item For every sequence of terms $(t_i)$ there is a sequence in normal form $(t_i')$ that represents the same linear order as $(t_i)$.
\item If $(t_i)$ and $(s_i)$ are both in normal form and represent the same linear order then $t_i = s_i$ for every $i$.
\item If $(t_i)$ is in normal form then all contiguous subsequences of $(t_i)$ are also in normal form (excluding the case where $(t_i)$ ends in a tail of $1$ and the contiguous subsequence contains only a part of this tail).
\end{enumerate}
\end{facts}
These facts are required to show the following theorem about the possible maximal chains of an $\aleph_{0}$-categorical tree.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:maxchain}
If $T$ is an $\aleph_{0}$-categorical coloured tree then every maximal chain of $T$ is an $\aleph_{0}$-categorical coloured linear order.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $L$ be a maximal chain of $T$ such that $L$ is not $\aleph_{0}$-categorical as a linear order. Every initial section of $L$ is an $\aleph_{0}$-categorical linear order. Therefore $L$ is expressible as the concatenation of an infinite list of $\aleph_{0}$-categorical linear orders $(L_i)$. We assume that $(L_i)$ is in normal form, which must be an infinite sequence as $L$ is not $\aleph_{0}$-categorical.
For each $i$ let $x_i \in L_i$. The tree $T$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical so there must be an automorphism $\phi$ that sends $(x_0, x_{n+1})$ to $(x_0, x_{m+1})$ for some $m < n$. The restriction of $\phi$ to $T^{\leq x_{n+1}}$ is an isomorphism from $L^{\leq x_{n+1}}$ to $L^{\leq x_{m+1}}$, so must send the set of predecessors of $x_{n+1}$ to the predecessors of $x_{m+1}$.
Suppose that $L_{n+1}$ is finite and therefore $\phi| _{T^{\leq x_{n+1}}}$ maps $L_0 \,^\wedge \ldots \,^\wedge L_n$ to $L_0 \,^\wedge \ldots \,^\wedge L_m$. Thus the finite sequences $(L_i)^n_{i=0}$ and $(L_i)^m_{i=0}$ are isomorphic and Fact 3. of Facts \ref{facts:nf} shows that these sequences are in normal form. Therefore $(L_i)^n_{i=0} = (L_i)^m_{i=0}$, and so $m=n$, giving a contradiction.
Suppose that $L_{n+1}$ is a shuffle, which we denote by $\mathbb{Q}_n(\tau_0, \ldots ,\tau_i)$. We also suppose that $x_{n+1}$ is contained in a copy of $\tau_0$, and we use $z$ to label the point in $\mathbb{Q}_n$ that is replaced by that particular copy of $\tau_0$, and let $L_{n+1}'$ be the initial section of $L_{n+1}$ that corresponds to $(-\infty,z)$, the interval of $\mathbb{Q}_n$.
Since $(-\infty,z) \cong \mathbb{Q}_n$ we can deduce two isomorphisms, $L_{n+1}' \cong L_{n+1}$ and
$$L_0 \,^\wedge \ldots \, ^\wedge L_n \,^\wedge L_{n+1} \cong L_0 \,^\wedge \ldots \, ^\wedge L_n \,^\wedge L_{n+1}'$$
Thus the normal form representation of $L_{n+1}'$ is equal to the n.f. representation of $L_{n+1}$. The function $\phi$ is an isomorphism, so the n.f. representation of $\phi(L_0 \,^\wedge \ldots \, ^\wedge L_n \,^\wedge L_{n+1}')$ is $L_0 \,^\wedge \ldots \, ^\wedge L_n \,^\wedge L_{n+1}$.
Therefore $\phi$ maps $L_i$ to itself for $i \leq n+1$, and thus the n.f. representation of $\tau_0^{\leq x_0}$ is also the n.f. representation of $L_{n+1} \,^\wedge \ldots \,^\wedge L_{m+1}^{\leq x_{m+1}}$.
$T$ is $\aleph_0$-categorical, so we may also assume that there is $m' \in \mathbb{N}$ such that there is an automorphism mapping $(x_0,x_{n+1})$ to $(x_0,x_{m'})$ and $m \not= m'$. Again, we conclude that the n.f. representation of $\tau_0^{\leq x_0}$ is also the n.f. representation of $L_{n+1} \,^\wedge \ldots \,^\wedge L_{m'+1}^{\leq x_{m'+1}}$.
This is a contradiction, as the n.f representation of $\tau_0^{\leq x_0}$ is of fixed length.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{Theorem:FinitelyManyChains}
If $T$ is a countable $\aleph_{0}$-categorical tree then $T$ has only finitely many maximal chains up to isomorphism.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $T$ be a tree with infinitely many non-isomorphic maximal chains, which we call $L_n$ for $n \in \mathcal{J}$. For each $I \subseteq \mathcal{J}$ we introduce colour predicate $C_I$ such that $T \models C_I(a)$ if and only if
$$I = \lbrace i \in \omega \: : \: a \:\textnormal{is contained in a maximal chain isomorphic to} \: L_i \rbrace$$
We introduce the following notation:
$$\mathcal{I} := \lbrace I \subseteq \omega \: : \: T \models \exists x C_I(x) \rbrace$$
If $I \not=J$ and $T \models C_I(a) \wedge C_J(b)$ then WLOG there is a maximal chain $A$ such that $A$ passes through $a$, but no maximal chain passing through $b$ is isomorphic to $A$. Any automorphism of $T$ that maps $a$ to $b$ will have to map $A$ to a maximal chain that contains $b$, showing that $a$ and $b$ lie in different orbits of $\textnormal{Aut}(T)$, and hence
$$\textnormal{Aut}(T) = \textnormal{Aut}( \langle T, \leq, C_I \: : \: I \in \mathcal{I} \rangle )$$
If $\mathcal{I}$ is infinite then there are infinitely many 1-orbits of $T$, and $T$ cannot be $\aleph_0$-categorical, so we assume that $\mathcal{I}$ is finite. Since $T$ has infinitely many maximal chains, $\bigcup \mathcal{I}$ is infinite, so there must be an infinite member of $\mathcal{I}$.
If $a < b$ and $T \models C_I(a) \wedge C_J(b)$ then $J \subsetneq I$, so if $I_0$ is a minimal element of $\mathcal{I}$ then there exists an $a_0 \in T$ such that $T^{\geq a_0}$ is mono-chromatically coloured by $C_{I_0}$.
Only finitely many of these $C_I$ can be realised but $T$ has infinitely many non-isomorphic maximal chains, so there is a $J \in \mathcal{I}$ such that $J$ is infinite. Let $x \in T$ be such that $T \models C_J(x)$ and let $I_0, \ldots I_{k-1}$ be the minimal elements of $\mathcal{I}$ where there is a $y \geq x$ such that $T \models C_{I_j}(y)$.
$$J \subseteq \bigcup_{j<k} I_j$$
$J$ is infinite, so at least one of the $I_j$ is infinite. We assume that $I_0$ is. Let $y \in T$ realise $C_{I_0}$, and let $S:= T^{\geq y}$. Since $I_0$ is minimal, $S$ is monochromatic.
In short, from our $T$ we have found another tree, $S$ where every element lies on a copy of two non-isomorphic linear orders. Let $L_0$ and $L_1$ be these non-isomorphic maximal chains and let $\lbrace s_i \in S: i \in \omega \rbrace$ be an enumeration of a copy of $L_0$. We build by induction an embedding of $L_0$ into $L_1$.
Since $s_0$ also lies on a copy of $L_1$
$$L_0^{\leq s_0} \cong T^{\leq s_0} \cong L_1^{\leq s_1}$$
so let $\phi_0$ be an isomorphism from $L_0^{\leq s_0}$ to $L_1^{\leq s_0}$.
Suppose we have defined $\phi_l$. Let $\alpha_{l+1} \in \mathbb{N}$ be the least number such that $s_{\alpha_{l+1}} > s_{\alpha_l}$. The element $s_{\alpha_{l+1}}$ is contained in both an copy of $L_0$ and $L_1$, so once again
$$L_0^{\leq s_{\alpha_{l+1}}} \cong T^{\leq s_{\alpha_{l+1}}} \cong L_1^{\leq s_{\alpha_{l+1}}}$$
By the induction hypothesis, we also know that $L_0^{\leq s_{\alpha_{l}}} \cong T^{\leq s_{\alpha_{l}}} \cong L_1^{\leq s_{\alpha_{l}}}$ thus the intervals $(s_{\alpha_{l}},s_{\alpha_{l+1}}] \subseteq L_0$ and $(s_{\alpha_{l}},s_{\alpha_{l+1}}] \subseteq L_1$ are isomorphic. Let this be witnessed by $\psi_{l+1}$, and we define $\phi_{l+1} := \phi_{l} \cup \psi_{l+1}$
Then $\bigcup \phi_{l}$ witnesses the fact that $L_0$ is isomorphic to an initial section of $L_1$. By symmetry, $L_1$ is isomorphic to an initial section of $L_0$ as well.
Therefore, if $\tau_0$ and $\tau_1$ are the normal form representations of $L_0$ and $L_1$ respectively $\tau_1 = \tau_0 ^\wedge \sigma_0 \: \mathrm{and} \: \tau_0 = \tau_1 ^\wedge \sigma_1$ for terms $\sigma_0$ and $\sigma_1$. Therefore $\tau_1 = \tau_1 ^\wedge \sigma_1^\wedge \sigma_0$ and so $\sigma_0 = \emptyset = \sigma_1$ and thus $\tau_0 = \tau_1$. This shows that $L_0 \cong L_1$, giving a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\section{Trees}
\subsection{Ramification Predicates}
Trees contain more information than which linear orders occur as their maximal chains, so in order to classify the $\aleph_0$-categorical trees using them we need a way to encode that extra information.
\begin{dfn}
Let $T$ be an $\aleph_0$-categorical tree, and let $\lbrace L_k \: : \: k \leq l \rbrace$ be the maximal chains of $T$. For each $L_k$, we enumerate the $1$-orbits.
We define $R^i_{(m,n)}$ to be a unary predicate that is only realised by $x \in T$ if $x$ lies on exactly $i$ maximal chains isomorphic to $L_m$ such that $x$ lies in the $n^{\mathrm{th}}$ orbit of $L_m$. Additionally
$$J_T := \lbrace (i,(m,n)) \: : \: \exists x \: T \models R^i_{(m,n)}(x) \rbrace$$
\end{dfn}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:NoKillingOrbits}
For all trees $T$
$$\textnormal{Aut}(\langle T, \leq \rangle) \cong \textnormal{Aut}(\langle T, \leq, R^i_{(m,n)} \, : \, (i,(m,n)) \in J_T \rangle)$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If $\phi \in \textnormal{Aut}(T)$ maps $y_0$ to $y_1$ also maps the maximal chains passing through $y_0$ to the maximal chains passing through $y_1$. In particular, if $L$ is a maximal chain that contains $y_0$, then $\phi(L^{\geq y_0}) \cong \phi(L)^{\geq y_1}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{Theorem:AddingStructuretoL}
If $\langle T, \leq \rangle$ is $\aleph_0$-categorical then for any maximal chain $L$ the structure $$\langle L, \leq, R^i_{(m,n)} \, : \, (i,(m,n)) \in J_T \rangle$$ is also $\aleph_0$-categorical.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We apply Theorem \ref{theorem:maxchain} to $\langle T, \leq, R^i_{(m,n)} \, : \, (i,(m,n)) \in J_T \rangle$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Classification}\label{Section:CombineColours}
\begin{prop}
If $(T,<)$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical then $(T^+,<)$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The orbits of the irrational elements of $T^+$ are determined by the orbits of pairs from $T$.
\end{proof}
$T^+$ being $\aleph_{0}$-categorical is not enough to ensure that $T$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical. This suggests that we need a way of restricting how points in $(T^+,<)$ can be deleted to ensure that the remaining structure is still $\aleph_{0}$-categorical. Recall from Definition \ref{def:irrational} that an irrational point of $T^+$ is a point in $T^+ \setminus T$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:whereIdef}
Let $T$ be a tree and $I$ be a unary predicate for the irrational points. Then $(T,<)$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical if and only if $(T^+,<,I)$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
An automorphisms of $(T,<)$ extends uniquely to an automorphism of $(T^+,<,I)$, and automorphisms of $(T^+,<,I)$ restrict uniquely to an automorphism of $(T,<)$, so $\textnormal{Aut}(T,<) \cong \textnormal{Aut}(T^+,<,I)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:AddingIrrationalstoI}
If $(T^+,<,I)$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical then if $L$ is a maximal chain of $T^+$ then the linear order $(L,<,I)$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof of Theorem \ref{theorem:maxchain} is easily adapted to this lemma.
\end{proof}
We are now ready to prove our main theorem about trees.
\begin{theorem}\label{Theorem:CCTreesMain}
$\langle T^+, I, <, R^i_{(m,n)} \, : \, (i,(m,n)) \in J_T \rangle$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical if and only if:
\begin{enumerate}
\item only finitely many of the $R^i_{(m,n)}$ are realised;
\item if $L$ is a maximal chain of $T^+$ then $\langle L, I, <, R^i_{(m,n)} \, : \, (i,(m,n)) \in J_T \rangle$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical; and
\item there are only finitely many maximal chains of $T^+$ up to isomorphism in the language $\langle I, <, R^i_{(m,n)} \: : \: (i,(m,n)) \in J_T \rangle$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\pagebreak
\begin{proof}
$\Rightarrow$: Since $\langle T^+, I, <, R^i_{(m,n)} \: : \:(i,(m,n)) \in J_T \rangle$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical it only has finitely many 2-orbits. This means that only finitely many of the $R^i_m$'s can be realised. Theorem \ref{theorem:maxchain} shows that $\langle L,<,I,R^i_{(m,n)} \: : \: (i,(m,n)) \in J_T \rangle$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical and Condition 3 is shown by Theorem \ref{Theorem:FinitelyManyChains}.
$\Leftarrow$: Let $T$ be a tree that satisfies the conditions of the theorem, and suppose that $T$ has infinitely many 2-orbits. Since only finitely many of the $R^i_{(m,n)}$ are realised, we may assume that there are $(x_0,y_0)$ and $(x_1,y_1)$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(x_0,y_0)$ and $(x_1,y_1)$ belongs to a different 2-orbit;
\item $x_i < y_i$; and
\item $T \models R^i_{(m,n)}(y_0) \Leftrightarrow T \models R^i_{(m,n)}(y_1)$ for all $R^i_{(m,n)}$
\end{enumerate}
Since $y_0$ and $y_1$ satisfy the same $R^i_{(m,n)}$, they lie on maximal chains which are isomorphic to the same $\aleph_0$-categorical linear order, which we will call $L$. We may assume that $\langle L, \leq , x_0, y_0 \rangle \cong \langle L, \leq , x_1, y_1 \rangle$. We build an automorphism of $T$ that maps $(x_0, y_0)$ to $(x_1, y_1)$ inductively as follows:
\begin{description}
\item[Base Case] Let $\phi_0 : \langle L, \leq , x_0, y_0 \rangle \rightarrow \langle L, \leq , x_1, y_1 \rangle$ be an isomorphism. There are maximal chains $T_0$ and $S_0$ of $T$ that contain $(x_0, y_0)$ and $(x_1, y_1)$ respectively such that $T_0 \cong L \cong S_0$. Thus $\phi_0$ can be viewed as a partial automorphism of $T$ that maps $T_0$ to $S_0$.
\item[Odd Step] Let $n$ be odd, let $T_n:= \mathrm{Dom}(\phi_n)$, let $S_n:= \mathrm{Im}(\phi_n)$ and let $t \in T_n \setminus T_{n-1}$. For each cone of $t$ that is disjoint from $T_n$, pick a maximal chain. We denote these maximal chains as $L_i(t)$, where $i \in I(t)$, an indexing set for each $t$.
Since $\phi_{n}$ is a partial automorphism of the language
$$\langle <, I, R^i_{(m,n)} \, : \, (i,(m,n)) \in J_T \rangle$$
the image $\phi_{n}(t)$ satisfies all of the same $R^i_{(m,n)}$ there is an isomorphism $\psi_{i,t}$ that maps $ L_i(t)$ to $K_i(\phi_n(t))$ and $\psi_{i,t}(t) =\phi_n(t)$.
This $\psi_{i,t}$ is also a partial automorphism. Since $\psi_{i,t}(t) = \phi_n(t)$ the union $\phi_n \cup (\psi_{i,t}|_{ L_i(t)^{> t}})$ is also a partial isomorphism. Indeed, since each $L_i(t)$ lies in a different cone to any other $L_i(t)$,
$$\phi_{n+1} := \phi_n \cup \bigcup_{t \in T_n \setminus T_{n-1}} \bigcup_{i \in I(t)} \psi_{i,t}|_{ L_i(t)^{> t}}$$
is a partial isomorphism.
\item[Even Step] The even step is very similar to the odd step, except that we map maximal chains passing through the elements of $S_n \setminus S_{n-1}$ back, and expand $\phi_{n}$ by the inverses of these maps.
\end{description}
Then $\phi:= \bigcup_{n \in \mathbb{N}}\phi_n$ is an automorphism of $T$ that maps $(x_0,y_0)$ to $(x_1,y_1)$, showing that $T$ must be $\aleph_0$-categorical.
\end{proof}
This gives us necessary and sufficient conditions for $(T, \leq)$ to be $\aleph_{0}$-categorical. A description of the coloured $\aleph_{0}$-categorical trees is contained in the proof of Theorem \ref{Theorem:CCTreesMain}, as we will now show.
\begin{cor}
A coloured tree $(T, < , C_0, \ldots, C_k)$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical iff
\begin{itemize}
\item only finitely many of the $R^i_{(m,n)}$ are realised;
\item $\langle L, <, I, C_0, \ldots, C_k, R^i_{(m,n)} \: : \: (i,(m,n)) \in J_T \rangle$ is $\aleph_{0}$-categorical for every maximal chain $L$; and
\item there are only finitely many such maximal chains up to isomorphism in the language
$$\langle <, I, C_0, \ldots, C_k, R^i_{(m,n)} \: : \: (i,(m,n)) \in J_T \rangle$$
\end{itemize}
where the $C_i$ are the colour predicates.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The proof of Theorem \ref{Theorem:CCTreesMain} is easily adapted.
\end{proof}
\section{Cycle-free Partial Orders}
The aim of this section is to extend the above result to the cycle-free partial orders. We shall give the definition of CFPO used in $\cite{Warren1997}$, after developing some notions analogous to those introduced at the start of this paper for trees.
\begin{dfn}
If $x,y$ are elements of a partial order $M$ then the \textbf{join} of $x$ and $y$ is written and defined as:
$$x \vee y := \mathrm{inf} \lbrace t \in T \: : \: t \leq x,y \rbrace $$
\end{dfn}
\begin{definition}
A partial order $M$ is said to be \textbf{path complete} if it for all $x,y \in M$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item if there exists a $z \in M$ such that $z \leq x,y$ then $x \wedge y \in T$; and
\item if there exists a $z \in M$ such that $z \geq x,y$ then $x \vee y \in T$.
\end{enumerate}
The \textbf{path completion} of a partial order $M$ is the intersection of all path complete partial orders $N$ such that $M \subseteq N$. It is written as $M^+$.
The elements of $M^+ \setminus M$ are called \textbf{irrational}.
\end{definition}
\begin{dfn}[2.3.2 of \cite{Warren1997}]\label{dfn:connectingset}
If $M$ is a partial order and $a,b \in M$, then the n-tuple $C = \langle c_1,c_2, \ldots ,c_n \rangle$ (for $n \geq 2$) is said to be a \textbf{connecting set} from $a$ to $b$ in $M$, written $C \in C^M \langle a, b \rangle$, if the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $c_1=a, c_n=b, c_2, \ldots ,c_{n-1} \in M^+$;
\item if $j \not= i+1,i-1$ then $c_i \not\leq c_j$ and $c_j \not\leq c_i$; and
\item if $1<i<n$, then $c_{i-1} < c_i > c_{i+1}$ or $c_{i-1} > c_i < c_{i+1}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{dfn}
\begin{dfn}[2.3.3 of \cite{Warren1997}]
Let $M$ be a partial order, $a,b \in M$, and let $C = \langle c_1,c_2,\ldots ,c_n \rangle$ be a connecting set from $a$ to $b$ in $M$. Let $\sigma_k$ (for $ 1< k < n$) be maximal chains in $M^+$ with endpoints $c_k,c_{k+1} \in \sigma_k$, such that if $x \in \sigma_i \cap \sigma_j$ for some $i < j$, then $j = i+1$ and $x = c_{i+1}$. Then we say that $P = \bigcup_{0<k<n} \sigma_k$ is a \textbf{path} from $a$ to $b$ in $M$.
\end{dfn}
\begin{dfn}
A partial order $M$ is said to be a \textbf{cycle-free partial order} (CFPO) if for all $x,y \in M$ there is at most one path between $x$ and $y$ in $M^+$. If it exists, this unique path is denoted by $\path{x,y}$.
\end{dfn}
\begin{dfn}
$\alt{}$ is the partial order with the domain $ \lbrace a_i \; : \; i \in \mathbb{Z} \rbrace $ ordered by:
\begin{itemize}
\item if $i$ is odd then $ a_{i-1} > a_{i} < a_{i+1} $; and
\item if $i$ is even then $ a_{i-1} < a_{i} > a_{i+1} $.
\end{itemize}
$\alt{n}$ is defined to be $\alt{}$ restricted to $\lbrace a_0, \ldots a_{n-1} \rbrace$. Note that flipping the order does not affect the definition of $\alt{}$, but does affect $\alt{n}$. We will write $\alt{n}^*$ for the reverse ordering of $\alt{n}$.
\end{dfn}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.13]
\draw (-25,0) -- (-20,5) -- (-10,-5) -- (0,5) -- (10,-5) -- (20,5) -- (25,0);
\fill (-20,5) circle (0.5);
\fill (-10,-5) circle (0.5);
\fill (0,5) circle (0.5);
\fill (20,5) circle (0.5);
\fill (10,-5) circle (0.5);
\draw[anchor=west] (-20,5) node {$a_{-2}$};
\draw[anchor=west] (-10,-5.5) node {$a_{-1}$};
\draw[anchor=west] (0,5) node {$a_{0}$};
\draw[anchor=west] (10,-5.5) node {$a_{1}$};
\draw[anchor=west] (20,5) node {$a_{2}$};
\draw[anchor=east] (-25,0) node {$\ldots$};
\draw[anchor=west] (25,0) node {$\ldots$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{The Alternating Chain}
\end{figure}
That $\alt{}$ is a CFPO is readily apparent.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:altnotCC}
Let $M$ be a CFPO. If $\alt{n} \subseteq M$ for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$ then $M$ is not $\aleph_0$-categorical.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Paths are preserved by automorphisms, so pairs joined by different length paths must lie in different 2-orbits.
\end{proof}
\begin{dfn}
We say that $M$, a CFPO, is a $\cfpo{n}$ if $M$ embeds $\alt{n}$ or $\alt{n}^*$, but not $\alt{n+1}$ or $\alt{n+1}^*$.
\end{dfn}
We may therefore restrict our attention to the $\cfpo{n}$s. However, it was shown in \cite{BarhamTreelike} that if $M$ is a $\cfpo{n}$ then there is a coloured tree $T(M)$ such that $\textnormal{Aut}(M) \cong \textnormal{Aut}(T(M))$, where this isomorphism is as permutations groups (i.e. the orbits of $M$ and $T(M)$ are equal), so we conclude the following:
\begin{cor}
Let $M$ be a $\cfpo{n}$. $M$ is $\aleph_0$-categorical if and only if $T(M)$ is as well.
\end{cor}
|
\section{Introduction}
Performing one-qubit measurements on an initially entangled state called \emph{graph state} \cite{HEB04} is a universal model for quantum computation introduced by Raussendorf and Briegel \cite{RB01,RBB03}. This model is very promising for the physical implementation of a quantum computer \cite{Wetal,Petal}. The measurement-calculus \cite{DKP,DKPP} is a formal framework for measurement-based quantum computation. In the original model introduced by Briegel and Raussendorf, all measurements are applied in the so called $\{X,Y\}$-plane of the Bloch sphere, however the model can be extended to other planes, namely $\{X,Z\}$ and $\{Y,Z\}$-planes. For instance, measurements in the $\{X,Z\}$-planes are universal \cite{MP} for quantum computation, with the particular property that only real numbers are used in this case. The Extended Measurement-Calculus \cite{DKPP} is an extension of the Measurement-Calculus in which the three possible planes of measurement are available.
The question of the reversibility is central in measurement-based quantum computation since the key ingredient of this model -- the quantum measurement -- has a fundamentally probabilistic evolution. Reversibility is essential for the simulation of quantum circuits, and as a consequence for the universality of the model. For deciding whether an initial resource (a graph state) can be used to implement a reversibile evolutions, a graphical condition called \emph{gflow} has been introduced \cite{DK,BKMP}.
Gflow is not unique in general. In the non-extended case a focused gflow \cite{MMPST} is nothing but a gflow in some normal form. We consider three natural extensions of the focused gflow for the extended measurement based quantum computation and we study in which cases these normal forms exist.
\section{Extended Measurement-based Quantum Computation}
In this section, a brief description of the extended measurement-based quantum computation is given, a more detailed introduction can be found in \cite{DKP,DKPP}. An measurement-based quantum computation (MBQC) is:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] {\bf Initialisation.} An \emph{open graph} $(G,I,O)$ which describes the initial entanglement ($G=(V,E)$ is a simple undirected graph), the inputs ($I\subseteq V$) and outputs ($O\subseteq V$) of the computation. The initial entanglement is obtained by applying the following preparation map $N$ which associates with every arbitrary input state located on the input qubits the initial entangled state of the MBQC:
\begin{eqnarray*}N : \mathbb C^{\{0,1\}^I}&\to& \mathbb C^{\{0,1\}^{V}}\\\ket x &\mapsto& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2^{|\comp{I}|}}} \sum_{y\in \{0,1\}^{\comp{I}}} (-1)^{|G[x,y]|}\ket{x,y}\end{eqnarray*}
where $G[x,y]$ denotes the subgraph of $G$ induced by the supports of $x$ and $y$ and $|G[x,y]|$ its size.
In other words $|G[x,y]|$ is the number of edges $(u,v)\in E$ such that $(x(u){=}1 \vee y(u) {=} 1) \wedge (u(v){=}1 \vee y(v){=}1)$;
~\\
\item[(ii)] {\bf Measurements.} For every non output qubit $u\in \comp{O}$, $\alpha(u)\in [0,2\pi)$ and two distinct Pauli operators $\lambda_1(u)$, $\lambda_2(u) \in \{X,Y,Z\}$
describe the \emph{plane} $\{\lambda_1(u),\lambda_2(u)\}$ and the \emph{angle} $\alpha(u)$ according to which the qubit $u$ is measured i.e., $u$ is measured according to the observable $$\cos(\alpha(u))\lambda_1(u)+\sin(\alpha(u))\lambda_2(u)$$
Measurement of qubit $u$ produces a classical outcome $(-1)^{s_u}$ where $s_u\in \{0,1\}$ is called \emph{signal}, or simply \emph{classical outcome} with a slight abuse of notation;
~\\
\item[(iii)] {\bf Corrections.} Two maps $\mathtt x, \mathtt z: \comp{O} \to 2^{V}$ called \emph{corrective maps}. Corrections work as follows: for every non output qubit $u$, the measurement of qubit $u$ is followed by the application of $X^{s_u}$ on the qubits in $\mathtt x(u)$ and $Z^{s_u}$ on the qubits in $\mathtt z (u)$. A vertex $v\in \mathtt x(u)\cup \mathtt z(u)$ is called a \emph{corrector} of $u$
The maps $\mathtt x, \mathtt z$ should be \emph{extensive} in the sense that there exists a partial order $\prec$ over the vertices of the graph s.t. any corrector $v$ of a vertex $u$ is larger than $u$, i.e. $v\in \mathtt x(u)\cup \mathtt z(u)$ implies $u\prec v$. The extensivity of $\mathtt x$ and $\mathtt z$ guarantees that the corrections are applied on qubits which are no yet measured.
\end{itemize}
The \emph{extended} variant of MBQC refers to the possibility to perform measurements in the three possible planes $\{X,Y\}$, $\{X,Z\}$ and $\{Y,Z\}$ of the Bloch sphere, whereas all measurements are performed in the $\{X,Y\}$-plane in the original measurement-based quantum computation.
\section{Reversibility, Determinism, and Generalized Flow}
Despite of the probabilistic evolution of quantum measurements, the correction mechanism can be used to make the overall evolution of an MBQC reversible which means that there exists an isometry $U$ ($U^\dagger U=\mathbb I$) from the input to the output qubits such that, whatever the classical outcomes of the measurements during the computation are, the evolution implemented by the MBQC is $U$. In the context of measurement-based quantum computation this form of reversibility is called \emph{determinism} \cite{DK}.
Determinism is an essential feature which is used for instance for proving that any quantum circuit can be simulated by an MBQC. Thus, this is a key ingredient for the universality of the model for quantum computing. The existence of a correction strategy that makes an MBQC deterministic crucially depends on the initial entangled state, i.e. on the open graph $(G,I,O)$ and the planes of measurement: given $\lambda: \comp{O}\to \{\{X,Y\},\{X,Z\},\{Y,Z\}\}$ a map which associates with every non output qubit its plane of measurement, an \emph{extended open graph} $(G,I,O,\lambda)$ is \emph{uniformly deterministic} if for any measurement angles $\alpha:\comp{O}\to [0,2\pi)$, there exist two corrective maps $\mathtt x$ and $\mathtt z$ such that the corresponding MBQC is deterministic.
Significant efforts have been made to characterize the open graphs that guarantees uniform determinism. Flow \cite{DK}, and generalised flow (\emph{gflow}) \cite{BKMP} are graphical conditions which are sufficient for uniform determinism.
Gflow can be defined as follows for the extended open graphs:
\begin{definition}[GFlow]
An extended open graph $(G,I,O,\lambda)$ has a gflow if there exists $g:\comp{O}\to 2^{\comp{I}}$ s.t. $u\mapsto g(u)\cup Odd(g(u))$ is extensive and
for any $u \in \comp{O}$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lambda(u) = \{X,Y\} &\Rightarrow &u\in Odd(g(u))\setminus g(u)\\
\lambda(u) = \{X,Z\} & \Rightarrow &u\in g(u) \cap Odd(g(u))\\
\lambda(u) = \{Y,Z\}&\Rightarrow &u\in g(u)\setminus Odd(g(u))
\end{eqnarray*}
where $Odd(A)=\{w\in V~|~|N(w)\cap A| = 0\bmod 2\}$ is the \emph{odd neighbourhood} of $A$
and a map $f:\comp{O}\to 2^V$ is \emph{extensive} if there exists a partial order $\prec$ such that for any $u\in \comp{O}$, $u$ is smaller than its image by $f$ i.e., $\forall v\in V\setminus \{u\}, v\in f(u)\Rightarrow u\prec v$.
\end{definition}
Concretely, if an extended open graph $(G,I,O)$ has a gflow $g$ then for any measurement angles $\alpha:\comp{O}\to [0, 2\pi)$ the corrective maps defined as $\forall u\in \comp{O}, \mathtt x(u):= g(u)\setminus \{u\}$ and $\mathtt z(u):= Odd(g(u)) \setminus \{u\}$ guarantees that the corresponding MBQC is deterministic \cite{BKMP}.
With some additional assumptions gflow is not only sufficient but also necessary for determinism in measurement-based quantum computing. More precisely, there are mainly two cases to consider, depending on the number of inputs and outputs of the computation. When there are as many inputs as outputs, determinism corresponds to the notion of unitary evolution (evolution $U$ s.t. $U^\dagger U=UU^\dagger = \mathbb I$). In this particular case,
the gflow condition is necessary for strong -- i.e., all measurements occur with the same probability -- uniform determinism \cite{MMPST}.
In the general case, when the number of inputs and outputs may differ, determinism corresponds to isometries (also called \emph{unitary embedding}). In this general case, gflow characterizes \emph{stepwise} strong uniform determinism (roughly speaking the additional stepwise condition means that any partial computation is also deterministic) \cite{BKMP}. Notice that it is not known whether the strong and stepwise conditions are required: there is no known example of uniformly deterministic MBQC which corresponding open graph does not have a gflow.
Notice that if an extended open graph has a gflow then all the input qubits must be measured in the $\{X,Y\}$-plane:
\begin{property}\label{prop:XY}
If an extended open graph $(G,I,O,\lambda)$ has a gflow then $\forall u\in I\cap \comp{O}$, $\lambda(u) = \{X,Y\}$.
\end{property}
\begin{proof} Let $g$ be a gflow for $(G,I,O,\lambda)$, and $u\in I\cap \comp{O}$, since for any $u\in \comp{O}$, $g(u)\subseteq \comp{I}$, $u\notin g(u)$, thus according to the definition of gflow, $\lambda(u)\neq \{X,Z\}$ and $\lambda(u)\neq \{Y,Z\}$. \hfill $\Box$
\end{proof}
\section{Focused Gflow and Normal Forms}
The gflow of an (extended) open graph is not unique in general. In the non extended case i.e., when all measurements are performed in the $\{X,Y\}$-plane several classes of gflow have been identified:
the \emph{maximally delayed gflow} which depth is minimal and which is produced by an polytime algorithm \cite{MP08}; and the focus gflow which guarantees that the $\mathtt z$ corrective map acts only on the output qubits. The definition of focused gflow is as follows: Given an open graph $(G,I,O)$, a gflow $g$ is \emph{focused} if $\forall u\in \comp{O}$, $Odd(g(u))\cap \comp{O} = \{u\}$. Since any gflow can be transformed into a focused gflow \cite{MMPST}, focused gflow can be used to characterize the open graphs that have a gflow:
\begin{property}
An open graph $(G,I,O)$ has a gflow if and only if there exists $g: \comp{O} \to 2^{\comp{I}}$ extensive such that
$\forall u\in \comp{O}$, $$Odd(g(u))\cap \comp{O} = \{u\}$$
\end{property}
Focused gflow is a simpler but equivalent variant of gflow, which can be used for instance as a tool for quantum circuits translation and optimisation \cite{BK,DP,DPK}.
So far, there is no definition of `focused' gflow in the context of the extended MBQC. By symmetry, there are three natural kinds of `focused' extended gflow: those for which $Odd(g(u))\cap \comp{O} \subseteq \{u\}$; those for which $g(u)\cap \comp{O} \subseteq \{u\}$; and finally those for which $g(u)\oplus Odd(g(u))\cap \comp{O} \subseteq \{u\}$, $\oplus$ denotes the \emph{symmetric difference}. We define the corresponding three normal forms (NF for short) for extended gflows:
\begin{definition}[Normal forms]
A gflow $g$ of an extended open graph $(G,I,O,\lambda)$ is
\begin{itemize}
\item $X$-NF if $\forall u\in \comp{O}$, $$Odd(g(u)) \subseteq \{u\}\cup O$$
\item $Y$-NF if $\forall u\in \comp{O}$, $$\left(Odd(g(u))\oplus g(u) \right) \subseteq \{u\}\cup O$$
\item $Z$-NF if $\forall u\in \comp{O}$, $$g(u) \subseteq \{u\}\cup O$$
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
Intuitively a $\sigma$-NF, for $\sigma\in \{X,Y,Z\}$, guarantees that in the corresponding MBQC all the correctors applied on the non output qubits are Pauli-$\sigma$ operators. For instance, given a Z-NF gflow, in the corresponding MBQC $\forall u\in \comp{O}, \mathtt x(u)=g(u)\setminus \{u\}\subseteq O$ which implies that all Pauli correctors applied on non output qubits are $Z$ operators. Given a Y-NF gflow, in the corresponding MBQC $\forall u\in \comp{O}, \mathtt x(u)\cap \comp{O} = \mathtt z(u)\cap \comp{O}$ which means that all the Pauli correctors applied on non output qubits are products of $X$ and $Z$ which is nothing but Pauli-Y operators (up to a global phase).
Notice that given an open graph $(G,I,O)$, $g$ is a focused gflow of $(G,I,O)$ if and only if $g$ is a X-NF gflow of $(G,I,O,u\mapsto \{X,Y\})$.
\section{Existence of Normal Forms}
In this section we consider the problem of the existence of gflow in normal forms. First notice that some extended open graphs have a gflow but no $Z$-NF gflow for instance. The following extended open graph $(G,I,O,\lambda)$ where $G=(\{1,2,3\}, \{(1,2),(2,3)\})$, $I=\{1\}$, $O=\{3\}$ and $\lambda(1)= \lambda (2) = \{X,Y\}$ admits exactly two gflows $g$ and $g'$ ($g(1) = \{1\}$, $g'(1)=\{2,3\}$, and $g(2)=g'(2)=\{3\}$), none of them is in the Z-normal form.
\begin{psfrags}
\psfrag{1}{$1$}
\psfrag{2}{$2$}
\psfrag{3}{$3$}
\psfrag{XY}[c]{~~~~~$\{X,Y\}$}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{P3.eps}
\end{center}
\end{psfrags}
This simple example points out a crucial difference with respect to the non-extended case for which any gflow can be turned into a focused gflow.
A sufficient condition for the existence of a $\sigma$-NF gflow for an extended open graph with gflow is that every non-input measurement plane contains $\sigma$:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:sc}
If an extended open graph $(G,I,O,\lambda)$ has a gflow then, for any $\sigma\in \bigcap_{u\in \comp{I}\cap \comp{O}} \lambda(u)$, $(G,I,O,\lambda)$ has a $\sigma$-NF gflow.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $g$ be a gflow for $(G,I,O,\lambda)$, and $\sigma\in \bigcap_{u\in \comp{I}\cap \comp{O}} \lambda(u)$. We define $g_\sigma:\comp{O}\to 2^{\comp{I}}$ as follows, depending on $\sigma$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
g_X(u)&:=& g(u)\oplus \left(\bigoplus_{{v\in Odd(g(u))\setminus (O\cup \{u\})}}g_X(v)\right)\\
g_Y(u)&:=& g(u)\oplus \left(\bigoplus_{{v\in (g(u)\oplus Odd(g(u)))\setminus (O\cup \{u\})}}g_Y(v)\right)\\
g_Z(u)&:=& g(u)\oplus \left(\bigoplus_{{v\in g(u)\setminus (O\cup \{u\})}}g_Z(v)\right)\\
\end{eqnarray*}
Extensivity of $g$ guarantees that $g_\sigma$ is well-defined. In the following we prove that $g_\sigma$ is a gflow, and then that $g_\sigma$ is in $\sigma$-NF. \\{[gflow]} Let $\prec$ a partial order according to which $g$ is extensive, we show that $g_\sigma$ is also extensive according to $\prec$. Indeed, for any $u\in \comp{O}$ and any $w\in V\setminus \{u\}$, s.t. $w\in g_\sigma(u)$, by induction if there is no larger elements in $\comp{O}$ then $g_\sigma(u) = g(u)$, so $u\prec w$. Otherwise, $w\in g(u)\cup (\bigcup_{v\in g(u)\cup Odd(g(u))\setminus (O\cup \{u\})}g_\sigma(v))$, so either (i) $w\in g(u)$ which implies $u\prec w$, or (ii) $\exists v\in g(u)\cup Odd(g(u))$ s.t. $w\in g_\sigma(v)$, so $u\prec v$ and, by induction, $v\prec w$ which implies $u\prec w$. \\
Regarding the remaining gflow conditions, notice that the extensivity of $g$ and $g_\sigma$ guarantees that for any $u\in \comp{O}$, $g_\sigma(u)\cap \{u\} = g(u)\cap \{u\}$ and $Odd(g_\sigma(u))\cap \{u\} = Odd(g(u))\cap \{u\}$ (the linearity of $Odd$ is also used in this second case: $Odd(A\oplus B) = Odd(A)\oplus Odd(B)$). Thus $g_\sigma$ is a gflow.
\\{[$\sigma$-NF]} In the following we prove that $g_\sigma$ is in a $\sigma$-NF. W.l.o.g. assume $\sigma=Y$ (the other two cases are similar). We actually prove by induction that $\forall u \in \comp{O}$, $Odd(g_Y(u)\oplus g_Y(u)) \cap \comp{O}= \{u\}$. Let $u\in \comp{O}$.
\begin{itemize}
\item If there is no larger element according to $\prec$ (the partial order induced by $g$ and $g_Y$) in $\comp{O}$, then $Odd(g_Y(u))\oplus g_Y(u)\subseteq Odd(g_Y(u))\cup g_Y(u)\subseteq \{u\}\cup O$ by extensivity of $g_Y$, moreover since $Y\in \lambda(u)$, $u\in Odd(g_Y(u))\oplus g_Y(u)$, so $(Odd(g_Y(u))\oplus g_Y(u)) \cap \comp{O} = \{u\}$.
\item Otherwise, $(Odd(g_Y(u))\oplus g_Y(u))\cap \comp{O}=$
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& \left(Odd(g(u))\oplus g(u) \oplus \left(\hspace{-2.8cm}\bigoplus_{{\hspace{2.8cm}v\in (g(u)\oplus Odd(g(u)))\setminus (O\cup \{u\})}} \hspace{-2.8cm}Odd(g_Y(v))\oplus g_Y(v)\right)\right)\cap \comp{O}\\
&=&\left(Odd(g(u))\oplus g(u)\right)\cap \comp{O} \oplus \left(\hspace{-2.8cm}\bigoplus_{{\hspace{2.8cm}v\in (g(u)\oplus Odd(g(u)))\setminus (O\cup \{u\})}} \hspace{-2.8cm}(Odd(g_Y(v))\oplus g_Y(v))\cap \comp{O}\right)\\
&=&\left(Odd(g(u))\oplus g(u)\right)\cap \comp{O} \oplus \left(\hspace{-2cm}\bigoplus_{{\hspace{2cm}v\in (g(u)\oplus Odd(g(u)))\setminus (O\cup \{u\})}} \hspace{-2cm}\{v\}~~~~~~~~~~~~~\right)\\
&=&\left(Odd(g(u))\oplus g(u)\right)\cap \comp{O} \oplus \left((g(u)\oplus Odd(g(u)))\setminus (O\cup \{u\})\right)\\
&=&\left(Odd(g(u))\oplus g(u)\right)\cap \{u\
\end{eqnarray*}
Moreover, since $Y\in \lambda(u)$, $u\in Odd(g(u))\oplus g(u)$, so $(Odd(g_Y(u))\oplus g_Y(u))\cap \comp{O}=\{u\}$. \hfill $\Box$
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
As a corollary, any (non extended) open graphs with gflow, admits both X- and Y-NF gflows. More generally, any extended open graph $(G,I,O,\lambda)$ with gflow such that $\lambda$ is constant over $\comp{I}\cap \comp{O}$ admits both $\sigma$- and $\sigma'$-NF gflows where $\comp{I}\cap \comp{O}\subseteq \lambda^{-1}(\{\sigma,\sigma'\})$
Theorem \ref{thm:sc} provides a sufficient condition for the existence of a $\sigma$-normal form. The following example points out that this condition is not necessary: in this extended open graph $\lambda(2)=\{X,Z\}$ however it admis the following Y-NF gflow $1\mapsto \{4\} ; 2\mapsto \{2,3,4\}$.
\begin{psfrags}
\psfrag{1}{$1$}
\psfrag{2}{$2$}
\psfrag{3}{$3$}
\psfrag{4}{$4$}
\psfrag{XY}[c]{~~~~~$\{X,Y\}$}
\psfrag{YZ}[c]{~~~~~$\{X,Z\}$}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{P4.eps}
\end{center}
\end{psfrags}
Notice that in this counter example there are strictly more outputs than inputs. %
Indeed, we show that the existence of a $\sigma$-NF gflow with $\sigma \in \{Y,Z\}$, implies that the number non-input measurement-planes which do not contain $\sigma$ is upper bounded by the \emph{input defect} i.e., the difference between the number of outputs and inputs:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:cn}
Given $\sigma\in \{Y,Z\}$ and an extended open graph $(G,I,O,\lambda)$, if $(G,I,O,\lambda)$ has a $\sigma$-NF gflow then $$|\{u \in \comp I \cap \comp O ~|~ \sigma\notin \lambda(u)\}| \le |O|-|I|$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Given $(G,I,O,\lambda)$ with a $\sigma$-NF gflow $g$ where $\sigma\in \{Y,Z\}$, we show that any non-input vertex which is measured in a plane which does not contain $\sigma$ can be, roughly speaking, turned into an input vertex. The proof is by induction on $|\{u \in \comp I \cap \comp O ~|~ \sigma\notin \lambda(u)\}|$. If $|\{u \in \comp I \cap \comp O ~|~ \sigma\notin \lambda(u)\}| = 0$ the property is satisfied since determinism implies $|I|\le |O|$.
Otherwise, let $u_0\in \comp I\cap \comp O$ s.t. $\sigma\notin \lambda(u_0)$ and let $g'(u):=\begin{cases} g(u)&\text{if $u=u_0$ or $u_0\notin g(u)$}\\ g(u)\oplus g(u_0)&\text{otherwise}\end{cases}$. $g'$ is a $\sigma$-NF gflow s.t. $\forall u\in \comp O \setminus \{u_0\}$, $u_0\notin g'(u)$.
\\{[Z-NF]} If $\sigma=Z$, $\lambda(u_0) = \{X,Y\}$, so $u_0\notin g'(u_0)$. As a consequence $\forall u\in \comp O, g'(u)\in \comp{(I\cup \{u_0\})}$, and $g'$ is a Z-NF gflow of $(G,I\cup \{u_0\},O, \lambda)$: in this new extended open graph the number of measurement-planes which do not contain $Z$ is decreased by one, as well as the input defect i.e., the difference between the number of outputs and inputs.
\\{[Y-NF]} If $\sigma=Y$, a new degree-one vertex $u_1$ is connected to $u_0$, and let $g'':\comp O\to 2^{\comp {(I\cup \{u_0\})}}$ be defined as follows\\\centerline{$g''(u):=\begin{cases}\{u_1\}&\text{if $u=u_0$}\\ g'(u_0)\oplus \{u_0, u_1\} &\text{if $u=u_1$}\\
g'(u)&\text{otherwise}\end{cases}$}
$g''$ is a Y-NF gflow for $(G',I\cup\{u_0\},O, \lambda')$, where $G'$ is the graph $G$ augmented with the dangling vertex $u_1$, and $\lambda'(u)=\begin{cases}\{X,Y\}&\text{if $u=u_0$}\\\{Y,Z\}&\text{if $u=u_1$}\\\lambda(u)&\text{otherwise}\end{cases}$. In this new open graph the number of inputs is increased by one, so the input defect decreases by one, moreover the number of measurement planes which do not contain $Y$ also decreases by one since $u_1$ is measured in the $\{Y,Z\}$-plane in this new open graph. \hfill $\Box$
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary} Given $\sigma\in \{Y,Z\}$ and an extended open graph $(G,I,O,\lambda)$ with gflow such that $|I| = |O|$, $(G,I,O,\lambda)$ has a $\sigma$-NF gflow if and only if for any $ u\in \comp{I}\cap \comp{O}$, $\sigma\in\lambda(u)$.
\end{corollary}
Theorem \ref{thm:cn} shows that in a Z-NF gflow, when a non-input is measured in the $\{X,Y\}$-plane, this non-input somehow behaves as an input. Regarding the Y-NF gflow when a non-input qubit is measured in the $\{X,Z\}$-plane, this qubit cannot be seen as an input qubit mainly because all inputs have to be measured in the $\{X,Y\}$-plane (Property \ref{prop:XY}). However, up to a transformation of the graph, it can be turned into an input (see proof of Theorem \ref{thm:cn}). One can wonder whether such a transformation exists for X-NF gflow? Surprisingly, Theorem \ref{thm:cn} cannot be extended to the X-NF case as illustrated by the following counter example where the number of inputs is equal to the number of outputs and which has a X-NF gflow ($1\mapsto \{3\} ; 2\mapsto \{2,3\}$) despite of the measurement of a non-input qubit in the $\{Y,Z\}$-plane:
\begin{psfrags}
\psfrag{1}{$1$}
\psfrag{2}{$2$}
\psfrag{4}{$3$}
\psfrag{XY}[c]{~~~~~$\{X,Y\}$}
\psfrag{YZ}[c]{~~~~~$\{Y,Z\}$}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{XNF.eps}
\end{center}
\end{psfrags}
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
\lettrine[nindent=0em,lines=2]{T}he basic idea of model predictive control (MPC) is to obtain a stabilizing feedback law by solving at each sampling instant, in a receding horizon fashion, a suitable finite-horizon open-loop optimal control problem that is parametrized by the evolving system state.
Only the first element of the optimal control input is applied to the plant and the optimization is repeated at the next time step in a receding horizon fashion.
Based on the predicted dynamics of the system to be controlled, both a user-defined cost objective and potential constraints on the system states and input can be taken into account explicitly within the corresponding optimization problem.
There exist various theoretical results concerning the stability properties of the closed-loop system for both linear and nonlinear systems, and MPC can be considered as a widely accepted control concept that is more and more applied to industrial processes, see~\cite{mayne00} and \cite{qin03} as well as references therein. \\
However, there often is a gap between theoretical MPC concepts and their actual implementation, and several disadvantages remain.
For example, algorithmic aspects of the required optimization are usually not taken into account explicitly in the MPC design, which may result in suboptimal or even unstable closed-loop behavior.
Furthermore, in the presence of disturbances, sensor outliers, or observer errors, the underlying open-loop optimal control problem may become infeasible, leading to a complete crash of the respective control algorithm.
In recent years, considerable research effort has been spent on designing efficient and reliable algorithmic MPC implementations that, if possible, still preserve some of the desired theoretical properties when running in closed-loop operation, see e.g. \cite{bemporadExplicitLQR,diehl05,zeilinger11,patrinos12,borrelliBook14}.
One particular approach that allows to reduce the gap between MPC schemes on the one and MPC algorithms on the other hand is given by the concept of barrier function based MPC, which was introduced in~\cite{wills04} and has been extended recently in~\cite{feller13,feller14b,feller14c}. In barrier function based MPC schemes, the inequality constraints occurring in the open-loop optimal control problem are incorporated into the cost function by means of suitable barrier function terms like it is also done in interior-point optimization algorithms~\cite{nesterovBook}. As shown in the above references, barrier function based MPC approaches allow to guarantee asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system
while at the same time reducing the underlying open-loop optimal control problem to an equality constrained or even unconstrained optimization problem. Thus, a barrier function based reformulation is already integrated into the MPC design, which then allows for an efficient implementation based on tailored numerical optimization techniques.
In particular, the barrier function based approach makes the open-loop optimal control problem accessible for continuous-time algorithms that asymptotically track the optimal solution of the unconstrained reformulation and, thus, allow to implement MPC without any iterative on-line optimization, see \cite{ohtsuka04,deHaan07,feller13,feller14}.
However, two main disadvantages remain. On the one hand, the open-loop optimal control problem may still become infeasible since the barrier functions are only defined within the interior of the corresponding constraint sets. On the other hand, the barrier function based approach inherently requires the use of a terminal set or terminal equality constraint, which is not desirable, and also typically not used, in practice.\\[0.2cm]
In this paper, we show that both of these problems can be eliminated by
making use of so-called relaxed logarithmic barrier functions, i.e., barrier functions that are smoothly extended by a suitable penalty term outside of the corresponding constraint set~\cite{benTal92,nash94,hauser06}.
We discuss suitable relaxation procedures (Section~\ref{sec:relBarrierIntro}) and present results that allow to guarantee asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system with and without making use of terminal sets (Sections \ref{sec:relBarrierStab1}, \ref{sec:relBarrierStab2}), to determine and control the maximal violation of input and state constraints in closed-loop operation~(Section~\ref{sec:relBarrierConstr}), and to recover the optimality properties of both nonrelaxed barrier function based and conventional linear MPC schemes~(Section~\ref{sec:relBarrierOpt}).
Furthermore, based on the presented results, we provide in Section~\ref{sec:relBarrierNumExample} a step-by-step procedure for the constructive design of the overall MPC scheme. \\
The basic idea of relaxed barrier function based MPC is closely related to approaches based on soft constraints or penalty functions, see e.g.~\cite{kerrigan00,zeilinger10}. However, in these approaches, closed-loop properties like stability or strict constraint satisfaction can usually only be guaranteed when making use of nonsmooth or even exact penalty functions.
The key feature of the relaxed barrier functions discussed in this paper is that they result in a smooth formulation of the overall problem while still allowing for an arbitrary close approximation of the corresponding nonrelaxed case.
As a result, the stabilizing control input can be characterized as the minimizer of a globally defined, twice continuously differentiable, and strongly convex cost function, which makes it efficiently computable by standard nonlinear programming algorithms.
Some preliminary results on the concept of relaxed barrier function based MPC have been presented in~\cite{feller14}.
In this paper we significantly extend these results and provide an in-depth study of several theoretical and practical aspects of the presented linear MPC schemes.
A particularly interesting new result is the insight that the use of relaxed barrier functions allows to ensure global asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system without making use of a terminal set.\\[0.3cm]
Throughout the paper we will make use of the following notation. $\mathbb{R}_+$, $\mathbb{R}_{+\!\!+}$, and $\mathbb{N}_+$ denote the sets of nonnegative real, strictly positive real, and strictly positive natural numbers. Furthermore, $\mathbb{S}^n_+$ and $\mathbb{S}^n_{\pplus}$ refer to the sets of positive semi-definite and positive definite matrices of dimension $n\in\mathbb{N}_+$. For any given matrix~$M$ or vector $v$, $M^i$ and $v^i$ refer to the $i$-th row or element and $\lVert x \rVert_M:=\sqrt{x^\TRANSP \! M x}$ for any $M\in\mathbb{S}_+$. A polytope is defined as the compact intersection of a finite number of halfspaces. For any arbitrary set $S$, the expression $S^\circ$ will denote the open interior and $\partial S$ the boundary. Moreover, $\mathds{1}:=\begin{bmatrix} 1 & \cdots & 1 \end{bmatrix}^\TRANSP$ of suitable dimension.
\section{Problem Setup}
In this paper, we consider the control of linear time-invariant discrete-time systems of the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:discreteSystem}
x(k+1)=Ax(k)+Bu(k)\, ,
\end{equation}
where $x(k) \in \mathbb{R}^n$ refers to the vector of system states and $u(k) \in \mathbb{R}^m$ refers to the vector of system inputs, both at time instant $k \geq 0$. Moreover, the matrices $A\in \mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ and $B\in \mathbb{R}^{n\times m}$ describe the corresponding system dynamics, where we assume $(A,B)$ to be stabilizable. The control task is to regulate the system state to the origin while minimizing a given, user defined performance criterion and satisfying state and input constraints of the form $x(k) \in \mathcal{X}$ and $u(k) \in \mathcal{U}$ for all $k \geq 0$. Here, $\mathcal{X}\!\subset \mathbb{R}^n$ and $\,\mathcal{U}\!\subset \mathbb{R}^m$ are typically considered to be given convex sets that contain the origin in their interior. In this paper, we assume $\mathcal{X}$ and $\mathcal{U}$ to be polytopes defined as
\begin{subequations}%
\begin{align}
\mathcal{X}&=\{x \in \mathbb{R}^n: C_{\mathrm{x}} x \leq d_{\mathrm{x}}\}\, , \\ \mathcal{U}&=\{u \in \mathbb{R}^m: C_{\mathrm{u}} u \leq d_{\mathrm{u}}\} \, ,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}%
where $C_{\mathrm{x}}\in\mathbb{R}^{q_{\mathrm{x}}\times n}$, $C_{\mathrm{u}}\in\mathbb{R}^{q_{\mathrm{u}}\times m}$ and $d_{\mathrm{x}}\in\mathbb{R}^{q_{\mathrm{x}}}_{+\!\!+}$, $d_{\mathrm{u}}\in\mathbb{R}^{q_{\mathrm{u}}}_{+\!\!+}$ with $q_x, q_u\in\mathbb{N}_+$.
In linear MPC, this problem setup is usually handled by solving at each sampling instant an open-loop optimal control problem of the form
\begin{subequations} \label{eq:OptProblemLin}
\begin{align}
J_N^{\ast}(x)&=\min_{\boldsymbol{u}} \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \ell(x_k,u_k) + F(x_N) \\
\text{s.t.\ } \ &{x}_{k+1}=A{x}_{k}+B{u}_{k}, \ {x}_0=x \ , \\
&x_k \in \mathcal{X}, \ k=0,\dots, N-1, \ x_N \in \mathcal{X}_f \ ,\\
&u_k \in \mathcal{U}, \ k=0,\dots, N-1 \ .
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
for the current system state~$x=x(k)$ and a finite prediction and control horizon~$N \in\mathbb{N}_+$.
Here, the stage cost $\ell:\mathbb{R}^n\times \mathbb{R}^m\to \mathbb{R}_+$ and the terminal cost $F:\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}_+$ are usually defined as $\ell(x,u)=\lVert x\rVert_Q^2+\lVert u\rVert_R^2$ and $F(x)=\lVert x\rVert_P^2$ for appropriately chosen weight matrices $Q\in \mathbb{S}^n_+$, $R \in \mathbb{S}^m_{\pplus}$, $P\in \mathbb{S}^n_{\pplus}$. Furthermore, $\boldsymbol{u}=\{u_0,\dots,u_{N-1}\}$ denotes the sequence of control inputs over the prediction horizon~$N$, while $\mathcal{X}_f$ refers to a closed and convex terminal constraint set that may be used to guarantee stability properties of the closed-loop system.
Note that we make use of subindices to distinguish open-loop predictions~$x_k$,~$u_k$~from actual state and input trajectories~$x(k), u(k)$.
The control law is obtained by solving~(\ref{eq:OptProblemLin}) at each sampling instant $k\geq 0$ and applying $u(k)=u_0^*(x(k))$ in a receding horizon fashion.
Sufficient conditions for the recursive feasibility of~(\ref{eq:OptProblemLin}) as well as for the asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system are summarized in~\cite{mayne00}.
In the following, we will refer to this setup as \emph{conventional} linear MPC.
Moreover, we will often use $x^+$ to denote the successor state and write~(\ref{eq:discreteSystem}) as $x^+=Ax+Bu$. For given system state $x=x(k)$ and input sequence $\boldsymbol{u}=\{u_0,\dots,u_{N-1}\}$, the resulting open-loop state sequence is given by $\boldsymbol{x}(\boldsymbol{u},x)=\{x_0(\boldsymbol{u},x),\dots,x_N(\boldsymbol{u},x)\}$, where the elements $x_k(\boldsymbol{u},x)$, $k=0,\dots,N$ are given according to~(\ref{eq:OptProblemLin}b) with $x_0(\boldsymbol{u},x)=x$. For a given optimal input sequence $\boldsymbol{u}^*(x)$, we write $\boldsymbol{x}^*(x):=\boldsymbol{x}(\boldsymbol{u}^*(x),x)$ as well as $x_k^*(x):=x_k(\boldsymbol{u}^*(x),x)$. Sometimes we also drop the explicit dependence on the current system state for ease of notation.
\section{Preliminary Results}
We introduce in this section some concepts and results on nonrelaxed logarithmic barrier function based MPC that we will need in the remainder of the paper. In particular, we present a novel stability theorem which generalizes different existing ideas and is applicable to a wide class of barrier function based MPC approaches.
\subsection{Barrier Function Based Model Predictive Control}\label{sec:barrierStab}
The main idea in barrier function based MPC is to eliminate the inequality constraints from the above MPC open-loop optimal control problem by making use of suitable barrier functions with a corresponding weighting factor. Based on this idea, it is possible to reformulate problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemLin}) as an equality constrained (or even unconstrained) strongly convex optimization problem, which can then be solved by means of tailored optimization procedures like, e.g., the Newton-method. In general, the exact solution to the original problem, and hence also the stability properties of the corresponding closed-loop system, are recovered when the weighting factor of the barrier functions approaches zero~\cite[ch. 11]{boydBook}. However, for an arbitrary but fixed nonzero weighting, as it will necessarily occur in all numerical implementations, stability of the origin is by no means guaranteed. Several approaches towards the stabilizing design of barrier function based MPC schemes have been presented in~\cite{wills04,feller13,feller14b,feller14c}. In the following, we shortly summarize the main aspects of barrier function based linear MPC and present a fairly general stability theorem for the considered problem setup with polytopic input and state constraints.
Details on the discussed MPC approaches can be found in the respective references. \\[0.2cm]
Let us consider in the following the barrier function based open-loop optimal control problem
\begin{subequations}\label{eq:OptProblemBarrier}
\begin{align}
\tilde{J}_N^{\ast}(x)&=\min_{\boldsymbol{u}}\sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \tilde{\ell}(x_k,u_k) + \tilde{F}(x_N) \\
\mbox{s.\,t.} \ \ & {x}_{k+1}=A{x}_{k}+B{u}_{k}, \ {x}_0=x\,,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $ \tilde{\ell}(x,u):= \ell(x,u)+ \varepsilon B_{\mathrm{u}}(u)+\varepsilon B_{\mathrm{x}}(x)$ and $\tilde{F}(x):=F(x)+\varepsilon B_{\mathrm{f}}(x)$ are the modified stage and terminal cost terms for $\ell(x,u)=\|x\|_Q^2+\|u\|_R^2$ and $F(x)=\|x\|_P^2$, and $B_{\mathrm{u}}(\cdot)$, $B_{\mathrm{x}}(\cdot)$, and $B_{\mathrm{f}}(\cdot)$ are suitable convex barrier functions with domains $\,\mathcal{U}^\circ$, $\mathcal{X}^\circ$, and $\mathcal{X}_f^\circ$ with $B_{\mathrm{u}}(u) \to \infty$ for $u\to \partial \mathcal{U}$, $B_{\mathrm{x}}(x) \to \infty$ for $x\to \partial \mathcal{X}$, and $B_{\mathrm{f}}(x) \to \infty$ for $x\to \partial \mathcal{X}_f$. Furthermore, the positive scalar $\varepsilon >0$ is the barrier function weighting parameter which determines the influence of the barrier function values on the overall cost function.
As outlined above, the goal is now to choose the problem parameters $P$ and $\mathcal{X}_f$ as well as convex barrier functions $B_{\mathrm{u}}(\cdot)$, $B_{\mathrm{x}}(\cdot)$, and $B_{\mathrm{f}}(\cdot)$ in such a way that a linear MPC scheme based on~(\ref{eq:OptProblemBarrier}) asymptotically stabilizes the origin for any arbitrary but fixed $\varepsilon \in \mathbb{R}_{+\!\!+}$.
If we want to employ standard MPC stability concepts which are based on using the value function $\tilde{J}_N^*(\cdot)$ as a Lyapunov function for the closed-loop system, this usually requires the overall cost function to be continuous as well as positive definite with respect to the origin.
In order to ensure the latter property for general barrier functions, the concept of gradient recentered barrier functions has been introduced in~\cite{wills04}. In addition, a weighting based recentering approach for logarithmic barrier functions on polytopic sets has been proposed in~\cite{feller14c}. \vspace*{-0.2cm}
\begin{defn}[Recentered log barrier function~\cite{wills04,feller14c}] \label{def:recBarrier}
Let $\mathcal{P}=\{z\in\mathbb{R}^r: Cz\leq d\}$ with $C\in\mathbb{R}^{q\times r}$, $d\in \mathbb{R}^q_{+\!\!+}$ be a polytopic set containing the origin and let $\bar{B}: \mathcal{P}^\circ\to \mathbb{R}$, $\bar{B}(z)=\sum_{i=1}^q \bar{B}_i(z)$ with $\bar{B}_i(z)=-\ln(-C^iz+d^i)$ be the corresponding logarithmic barrier function.
Then, the function ${B}_G:\mathcal{P}^\circ \to\mathbb{R}_+$ with
\begin{equation}
{B}_G(z)=\bar{B}(z)-\bar{B}(0)-[\nabla \bar{B}(0)]^\TRANSP z
\end{equation}
defines the gradient recentered logarithmic barrier function for the polytopic set $\mathcal{P}$. Furthermore, ${B}_W:\mathcal{P}^\circ\to\mathbb{R}_+$ with
\begin{equation}
{B}_W(z)=\sum_{i=1}^q(1+w^i)\left(\bar{B}_i(z)-\bar{B}_i(0) \right)
\end{equation}
defines the corresponding weight recentered logarithmic barrier function, where the weighting vector $w \in \mathbb{R}^q_+$ is chosen in such a way that\! $\nabla {B}_W(0)=\sum_{i=1}^q(1+w^i)\nabla \bar{B}_i(0)=0$.
\end{defn}
In principle, the recentering can be seen as a modification which preserves the main characteristics of the barrier function while ensuring that it is positive definite with respect to the origin.
Both recentering approaches can in general be applied to our problem setup and will result in a continuously differentiable cost function that is positive definite and strongly convex in the optimization variable~$\boldsymbol{u}$. Moreover, the stability results presented in this work do hold independently of the underlying recentering method.\\
Let us now turn towards the stability properties of the closed-loop system when applying the barrier function based MPC feedback $u(k)=\tilde{u}(x(k))$.
\begin{defn} \label{def:feasSet}
For $N\in \mathbb{N}_+$, let the feasible set $\mathcal{X}_N$ be defined as
$\mathcal{X}_N:=\{x \in\mathcal{X}: \exists\, \boldsymbol{u}=\{u_0,\dots,u_{N-1}\}$ such that $u_k \in \mathcal{U}$, $ x_k(\boldsymbol{u},x) \in \mathcal{X}$ for $k=0,\dots,N-1$ and $x_N(\boldsymbol{u},x) \in \mathcal{X}_f\}$.
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}
In the following, the matrix $A_K:=A+BK$ describes the closed-loop dynamics for a given stabilizing local control law $u=Kx$ and $B_K(x):=B_{\mathrm{x}}(x)+B_{\mathrm{u}}(Kx)$ refers to the corresponding combined barrier function of input and state constraints for the set $\mathcal{X}_K:=\{x\in \mathcal{X}: Kx \in \mathcal{U}\}$.
\end{defn}
As outlined above, different approaches towards the stabilizing design of barrier function based MPC formulations, i.e., on how to choose the terminal cost matrix $P$, the terminal set $\mathcal{X}_f$, and the corresponding barrier function $B_{\mathrm{f}}(\cdot)$, have been presented in~\cite{wills04,feller13,feller14b} and \cite{feller14c}. In principle, all mentioned approaches are based on the idea of choosing the terminal set $\mathcal{X}_f$ as a positively invariant subset of the state space in which the function $B_K(\cdot)$, i.e., the influence of the input and state constraint barrier functions, can be upper bounded by a quadratic function. Then, based on this quadratic bound, the terminal cost matrix $P$ is computed in such a way that it compensates for this influence and ensures that the barrier function based terminal cost $\tilde{F}(\cdot)$ is a local control Lyapunov function for the auxiliary control law $u=Kx$. While the approaches in \cite{wills04}
and \cite{feller13} make use of ellipsoidal terminal sets, the approaches presented in \cite{feller14b} and \cite{feller14c} are based on polytopic terminal sets.
In the following, we present a set of sufficient stability conditions that is used in the remainder of this work and can be seen as a generalization of the ideas presented in the above references. \vspace*{-0.15cm}
\begin{ass}\label{ass:barrierMPCStab}
For $Q\in\mathbb{S}^n_{+}$, $R\in\mathbb{S}^m_{+\!\!+}$, $\varepsilon \in \mathbb{R}_{+\!\!+}$ and a given stabilizing local control gain $K\in\mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ let the parameters of the barrier function based open-loop optimal control problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemBarrier}) satisfy the following conditions.
\begin{itemize}\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}
\item[\textbf{A1}:] The barrier functions $B_{\mathrm{u}}(\cdot)$ and $B_{\mathrm{x}}(\cdot)$ are recentered barrier functions for the sets $\mathcal{U}$ and $\mathcal{X}$, respectively.
\item[\textbf{A2}:] There exists $M \in \mathbb{S}^{n}_+$, s.\,t. $B_K(x)\leq x^{\TRANSP}\!Mx \ \forall x \in \mathcal{N}$, where $\mathcal{N}\subset \mathcal{X}_K$, $0 \in \mathcal{N}^\circ$, is a convex, compact set.
\item[\textbf{A3}:] The matrix $P\in\mathbb{S}^n_{+\!\!+}$ is a solution to the Lyapunov equation $P=A_K^{\TRANSP}PA_K^{}+K^{\!\TRANSP}\!RK+Q+\varepsilon M$.
\item[\textbf{A4}:] The terminal set $\mathcal{X}_f$ is convex and compact with $0\in\mathcal{X}_f$, $\mathcal{X}_f \subset \mathcal{N}\subset \mathcal{X}_K$, and $x^+\!=A_Kx\in\mathcal{X}_f \ \forall x \in \mathcal{X}_f$.
\item[\textbf{A5}:] The function $B_{\mathrm{f}}(\cdot)$ is a recentered barrier function for the set $\mathcal{X}_f$ and $B_{\mathrm{f}}(A_Kx)-B_{\mathrm{f}}(x)\leq 0 $ $ \ \forall x\in \mathcal{X}_f^\circ$.
\end{itemize}
\end{ass}
Based on Assumption~\ref{ass:barrierMPCStab}, we can state the following result on the stability of the closed-loop system.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:barrierMPCStab}
Let Assumption~\ref{ass:barrierMPCStab} hold true and let the feasible set $\mathcal{X}_N$ defined according to Definition~\ref{def:feasSet} have nonempty interior. Then, the barrier function based MPC feedback $u(k)=\tilde{u}_0^*(x(k))$ resulting from problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemBarrier}) asymptotically stabilizes the origin of system~(\ref{eq:discreteSystem}) under strict satisfaction of all input and state constraints for any initial condition $x(0)\in \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The proof uses standard MPC stability arguments and comprises some of the main ideas presented in~\cite{wills04,feller13} and \cite{feller14b}.
We first show recursive feasibility of problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemBarrier}). For any $x_0 \in \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$, there exists by definition an optimal input sequence $\tilde{\boldsymbol{u}}^*(x_0)=\{\tilde{u}_0^*, \dots, \tilde{u}_{N-1}^*\}$ that guarantees strict satisfaction of all input, state, and terminal set constraints and results in a feasible open-loop state sequence $\boldsymbol{x}^*(x_0)=\{x_0,x_1^*,\dots,x_N^*\}$ with $x_N^*\in \mathcal{X}_f^\circ$. The successor state is given as $x_0^+=Ax_0+B\tilde{u}_0^*=x_1^*$. Due to the linear dynamics and the properties of the terminal set $\mathcal{X}_f$, see A4 of Assumption~\ref{ass:barrierMPCStab}, $\tilde{\boldsymbol{u}}^+(x_0)=\{\tilde{u}_1^*, \dots, \tilde{u}_{N-1}^*, Kx_N^*\}$ is a suboptimal but feasible input sequence for the initial state $x_0^+$ that results in the in the feasible open-loop state sequence $\boldsymbol{x}(\tilde{\boldsymbol{u}}^+(x_0),x_0^+)=\{x_0^+,x_2^*,\dots,x_N^*,A_Kx_N^*\}$
with $A_Kx_N^* \in \mathcal{X}_f^\circ$. This shows that for any $x_0 \in \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$, there exists a feasible input sequence that ensures that the successor state $x_0^+=Ax_0+B\tilde{u}_0^*$ lies again in the interior of the feasible set~$\mathcal{X}_N$, which guarantees recursive feasibility of the open-loop optimal control problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemBarrier}).\\ In the following, we show that the value function satisfies
\begin{equation} \label{eq:jdrecease}
\tilde{J}_N^*(x_0^+)-\tilde{J}_N^*(x_0)\leq -\tilde{\ell}(x_0,\tilde{u}_0^*(x_0)) \ \ \forall x_0 \in \mathcal{X}_N^\circ \ .
\end{equation}
First, due to the suboptimality of~$\tilde{\boldsymbol{u}}^+(x_0)$, it holds that $\tilde{J}_N^*(x_0^+)-\tilde{J}_N^*(x_0)\leq \tilde{J}_N(\tilde{\boldsymbol{u}}^+(x_0),x_0^+)-\tilde{J}_N^*(x_0)$, where $\tilde{J}_N(\tilde{\boldsymbol{u}}^+(x_0),x_0^+)$ denotes the value of the cost function evaluated for the suboptimal input sequence~$\tilde{\boldsymbol{u}}^+(x_0)$. Moreover, $\tilde{J}_N(\tilde{\boldsymbol{u}}^+(x_0),x_0^+)-\tilde{J}_N^*(x_0) = \tilde{F}(A_Kx_N^*) -\tilde{F}(x_N^*) + \tilde{\ell}(x_N^*,Kx_N^*) - \tilde{\ell}(x_0,\tilde{u}_0^*) \leq -\tilde{\ell}(x_0,\tilde{u}_0^*)$ for any $x_0 \in \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ since
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
&\tilde{F}(A_Kx_N^{*}) -\tilde{F}(x_N^*) + \tilde{\ell}(x_N^*,Kx_N^*) \\
\ &= \lVert A_K x_N^* \rVert^2_{P} - \lVert x_N^*\rVert^2_P + \lVert x_N^* \rVert^2_Q + \lVert Kx_N^* \rVert^2_{R} \\
\ & \quad + \varepsilon B_K(x_N^*) + \varepsilon B_{\mathrm{f}}(A_Kx_N^*)- \varepsilon B_{\mathrm{f}}(x_N^*) \\
\ & \leq \varepsilon \left(B_{\mathrm{f}}(A_Kx_N^*)- B_{\mathrm{f}}(x_N^*)\right) \leq 0 \ \ \forall \ x_N^* \in \mathcal{X}_f^\circ \ .
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Here, the first inequality follows from the quadratic bound $B_K(x)\leq \gamma\, x^\TRANSP\! Mx \ \forall x \in \mathcal{X}_f \subset \mathcal{N}$ and the suitable choice of the terminal cost matrix~$P$, see A2 and A3 of Assumption~\ref{ass:barrierMPCStab}. The second inequality holds due to A5 of Assumption~\ref{ass:barrierMPCStab}. \\
Finally, the considered problem setup and the design of the barrier functions according to A1 of Assumption~\ref{ass:barrierMPCStab} ensure that $\tilde{J}_N^*: \mathcal{X}_N^\circ \to \mathbb{R}_+$ is a well-defined and positive definite function with $\tilde{J}_N^*(x) \to \infty$ whenever $x\to \partial \mathcal{X}_N$. Thus, in combination with the decrease property~(\ref{eq:jdrecease}), it can be used as a Lyapunov function which proves asymptotic stability of the origin of system~(\ref{eq:discreteSystem}) under the feedback $u(k)=\tilde{u}_0^*(x(k))$ for any $x(0) \in \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
Note that the barrier function parameter $\varepsilon\in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ can in principle be decreased iteratively in each sampling step or between two consecutive sampling steps without loosing feasibility or stability properties of the closed-loop system. This might be meaningful for numerical reasons or in order to enforce convergence to the optimal solution of the conventional MPC problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemLin}). We limit ourselves to fixed values of $\varepsilon$.
\end{rem}
Different approaches on how to actually construct the neighborhood~$\mathcal{N}$ and the corresponding quadratic bound for $B_K(\cdot)$ as well as suitable choices for the terminal set $\mathcal{X}_f$ and the barrier function $B_{\mathrm{f}}(\cdot)$ have been proposed in~\cite{wills04,feller13,feller14b,feller14c}.
However, the fact that the underlying barrier functions are only defined in the interior of the respective constraint sets may be problematic both from a practical and from a conceptual point of view. On the one hand, violations of the state, input, and terminal set constraints are not tolerated at all, which might cause severe problems in the presence of uncertainties, disturbances, noise, observer errors, or sensor outliers. On the other hand, all existing stability concepts inherently require the use of a suitable terminal set as they are based on upper bounding the barrier function $B_K(\cdot)$ by a quadratic function, which is of course only possible locally in a region around the origin.
In the following section, we introduce the concept of relaxed logarithmic barrier function based MPC and show that it can be used to overcome all these limitations, allowing for conceptually simpler and more reliable linear MPC schemes.
\section{Main Results}
The basic idea of relaxed logarithmic barrier functions is to smoothly extend a given logarithmic barrier function with a suitable, globally defined penalty function~\cite{benTal92,nash94,hauser06}.
In the following, we provide an in-depth study of several interesting theoretical and practical aspects of linear MPC approaches that are based on such relaxed logarithmic barrier functions.
In particular, we show that, on the one hand, feasibility and stability properties of the nonrelaxed formulation can always be recovered by approximating the original barrier functions close enough.
On the other hand, we present novel linear MPC schemes that, by exploiting the properties of relaxed logarithmic barrier functions, do not require the use of a terminal set and allow to guarantee global asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system, see Section~\ref{sec:relBarrierStab2}.
The benefits of global stabilization and a simplified design procedure are bought with the loss of guaranteed input and state constraint satisfaction. However, as we will show in Section~\ref{sec:relBarrierConstr}, the relaxed barrier functions can always be designed in such a way that an a-priori defined tolerance for the maximal violation of state and input constraints is guaranteed for a certain set of initial conditions. We briefly discuss some interesting performance and robustness properties of the proposed MPC schemes in Section~\ref{sec:relBarrierOpt}.\vspace*{-0.1cm}
\subsection{Relaxed Logarithmic Barrier Function Based MPC} \label{sec:relBarrierIntro}
We begin our studies by introducing the concept of relaxed logarithmic barrier functions and discussing suitable realizations based on different relaxing functions. \vspace*{-0.1cm}
\begin{defn}[Relaxed logarithmic barrier function] \label{def:relBarrier} \ Consider a scalar $\delta \in \mathbb{R}_{+\!\!+}$, called the relaxation parameter, and let $\beta(\cdot\,;\delta):(-\infty,\delta]\to \mathbb{R}$ be a strictly monotone and continuously differentiable function that satisfies $\beta(\delta;\delta)=-\ln(\delta)$ as well as $\lim_{z\to -\infty}\beta(z;\delta) = \infty$.
Then, we call $\hat{B}:\mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R}$ defined as
\begin{equation}
\hat{B}(z)=\begin{cases}
-\ln(z) & z>\delta \\
\phantom{-}\beta(z;\delta) & z \leq \delta
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
the relaxed logarithmic barrier function for the set $\mathbb{R}_+$ and refer to the function $\beta(\cdot;\delta)$ as the relaxing function.
\end{defn}
A~graphical illustration of the basic idea is given in Fig.~\ref{fig:recMethods}.
In general, it is advisable to choose the relaxing function $\beta(\cdot\,;\delta)$ as a strictly convex $C^2$ function that smoothly extends the natural logarithm at $z=\delta$. In this case, $\hat{B}(\cdot)$ is a strictly convex function that is twice continuously differentiable and defined on $z\in (-\infty,\infty)$. Note that $\lim_{\delta\to 0}\hat{B}(z) \to B(z)$ for any strictly feasible $z\in\mathbb{R}_{+\!\!+}$, which shows that the nonrelaxed formulation can always be recovered by decreasing the relaxation parameter $\delta$ to zero. Note that we do not indicate the explicit dependence of the relaxed barrier functions on the relaxation parameter~$\delta$ for the sake of notational simplicity. However, we will use $\hat{B}(\cdot)$ to denote the relaxed version of a barrier function based expression~${B}(\cdot)$. \\[0.15cm]
The first ideas on relaxed (or approximate) logarithmic barrier functions with a quadratic relaxing function $\beta(\cdot\,;
\delta)$ seem to have been proposed in~\cite{benTal92} and~\cite{nash94}, respectively.
In \cite{hauser06}, the authors extended the concept to general polynomial penalty terms and applied it in the context of continuous-time trajectory optimization.
In particular, the authors make use of the polynomial relaxing function
\begin{equation} \label{eq:relFunHauser}
\beta_k(z;\delta)=\frac{k-1}{k}\left[\left(\frac{z-k\delta}{(k-1)\delta}\right)^k-1\right]-\ln(\delta) \, ,
\end{equation}
where $k>1$ is an even integer. It is easy to verify that the function $ \beta_k(\cdot\,;\delta)$ has all the desired properties mentioned above. As reported in~\cite{hauser06}, already a quadratic extension based on $k=2$ seems to work well in practice. \\
In order to avoid large constraint violations, it may be beneficial if the relaxing function increases very rapidly outside the border of the feasible set. As an alternative to the polynomial relaxation above, we proposed in~\cite{feller14} the following exponential relaxing function
\begin{equation}
\beta_e(z;\delta)=\exp\left(1-\dfrac{z}{\delta}\right)-1-\ln(\delta) \, ,
\end{equation}
which is an upper bound for the function $ \beta_k(\cdot\,;\delta)$. In fact, using the derivatives $\beta_k'(\cdot;\delta)$, $\beta_e'(\cdot;\delta)$ and the limit representation of the exponential function, it can be shown that $\beta_k(z;\delta)\leq \beta_{k+2}(z;\delta)\leq \beta_e(z;\delta)$ and that $\lim_{k\to\infty}\beta_k(z;\delta)=\beta_e(z;\delta)$ $\forall z\leq \delta$. Furthermore, for $\beta(\cdot\,;\delta)=\beta_k(\cdot\,;\delta)$ and $\beta(\cdot\,;\delta)=\beta_e(\cdot\,;\delta)$ it also holds that $\hat{B}(z)\leq B(z) \ \forall z \in \mathbb{R}_{+\!\!+}$.
We assume in the following that one of the two functions $\beta_k(\cdot\,;\delta)$ and $\beta_e(\cdot\,;\delta)$ is used as relaxing function.\\[0.2cm]
Based on these concepts, let us now consider the following relaxed barrier function based MPC formulation
\begin{subequations}\label{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}
\begin{align}
\hat{J}_N^{\ast}(x;\delta)&=\min_{\boldsymbol{u}}\sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \hat{\ell}(x_k,u_k) + \hat{F}(x_N) \\
\mbox{s.\,t.} \ \ & {x}_{k+1}=A{x}_{k}+B{u}_{k}, \ {x}_0=x\, ,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $\hat{\ell}(x,u):= \ell(x,u)+ \varepsilon \hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(u)+\varepsilon \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x)$ for suitable relaxed recentered logarithmic barrier functions $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(\cdot)$ and $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(\cdot)$ as discussed below. The term $\hat{F}(\cdot)$ denotes a suitable relaxed terminal cost function which we do not specify at the moment. As we will see in the Sections~\ref{sec:relBarrierStab1}~and~~\ref{sec:relBarrierStab2}, the choice of $\hat{F}(\cdot)$ is crucial for ensuring stability properties of the closed-loop system.
\begin{ass}\label{ass:relBarriersXU}
The functions $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(u)=\sum_{i=1}^{q_{\mathrm{u}}}\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u},i}(u)$ and $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x)=\sum_{i=1}^{q_{\mathrm{x}}}\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x},i}(x)$ are relaxed recentered logarithmic barrier functions for the polytopic sets $\mathcal{U}$ and $\mathcal{X}$ and the relaxation parameter $\delta \in \mathbb{R}_{+\!\!+}$ is chosen such that
$\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(0)=\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(0)=0$ and $\nabla\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(0)=0$, $\nabla\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(0)=0$.
\end{ass}
Note that a $\delta$ satisfying Assumption~\ref{ass:relBarriersXU} always exists. In particular, if the relaxation parameter satisfies $0<\delta\leq\min\{d_{\mathrm{x}}^1,\dots,d_{\mathrm{x}}^{q_{\mathrm{x}}},d_{\mathrm{u}}^1$, $\dots,d_{\mathrm{u}}^{q_{\mathrm{u}}}\}$, suitable relaxed barrier functions can be easily constructed by simply relaxing the logarithmic terms of the recentered nonrelaxed formulation. Hence, for $z_i(x):=-{C_{\mathrm{x}}^i}x+d_{\mathrm{x}}^i$, $i=1,\dots,q_{\mathrm{x}}$, we get for example
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bxGrad}
\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x},i}(x)\!=\!\begin{cases}
-\ln(z_i(x))+\ln(d_{\mathrm{x}}^i)-\frac{{C_{\mathrm{x}}^i} x}{d_{\mathrm{x}}^i} & z_i(x) > \delta \\[0.15cm]
\, \beta(z_i(x);\delta) +\ln(d_{\mathrm{x}}^i)-\frac{{C_{\mathrm{x}}^i} x}{d_{\mathrm{x}}^i} & z_i(x) \leq \delta \,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
when using gradient recentered barrier functions and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bxWeight}
\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x},i}(x)\!=\!\begin{cases}
(1+w_{\mathrm{x}}^i)\left(-\ln(z_i(x))+\ln(d_{\mathrm{x}}^i)\right) & z_i(x) > \delta \\[0.1cm]
(1+w_{\mathrm{x}}^i)\left(\,\beta(z_i(x);\delta) +\ln(d_{\mathrm{x}}^i)\right) & z_i(x) \leq \delta \,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
when using weight recentered barrier functions, cf.~Definition~\ref{def:recBarrier}.
The barrier functions $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u},i}(\cdot)$ for the input constraints can be defined analogously.
Note that it is in principle possible to consider individual relaxation parameters $\delta_i$ for the different constraints, but we restrict ourselves to one overall $\delta$ for the sake of simplicity.
While the relaxation of the barrier functions directly implies that problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) is always recursively feasible, stability properties of the resulting closed-loop system are by no means guaranteed.
This problem will be addressed in the following two sections. \vspace*{-0.1cm}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.9]{figs/felle2.eps}
\captionof{figure}{Left: Principle of relaxed logarithmic barrier functions based on the relaxing function $\beta(z;\delta)$. Right: Weight recentered logarithmic barrier function (solid) and relaxed weight recentered logarithmic barrier function for $\delta \in \{0.01, 0.1, 0.5, 1\}$ for the constraint $-1\leq z \leq 2$ with $z\in\mathbb{R}$.}
\label{fig:recMethods}
\vspace*{-0.3cm}
\end{figure}
%
\subsection{Closed-Loop Stability: Terminal Set Based Approaches} \label{sec:relBarrierStab1}
In this section we present our main results on the closed-loop stability properties of relaxed logarithmic barrier function based MPC schemes that make use of a suitable terminal set,~cf.~\cite{feller14}.
In accordance with \cite{wills04,feller13,feller14b,feller14c}, we assume in the following that the terminal set $\mathcal{X}_f$ can be represented as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:XfPhi}
\mathcal{X}_f=\{x \in \mathbb{R}^n: \varphi(x) \leq 1\}\, ,
\end{equation}
where $\varphi: \mathbb{R}^n \to \mathbb{R}_+$ is a continuously differentiable, convex, and positive definite function that satisfies $\varphi(A_Kx) \leq \varphi(x) \ \forall x\in \mathcal{X}_f$.
When considering ellipsoidal terminal sets as discussed in \cite{wills04} and\cite{feller13}, $\varphi(\cdot)$ may for example be chosen as $\varphi(x)=x^\TRANSP P_fx$ with a suitable $P_f \in \mathbb{S}^n_{+\!\!+}$. In \cite{feller14b} and \cite{feller14c}, it is moreover shown how smooth approximations of the Minkowski functional can be used to define $\varphi(\cdot)$ for polytopic terminal sets of the form $\mathcal{X}_f=\{x\in\mathbb{R}^n:H_fx\leq \mathds{1}\}$. \\[0.25cm]
\textit{\indent B1) Stabilization with strict constraint satisfaction}\\[0.15cm]
In the following, we will show that asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system as well as strict satisfaction of all input and state constraints can always be guaranteed for any feasible initial condition by making the relaxation parameter $\delta \in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ arbitrarily small.
The key assumption underlying the following results is that both the state and input constraint barrier functions and the terminal set constraint barrier function are relaxed.
In particular, the barrier functions for the input and state constraints are chosen according to Assumption~\ref{ass:relBarriersXU}, while the terminal cost function is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:termCost_relXf}
\hat{F}(x)=x^\TRANSP\! Px+\varepsilon \hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(x)\, ,
\end{equation}
where $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(\cdot)$ is a relaxed logarithmic barrier function for the terminal set $\mathcal{X}_f$.
Assuming $\delta \leq 1$, the function $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(\cdot)$ can be defined as follows.
\begin{ass} \label{ass:barrierXf}
The barrier function $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(\cdot)$ for the terminal set $\mathcal{X}_f$ is a relaxed logarithmic barrier function of the form
\begin{equation}
\hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(x)=\begin{cases}
-\ln(1-\varphi(x)) & 1-\varphi(x) > \delta \\
\, \beta(1-\varphi(x);\delta) & 1-\varphi(x) \leq \delta \, ,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\delta \in \mathbb{R}_{+\!\!+}$, $\delta \leq 1$, is the relaxation parameter and $\varphi(\cdot)$ is the function defining the terminal set according to~(\ref{eq:XfPhi}).
\end{ass}
Note that the function $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(\cdot)$ is continuously differentiable, convex, and positive definite by design.
Consider now the following definition, which introduces a lower bound for the value of the relaxed barrier functions $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(\cdot)$, $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(\cdot)$, and $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(\cdot)$ evaluated at the borders of the respective constraint sets.
\begin{defn}\label{def:betaBar}
Let the scalar $\bar{\beta}(\delta) \in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ be defined as
\begin{equation}
\bar{\beta}(\delta)=\min\left\lbrace \bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{x}}(\delta), \bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{u}}(\delta), \bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{f}}(\delta)\right\rbrace\, ,
\end{equation}
where $\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{f}}(\delta)=\beta(0;\delta)$ and
\begin{subequations} \label{eq:betaXUEq}
\begin{align}
\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{x}}(\delta)&=\min_{i,x}\{\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x)\vert \ {C_{\mathrm{x}}^ix=d_{\mathrm{x}}^i}\}, \quad i=1,\dots,q_{\mathrm{x}} \, , \\
\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{u}}(\delta)&=\min_{u,j}\{\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(u) \vert \ {C_{\mathrm{u}}^ju=d_{\mathrm{u}}^j}\}, \quad j=1,\dots,q_{\mathrm{u}} \, .
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\vspace*{-0.45cm}
\end{defn}
Note that the values $\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{x}}(\delta)$, $\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{u}}(\delta)$, and hence also $\bar{\beta}(\delta)$, can be computed easily for a given $\delta\in\mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ as the optimization problems in~(\ref{eq:betaXUEq}) are convex.
Moreover, for the case of gradient recentered relaxed logarithmic barrier functions, an explicit expression for a lower bound on $\bar{\beta}(\delta)$ has been given in~\cite{feller14}.
The following Lemma shows that the sublevel sets of $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(\cdot)$, $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(\cdot)$, and $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(\cdot)$ related to $\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{x}}(\delta)$, $\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{u}}(\delta)$, and $\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{f}}(\delta)$ are always contained within the sets $\mathcal{X}$, $\mathcal{U}$, and $\mathcal{X}_f$, respectively.
\begin{lem} \label{lem:relBarrierLevelSets}
Let the Assumptions~\ref{ass:relBarriersXU} and \ref{ass:barrierXf} hold and let the values $\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{x}}(\delta)$, $\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{u}}(\delta)$, and $\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{f}}(\delta)$ be defined according to Definition~\ref{def:betaBar}. Then it holds that $\mathcal{S}_{\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}}=\{x \in \mathbb{R}^n| \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x)\leq \bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{x}}(\delta)\}\subseteq \mathcal{X}$, $\mathcal{S}_{\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}}=\{u \in \mathbb{R}^m| \hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(u)\leq \bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{u}}(\delta)\}\subseteq \mathcal{U}$, as well as $\mathcal{S}_{\hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}}=\{x \in \mathbb{R}^n| \hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(x)\leq \bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{f}}(\delta)\}\subseteq \mathcal{X}_f$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The result for the terminal set $\mathcal{X}_f$ follows directly from the fact that $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(\cdot)$ is convex and strictly monotone in the argument $\, z=1-\varphi(x)$. Considering the state constraints, let us assume that there exists an $\bar{x}\in \mathcal{S}_{B_x}$ with $\bar{x} \notin \mathcal{X}$, i.e., $C_{\mathrm{x}} \bar{x}>d_{\mathrm{x}}$. However, then there would exists a $\lambda \in (0,1)$ such that $C_{\mathrm{x}} \lambda \bar{x} =\lambda C_{\mathrm{x}} \bar{x}\leq d_{\mathrm{x}}$ and $C_{\mathrm{x}}^i \lambda \bar{x} =\lambda C_{\mathrm{x}}^i \bar{x}=d_{\mathrm{x}}^i$ for some $i=1,\dots,q_{\mathrm{x}}$. Now, due to the convexity and positive definiteness of $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(\cdot)$, it holds that $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(\lambda\bar{x})\leq \lambda \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(\bar{x})<\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{x}}(\delta)$, which obviously is a contradiction to the definition of $\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{x}}(\delta)$. For the input constraints we can use similar arguments.
\end{proof}
Based on the above results, we now define a set of initial conditions for which we can guarantee asymptotic stability of the origin as well as strict satisfaction of all input and state constraints.
\begin{defn} \label{def:Xdelta}
For a given $\delta \in \mathbb{R}_{+\!\!+}$ and a corresponding $\bar{\beta}(\delta)\in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ according to Definition~\ref{def:betaBar}, let the set $\hat{\mathcal{X}}_{N}(\delta)$ be defined as $\hat{\mathcal{X}}_{N}(\delta):=\{x \in \mathbb{R}^n\, |\, \hat{J}^*_N(x;\delta)\leq \varepsilon \bar{\beta}(\delta)\}$.
\end{defn}
\begin{thm} \label{thm:exactRel}
Let Assumptions~\ref{ass:barrierMPCStab},~\ref{ass:relBarriersXU}, and \ref{ass:barrierXf} hold true. Consider problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) with the terminal cost $\hat{F}(\cdot)$ from~(\ref{eq:termCost_relXf}) and let the set $\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$ be defined according to Definition~\ref{def:Xdelta}. Then, the feedback $u(k)=\hat{u}_0^*(x(k))$ asymptotically stabilizes the origin of system~(\ref{eq:discreteSystem}) under strict satisfaction of all input and state constraints for any $x(0) \in \hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The proof consists of three parts and is closely related to that of Theorem~12~in~\cite{feller14}. First, we show that the underlying input, state, and terminal set constraints are not violated for any $x_0\in \hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$; then we use standard MPC arguments to show that the value function $\hat{J}^*(x(k);\delta)$ will decrease when applying the feedback $u(k)$; finally, we use this result to conclude that the resulting input and state sequences will also be strictly feasible at all later time steps and that the origin of the closed-loop system is asymptotically stable. \\
i) Let $\hat{\boldsymbol{u}}^*(x_0)=\{\hat{u}_0^*, \dots, \hat{u}_{N-1}^*\}$, $\boldsymbol{x}^*(x_0)=\{x_0,\dots,x_N^*\}$ denote the optimal open-loop input and state sequences for a given $x_0\in \hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$. Since the cost function in~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) is a sum of positive definite terms, it holds that $\varepsilon \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x^*_{k}) < \hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)$, $\varepsilon \hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(\hat{u}_k^*) < \hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)$, as well as $\varepsilon \hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(x^*_N) < \hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)$ for all $x_0\in \hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)\setminus\{0\}$. Hence, $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x^*_k) < \bar{\beta}(\delta)$, $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(\hat{u}_k^*) < \bar{\beta}(\delta)$, as well as $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(x^*_N) < \bar{\beta}(\delta)$.
Due to Lemma~\ref{lem:relBarrierLevelSets} and the definition of~$\bar{\beta}(\delta)$, this implies that $x_k^* \in\mathcal{X}^\circ$ and $\hat{u}_k^*\in\mathcal{U}^\circ$ as well as $x_N^*\in\mathcal{X}_f^\circ$ for any $x_0 \in \hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)\setminus\{0\}$. Of course, the case $x_0=0$ is trivial.
Hence, the predicted input and state sequences are strictly feasible and the applied input results in a successor state $x_0^+=Ax_0+B\hat{u}_0^* \in\mathcal{X}_N^\circ$. \\
ii) Let us now consider $x_0^+ \in\mathcal{X}_N^\circ$.
We can use basically the same arguments as in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:barrierMPCStab} to show that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:jRelDrecease}
\hat{J}_N^*(x_0^+;\delta)-\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)\!\leq\!-\hat{\ell}(x_0,\hat{u}_0^*(x_0)) \ \forall x_0 \in \hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta) .
\end{equation}
In particular, we know that
$\tilde{\boldsymbol{u}}^+(x_0)=\{\hat{u}_1^*, \dots, \hat{u}_{N-1}^*, Kx_N^*\}$ and ${\boldsymbol{x}}^+(x_0)=\{x_0^+,x_2^*,\dots,x_N^*,A_Kx_N^*\}$ with $A_Kx_N^* \in \mathcal{X}_f$ are suboptimal but feasible input and state sequences for the initial state $x_0^+\in \mathcal{X}_N$.
Moreover,
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
&\hat{F}(A_Kx_N^{*}) -\hat{F}(x_N^*) + \hat{\ell}(x_N^*,Kx_N^*) \\
\ &= \lVert A_K x_N^* \rVert^2_{P} - \lVert x_N^*\rVert^2_P + \lVert x_N^* \rVert^2_Q + \lVert Kx_N^* \rVert^2_{R} \\
\ & \quad + \varepsilon \hat{B}_K(x_N^*) + \varepsilon \hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(A_Kx_N^*)- \varepsilon \hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(x_N^*) \\
\ & \leq \varepsilon \big(\hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(A_Kx_N^*)- \hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(x_N^*)\big) \leq 0 \ \ \forall \ x_N^* \in \mathcal{X}_f \ .
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Here, the first inequality follows from the choice of $\mathcal{X}_f$ and~$P$ according to Assumption~\ref{ass:barrierMPCStab} and the fact that $\hat{B}_K(x_N^*)\leq B_K(x_N^*)\leq x_N^{*\mathrm{T}}Mx_N^* \ \forall\, x_N^* \in \mathcal{X}_f$. The second inequality follows from the monotonicity of the relaxed logarithmic barrier function $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(\cdot)$ and the assumption that $\varphi(A_Kx_N^*)\leq\varphi(x_N^*)$ $\forall x_N^*\in \mathcal{X}_f$. Based on arguments as in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:barrierMPCStab}, this result can be used to prove the decrease property~(\ref{eq:jRelDrecease}). \\
iii) The fact that the value function decreases shows that $\hat{J}_N^*(x_0^+;\delta)\leq \hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta) \leq \varepsilon \bar{\beta}(\delta)$ and hence $x_0^+ \in \hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$ for any $x_0 \in \hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$. By repeating this argument, the resulting closed-loop system state satisfies $x(k) \in \hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta) \ \forall k\geq 0$ for any $x(0) \in \hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$, which shows that all future states and inputs will be strictly feasible.
Moreover, due to the design of the relaxed barrier functions, $\hat{J}_N^*(x;\delta)$ is a well-defined, positive definite, and radially unbounded function.
Hence, in combination with (\ref{eq:jRelDrecease}) it can be used as a Lyapunov function, proving asymptotic stability of the origin with a guaranteed region of attraction of at least $\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$.
\end{proof}
The following results state some useful properties of the region of attraction $\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$ and show that the feasible set $\mathcal{X}_N$ of the corresponding non-relaxed formulation can be recovered by making the relaxation parameter arbitrarily small. \vspace*{-0.15cm}
\begin{lem}[cf. \cite{feller14}]\label{lem:XbetaProp}
Let the assumptions in Theorem~\ref{thm:exactRel} hold and let the set $\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$ be defined according to Definition~\ref{def:Xdelta}. Then, $\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$ is a nonempty compact and convex set. Furthermore, $\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta) \subseteq \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ and $\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta) \to \mathcal{X}_N$ as $\delta \to 0$. \vspace*{-0.05cm}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
For any $\delta\in\mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ satisfying Assumptions~\ref{ass:relBarriersXU}~and~\ref{ass:barrierXf}, $J_N^*(\cdot;\delta)$ is a positive definite function that is convex and radially unbounded. As $\bar{\beta}(\delta)$ is strictly positive~(see Definition~\ref{def:betaBar}), and $\varepsilon\in\mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$, the first part follows immediately.\\
As shown in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:exactRel}, any initial condition $x_0\!\in\!\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$ results in strictly feasible input and state sequences, which implies that $\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta) \subseteq \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$.
We now show that $\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$ will contain any compact subset of $\mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ if we make the relaxation parameter arbitrarily small.
Assume $x_0 \in \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ and let $\boldsymbol{\tilde{u}}^*(x_0)$,~$\boldsymbol{\tilde{x}}^*(x_0)$,~$\tilde{J}_N^*(x_0)$ denote the solution of the corresponding nonrelaxed problem formulation~(\ref{eq:OptProblemBarrier}).
Then, there always exists $\delta_0(x_0):=\min\{-C_{\mathrm{x}}^i \tilde{x}_k(x_0)+d_{\mathrm{x}}^i$, $-C_{\mathrm{u}}^j \tilde{u}_k(x_0)+d_{\mathrm{u}}^j$, $1-\varphi(\tilde{x}_N^*(x_0)$, \ $i\!=\!1,\dots,q_{\mathrm{x}}$, $j\!=\!1,\dots,q_{\mathrm{u}}$, $k\!=\!0,\dots,N\!-\!1\} \, \in\mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ with the property that the solutions of relaxed and nonrelaxed formulation will be equivalent for all $\delta\leq\delta_0(x_0)$, i.e., $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}^*(x_0)=\boldsymbol{\tilde{u}}^*(x_0)$, $\boldsymbol{\hat{x}}^*(x_0)=\boldsymbol{\tilde{x}}^*(x_0)$, $\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)=\tilde{J}_N^*(x_0)$. Note that $\delta_0(x_0)$ is a continuous function of $x_0$ since both $\boldsymbol{\tilde{u}}^*(x_0)$ and $\boldsymbol{\hat{x}}^*(x_0)$ are continuous due to the smooth problem formulation~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}).
Let us further define $\delta'_0(x_0):=\max\{\delta \in\mathbb{R}_{\pplus}\,|\,\delta\leq\delta_0(x_0),\,\tilde{J}_N^*(x_0)\leq \varepsilon \bar{\beta}(\delta)\}$ with the property that $x_0\in\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$ $\forall\delta\leq\delta'_0(x_0)$.
As $\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)=\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta_0(x_0))=\tilde{J}_N^*(x_0)$ for all $\delta\leq \delta_0(x_0)$ and $\bar{\beta}(\delta)$ is, on the other hand, continuous and strictly increasing for decreasing~$\delta$, we can state that $\delta'_0(x_0) \in\mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ exists for any $x_0\in\mathcal{X}_N^\circ$.
Moreover, since both $\delta_0(x_0)$ and $\tilde{J}_N^*(x_0)$ are continuous, ${\delta}'_0(x_0)$ also is a continuous function of $x_0$.
Consider now an arbitrary compact set $\mathcal{X}_0 \subseteq \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ and define $\bar{\delta}_0\in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ as $\bar{\delta}_0=\min_{x_0\in\mathcal{X}_0}{\delta}'_0(x_0)$. Due to the continuity of
${\delta}'_0(x_0)$ and the compactness of $\mathcal{X}_0$, this value always exists and it holds that
$\mathcal{X}_0\subseteq\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$ for all $\delta \leq \bar{\delta}_0$.
This implies that $\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta) \to \mathcal{X}_N$ as $\delta \to 0$, which completes the proof.
\end{proof} \vspace*{-0.1cm}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:exactRelX0}
Consider the relaxed barrier function based MPC problem formulation~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) with $\hat{F}(\cdot)$ given by~(\ref{eq:termCost_relXf}). For any compact set $\mathcal{X}_0 \subseteq \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ there exists a $\bar{\delta}_0 \in \mathbb{R}_{+\!\!+}$ such that for any $\delta\leq\bar{\delta}_0$ and any $x(0) \in \mathcal{X}_0$ the feedback $u(k)=\hat{u}_0^*(x(k))$ asymptotically stabilizes the origin of system~(\ref{eq:discreteSystem}) under strict satisfaction of all input and state constraints.
\end{cor}
It has to be noted that the above conditions for closed-loop stability and constraint satisfaction are of course only sufficient and may be rather conservative.
In particular, for a given $\delta\!\in\!\mathbb{R}_{+\!\!+}$ the actual region of attraction of the closed-loop system may be considerably larger than the set~$\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$. Likewise, a very small $\delta$ may be needed to achieve $\mathcal{X}_0 \subset \hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$ when $\mathcal{X}_0$ approaches $\mathcal{X}_N^\circ$. However, despite possible practical limitations, the presented results provide interesting insights and a theoretical justification for the use of relaxed barrier functions in the context of MPC. \\[0.25cm]
\textit{\indent B2) Global stabilization with a nonrelaxed terminal set}\\[0.15cm]
Assuming controllability of system~(\ref{eq:discreteSystem}), we will in the following present a second approach that allows to guarantee asymptotic stability for any initial condition by relaxing the barrier functions of state and input constraints while strictly enforcing the terminal set constraint
\begin{ass} \label{ass:globalStab}
The pair $(A,B)$ is controllable and the prediction horizon satisfies the condition $N\geq n$.
Moreover, the terminal cost function is given as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:termCost_nonrelXf}
\hat{F}(x)=x^\TRANSP\! Px + \varepsilon {B}_f(x) \, ,
\end{equation}
where $P$ and ${B}_f(\cdot)$ are chosen according to Assumption~\ref{ass:barrierMPCStab}.
\end{ass}
\begin{thm} \label{thm:globalStabilization}
Let Assumptions~\ref{ass:barrierMPCStab},~\ref{ass:relBarriersXU}, and \ref{ass:globalStab} hold true and consider problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) with the terminal cost $\hat{F}(\cdot)$ from~(\ref{eq:termCost_nonrelXf}). Then, independently of the relaxation parameter $\delta \in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$, the feedback $u(k)=\hat{u}_0^*(x(k))$ asymptotically stabilizes the origin of system~(\ref{eq:discreteSystem}) for any initial condition $x(0) \in \mathbb{R}^n$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Due to the above controllability assumption, there exists for any $x_0 \in \mathbb{R}^n$ an input sequence $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}(x_0)=\{\hat{u}_0, \dots, \hat{u}_{N-1}\}$ such that $x_N(\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}(x_0),x_0) \in \mathcal{X}_f^{\circ}$. Hence, $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}^*(x_0)$ and $\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)$ are defined for any $x_0 \in \mathbb{R}^n$.
Since the corresponding terminal state satisfies $x_N^*(x_0)\in\mathcal{X}_f^{\circ}$, the local controller $u=Kx$ can again be used to construct a feasible control sequence $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}^+(x_0)=\{\hat{u}_1^*, \dots, \hat{u}_{N-1}^*, Kx_N^*\}$ for the successor state $x_0^+=Ax_0+B\hat{u}_0^*$. Since all parameters are chosen according to Assumption~\ref{ass:barrierMPCStab}, the same arguments as in part ii) of the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:exactRel} can be used in order to show that
\begin{equation}
\hat{J}_N^*(x_0^+;\delta)- \hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta) \leq -\hat{\ell}_0(x_0,\hat{u}_0^*(x_0)) \ \forall x_0 \in \mathbb{R}^n \, .
\end{equation}
Moreover, due to the design of all involved barrier functions, $\hat{J}_N^*(x;\delta)$ is a well-defined, positive definite, and radially unbounded function.
Hence, $ \hat{J}_N^*(\cdot;\delta)$ can be employed as a Lyapunov function for proving global asymptotic stability of the origin, see part iii) of the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:exactRel}.
\end{proof}
\vspace*{0.2cm}
The above result illustrates how we can achieve stabilization of the origin for any initial condition, which makes the corresponding MPC scheme very robust against uncertainties, disturbances, or even infeasible start configurations. As we need to strictly enforce the terminal set constraint, the benefit of global stabilization comes with the cost of possible violations of the state and input constraints. However, using the arguments of the previous section, we can for any $\mathcal{X}_0 \subseteq \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ still recover strict satisfaction of all state and input constraints by making the relaxation parameter $\delta$ arbitrarily small. \vspace*{-0.1cm}
\subsection{Closed-Loop Stability: Terminal Set Free Approaches} \label{sec:relBarrierStab2}
In the previous section, we have seen how asymptotic stability and even strict constraint satisfaction can be guaranteed in the context of relaxed logarithmic barrier function based MPC by making use of suitable terminal set formulations.
As in conventional MPC schemes, the terminal set is on the one hand used for ensuring the existence of a feasible local control law and, thus, the recursive feasibility of the corresponding open-loop optimal control problem.
On the other hand, only restricting the terminal state to a compact set around the origin allowed us to derive a quadratic upper bound for the barrier function $B_K(\cdot)$, see Assumption~\ref{ass:barrierMPCStab} and the proof of Theorem~\ref{ass:barrierMPCStab}.
In the following, we will show that the use of relaxed logarithmic barrier functions in fact allows us to circumvent these two problems and to design novel MPC approaches which not only eliminate the need for an explicit terminal set constraint but also to prove global asymptotic stability of the origin. \\[0.25cm]
\textit{\indent C1) Tail sequence based terminal cost function} \\[0.15cm]
It is a well-known result that closed-loop stability of both linear and nonlinear MPC schemes may be ensured by choosing the terminal cost as a suitable CLF that is an upper bound for the infinite-horizon cost-to-go, see~e.g.~\cite{jadbabaie01}. In the presence of input and state constraints, deriving such a function in global form is generally not possible, which directly motivates the use of a local CLF in combination with a corresponding terminal set constraint. However, when considering the relaxed problem formulation~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}), any input sequence which steers the state to the origin in a finite number of steps can be used to derive an upper bound on the infinite-horizon cost-to-go.
\begin{ass} \label{ass:deadBeatStab2}
Let $\boldsymbol{{v}}(x):=\{{v}_0(x),\dots,{v}_{T-1}(x)\}$ be an input sequence which steers the state of system~(\ref{eq:discreteSystem}) to the origin in a finite number of $T\geq n$ steps for any $x \in \mathbb{R}^n$ and assume that $v_l(x)=0 \ \forall \, l=0,\dots,T-1 \Leftrightarrow x=0$. Furthermore, let $\boldsymbol{{z}}(x):=\{z_0(x),\dots,z_{T-1}(x)\}$ with $z_{{0}}(x)=x$, $z_{{l+1}}(x)=Az_{l}(x)+Bv_{l}(x)$, $l=0,\dots,T-1$, and $z_{T}(x)=0$ be the corresponding state sequence.
\end{ass}
Based on Assumption~\ref{ass:deadBeatStab2} we propose to choose the terminal cost as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:deadBeatF}
\hat{F}(x)= \sum_{l=0}^{{T}-1} \hat{\ell}(z_l(x),v_l(x)) \, ,
\end{equation}
where $\hat{\ell}:\mathbb{R}^n\times\mathbb{R}^m \to \mathbb{R}_+$ refers to the already introduced modified stage cost based on relaxed logarithmic barrier functions for the state and input constraints,~cf.~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}).
Due to the relaxation, $\boldsymbol{v}(x)$ is a valid but possibly suboptimal input sequence that steers the state from $x(0)=x$ to the origin in a finite number of steps. Consequently, $\hat{F}(\cdot)$ is an upper bound for the infinite-horizon cost-to-go, which allows us to state the following stability result.
\begin{thm} \label{thm:deadBeatStab}
Let the Assumptions~\ref{ass:relBarriersXU} and \ref{ass:deadBeatStab2} hold and consider problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) with the terminal cost $\hat{F}(\cdot)$ from~(\ref{eq:deadBeatF}). Then, independently of the relaxation parameter $\delta \in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$,
the feedback $u(k)=\hat{u}_0^*(x(k))$ asymptotically stabilizes the origin of system~(\ref{eq:discreteSystem}) for any initial condition $x(0) \in \mathbb{R}^n$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Due to Assumption~\ref{ass:deadBeatStab2}, there exist for any $x_0 \in \mathbb{R}^n$ and any input sequence $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}(x_0)$ with resulting terminal state $x_N=x_N(\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}(x_0),x_0)$ suitable tail sequences $\boldsymbol{{v}}(x_N)$ and $\boldsymbol{{z}}(x_N)$. Moreover, as all barrier functions for the state and input constraints are relaxed, see Assumption~\ref{ass:relBarriersXU}, both the stage and terminal cost are always well defined. Hence, also $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}^*(x_0)$ and $\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)$ are defined for any $x_0 \in \mathbb{R}^n$, which shows that problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) always admits a feasible solution. \\
We now want to show that the value function~$\hat{J}_N^*(x(k);\delta)$ decreases under the applied feedback for all $x(0)\in\mathbb{R}^n$.
Let $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}^*(x_0)=\{\hat{u}_0^*, \dots, \hat{u}_{N-1}^*\}$ and $\boldsymbol{x}^*(x_0)=\{x_0,x_1^*,\dots,x_N^*\}$ denote the optimal open-loop input and state sequences for a given initial condition $x_0\in \mathbb{R}^n$ and let $\boldsymbol{v}^*(x_0):=\boldsymbol{v}(x_N^*(x_0))$ and $\boldsymbol{z}^*(x_0):=\boldsymbol{z}(x_N^*(x_0))$ be the corresponding tail sequences for the resulting predicted terminal state.
Consider now the successor state $x_0^+=Ax_0+B\hat{u}_0^*$. Clearly, $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}^+(x_0)=\{\hat{u}_1^*,\dots,\hat{u}_{N-1}^*,v_0^*\}$ and $\boldsymbol{{v}}^+(x_0)=\{v_1^*,\dots,v_{T-1}^*,0\}$ are suboptimal input sequences which steer the state from $x_0^+$ to the origin in a finite number of $N+T-1$ steps. The resulting state sequences are given by $\boldsymbol{{x}}^+(x_0)=\{x_1^*,\dots,x_N^*,z_1^*\}$ and $\boldsymbol{{z}}^+(x_0)=\{z_1^*,\dots,z_{T-1}^*,0\}$. Using the above suboptimal input and state sequences and the fact that the tail sequences within the terminal cost are simply appended by zero values, it is straightforward to show that
$ \hat{J}_N(\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}^+(x_0),x_0^+;\delta)-\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta) =-\hat{\ell}(x_0,\hat{u}_0^*(x_0)) \ \forall x_0 \in \mathbb{R}^n$.
From the suboptimality of $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}^+(x_0)$ it follows immediately that
\begin{equation}
\hat{J}_N^*(x_0^+;\delta)-\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)\leq -\hat{\ell}(x_0,\hat{u}_0^*(x_0)) \ \forall x_0 \in \mathbb{R}^n \ .
\end{equation}
By the design of the relaxed barriers and the assumption that $v_l(x)=0 \ \forall \, l=0,\dots,T-1 \Leftrightarrow x=0$, the function $\hat{J}_N^*(\cdot;\delta)$ is well-defined, positive definite, and radially unbounded. Thus, it can be used as a Lyapunov function for the closed-loop system, proving global asymptotic stability of the origin.
\end{proof}
Note that in order to ensure convexity of the terminal cost function $\hat{F}(\cdot)$, the elements of the parametrized tail input sequence $\boldsymbol{v}(x)$ should be affine in the argument $x$. In combination with the condition that $v_l(x)=0 \ \forall \, l=1,\dots,T-1 \Leftrightarrow x=0$, this in fact limits $\boldsymbol{v}(\cdot)$ to contain a sequence of linear state feedback laws, i.e. $\boldsymbol{v}(x)=\{K_0 x, \dots, K_{T-1}x\}$. In the following, we briefly discuss two different design approaches for $\boldsymbol{v}(x)$ that meet this requirement and thus allow to guarantee stability of the closed-loop system as well as convexity of the resulting overall cost function. \\[0.2cm]
The easiest way to design suitable tail sequences $\boldsymbol{v}(\cdot)$ and $\boldsymbol{z}(\cdot)$ is by making use of a linear dead-beat controller. To this end, we may choose a terminal control gain $K \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ in such a way that the matrix $A_K=A+BK$ is nilpotent, i.e., that it satisfies $A_K^r=0$ for some $r\leq n$. Under the assumption of controllability, this can for example be achieved by a suitable pole placement procedure which ensures that all eigenvalues of the matrix $A_K$ are located at the origin of the complex plane. Based on these ideas, we may set $T=n$ and choose the tail input sequence as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:deadBeatK}
\boldsymbol{v}(x)=\left\lbrace {K}x,\dots,{K}\left(A+B{K}\right)^{n-1}\!x \right\rbrace \
\end{equation}
which results in the corresponding state sequence $\boldsymbol{z}(x)=\{x,\dots,A_K^{n-1}x\}$. Due to the design of the matrix $K$, it obviously holds that $z_n=A_K^n\!x=0$. Thus, $\boldsymbol{v}(\cdot)$ and $\boldsymbol{z}(\cdot)$ satisfy the conditions in Assumption~\ref{ass:deadBeatStab2}, and Theorem~\ref{thm:deadBeatStab} can be used to conclude stability of the closed-loop system.
Note that, depending on the algorithm, the pole placement problem may become numerically ill-conditioned when assigning all poles to exactly the same location. Hence, for practical implementations it may be meaningful to distribute the poles of $A_K$ in an $\varepsilon$-ball around the origin. \\[0.2cm]
While the above approach allows for a rather simple design of the tail sequences $\boldsymbol{v}(\cdot)$ and $\boldsymbol{z}(\cdot)$, and thus of the terminal cost $\hat{F}(\cdot)$, the implicit requirement that the predicted terminal state is steered to the origin in at most $n$ steps might be restrictive, leading to suboptimal or even aggressive behavior of the overall closed-loop system. In the following, we present a second approach that eliminates this restriction by allowing for tail sequences with $T\geq n$ elements.
In order to enforce in addition a certain optimality with respect to the underlying performance criterion, we propose to choose the parametrized tail input sequence $\boldsymbol{v}(\cdot)$ as the solution to the finite-horizon LQR problem with zero terminal state constraint, i.e., \\[-0.3cm]
\begin{subequations} \label{eq:zeroTstateLQR}
\begin{align}
\boldsymbol{v}(x)&=\arg\min_{\boldsymbol{v}} \sum_{l=0}^{{T}-1} \ell(z_l,v_l) \\
\mbox{s.\,t.} \ \ & {z}_{l+1}=A{z}_{l}+B v_{l}, \ l=0,\dots,T-1\, , \\
& z_{T}=0, \ z_0=x \\[-0.4cm]
\nonumber
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
for the standard quadratic stage cost $\ell(z,v)= \| z \|_Q^2 + \|v\|_R^2 $.
It can be shown that the solution $\boldsymbol{v}^*(x)$ to problem~(\ref{eq:zeroTstateLQR}) can be expressed as a sequence of static linear state feedbacks of the form $v_l^*(x)=K_l x$ with $l=0,\dots,T-1$. Explicit expressions for the optimal control law and the corresponding state (and costate) trajectories were given in~\cite{ntogramatzidis03} based on the solution of two unconstrained infinite-horizon LQR problems and a suitable iteration scheme.
Furthermore, in~\cite{ntogramatzidis05} the authors present explicit solutions for more general start and end point constraints based on a parametrization of all the solutions of the extended symplectic system.
However, as discussed in the Appendix, the optimal input sequence can also be computed directly in vector form as $V^*(x)=\begin{bmatrix} v_0^{*\TRANSP}(x) & \cdots & v_{T-1}^{*\TRANSP}(x) \end{bmatrix}^\TRANSP=K_V x$ with $K_V \in \mathbb{R}^{Tm\times n}$.
In both cases, the resulting terminal cost function can be formulated as \vspace*{-0.1cm}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:quadrFdeadBeat}
\hat{F}(x)= x^\TRANSP\! Px+ \varepsilon \sum_{l=0}^{{T}-1}\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(z_l(x))+ \hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(v_l(x)) \, ,
\end{equation}
where $z_l(x)$ and $v_l(x)$ denote the elements of the respective state and input tail sequences and the matrix $P\in \mathbb{S}^n_{\pplus}$ can be constructed by inserting these sequences into the quadratic stage cost $\ell(\cdot,\cdot)$, see Appendix.
As for the previous approach, global asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system can be concluded from Theorem~\ref{thm:deadBeatStab}. However, the possibility to choose the length of the tail sequences within the construction of the terminal cost typically leads to an overall improved closed-loop performance. Especially if no constraints are active or violated by the open-loop state and input tail sequences, the terminal cost function $\hat{F}(\cdot)$ based on~(\ref{eq:zeroTstateLQR}) may give a quite good approximation of the real infinite-horizon cost-to-go.
\begin{rem}
Note that the discussed approaches force the predicted state to the origin in $N+T$ steps and are hence similar to MPC approaches that are based on an explicit zero terminal state constraint, see e.g.~\cite{keerthi88}.
However, by using the proposed terminal cost function, this behavior is enforced implicitly, i.e., without introducing an explicit equality constraint within the optimization problem. Furthermore, stability can be guaranteed for a global region of attraction and the tail sequence horizon $T$ may be made arbitrary large without increasing the number of optimization variables.
\end{rem}
\textit{ C2) Quadratic terminal cost} \quad \\[0.15cm]
In the previous section, we exploited the fact that the relaxation of input and state constraint allows to apply any sequence of inputs at the end of the prediction horizon. In the following, we will show that in the presence of relaxed barrier functions we can in addition derive a \emph{global} quadratic upper bound for the combined state and input constraint barrier function, which makes it possible to use a purely quadratic terminal cost function term without the need for a corresponding terminal set constraint.
\begin{ass}\label{ass:globalUpperBound}
Let $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(\cdot)$ and $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(\cdot)$ be relaxed gradient or weight recentered logarithmic barrier functions according to Assumption~\ref{ass:relBarriersXU}, see (\ref{eq:bxGrad}) and (\ref{eq:bxWeight}), respectively. Let the relaxing function be quadratic and given by $\beta_2(\cdot;\delta)$ from~(\ref{eq:relFunHauser}).
\end{ass}
\begin{lem} \label{lem:quadraticBound}
Let $(A,B)$ be stabilizable and let $K \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ be a corresponding stabilizing linear control gain. Furthermore, let Assumption~\ref{ass:globalUpperBound} hold and consider $\hat{B}_K(x)=\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x)+\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(Kx)$ for a given $\delta\in\mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$. Then, it holds that
\begin{equation}
\hat{B}_K(x)\leq \ x^\TRANSP\!\left(M_{\mathrm{x}} + K^\TRANSP \!M_{\mathrm{u}}K \right) x \quad \forall x \in \mathbb{R}^n \, ,
\end{equation}
where the matrices $M_{\mathrm{x}}\in \mathbb{R}^{n \times n}$ and $M_{\mathrm{u}} \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times m}$ are defined as
$M_{\mathrm{x}}:=\frac{1}{2\delta^2}C_{\mathrm{x}}^\TRANSP\mathrm{diag}\left(\mathds{1}+w_{\mathrm{x}}\right)C_{\mathrm{x}}^{}$ and $M_{\mathrm{u}}:=\frac{1}{2\delta^2}C_{\mathrm{u}}^\TRANSP\mathrm{diag}\left(\mathds{1}+w_{\mathrm{u}}\right)C_{\mathrm{u}}^{}$, respectively. Here, $w_{\mathrm{x}} \in \mathbb{R}^{q_{\mathrm{x}}}_+$ and $w_{\mathrm{u}} \in \mathbb{R}^{q_{\mathrm{u}}}_+$ are suitable weighting vectors when considering weight recentered barrier functions, whereas $w_{\mathrm{x}}=0$, $w_{\mathrm{u}}=0$ in the gradient recentering case.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We exemplary consider the state constraints and show that $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x)\leq \|x\|_{M_{\mathrm{x}}}^2 \ \forall x \in \mathbb{R}^n$. Based on Taylor's Theorem (see \cite[Theorem 2.1]{nocedalWright99}) we know that
$ \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x)=\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(0)+[\nabla \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(0)]^\TRANSP x + \frac{1}{2} x^T \nabla^2 \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(\lambda x) x $ for some $\lambda \in (0,1)$. Due the recentering of the barrier functions, the first two terms vanish and we get $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x)= \frac{1}{2} x^T \nabla^2 \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(\lambda x) x $ for some $\lambda \in (0,1)$. In particular, it holds that $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x) \leq x^\TRANSP \! M x \ \forall x \in \mathbb{R}^n$ for any $M \in \mathbb{S}^n_{\pplus}$ satisfying $\nabla^2 B_{\mathrm{x}}(x)\preceq M \ \forall x \in \mathbb{R}^n$.
When considering the quadratic relaxing function $\beta_2(\cdot;\delta)$ from~(\ref{eq:relFunHauser}), the Hessian of $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(\cdot)$ is given by
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\nabla^2 \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x)&=C_{\mathrm{x}}^\TRANSP \mathrm{diag}\big(D_1(x), \dots, D_{q_{\mathrm{x}}}(x)\big) C_{\mathrm{x}}\, , \\
\mbox{where\ \ }D_i(x)&=\begin{cases} \frac{1+w_{\mathrm{x}}^i}{(-C_{\mathrm{x}}^ix+d_{\mathrm{x}}^i)^2} & -C_{\mathrm{x}}^ix+d_{\mathrm{x}}^i > \delta \\
\ \ \frac{1+w_{\mathrm{x}}^i}{\delta^2} & -C_{\mathrm{x}}^ix+d_{\mathrm{x}}^i \leq \delta \, . \end{cases}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\noindent Note that $w_{\mathrm{x}}=0$ in the case of gradient recentered barrier functions. Since $D_i(x) \leq \frac{1+w_{\mathrm{x}}^i}{\delta^2} \ \forall x\in\mathbb{R}^n$, it follows immediately that
$ \nabla^2 \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x) \preceq \frac{1}{\delta^2} C_{\mathrm{x}}^\TRANSP \mathrm{diag}\left(\mathds{1}+w_{\mathrm{x}} \right) C_{\mathrm{x}} \ \forall x \in \mathbb{R}^n$.
Combining this upper bound on the Hessian with the previous arguments, it follows that $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x) \leq x^\TRANSP \! M_{\mathrm{x}}\,x \ \forall x \in \mathbb{R}^n$ with $M_{\mathrm{x}}=\frac{1}{2\delta^2} C_{\mathrm{x}}^\TRANSP \mathrm{diag}\left(\mathds{1}+w_{\mathrm{x}} \right) C_{\mathrm{x}}$. Similarly, it is straightforward to show that $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(Kx) \leq x^\TRANSP \! K^\TRANSP M_{\mathrm{u}} K x \ \forall x \in \mathbb{R}^n$ with $M_{\mathrm{u}}$ as defined above.
\end{proof} \vspace*{0.3cm}
\noindent Let now the controller matrix $K$ and the matrix $P \in \mathbb{S}^n_{\pplus}$ be solutions to the modified Riccati equation
\begin{subequations} \label{eq:riccatiP}
\begin{align}
K&=-\left(R+B^\TRANSP PB+\varepsilon M_{\mathrm{u}}\right)^{-1}B^\TRANSP PA \\
P&=A_{K}^{\TRANSP} P A_K^{}+K^\TRANSP \!(R+\varepsilon M_{\mathrm{u}})K+Q + \varepsilon M_{\mathrm{x}} \ ,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $M_{\mathrm{x}}$ and $M_{\mathrm{u}}$ are defined according to Lemma~\ref{lem:quadraticBound}.
We then propose to choose the terminal cost function as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:quadraticF}
\hat{F}(x)=x^\TRANSP\!P\,x \, ,
\end{equation}
where $P\in \mathbb{S}^n_{\pplus}$ is the solution to~(\ref{eq:riccatiP}b).
Note that the controller gain~$K$ is in principle arbitrary. However, the above choice results in a minimal value of the terminal cost function and ensures that for $\varepsilon \to 0$ or in the absence of constraints, $K$ and $P$ will reduce to the solution of the unconstrained LQR problem.
We can now state the following stability result.
\begin{thm} \label{thm:quadrBoundStab}
Let Assumption~\ref{ass:globalUpperBound} hold true and consider problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) with the terminal cost function~$\hat{F}(\cdot)$ from~(\ref{eq:quadraticF}).
Then, independently of the relaxation parameter $\delta \in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$,
the feedback $u(k)=\hat{u}_0^*(x(k))$ asymptotically stabilizes the origin of system~(\ref{eq:discreteSystem}) for any initial condition $x(0) \in \mathbb{R}^n$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Again, both $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}^*(x_0)$ and $\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)$ are defined for any $x_0 \in \mathbb{R}^n$ due to the relaxed state and input constraints. Based on the quadratic terminal cost function above, it is now straightforward to show that the value function~$\hat{J}_N^*(x(k);\delta)$ decreases under the applied MPC feedback for all $x(k)\in\mathbb{R}^n$.
For any $x_0 \in \mathbb{R}^n$ there exist optimal input and state sequences $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}^*(x_0)=\{\hat{u}_0^*, \dots, \hat{u}_{N-1}^*\}$ and $\boldsymbol{x}^*(x_0)=\{x_0,x_1^*,\dots,x_N^*\}$ as well as the suboptimal input and state sequences $\boldsymbol{\hat{u}}^+(x_0)=\{\hat{u}_1^*,\dots,\hat{u}_{N-1}^*,Kx_N^*\}$ and $\boldsymbol{x}^+(x_0)=\{x_1^*,\dots,x_N^*,A_Kx_N^*\}$ for the successor state $x_0^+=Ax_0+B\hat{u}_0^*$ with $\hat{J}_N^*(x_0^+;\delta)-\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)\leq \hat{J}_N(\boldsymbol{\hat {u}}^+(x_0),x_0^+,\delta)-\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)$.
This gives us
\begin{align}
&\hat{J}_N^*(x_0^+;\delta)-\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta) \leq \lVert A_K x_N^* \rVert^2_{P} - \lVert x_N^*\rVert^2_P \ \dots\\
\ & \ +\lVert x_N^* \rVert^2_Q + \lVert Kx_N^* \rVert^2_{R} + \varepsilon B_K(x_N^*)
\ \leq 0 \ \ \forall \ x_N^* \in \mathbb{R}^n \, , \nonumber
\end{align}
where we used the global quadratic bound on $B_K(\cdot)$ from Lemma~\ref{lem:quadraticBound} and the choice of the terminal cost matrix~$P$, see~(\ref{eq:riccatiP}b). Thus, $\hat{J}_N^*(\cdot;\delta)$ can again be used as a Lyapunov function for proving global asymptotic stability.
\end{proof}
In summary, we can conclude that the concept of relaxed logarithmic barrier functions allows us to design globally stabilizing MPC schemes without making use of an explicit terminal set or state constraint. Instead, the presented approaches are based on a suitable design of the respective terminal cost function term that heavily exploits the properties and advantages of the underlying barrier function relaxation.
Thus, the presented results may be seen as a barrier function based counterpart to existing terminal set free MPC approaches relying on suitable terminal cost {functions~(\!\cite{jadbabaie01,limon06})}, a sufficiently large prediction horizon~(\!\cite{chmielewski96,scokaert98,bemporadExplicitLQR}), or particular controllability assumptions~(\!\cite{grimm05,gruene12,boccia14}). \\
However, with the exception of Theorem~\ref{thm:exactRel}, no guarantees on the satisfaction of state and input constraints have been discussed so far. In fact, the presented global stability results can only be achieved since the relaxed barrier functions allow for in principle arbitrarily large constraint violations. In the next section, we will show that the maximal violation of state and input constraints in closed-loop operation is always bounded, and we discuss how we can compute and control it a priori for a given set of initial conditions by adjusting the relaxation parameter $\delta\in\mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$.
\subsection{Maximal Constraint Violation Guarantees} \label{sec:relBarrierConstr}
As outlined above, one of the main advantages of model predictive control is given by its ability to deal with input and state constraints.
On the other hand, possible violations of the corresponding constraints seem to be inherent to the concept of relaxed barrier functions.
In the following, we will show how guarantees on the strict satisfaction or the maximal violation of input and state constraints can be given for the globally stabilizing relaxed logarithmic barrier function based MPC schemes from the previous section.
We start with the following Lemma which allows to upper bound the values of the relaxed barrier functions in closed-loop operation by an expression that depends on the initial condition.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:relBarrierBounds}
Let problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) be formulated based on one of the globally stabilizing MPC schemes discussed above (Theorems~\ref{thm:globalStabilization},~\ref{thm:deadBeatStab},~\ref{thm:quadrBoundStab}).
Furthermore, let $\boldsymbol{x}_{cl}=\{x(0),x(1),\dots\}$ and $\boldsymbol{u}_{cl}=\{u(0),u(1),\dots \}$ with $u(k)=\hat{u}_0^*(x(k))$ for $k\geq 0$ denote the resulting state and input trajectories of the closed-loop system. Then, for any initial condition $x_0=x(0) \in \mathbb{R}^n$ and any $k\geq 0$ it holds that
\vspace*{-0.35cm}
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x(k))&\leq \frac{1}{\varepsilon} \left(\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)-x_0^\TRANSP P_{\mathrm{uc}}^{*} \, x_0 \right)\, , \\
\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(u(k))&\leq \frac{1}{\varepsilon} \left(\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)-x_0^\TRANSP P_{\mathrm{uc}}^* \,\, x_0 \right)\, ,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $P_{\mathrm{uc}}^* \in \mathbb{S}^n_{\pplus}$ is the solution to the discrete-time algebraic Riccati equation related to the infinite-horizon LQR problem.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Based on the respective Theorems we know that
$\hat{J}_N^*(x(k+1);\delta)-\hat{J}_N^*(x(k);\delta) \leq -\hat{\ell}(x(k),u(k))$ for any $k\geq0$ and any $x(0) \in \mathbb{R}^n$. In particular, this ensures that the closed-loop system is asymptotically stable and that $\lim_{k\to \infty}\hat{J}_N^*(x(k);\delta)=0$. Summing up over all future sampling instants and using a telescoping sum on the left hand side, we get that $\hat{J}_N^*(x(0);\delta) \geq \sum_{k=0}^\infty \hat{\ell}(x(k),u(k))$. Furthermore, $\sum_{k=0}^\infty \hat{\ell}(x(k),u(k))= \sum_{k=0}^\infty \ell(x(k),u(k))+\varepsilon \sum_{k=0}^\infty \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x(k))+\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(u(k))$ and $ \sum_{k=0}^\infty \ell(x(k),u(k))\geq x(0)^\TRANSP \! P_{\mathrm{uc}}^*\, x(0)$ due to the optimality of the unconstrained infinite-horizon LQR solution. In combination this yields
\begin{equation}
\hat{J}_N^*(x(0);\delta) \geq x(0)^\TRANSP \! P_{\mathrm{uc}}^* \,x(0)+\varepsilon \sum_{k=0}^\infty \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x(k))+\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(u(k))
\end{equation}
and finally, since all terms in the sum on the right hand side are positive definite,
$\varepsilon \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x(k)) \leq \hat{J}_N^*(x(0);\delta)- x(0)^\TRANSP \! P_{\mathrm{uc}}^* x(0)$ as well as
$ \varepsilon \hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(u(k)) \leq \hat{J}_N^*(x(0);\delta)- x(0)^\TRANSP \! P_{\mathrm{uc}}^* x(0)$ $\forall k\geq0$.
\end{proof} \vspace*{0.1cm}
\noindent For ease of notation, let now the scalar $\hat{\alpha}(x_0;\delta) \in \mathbb{R}_{+}$ be defined as \vspace*{-0.15cm}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:alphaEq}
\hat{\alpha}(x_0;\delta):= \hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)-x_0^\TRANSP P_{\mathrm{uc}}^*\, x_0 \, .
\end{equation}
As the relaxed barrier function are positive definite and radially unbounded, Lemma~\ref{lem:relBarrierBounds} implies that also the violations of the corresponding constraints are bounded.
In particular, for any $\varepsilon\in\mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$, $\delta\in\mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ and any initial condition $x_0 =x(0)\in \mathbb{R}^n$, upper bounds for the maximal violations of state and input constraints are given by
\begin{subequations}\label{eq:maxConstrViol}
\begin{align}
\hat{z}_{x}^i(x_0;\delta)= &\max_{x} \bigg\lbrace C_{\mathrm{x}}^i x -d_{\mathrm{x}}^i\, \big\vert \ \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x)\leq \frac{\hat{\alpha}(x_0;\delta)}{\varepsilon} \bigg\rbrace \\
\hat{z}_{u}^j(x_0;\delta)= &\max_{u} \bigg\lbrace C_{\mathrm{u}}^j x -d_{\mathrm{u}}^j\, \big\vert \ \hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(u)\leq \frac{\hat{\alpha}(x_0;\delta)}{\varepsilon} \bigg\rbrace
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
for $i=1,\dots,q_{\mathrm{x}}$ and $j=1,\dots,q_{\mathrm{u}}$, where $\hat{\alpha}(x_0;\delta)$ is defined according to~(\ref{eq:alphaEq}). Based on this, we can formulate the following result on the maximal constraint violations that can occur in closed-loop operation.
\begin{thm} \label{thm:maxConstrViolation}
Let problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) be formulated based on one of the globally stabilizing MPC schemes discussed above (Theorems~\ref{thm:globalStabilization},~\ref{thm:deadBeatStab},~\ref{thm:quadrBoundStab}) and let $\boldsymbol{x}_{cl}=\{x(0),x(1),\dots\}$ and $\boldsymbol{u}_{cl}=\{u(0),u(1),\dots \}$ with $u(k)=\hat{u}_0^*(x(k))$ for $k\geq 0$ denote the resulting closed-loop state and input trajectories.
Then, for any $x_0=x(0) \in \mathbb{R}^n$ and any $k\geq 0$ it holds that
\begin{equation}
C_{\mathrm{x}} x(k)\leq d_{\mathrm{x}} + \hat{z}_{\mathrm{x}}(x_0,\delta), \quad C_{\mathrm{u}} u(k)\leq d_{\mathrm{u}} + \hat{z}_{\mathrm{u}}(x_0,\delta),
\end{equation}
where the elements of the maximal constraint violation vectors $\hat{z}_{\mathrm{x}}(x_0;\delta) \in \mathbb{R}^{q_{\mathrm{x}}}$ and $\hat{z}_{\mathrm{u}}(x_0;\delta) \in \mathbb{R}^{q_{\mathrm{u}}}$ are given by~(\ref{eq:maxConstrViol}).
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Follows directly from Lemma~\ref{lem:relBarrierBounds} and the definition of $\hat{\alpha}(x_0;\delta)$ and $\hat{z}_{x}^i(x_0;\delta)$, $ \hat{z}_{u}^j(x_0;\delta)$ in (\ref{eq:alphaEq}) and~(\ref{eq:maxConstrViol}).
\end{proof}
Note that the optimization problems in~(\ref{eq:maxConstrViol}) are convex as $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(\cdot)$ and $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(\cdot)$ are convex functions.
Moreover, when considering gradient recentered logarithmic barrier functions, we can exploit the fact that $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(\cdot)$ and $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(\cdot)$ consist only of positive definite terms. In this case, upper bounds for the maximal constraint violations are given by $\hat{z}_{\mathrm{x}}^i(x_0;\delta)\leq \max \{-\bar{z}_{\mathrm{x}}^{i},0\}$, where $\bar{z}_{\mathrm{x}}^{i}$ is given as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ziEq}
\bar{z}_{\mathrm{x}}^{i}\!=\min\left\lbrace z\,\big|\,\beta({z};\delta)+\ln(d_{\mathrm{x}}^i)+\frac{z}{d_{\mathrm{x}}^i}-1=\frac{\hat{\alpha}(x_0;\delta)}{\varepsilon}\right\rbrace
\end{equation}
for $i=1,\dots,q_{\mathrm{x}}$ and similar for the input constraints,~cf.~(\ref{eq:bxGrad}).
If the relaxing function $\beta(\cdot\,;\delta)$ is chosen as $\beta_e(\cdot\,;\delta)$ or $\beta_k(\cdot\,;\delta)$ with $k>2$, a nonlinear equation solver can be used to find suitable solutions $\bar{z}_{\mathrm{x}}^{i}$. However, in the case of $\beta(\cdot\,;\delta)=\beta_k(\cdot\,;\delta)$ with $k=2$, the equality constraint in~(\ref{eq:ziEq}) reduces to a quadratic equation in ${z}$ and a closed form expression of the maximal constraint violation can be given as
\begin{equation}
\bar{z}_{\mathrm{x}}^i= \delta\left(\gamma_{i,1}-\sqrt{\gamma_{i,1}^2-\gamma_{i,2}} \right), \ i=1,\dots,q_{\mathrm{x}} \, ,
\end{equation}
where $\gamma_{i,1}:=2-\frac{\delta}{d_{\mathrm{x}}^i}$ and $\gamma_{i,2}:=1+2\ln\left(\frac{d_{\mathrm{x}}^i}{\delta}\right)-\frac{2}{\varepsilon}\,\hat{\alpha}(x_0;\delta)$, see also Lemma~21 in \cite{feller14}.
Note that the values for the maximal constraint violations obtained above may also be negative. In this case, the corresponding constraints will not be violated but rather satisfied with the respective safety margin.
An important consequence of Theorem~\ref{thm:maxConstrViolation} is that, as stated in the following Lemma, there always exists a set of initial conditions for which the input and state constraints will not be violated at all.
\begin{lem}
Let problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) be formulated based on one of the globally stabilizing MPC schemes discussed above (Theorems~\ref{thm:globalStabilization},~\ref{thm:deadBeatStab},~\ref{thm:quadrBoundStab}) and let $\boldsymbol{x}_{cl}=\{x(0),x(1),\dots\}$ and $\boldsymbol{u}_{cl}=\{u(0),u(1),\dots \}$ with $u(k)=\hat{u}_0^*(x(k))$ for $k\geq 0$ denote the resulting closed-loop state and input trajectories. Furthermore, for $\delta \in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ let the set $\hat{\mathcal{X}}'_{N}(\delta)$ be defined as
\begin{equation}
\hat{\mathcal{X}}'_{N}(\delta):=\left\lbrace x \in \mathcal{X}\, |\, \hat{\alpha}(x,\delta) \leq \varepsilon \bar{\beta}'(\delta) \right\rbrace \, ,
\end{equation}
with $\bar{\beta}'(\delta):=\min\{\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{x}}(\delta), \bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{u}}(\delta)\}$, where $\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{x}}(\delta)$ and $\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{u}}(\delta)$ are defined according to Definition~\ref{def:betaBar}. Then, for any initial condition $x(0)\in \hat{\mathcal{X}}'_{N}(\delta)$ and any $k\geq 0$ it holds that $C_{\mathrm{x}} x(k) \leq d_{\mathrm{x}}$ as well as $C_{\mathrm{u}} u(k) \leq d_{\mathrm{u}}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
For any $x_0=x(0) \in \hat{\mathcal{X}}'_{N}(\delta)$ and all $k\geq 0$ it holds due to Lemma~\ref{lem:relBarrierBounds} and the definition of $\bar{\beta}'(\delta)$ that $\varepsilon \hat{B}_{\mathrm{x}}(x(k)) \leq $ $\hat{\alpha}(x_0;\delta)$ $\leq \varepsilon \bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{x}}(\delta)$ and $\varepsilon \hat{B}_{\mathrm{u}}(u(k)) \leq \hat{\alpha}(x,\delta) \leq \varepsilon \bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{u}}(\delta)$. In combination with the definition of $\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{x}}(\delta)$ and $\bar{\beta}_{\mathrm{u}}(\delta)$, it follows directly that $x(k) \in \mathcal{X}$, $u(k) \in \mathcal{U}$ $\forall k\geq 0$, cf.~Lemma~\ref{lem:relBarrierLevelSets}.
\end{proof}
\noindent One may now ask how large we can make the set~$\hat{\mathcal{X}}'_{N}(\delta)$ of initial conditions for which strict satisfaction of all input and state constraints is guaranteed. In the following, we give an answer to this question for each of the different MPC approaches discussed above. In particular, we show that it is always possible to recover the feasible set of a suitable corresponding nonrelaxed MPC formulation.
\begin{thm} \label{thm:xBeta}
Let problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) be formulated based on one of the globally stabilizing MPC schemes discussed above (Theorems~\ref{thm:globalStabilization},~\ref{thm:deadBeatStab},~\ref{thm:quadrBoundStab}).
Moreover, let $\mathcal{X}_N$ be defined as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:xN_def_tSet}
\mathcal{X}_N=\{x \in \mathcal{X}: \exists\, \boldsymbol{u} \text{\ s.t.\ } x_k \in \mathcal{X}, u_k\in \mathcal{U}, x_N \in \mathcal{X}_f\}
\end{equation}
when considering the approach based on a nonrelaxed terminal set constraint~(Theorem~\ref{thm:globalStabilization}), as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:xN_def_deadBeat}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{X}_N=\{x \in \mathcal{X}:&\ \exists\, \boldsymbol{u} \text{\ s.t.\ } x_k \in \mathcal{X}, u_k\in \mathcal{U}, \\
& \qquad \quad \ z_l(x_N) \in \mathcal{X}, v_l(x_N) \in \mathcal{U}\} \quad
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
when considering the approach based on auxiliary tail sequences $z_l(\cdot)$ and $v_l(\cdot)$ with $l=1,\dots,T-1$ (Theorem~\ref{thm:deadBeatStab}), and as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:xN_def_quadr}
\mathcal{X}_N=\{x \in \mathcal{X}: \exists\, \boldsymbol{u} \text{\ s.t.\ } x_k \in \mathcal{X}, u_k\in \mathcal{U}, x_N = 0\} \ \
\end{equation}
when considering the approach based on a purely quadratic terminal cost function~(Theorem~\ref{thm:quadrBoundStab}), where in all three cases $x_0=x$ and $x_k=x_k(\boldsymbol{u},x)$ for $k=1,\dots,N$. Then, for any compact set of initial conditions $\mathcal{X}_0 \subseteq \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ there exists a $\bar{\delta}_0 \in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ such that $\mathcal{X}_0\subseteq \hat{\mathcal{X}}'_{N}(\delta)$ for all $\delta \leq \bar{\delta}_0$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We first consider the approaches based on Theorem~\ref{thm:globalStabilization} and Theorem~\ref{thm:deadBeatStab}. The proof is closely related to that of Lemma~\ref{lem:XbetaProp} and only a sketch is given here. In particular, it can be shown that $\hat{\mathcal{X}}'_{N}({\delta})$ is a nonempty and compact set with $\hat{\mathcal{X}}'_{N}(\delta)\subseteq \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ and $\hat{\mathcal{X}}'_{N}(\delta) \to \mathcal{X}_N$ as $\delta \to 0$. The result is again based an the fact that the existence of a strictly feasible solution implies that for any $x_0 \in \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ there exists a ${\delta}_0(x_0)$ such that $\hat{\alpha}(x_0;\delta)$ will stay constant for all $\delta \leq {\delta}_0$, whereas $\bar{\beta}(\delta)$ can be made arbitrarily large as $\delta\to 0$.\\
When considering the approach based on Theorem~\ref{thm:quadrBoundStab} the problem occurs that the matrix $P$ from (\ref{eq:riccatiP}), and hence the quadratic terminal cost function $\hat{F}(x)=x^TPx$, will grow without bound for $\delta \to 0$. Also, in this case it does not necessarily hold that $\hat{\mathcal{X}}'_{N}(\bar{\delta}) \subset \mathcal{X}_N$ as the resulting optimal state and input sequences for a given $x_0 \in \hat{\mathcal{X}}'_{N}(\delta)$ will in general not satisfy the additional constraint $x_N=0$.
However, for any $x_0 \in \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ there exists input and state sequences $\boldsymbol{\bar{u}}(x_0)$ and $\boldsymbol{\bar{x}}(x_0)$ which strictly satisfy the conditions specified in~(\ref{eq:xN_def_quadr}), in particular $x_N(\boldsymbol{\bar{u}}(x_0),x_0)=0$.
For these sequences, we can always find a ${\delta}_0(x_0) \in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ such that $\hat{J}_N(\boldsymbol{\bar{u}}(x_0),x_0;\delta) =\tilde{J}_N(\boldsymbol{\bar{u}}(x_0),x_0)$ for all $\delta \leq \delta_0(x_0)$, where $\tilde{J}_N(\boldsymbol{\bar{u}}(x_0),x_0)$ denotes the value function of a nonrelaxed problem formulation with the additional constraint $x_N=0$, cf. the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:XbetaProp}. Furthermore, due to the suboptimality of the input sequence~$\boldsymbol{\bar{u}}(x_0)$, it holds that $\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)\leq \hat{J}_N(\boldsymbol{\bar{u}}(x_0),x_0;\delta)$.
Hence, $ \hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta) \leq \tilde{J}_N(\boldsymbol{\bar{u}}(x_0),x_0)$ for all $\delta \leq \delta_0(x_0)$, which shows that for any $x_0 \in \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ the value function $\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)$, and hence also the expression $\hat{\alpha}(x_0;\delta)$, will stay bounded as $\delta \to 0$. As, on the other hand, $\bar{\beta}(\delta)$ increases without bound and both $\delta_0(x_0)$ and $\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)$ are continuous functions, there exists for any compact set $\mathcal{X}_0 \subseteq \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ a $\bar{\delta}_0 \in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}\leq \min_{x_0\in \mathcal{X}_0}\delta_0(x_0)$ such that $\mathcal{X}_0 \subseteq \hat{\mathcal{X}}'_N(\delta) \ \forall \delta\leq\bar{\delta}_0$, see also the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:XbetaProp}.
\end{proof} \vspace*{0.1cm}
\noindent Note that for a general stabilizable system, the set~$\mathcal{X}_N$ in~(\ref{eq:xN_def_quadr}) may be restricted to a lower-dimensional subspace of $\mathbb{R}^n$ or it may even be empty. However, in case of a controllable system it is straightforward to show that $\mathcal{X}_N$ is a nonempty polytope. \\[0.2cm]
\noindent In general, the parameter $\bar{\delta}_0$ that is sufficient for ensuring strict constraint satisfaction based on the above results may be very small. For practical applications, it might therefore be reasonable to enforce the satisfaction of input and state constraints only with a predefined tolerance.
Based on the above arguments, we can easily state the following result.
\begin{cor}
Let problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) be formulated based on one of the globally stabilizing MPC schemes discussed above (Theorems~\ref{thm:globalStabilization},~\ref{thm:deadBeatStab},~\ref{thm:quadrBoundStab})
and let the respective sets $\mathcal{X}_N$ be given according to Theorem~\ref{thm:xBeta}. Then, for any given constraint violation tolerance $\hat{z}_{\textrm{tol}}\in \mathbb{R}_{+}$ and any given set of initial conditions $\mathcal{X}_0 \subseteq \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ there exists a $\bar{\delta}_0 \in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ such that for all $\delta \leq \bar{\delta}_0$ and any initial condition $x(0) \in \mathcal{X}_0$ the maximal possible constraint violation is less than $\hat{z}_{\textrm{tol}}$, i.e., that for all $k\geq 0$
\begin{equation}
C_{\mathrm{x}} x(k) \leq d_{\mathrm{x}}+\hat{z}_{\textrm{tol}}\mathds{1}, C_{\mathrm{u}} u(k) \leq d_{\mathrm{u}}+\hat{z}_{\textrm{tol}}\mathds{1} \ .
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
\noindent Based on the above results, we can formulate the following iterative algorithm that allows to determine a priori a sufficiently small relaxation parameter for ensuring satisfaction of a given maximal constraint violation tolerance for a given set of initial conditions.
\newpage
\hrule height 0.3pt
\vspace*{0.1cm}
\noindent \textbf{Algorithm 1} \textit{(Compute $\bar{\delta}_0$ for $\mathcal{X}_0$ and $\hat{z}_{\textrm{tol}} \in\mathbb{R}_+$)} \\
\vspace*{-0.25cm}
\hrule height 0.1pt
\vspace*{0.1cm}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE problem formulation, set $\mathcal{X}_0$, tolerance $\hat{z}_{\textrm{tol}}$
\ENSURE parameter $\bar{\delta}_0 \in \mathbb{R}_{+\!\!+}$ s.t. the maximal constraint violation is bounded by $\hat{z}_{\textrm{tol}}$ for any $x(0) \in \mathcal{X}_0$ \\
\STATE choose initial $\varepsilon, \delta \in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ and set up problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier})
\REPEAT
\STATE $\llcorner$ decrease relaxation parameter: $\delta\leftarrow\gamma\delta$, $\gamma \in (0,1)$\\
\STATE $\llcorner$ determine $\hat{\alpha}(\mathcal{X}_0,\delta)=\max_{x \in \mathcal{X}_0} \hat{\alpha}(x,\delta)$ based on~(\ref{eq:alphaEq})
\STATE $\llcorner$ compute $\hat{z}_{\mathrm{x}}^i(\mathcal{X}_0,\delta)$, $\hat{z}_{\mathrm{u}}^j(\mathcal{X}_0,\delta)$ from~(\ref{eq:maxConstrViol}) with $\hat{\alpha}(\mathcal{X}_0,\delta)$
\UNTIL{$ \hat{z}_{\mathrm{x}}^i(\mathcal{X}_0;\delta)\leq\hat{z}_{\textrm{tol}}$ and $\hat{z}_{\mathrm{u}}^j(\mathcal{X}_0;\delta)\leq\hat{z}_{\textrm{tol}}$ holds $\forall\ i, j$}
\end{algorithmic}
\hrule height 0.3pt
\vspace*{0.35cm}
\begin{rem}
Up to now, it has not been clarified whether the function $\hat{\alpha}(x;\delta)$ that is maximized in step~4 of Algorithm~1 is convex.
However, for all tested parameter configurations and examples with convex $\mathcal{X}_0$, the maximal value of $\hat{\alpha}(x;\delta)$ was in fact always attained at on of the vertices of the set~$\mathcal{X}_0$. Moreover, a conservative solution can always be found by evaluating a convex upper bound of $\hat{\alpha}(x;\delta)$, e.g., the value function $\hat{J}_N^*(x;\delta)$ itself, at the vertices of the set~$\mathcal{X}_0$.
\end{rem}
Summarizing, we can state that, despite the use of the relaxed barrier functions, the maximal possible violation of input and state constraints in closed-loop operation is bounded and depends directly on the choice of the relaxation parameter~$\delta$.
Furthermore, the presented results allow to compute an estimate for the maximal constraint violation a priori or to determine a suitable relaxation parameter that guarantees satisfaction of a given constraint violation tolerance.
Note that certain constraints can be prioritized by making use of different $\delta_i$ in the relaxation. This important fact may for example be used in order to enforce satisfaction of physically motivated hard input constraints.
\subsection{Closed-Loop Performance and Robustness} \label{sec:relBarrierOpt}
In this section, we briefly discuss some aspects concerning the performance and robustness properties of the presented relaxed barrier function based MPC approaches. Of course, a thorough investigation of these issues is well beyond the scope of this paper and can be considered as future work.
We begin with the following arguments, which show that the presented relaxed barrier function based MPC schemes will always recover the closed-loop performance of a related MPC scheme based on nonrelaxed barrier functions if the relaxation parameter~$\delta$ is small enough as well as that of a conventional linear MPC scheme when the barrier weighting~$\varepsilon$ goes to zero. \\[0.2cm]
Let the relaxed barrier function based MPC problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) be formulated based on one of the stabilizing design approaches discussed above (Theorem~\ref{thm:exactRel},~\ref{thm:globalStabilization},~\ref{thm:deadBeatStab}, or~\ref{thm:quadrBoundStab}), and let the set $\mathcal{X}_N$ be defined according to~(\ref{eq:xN_def_tSet}) for the terminal set based approaches and according to~(\ref{eq:xN_def_deadBeat}) and~(\ref{eq:xN_def_quadr}) for the respective terminal set free approaches.
Consider $\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)$ for a given $x_0 \in \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ and let $\tilde{J}_N^*(x_0)$ and $J_N^*(x_0)$ denote to the value functions for the corresponding nonrelaxed problem formulation and a conventional MPC formulation, both based on the constraints that define the set $\mathcal{X}_N$.
By definition, there exists for any $x_0 \in \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ an feasible state and input sequences that result in strict satisfaction of all inequality constraints in the respective description of $\mathcal{X}_N$,
which implies that there exists a ${\delta}_0(x_0)\in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ such that $\hat{J}_N^*(x_0;\delta)=\tilde{J}_N^*(x_0)$ $\forall \delta \leq \delta_0(x_0)$, see the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:XbetaProp}. In particular, for any compact set of initial conditions $\mathcal{X}_0 \subseteq \mathcal{X}_N^\circ$ there exists a $\bar{\delta}_0 \in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$ such that for any $\delta \leq \delta_0$, any $x(0) \in \mathcal{X}_0$, and any $k\geq0$ it holds that $\hat{J}_N^*(x(k);\delta)=\tilde{J}_N^*(x(k))$. This shows that the performance of a corresponding nonrelaxed formulation can always be recovered within the interior of the respective feasible set. Furthermore, it is well known that the solution of the nonrelaxed barrier function based problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemBarrier}) converges to the solution of the corresponding conventional problem when the barrier function weighting parameter~$\varepsilon$ approaches zero~\cite[ch.~11]{boydBook}. Thus, for arbitrary small $\varepsilon, \delta \in \mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$, the presented relaxed barrier function based MPC schemes recover the closed-loop behavior and performance of related conventional MPC schemes.
The question whether and under which circumstances the relaxed barrier function based setup may also lead to an overall improved performance of the closed-loop system, e.g., a decreased cumulated cost, can be considered as possible future work.
To the experience of the authors, the resulting closed-loop behavior is already very good for moderate values of the barrier parameters, i.e. $\varepsilon, \delta$ in the order of~$10^{-2}$, and typically close to the solution of the original MPC problem for $\varepsilon, \delta$ in the order of~$10^{-4}$. \\[0.2cm]
Concerning the robustness of the closed-loop system, it has to be noted that, due to the relaxation of the underlying state and input constraints, the resulting overall cost function is defined for any $x \in \mathbb{R}^n$.
Hence, the presented MPC schemes are robust against arbitrary effects caused by disturbances, uncertainties, or measurement errors in the sense that the corresponding open-loop optimal control problem always admits a feasible solution.
However, can we say something about the qualitative robust stability properties of the closed-loop system? For example, we might consider the disturbance affected dynamics
\begin{equation} \label{eq:distSystem}
x(k+1)=Ax(k)+B\hat{u}_0^*(x(k))+w(k) \, ,
\end{equation}
where $w(k)\in \mathbb{R}^n$ denotes an unknown but bounded additive disturbance at time instant $k\geq0$.
When considering the approach based on Theorem~\ref{thm:exactRel}, any stability or convergence guarantees of the closed-loop system will in general be lost as the disturbance might cause the system state to leave the set~$\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$.
On the other hand, the approaches based on Theorems~\ref{thm:globalStabilization},~\ref{thm:deadBeatStab}, and~\ref{thm:quadrBoundStab} allow to guarantee global asymptotic stability of the undisturbed closed-loop system. Interestingly, based on the main result of~\cite{angeli99}, this directly implies that system~(\ref{eq:distSystem}) is integral input-to-state stable~(iISS) with respect to the disturbance $w$.
As an important consequence,
the state remains bounded and converges asymptotically to the origin for any disturbance sequence with bounded energy, see~\cite{angeli99} for more details.
Further investigations, e.g., proving stronger input-to-state stability results for system~(\ref{eq:distSystem}), are the subject of possible future work.
\section{Example and Numerical Aspects} \label{sec:relBarrierNumExample}
In this section, we outline a selection of steps which can be used to get from a given control problem to a stabilizing relaxed logarithmic barrier function based MPC scheme, and illustrate both the design and the behavior of the closed-loop system by means of a numerical example.
In addition, we also briefly comment on some interesting numerical aspects of the resulting open-loop optimal control problem.
\subsection{Overall MPC Design Procedure}
\noindent\textbf{Step 1: Basic problem setup.} \ Choose suitable values for the problem parameters that are not related to the barrier functions, i.e., the weighting matrices $Q \in \mathbb{S}^n_{+}$ and $R \in \mathbb{S}^n_{\pplus}$ as well as the prediction horizon $N \in \mathbb{N}_+$. \\[0.1cm]
\textbf{Step 2: Relaxed barrier functions.} \ Decide on procedures for relaxing and recentering the logarithmic barrier functions and choose suitable (initial) values for the barrier function parameters $\varepsilon\!\in\!\mathbb{R}_{ \pplus}$, $\delta\!\in\!\mathbb{R}_{\pplus}$. In general, the quadratic relaxation $\beta(\cdot;\delta)=\beta_2(\cdot;\delta)$ seems to work well in practice. \\[0.1cm]
\textbf{Step 3: Terminal cost function.} \ Choose a suitable approach that allows to design the terminal cost $\hat{F}(\cdot)$ in such a way that asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system is guaranteed. The different approaches presented in this paper are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:approaches} together with additional information regarding the necessity of a terminal set $\mathcal{X}_f$, the underlying assumptions, and the respective region of attraction~(ROA). \\[0.1cm]
\textbf{Step 4: Parameter tuning.} Formulate the open-loop optimal control problem~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) based on Steps~1\--3. The relevant problem parameters may be adjusted in order to achieve a desired closed-loop performance, e.g. based on closed-loop simulations. In addition to the usual MPC parameters, the parameters $\varepsilon$ and $\delta$ as well as the chosen terminal cost function will have a major impact on the resulting behavior.
To the experience of the authors, and in accordance with the above results, the barrier function weighting parameter $\varepsilon$ may be used to influence the closed-loop performance while the relaxation parameter~$\delta$ primarily allows to control the occurrence and the maximal amount of state and input constraint violations.
In particular, Algorithm~1 from Section~\ref{sec:relBarrierConstr} may be used to adapt the relaxation parameter in such a way that satisfaction of a given constraint violation tolerance can be guaranteed.
\begin{table*}
\caption{Summary of the presented MPC schemes based on relaxed logarithmic barrier functions.}
\label{tab:approaches}
\centering
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lcrcclccc}
\toprule
Approach & Section & Terminal cost $\hat{F}(x)$& $\mathcal{X}_f$ & ($A,B)$ & Relaxing function & Theorem & ROA & constraint violation\\
\midrule
Relaxed $\mathcal{X}_f$ & \ref{sec:relBarrierStab1}1 & $x^\TRANSP P x + \varepsilon \hat{B}_{\mathrm{f}}(x)$ & yes & stabilizable & $\beta_k(\cdot\,;\delta)/ \beta_e(\cdot\,;\delta)$ & Thm.~\ref{thm:exactRel} & $\hat{\mathcal{X}}_N(\delta)$ & none \\[0.1cm]
Nonrelaxed $\mathcal{X}_f$ & \ref{sec:relBarrierStab1}2 & $x^\TRANSP P x + \varepsilon {B}_{\mathrm{f}}(x)$ & yes & controllable & $\beta_k(\cdot\,;\delta)/ \beta_e(\cdot\,;\delta)$ & Thm.~\ref{thm:globalStabilization}& $\mathbb{R}^n$ & adjustable, none in $\hat{\mathcal{X}}'_N(\delta)$ \\[0.1cm]
Tail sequences & \ref{sec:relBarrierStab2}1 & $\sum_{l=0}^{{T}-1} \hat{\ell}(z_l(x),v_l(x))$ & no & controllable & $\beta_k(\cdot\,;\delta)/ \beta_e(\cdot\,;\delta)$ & Thm.~\ref{thm:deadBeatStab}& $\mathbb{R}^n$ & adjustable, none in $\hat{\mathcal{X}}'_N(\delta)$ \\[0.1cm]
Quadratic bound & \ref{sec:relBarrierStab2}2 & $x^\TRANSP\! P x$ & no & stabilizable & $\beta_2(\cdot\,;\delta)\, $, quadratic & Thm.~\ref{thm:quadrBoundStab} & $\mathbb{R}^n$ & adjustable, none in $\hat{\mathcal{X}}'_N(\delta)$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\vspace*{-0.15cm}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Numerical Example}
In the following, we briefly illustrate the outlined design procedure and the closed-loop behavior of the proposed MPC schemes by means of an academic numerical example. We consider a discrete-time double integrator system of the form
\begin{equation}
x(k+1)=\begin{bmatrix}
1 & T_s\\
0 & 1
\end{bmatrix}x(k) + \begin{bmatrix}
T_s^2 \\ T_s
\end{bmatrix} u(k)\,, \ \ \ T_s=0.1\,.
\end{equation}
with the input and state constraint sets $\mathcal{U}=\{u \in \mathbb{R}: -2\leq u \leq 1\}$ and $\mathcal{X}=\{x \in \mathbb{R}^2: -2\leq x_1 \leq 3, |x_2| \leq 0.8\}$.\\%[0.2cm]
Following Step~1 of our design procedure, we choose the basic problem parameters to $N=10$, $Q=\text{diag}(1,\, 0.1)$, and $R=1$.
In a second step, we decide on using weight recentered logarithmic barrier functions with a quadratic relaxation based on $\beta(\cdot\,;\delta)=\beta_2(\cdot\,;\delta)$, see Definition~\ref{def:recBarrier} and Eq.~(\ref{eq:relFunHauser}). We fix the barrier function weighting parameter to $\varepsilon=10^{-2}$ and set up the different MPC schemes from Table~\ref{tab:approaches} for varying values of the relaxation parameter~$\delta$. For the terminal set based approaches from Section~\ref{sec:relBarrierStab1}, we employ a contractive polytopic terminal set as discussed in~\cite{feller14b}. \\
Inspired by our results above, we are in particular interested in the region of attraction of the locally stabilizing approach from Section~\ref{sec:relBarrierStab1}1 as well as in the regions with guaranteed strict or approximate constraint satisfaction when considering the globally stabilizing approaches from the Sections~\ref{sec:relBarrierStab1}2 and \ref{sec:relBarrierStab2}1/C2. Furthermore, we would like to compare the closed-loop behavior of the corresponding different MPC schemes and illustrate how the maximal constraint violation can be controlled by adjusting the relaxation parameter. \\
Fig.~\ref{fig:differentSets} depicts and compares some of the $\delta$-dependent sets that have been discussed in the results above, i.e., regions of initial conditions for which we can guarantee properties like asymptotic stability or satisfaction of input and state constraints. Note that the superscript in each case indicates the respective MPC approach by referring to the corresponding theorem number (we use extra indices $a$ and $b$ to distinguish between the two tail sequence based approaches).
While the sets $\hat{\mathcal{X}}^2_N(\delta)$ and $\hat{\mathcal{X}}'^{\#}_N(\delta)$ are given as sublevel sets of the value function~$\hat{J}_N^*(x;\delta)$, the sets $\mathcal{X}_0^{\#}$ are sublevel sets of the resulting maximal constraint violation based on Theorem~\ref{thm:maxConstrViolation}, both for a given $\delta=10^{-6}$.
In this case, the functions were evaluated over a fine grid and \textsc{Matlab}'s \texttt{contour} function was used for plotting.
Whereas the sets for which strict constraint satisfaction can be ensured may be very small, approximate constraint satisfaction with a meaningful tolerance of $\hat{z}_{\textrm{tol}}=10^{-3}$ is achieved for much larger regions of initial conditions. The approach based on a purely quadratic terminal cost $\hat{F}(x)=x^\TRANSP\! Px$ results in very small sets which is due to the conservative quadratic upper bound (see Lemma~\ref{lem:quadraticBound}), that causes $P$ to grow rather fast depending on the relation~$\varepsilon/\delta^2$. \\
In Fig.~\ref{fig:closedLoop}, the behavior of the resulting closed-loop systems is illustrated for different initial conditions and a varying relaxation parameter~$\delta$. It can be seen how convergence to the origin is achieved even for infeasible initial conditions and how strict or approximate constraint satisfaction may be enforced by making $\delta$ sufficiently small. Note that, in order to get comparable closed-loop performance and execution times, we chose a doubled horizon of $N=20$ for the MPC schemes based on a dead-beat tail sequence and a purely quadratic terminal cost.
\subsection{Numerical Aspects} \label{sec:relBarrierNumerics}
As outlined above, one of the main advantages of relaxed barrier function based MPC formulations is given by the fact that the stabilizing control input can be characterized as the minimum of a globally defined, continuously differentiable, and strongly convex cost function that is parametrized by the current system state.
In fact, after elimination of the linear system dynamics, the open-loop optimal control problem can be formulated as the unconstrained minimization of a cost function of the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:QPformulation}
\hat{J}_N(U,x)= \frac{1}{2}U^\TRANSP\! HU+x^{\!\TRANSP}\! FU + x^{\!\TRANSP}\!Yx + \varepsilon \hat{B}_{\mathrm{xu}}(U,x)\, ,
\end{equation}
where $U:=\begin{bmatrix}u_0^\TRANSP & \cdots & u_{N-1}^\TRANSP\end{bmatrix} \in \mathbb{R}^{n_U}$, $n_{U}=Nm$, and $\hat{B}_{\mathrm{xu}}: \mathbb{R}^{Nm} \times \mathbb{R}^n\to \mathbb{R}_+$ is a positive definite, convex, and continuously differentiable relaxed logarithmic barrier function for polytopic constraints of the form $GU\leq w+Ex$.
The matrices $H \in \mathbb{S}^{n_{U}}_{\pplus}$, $F\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n_{U}}$, $Y\in\mathbb{S}^{n}_+$, $G \in \mathbb{R}^{q \times n_{U}}$, $w\in \mathbb{R}^q$, and $E\in\mathbb{R}^{q \times n}$ can be constructed from~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) and the corresponding constraints by means of simple matrix operations.
Note that the matrices in the above QP formulation may be rather ill-conditioned when considering unstable systems and long prediction horizons. This issue can, however, be resolved by a suitable prestabilization, see \cite{rossiter98}.
The then resulting mixed input and state constraints are not considered here in detail but can be handled by all discussed approaches after some minor modifications.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\input{figs/tac_xNdeltaSets_061214.tex}
\includegraphics[scale=0.75]{figs/tac_xNdeltaSets_061214_b.eps}
\vspace*{-0.5cm}\caption{The discussed sets for the different MPC schemes with $\varepsilon=10^{-2}$ and $\delta= 10^{-6}$. Here, $\mathcal{X}_f$ and $\mathcal{X}_N$ denote the polytopic terminal set and the resulting feasible set of the terminal set based approaches. Furthermore, $\hat{\mathcal{X}}^2_N(\delta)$ denotes the region of attraction of the locally stabilizing approach with strict constraint satisfaction, while $\hat{\mathcal{X}}'^3_N(\delta)$ and $\hat{\mathcal{X}}'^{4b}_N(\delta)$
denote the sets with guaranteed zero constraint violation for the globally stabilizing approaches based on Theorems~\ref{thm:globalStabilization} and \ref{thm:deadBeatStab}, where the LQR based tail sequence is used in the latter case.
The corresponding sets $\hat{\mathcal{X}}'^{4a}_N(\delta)$ for a dead-beat controller based tail-sequence and $\hat{\mathcal{X}}'^{5}_N(\delta)$ for a purely quadratic terminal cost where in this case too small to be plotted.
In addition, the much larger sets $\mathcal{X}^3_0(\delta)$, $\mathcal{X}^{4a}_0(\delta)$, $\mathcal{X}^{4b}_0(\delta)$, and $\mathcal{X}^{5}_0(\delta)$ denote the regions in which the respective MPC schemes result in a maximal constraint violation of $\hat{z}_{\textrm{tol}}=10^{-3}$.}
\label{fig:differentSets}
\vspace*{-0.25cm}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\begin{minipage}{0.32\textwidth}
\centering
\input{figs/tac_closedLoop_061214_N1020.tex}
\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{figs/tac_closedLoop_061214_N1020.eps}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.32\textwidth}
\centering
\input{figs/tac_closedLoop_inputs_061214_N1020.tex}
\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{figs/tac_closedLoop_inputs_061214_N1020.eps}
\end{minipage}
\hspace*{0.1cm}
\begin{minipage}{0.32\textwidth}
\centering
\input{figs/tac_deltaZero_081214_b.tex}
\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{figs/tac_deltaZero_081214_b.eps}
\end{minipage}
\vspace*{0.1cm}
\caption{\emph{Left:} closed-loop behavior for $x_{0,1}=[2.15,-0.7]^\TRANSP \in \mathcal{X}_N$
and $\delta \in\{0.1,2.5\times10^{-2},10^{-2},10^{-3},10^{-4}\}$ for the approach based on a nonrelaxed terminal set~[{\textcolor{blue}{{$*$}}}]: if $\delta$ is small enough, the state trajectories stay feasible. Also shown is the behavior for two infeasible initial conditions $x_{0,2}$ and $x_{0,3}$ with $\delta=10^{-3}$ together with the corresponding predicted terminal states $x_N^*(x(k))$ [\textcolor{darkgreen}{$\circ$}]. For the infeasible initial condition $x_{0,2}=[-1.75,-1]^\TRANSP$, also the closed-loop trajectories of the globally stabilizing terminal set free MPC schemes from Section~\ref{sec:relBarrierStab2} are depicted (dead-beat based tail sequence~[$\textcolor{darkgreen}{\diamond}$], LQR based tail sequence~[{\footnotesize \textcolor{red}{$+$}}], purely quadratic terminal cost~[{\footnotesize \textcolor{magenta}{$\vartriangle$}}]). \newline
\emph{Middle:} control input for the different globally stabilizing MPC schemes for the initial condition $x_{0,2}=[-1.75,-1]^\TRANSP$ using the same coloring scheme. \newline
\emph{Right:} The relaxation parameter $\bar{\delta}_0$ obtained by Algorithm~1 for ensuring strict constraint satisfaction~[\textcolor{blue}{$\circ$}], i.e.~$\hat{z}_{\textrm{tol}}=0$, respectively approximate constraint satisfaction with a tolerance of $\hat{z}_{\textrm{tol}}=10^{-3}$~[\textcolor{blue}{$*$}] for the approach based on Theorem~\ref{thm:globalStabilization} with initial conditions in $\mathcal{X}_0=\kappa \mathcal{X}_N$ where $\kappa\in(0,1)$. Also depicted is the $\bar{\delta}_0$ required for ensuring asymptotic stability and strict constraint satisfaction directly based on the approach with a relaxed terminal set~[{\footnotesize \textcolor{darkgray}{$\diamond$}}], cf. Theorem~\ref{thm:exactRel}.}
\label{fig:closedLoop}
\vspace*{-0.15cm}
\end{figure*}
While the above condensed QP formulation allows for a compact representation with a minimal number of optimization variables, the original formulation~(\ref{eq:OptProblemRelBarrier}) might allow to exploit the inherent problem structure, which may be beneficial from a numerical point of view. Tailored structure exploiting optimization algorithms have been presented in the context of both conventional linear MPC, e.g.\cite{rao98} and \cite{wang10}, and nonrelaxed barrier function based linear MPC, see~\cite{willsPHD}. Whether such techniques could also be applied for the relaxed barrier function based MPC approaches discussed in this paper, is an interesting open question which might be considered as possible future work.\\
Another interesting property of the condensed formulation~(\ref{eq:QPformulation}) is that it can be tackled directly by Newton-based continuous-time optimization algorithms as they are, for example, discussed in~\cite{feller13} and \cite{feller14}.
In particular, the differentiability and convexity properties of the cost function allow to design a continuous-time dynamical system of the form
\begin{equation}
\dot{U}(t)=f(U(t),x(t)), \quad U(t_0)=U_0
\end{equation}
whose solution asymptotically tracks the optimal input vector~$\hat{U}^*(x(t))$, where $x(t)$ is the continuously measured system state, see the aforementioned references for more details.
Such continuous-time linear MPC algorithms completely eliminate the need for an iterative on-line optimization and can be implemented for in principle arbitrary fast system dynamics.
We expect that it might be possible to exploit some of the advantages of relaxed logarithmic barrier function based formulations, e.g., the global definition of the cost function and a bounded curvature, explicitly within the underlying numerical integration.
\section{Conclusion}
In summary, our investigation showed that the concept of relaxed logarithmic barrier function based model predictive control is interesting both from a system theoretical and a practical point of view.
In particular, while we are still able to recover many of the theoretical properties of conventional or nonrelaxed barrier function based MPC schemes, the use of relaxed logarithmic barrier functions allows to characterize the stabilizing control input as the minimizer of a globally defined, continuously differentiable and strongly convex function that is parametrized by the current system state.
As a main result, we presented different constructive MPC design approaches that guarantee global asymptotic stability and allow to influence the performance and constraint satisfaction properties of the closed-loop system directly by adjusting the relaxation parameter. The resulting MPC schemes are not necessarily based on the construction of a suitable terminal set and, due to the underlying relaxation, inherently robust against disturbances, uncertainties, or sensor faults. \\[0.2cm]
Interesting open problems may include a thorough analysis of the performance and robustness properties of the resulting closed-loop system, the derivation of less conservative constraint violation bounds, or the design and comparison of tailored iterative or continuous-time optimization algorithms that explicitly exploit the properties of the relaxed MPC problem formulation.
\section*{Appendix}
In the following, we show how the finite-horizon LQR problem with zero terminal state constraint can be solved without the use of algebraic Riccati equations. Consider problem~(\ref{eq:zeroTstateLQR}) for a given initial state $x$ and horizon $T\geq n$. By eliminating the predicted states $z_l$ for $l=1\dots,T$ using~(\ref{eq:zeroTstateLQR}b), we get the following equivalent formulation in vectorized form:
\begin{align} \label{eq:zeroTstateLQR_QP}
J_V^*(x)&=\min_{V} \frac{1}{2}V^\TRANSP\! H V+\frac{1}{2}x^\TRANSP\!F V + \frac{1}{2}V^\TRANSP\!F^\TRANSP\! x + \frac{1}{2}x^\TRANSP\! Y x \nonumber \\
\mbox{s.\,t.} \ \ & A^Tx+\begin{bmatrix}S_1 & S_2 \end{bmatrix} V =0 \, ,
\end{align}
where the respective matrices are given as
\begin{align*}
S_1&=\begin{bmatrix}A^{T-1}B & \cdots & A^nB \end{bmatrix}, \ S_2=\begin{bmatrix}A^{n-1}B & \cdots & B \end{bmatrix} \\[0.1cm]
H&=2\left(\tilde{R}+ \Phi^{\!\TRANSP}\! \tilde{Q} \Phi \right), \ F=2\Omega^{\!\TRANSP}\! \tilde{Q}\Phi, \ Y=2\left({Q}+ \Omega^{\!\TRANSP}\! \tilde{Q} \Omega \right) \\
\Omega&=\begin{bmatrix}A \\[-0.1cm] \vdots \\ A^T \end{bmatrix}, \
\Phi=\begin{bmatrix} B & \cdots & 0 \\[-0.1cm]
\vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
A^{T-1}B & \cdots & B
\end{bmatrix}, \ \begin{array}{l}
\tilde{Q}= I_T \otimes Q \\[0.3cm]
\tilde{R}=I_T \otimes R\,.
\end{array}
\end{align*}
Due to the controllability of the system, there always exists a feasible solution $V(x)$ to problem~(\ref{eq:zeroTstateLQR_QP}). We partition the vector $V \in \mathbb{R}^{Tm}$ as $V^\TRANSP=\begin{bmatrix} V_1^\TRANSP & V_2^\TRANSP \end{bmatrix}$ with $V_1 \in \mathbb{R}^{(T-n)m}$ and $V_2 \in \mathbb{R}^{nm}$. The terminal state constraint can be eliminated by choosing $V_2=-S_2^{+}\left(A^Tx+S_1V_1\right)$, where $S_2^+$ denotes the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse of the matrix $S_2$. This leads to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:elimXNconstr}
V=\begin{bmatrix}I_{(T-n)m} \\ -S_2^{+}S_1 \end{bmatrix} V_1 + \begin{bmatrix} 0 \\ -S_2^{+}A^T \end{bmatrix}x = \Gamma_V V_1 + \Gamma_x x \ .
\end{equation}
Inserting~(\ref{eq:elimXNconstr}) into problem~(\ref{eq:zeroTstateLQR_QP}) results in the following unconstrained optimization problem in the variable $V_1$
\begin{equation}\label{eq:zeroTstateLQR_redQP}
J_V^*(x)=\min_{V_1} \frac{1}{2}V_1^\TRANSP\! \tilde{H} V_1+x^\TRANSP\!\tilde{F} V_1 + \frac{1}{2}x^\TRANSP\! \tilde{Y} x \ ,
\end{equation}
where the transformed problem matrices are given by $\tilde{H}=\Gamma_V^\TRANSP H\,\Gamma_V$, $\tilde{F}=\Gamma_x^\TRANSP H\, \Gamma_V+F^\TRANSP\! \Gamma_V$, and $\tilde{Y}=Y+\Gamma_x^\TRANSP\! H\, \Gamma_x + \Gamma_x^\TRANSP\!F^\TRANSP+F\Gamma_x$.
Note that since $V(x)=\Gamma_x x$ is a feasible solution and $\mathrm{Im}(\Gamma_V)=\mathrm{Null}(\begin{bmatrix}S_1 & S_2\end{bmatrix})$, the solution is invariant under this change of coordinates, and the problems~(\ref{eq:zeroTstateLQR_QP}) and~(\ref{eq:zeroTstateLQR_redQP}) are equivalent, cf.~\cite[p.\,132]{boydBook}. Furthermore, it always
holds that $\tilde{H}\in\mathbb{S}^{(T-n)m}_{\pplus}$ as the matrix $\Gamma_V$ has full column rank.
The optimal solution to the reduced problem can be computed easily as $V_1^*(x)=-\tilde{H}^{-1}\tilde{F}^\TRANSP x$ which results in
\begin{equation}
V^*(x)=\left(\Gamma_x-\Gamma_V\tilde{H}^{-1}\tilde{F}^\TRANSP\right) x =K_V x\ .
\end{equation}
Furthermore, the optimal cost is given by $J_V^*(x)=x^\TRANSP\! P_Vx$ with $P_V=\frac{1}{2}\left(\tilde{Y}+\tilde{F}^\TRANSP \tilde{H}^{-1} \tilde{F} \right)\in \mathbb{S}^n_{+}$.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Quantifiers for the distance (distinguishability) between two density
operators in the quantum state space $\mathcal{D}(\mathcal{H})$--the
space formed by positive semidefinite matrices with trace equal to
one--are an essential and frequently used item in the quantum information
scientist toolkit \cite{Nielsen_Book,Wilde_Book,Fuchs_PhD}. For instance,
how well a quantum system was prepared \cite{Watanabe_QSP}, manipulated
\cite{Walter_EOWQC} or protected \cite{Laflamme_QEC} in an experiment
is usually evaluated via how close (how indistinguishable) its real
state is from what one would ideally expect. Distance measures in
$\mathcal{D}(\mathcal{H})$ naturally appear also in the contexts
of quantum foundations \cite{Gisin_cloning,Wilde_U_Mem,Zurek_qcb1},
quantum processes \cite{Cory_QP,Nielsen_QP}, quantum cryptography
\cite{Fuchs_Cryp,Gisin_RevQC}, quantum phase transitions \cite{Gu_RevF},
quantum speed limits \cite{Plastino_QSL,Kok_QSL,Davidovich_QSL,Lutz_QSL,Plenio_QSL,Fan_QSL},
quantum channel capacities \cite{Giovannetti_Channels}, and also
in the theories of quantum entanglement \cite{Horodecki_RevE,Davidovich_RevE},
quantum discord \cite{Lucas_RevD,Vedral_RevD,Streltsov_B}, and quantum
coherence \cite{Plenio_QC,Aberg_QC,Girolami_QC,Zhao_QC}.
Several distance (distinguishability) measures in the quantum state space
have been proposed in the literature in the last decades. A partial
list is provided in Ref. \cite{Audenaerte_DM}. A few examples are
the Bures' distance, that is defined in terms of a similarity measure
known as Uhlmann's fidelity \cite{Bures,Uhlmann_F} (for a critical
assessment regarding the use of this function in quantum information
science see Ref. \cite{Paris_F}), the $p-$norm distance, with the
trace distance (or $1-$norm distance) and the Hilbert-Schmidt distance
(or $2-$norm distance) being used more frequently (see Refs. \cite{Petz_p_norm,Sarandy_1Norm_D,Sarandy_DSC_exp,Vedral_2Norm_D}
and references therein), the quantum relative entropy \cite{Umegaki_QRE,Petz_QRE,Vedral_QRE,Maziero_dist_MI},
and the quantum Chernoff bound \cite{Szkola_QCB,Acin_QCB}, with these
last two distinguishability measures being defined operationally,
respectively, in the contexts of asymmetric and symmetric quantum
hypothesis testing.
In this article we are interested mainly in one of the most popular
distance measures, the trace distance, that is defined using the trace
norm. For a Hermitian matrix $A$, the \emph{trace norm} is defined
and given as follows:
\begin{equation}
||A||_{1}:=\mathrm{Tr}\sqrt{A^{\dagger}A}=\mathrm{Tr}\sqrt{A^{2}}={\textstyle \sum_{j}}|a_{j}|,\label{eq:trace_norm}
\end{equation}
with $|a_{j}|$ being the absolute value of the real eigenvalues of
$A$. We can quantify how dissimilar two density operators $\rho$
and $\zeta$ are by their \emph{trace distance} (TD), which is defined
as the trace norm of their subtraction,
\begin{equation}
d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta):=||\rho-\zeta||_{1},\label{eq:trace_distance}
\end{equation}
and assumes values between zero and two \cite{Wilde_Book}.
This mathematical function possesses several of those properties required
for a faithful distance (distinguishability) measure in the quantum
state space \cite{Nielsen_Book,Wilde_Book}: For the density operators
$\rho$, $\zeta$, and $\alpha$, the trace distance is, e.g., positive
semidefinite ($d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta)\ge0$), it is zero if and only if
the two density operators are equal ($d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta)=0\Leftrightarrow\rho=\zeta$),
it is symmetric ($d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta)=d_{tr}(\zeta,\rho)$), it obeys
the triangle inequality ($d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta)\le d_{tr}(\rho,\alpha)+d_{tr}(\alpha,\zeta)$),
it is invariant under unitary transformations ($d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta)=d_{tr}(U\rho U^{\dagger},U\zeta U^{\dagger})$
for $UU^{\dagger}=\mathbb{I}_{d}$, where $\mathbb{I}_{d}$ is the
$d\mathrm{x}d$ identity matrix), it leads to the equality $d_{tr}(\rho\otimes\alpha,\zeta\otimes\alpha)=d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta)$,
it is monotonic under discarding subsystems ($d_{tr}(\rho_{1},\zeta_{1})\le d_{tr}(\rho_{12},\zeta_{12})$
with $x_{1}=\mathrm{Tr}_{2}(x_{12})$), and it is consequently also
monotonic under trace-preserving quantum operations ($d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta)\ge d_{tr}(\Phi(\rho),\Phi(\zeta))$
with $\Phi(x)={\textstyle \sum_{j}}K_{j}xK_{j}^{\dagger}$ and ${\textstyle \sum_{j}}K_{j}^{\dagger}K_{j}=\mathbb{I}_{d}$).
Notwithstanding, it was mentioned in Ref. \cite{Acin_QCB} that the
trace distance lacks monotonicity under taken tensor products of its
arguments. That is to say, we can find four density operators $\rho$,
$\zeta$, $\xi$, and $\eta$ such that the following inequalities
are satisfied:
\begin{eqnarray}
d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta) & \gtrless & d_{tr}(\xi,\eta),\label{eq:ineq0}\\
& \mbox{and}\nonumber \\
d_{tr}(\rho^{\otimes2},\zeta^{\otimes2}) & \lessgtr & d_{tr}(\xi^{\otimes2},\eta^{\otimes2}).\label{eq:ineq1}
\end{eqnarray}
This non-monotonicity under tensor products (NMuTP) does not seem
to be a desirable property for a distance measure in $\mathcal{D}(\mathcal{H})$.
If a pair of states of a quantum system is more distinguishable than
another pair of states, one would expect the same to hold for two
identical and uncorrelated copies of the system prepared in those
states.
Two relevant questions to answer regarding this issue are (i) for
what kind of state and (ii) how often the inequalities in Eqs. (\ref{eq:ineq0})
and (\ref{eq:ineq1}) can simultaneously hold. The remainder of this
article will be devoted to answer these questions for the cases of
general state vectors (Sec. \ref{pure}), for one-qubit states (Sec.
\ref{mixed_1qb}), and also for high-dimensional quantum systems (Sec.
\ref{mixed_1qd}).
\section{The non-monotonicity of trace distance under tensor products}
This section is dedicated to investigate such an issue considering
some particular classes of states. Though we present some analytical
results, much of the work should be numeric. We will start using general
pure states and a two-level quantum system to address the question
(i). In the sequence the question (ii) will be studied mainly with
regard to its dependence with the system's dimension.
\subsection{Arbitrary pure states}
\label{pure}
Let $\rho$, $\zeta$, $\xi$, and $\eta$ be arbitrary state vectors
on the discrete Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}$ of dimension $d$. The
trace distance between the pair of states $x=\rho\mbox{ }(\xi)$ and
$y=\zeta\mbox{ }(\eta)$ can be written as \cite{Wilde_Book}:
\begin{equation}
d_{tr}(x,y)=2\sqrt{1-\mathrm{Tr}(xy)}.
\end{equation}
Given that $0\le\mathrm{Tr}(xy)\le1$, $d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta)>d_{tr}(\xi,\eta)$
implies $\mathrm{Tr}(\rho\zeta)<\mathrm{Tr}(\xi\eta)$. Using this
inequality and the fact that, in the present case,
\begin{equation}
d_{tr}(x^{\otimes2},y^{\otimes2})=2\sqrt{1-[\mathrm{Tr}(xy)]^{2}},
\end{equation}
we see that $d_{tr}(\rho^{\otimes2},\zeta^{\otimes2})>d_{tr}(\xi^{\otimes2},\eta^{\otimes2}).$
Thus, if all the states involved are pure states, the trace distance
does not suffer from the NMuTP drawback under analysis here.
\subsection{One-qubit states}
\label{mixed_1qb}
\subsubsection{Collinear States}
\label{mixed_1qb_1}
Let us consider the special case in which the pairs of density operators
$(\rho,\zeta)$ and $(\xi,\eta)$ are, individually, collinear. That
is to say, let e.g.
\begin{equation}
\rho=2^{-1}(\mathbb{I}_{2}+\vec{r}\cdot\vec{\sigma})\mbox{ and }\zeta=2^{-1}(\mathbb{I}_{2}+\vec{z}\cdot\vec{\sigma})
\end{equation}
with the two Bloch's vectors being $\vec{r}=r\hat{n}$ and $\vec{z}=\pm z\hat{n}$,
where $\hat{n}$ is any unit vector in $\mathbb{R}^{3}$ and $\vec{\sigma}$
is the Pauli's vector. One can readily show that
\begin{equation}
d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta)=|r\mp z|.
\end{equation}
For the tensor products we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho^{\otimes2}-\zeta^{\otimes2} & = & 2^{-2}((r\mp z)(\mathbb{I}_{2}\otimes\hat{n}\cdot\vec{\sigma}+\hat{n}\cdot\vec{\sigma}\otimes\mathbb{I}_{2})\nonumber \\
& & +(r^{2}-z^{2})\hat{n}\cdot\vec{\sigma}\otimes\hat{n}\cdot\vec{\sigma})\\
& = & 2^{-2}((r\mp z)(r\pm z+2)P_{+}\otimes P_{+}\nonumber \\
& & +(r\mp z)(r\pm z-2)P_{-}\otimes P_{-}\nonumber \\
& & -(r^{2}-z^{2})(P_{+}\otimes P_{-}+P_{-}\otimes P_{+})),\label{eq:rrzz}
\end{eqnarray}
where we used $\hat{n}\cdot\vec{\sigma}=P_{+}-P_{-}$ and $\mathbb{I}_{2}=P_{+}+P_{-}$.
It is straightforward applying Eq. (\ref{eq:rrzz}) to get
\begin{eqnarray}
d_{tr}(\rho^{\otimes2},\zeta^{\otimes2}) & = & d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta)2^{-1}(2+|r\pm z|).
\end{eqnarray}
We see that $d_{tr}(\rho^{\otimes2},\zeta^{\otimes2})$ is a monotonically
increasing function of $d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta)$. Thus, for this particular
set of states, the inequalities in Eqs. (\ref{eq:ineq0}) and (\ref{eq:ineq1})
cannot be satisfied simultaneously.
\subsubsection{$\rho$, $\zeta$, $\xi$, and $\eta$ arbitrary states}
Even this apparently simple one-qubit case is not easily tamable for
analytical computations. Hence we recourse to numerical calculations
via Monte Carlo (random) sampling of the quartets of states to be
used. The computations of eigenvalues involved in this article are
done utilizing the LAPACK subroutines (see Ref. \cite{LAPACK}). Let
us start by using the Fano's parametrization \cite{Fano_1983} to
write an one-qubit density matrix $x=\rho\mbox{, }\zeta\mbox{, }\xi\mbox{, }\eta$
in the form:
\begin{equation}
x=2^{-1}(\mathbb{I}_{2}+{\textstyle \sum_{j=1}^{3}}x_{j}\sigma_{j}),\label{eq:1qbDM}
\end{equation}
with $\vec{x}=(x_{1},x_{2},x_{3})$, where $x_{1}=||\vec{x}||_{2}\sin\theta\cos\phi$,
$x_{2}=||\vec{x}||_{2}\sin\theta\sin\phi$, and $x_{3}=||\vec{x}||_{2}\cos\theta$.
The parameters appearing in these equations can assume values in the
ranges \cite{Fano_1983,Petruccione_PofU}: $||\vec{x}||_{2}\in[0,1]$,
$\theta\in[0,\pi]$, and $\phi\in[0,2\pi]$. In order to obtain an
uniform distribution of points (states) in the Bloch's ball, each
one of the quantum states is generated setting
\begin{equation}
||\vec{x}||_{2}=(t_{1})^{1/3}\mbox{, }\theta=\arccos(-1+2t_{2})\mbox{, }\phi=2\pi t_{3}
\end{equation}
with $t_{j}$ ($j=1,2,3$) being a pseudorandom number with uniform
distribution in the interval $[0,1]$. The Mersenne Twister pseudo-random
number generator \cite{Matsumoto_MT} is applied to produce these
numbers. By setting the Euclidean norm of the Bloch's vector equal
to one (zero) we obtain pure (maximally mixed) states. For the sake
of illustration, the probability distribution for the values of TD
between pairs of randomly-generated one-qubit states is presented
in Fig. \ref{prob_dist}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{td_stat_1qb}
\par\end{centering}
\protect\caption{(color online) Probability distribution for the different values of
trace distance ($d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta)=||\vec{r}-\vec{z}||_{2}$, where
$\zeta=2^{-1}(\mathbb{I}_{2}+\vec{z}\cdot\vec{\sigma})$) for $10^{8}$
pairs of randomly-generated one-qubit states: (a) two density operators
$(\rho\mbox{, }\zeta)$, (b) one mixed and one pure state $(\rho\mbox{, }|\zeta\rangle)$,
and (c) two state vectors $(|\rho\rangle\mbox{, }|\zeta\rangle)$.
The mean value of TD in the three cases are, respectively, $1.03$,
$1.20$, and $1.33$.}
\label{prob_dist}
\end{figure}
It is worthwhile mentioning at this point that we have made several
tests from which we found that the numerical and analytical results
for the TD coincide up to the fifteenth digit when applied to random
states in those classes considered in Secs. \ref{mixed_1qb_1} and
\ref{pure}. More specifically, we generated one million pairs of random collinear states ($d=2$) and one million pairs of random pure states (see e.g. Ref. \cite{Maziero_pRPV}) for each value of the system dimension (with $d = 2,\cdots,20$). The error, in each case, is computed by comparing the trace distance obtained via diagonalization with the LAPACK subroutines and the value of TD obtained using its analytical expression. Then the precision is established via the worst case error.
\begin{table}
\begin{centering}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
States generated & Percentage & $\langle G\rangle$ & $\Delta G$ & $G_{\mathrm{max}}$\tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
$(\rho,\zeta),(\xi,\eta)$ & $7.28$ & $0.161$ & $0.083$ & $0.475$\tabularnewline
\hline
$(\rho,\zeta),(\xi,|\eta\rangle)$ & $7.86$ & $0.186$ & $0.091$ & $0.486$\tabularnewline
\hline
$(\rho,|\zeta\rangle),(\xi,|\eta\rangle)$ & $3.16$ & $0.071$ & $0.038$ & $0.190$\tabularnewline
\hline
$(\rho,\zeta),(|\xi\rangle,|\eta\rangle)$ & $4.06$ & $0.134$ & $0.072$ & $0.333$\tabularnewline
\hline
$(\rho,|\zeta\rangle),(|\xi\rangle,|\eta\rangle)$ & $3.00$ & $0.083$ & $0.044$ & $0.194$\tabularnewline
\hline
$(\rho,\zeta),(\xi,\mathbb{I}_{2}/2)$ & $8.49$ & $0.192$ & $0.098$ & $0.488$\tabularnewline
\hline
$(\rho,\zeta),(|\xi\rangle,\mathbb{I}_{2}/2)$ & $20.75$ & $0.226$ & $0.096$ & $0.500$\tabularnewline
\hline
$(\rho,|\zeta\rangle),(\xi,\mathbb{I}_{2}/2)$ & $3.20$ & $0.101$ & $0.045$ & $0.248$\tabularnewline
\hline
$(\rho,|\zeta\rangle),(|\xi\rangle,\mathbb{I}_{2}/2)$ & $7.67$ & $0.123$ & $0.037$ & $0.177$\tabularnewline
\hline
$(|\rho\rangle,|\zeta\rangle),(\xi,\mathbb{I}_{2}/2)$ & $2.63$ & $0.107$ & $0.043$ & $0.177$\tabularnewline
\hline
$(|\rho\rangle,|\zeta\rangle),(|\xi\rangle,\mathbb{I}_{2}/2)$ & $8.85$ & $0.169$ & $0.004$ & $0.177$\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\par\end{centering}
\protect\caption{Percentage of the $10^{6}$ quartets of randomly-generated one-qubit
states leading to the NMuTP drawback of trace distance. In the
last three columns are presented the average value, standard deviation,
and maximum value of the strength of the NMuTP drawback of TD, as
defined in Eq. (\ref{eq:gap}), for each case study.}
\label{table_1qb}
\end{table}
We proved in the previous subsections that if the pairs $(\rho,\zeta)$
and $(\xi,\eta)$ are, individually, collinear or if all the four
states are pure, we shall have no NMuTP drawback of trace distance.
However, as is shown in Table \ref{table_1qb}, for all the other
possibilities a significant fraction of the one million one-qubit
quartets of states randomly generated presented this unwanted property
of TD. In Fig. \ref{exe_BlochS} we draw an example of such a quartet
of states.
\begin{figure}
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{example_BlochS}
\par\end{centering}
\protect\caption{(color online) Example of a quartet of states for which the trace
distance is not monotonic under taking tensor products of its arguments.
Here $r$ is the size of the corresponding Bloch's vector, the angles
are given in radians, and $d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta)=0.80$, $d_{tr}(\xi,\eta)=0.76$,
$d_{tr}(\rho^{\otimes2},\zeta^{\otimes2})=0.87$, and $d_{tr}(\xi^{\otimes2},\eta^{\otimes2})=1.07$.}
\label{exe_BlochS}
\end{figure}
For the sake of measuring the \emph{strength of the NMuTP drawback
of TD}, when applicable, we will define the following quantity:
\begin{eqnarray}
G(\rho,\zeta,\xi,\eta) & := & |d_{tr}(\rho,\zeta)-d_{tr}(\xi,\eta)|\label{eq:gap}\\
& & +|d_{tr}(\rho^{\otimes2},\zeta^{\otimes2})-d_{tr}(\xi^{\otimes2},\eta^{\otimes2})|.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The quantity $G$ measures how far the TD is from been monotonic under tensor products. As $G$ is defined only for those quartets of states leading to the NMuTP of TD, its lower bound is zero.
In order to access more details about the distribution of $G$, we
shall use its mean value $\langle G\rangle$, standard deviation $\Delta G$,
and maximum value $G_{\mathrm{max}}$. These quantities are also shown
in Table \ref{table_1qb}. A sample of the values of $G$ for the
case study $(\rho,\zeta),(\xi,\eta)$ is presented in Fig. \ref{fig_distG}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[scale=0.52]{dist_G}
\par\end{centering}
\protect\caption{(color online) Values of the strength defined in Eq. (\ref{eq:gap})
for one fourth of the $72802$ quartets of states leading to the NMuTP
drawback of TD in the case study $(\rho,\zeta),(\xi,\eta)$, in one
numerical experiment with one million random samples generated. The
blue line is $\langle G\rangle$ and the points in the cyan area are
values of $G$ in the interval $[\langle G\rangle-\Delta G,\langle G\rangle+\Delta G]$
(see Table \ref{table_1qb}).}
\label{fig_distG}
\end{figure}
Even with these additional informations, as can be seem in Table \ref{table_1qb},
in the general case the relationship between the existence of the
NMuTP drawback of TD and the classes of states involved is not an
easy matter. For instance, starting with general states and then restricting
one of them to be pure we pass from a percentage of $7.28\mbox{ \%}$
to $7.86\mbox{ \%}$. But then the addition of the same restriction
for one state of the other pair reduces the percentage with the undesired
property of TD to $3.16\mbox{ \%}$. Several other similar nontrivial
changes in the percentages can be identified. One striking one is
that in the last line of the table. For four pure states there is
no drawback, however just by putting one of the states in the center
of the Bloch's ball, we get a percentage of $8.85\mbox{ \%}$, the
second higher among the classes of one-qubit states studied. These
results stress the richness and complexity of the quantum state space,
already for the composition of two of its simplest systems. Thus,
in order to simplify the analysis, we will investigate in the next
section the general dependence of the NMuTP drawback of TD with the
dimension of the system.
\subsection{General one-qudit states}
\label{mixed_1qd}
\begin{figure}[b]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{nmutp_td_d}
\par\end{centering}
\protect\caption{(color online) Minimum value (red bar on the left), mean value (green
bar in the middle), and maximum value (blue bar on the right) of the
fraction of the quartets of randomly-generated quantum states leading
to the NMuTP drawback of trace distance as a function of the system's
dimension for ten numerical experiments. We generated one million
quartets of states in each experiment. }
\label{fig_nmutp}
\end{figure}
In this subsection we shall study the NMuTP drawback of trace distance
for $d-$level quantum systems, known as qudits. As there is no explicit
parametrization for density matrices with $d\ge3$ \cite{Petruccione_PofU},
we will proceed as follows. Let us first look for the spectral decomposition
of a given density operator $x=\rho\mbox{, }\zeta\mbox{, }\xi\mbox{, }\eta$:
\begin{equation}
x={\textstyle \sum_{j=1}^{d}x_{j}|x_{j}\rangle\langle x_{j}|}.
\end{equation}
Once the eigenvalues of $x$ form a probability distribution, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
x_{j}\ge0\mbox{ and }{\textstyle \sum_{j=1}^{d}x_{j}=1,}
\end{equation}
we can use a geometric parametrization for them \cite{Fritzche4}:
\begin{equation}
x_{j}=\sin^{2}\theta_{j-1}{\textstyle \prod_{k=j}^{d-1}}\cos^{2}\theta_{k}
\end{equation}
with $\theta_{0}=\pi/2$. The details about the numerical generation
of $\{x_{j}\}$ using this parametrization can be found in Ref. \cite{Maziero_pRPV}.
The basis formed by the eigenvectors of a density operator $x$, $\{|x_{j}\rangle\}$,
can be obtained from the computational basis, $\{|j\rangle\}$, using
an unitary matrix $U$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
|x_{j}\rangle=U|j\rangle,\mbox{ with }j=1,\cdots,d.
\end{equation}
There are several parametrizations for unitary matrices \cite{Petruccione_PofU}.
Here we use the Hurwitz's parametrization with Euler's angles. For
details see e.g. Ref. \cite{Zyczkowski_U}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[scale=0.85]{dist_G_d}
\par\end{centering}
\protect\caption{(color online) Samples with 5000 values of the strength of the NMuTP
drawback of trace distance for some values of the system's dimension
$d$. The NMuTP average percentage of the whole sample with ten sets
of $10^{6}$quartets of states is shown at the side of $d$. The blue
line indicates $\langle G\rangle$.}
\label{fig_distG_d}
\end{figure}
By creating pseudo-random probability distributions $\{x_{j}\}$ and
pseudo-random unitary matrices $U$, we did ten numerical experiments
for each value of the system's dimension $d$ generating one million
quartets of states in each experiment. The mean, minimum, and maximum
values of the percentages of the quartets of states leading to NMuTP
of TD are shown in Fig. \ref{fig_nmutp}. In the Fig. \ref{fig_distG_d}
we present samples of the distribution of values of the drawback's
strength for some values of $d$. We can see in these figures a steady
decreasing of such a proportion and strength as the system dimension
$d$ grows.
\section{Final remarks}
The trace distance has several good properties that rank it as one
of the major distance measures between quantum states. Nevertheless,
it also presents a potential drawback, the possibility of being non-monotonic
under taking tensor products of its arguments, that was shown in this
article to exist for a non-negligible fraction of the density matrices
investigated. Thus, although such issue seems not to be much relevant
for high-dimensional quantum systems, it must be taken into account
when dealing with few qubits.
The important question that yet remains is if, in the cases were the NMuTP of TD is significant, it has some undesirable consequence for important functions in quantum information science.
The possible implications of this issue regarding, for instance, the
quantification of quantum entanglement, of quantum discord, and of
quantum coherence is an appealing topic for further researches. It
would also be fruitful analyzing the NMuTP drawback considering other
quantum distance measures. The obtention of a more precise operational and/or physical interpretation of $G$ and its upper bound are also left as open problems.
\begin{acknowledgements}
This work was supported by the Brazilian funding agencies: National Counsel of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq), under process number 303496$\slash$2014-2 and under grant number 441875/2014-9, and by the National Institute of Science and Technology - Quantum Information (INCT-IQ), under process number 2008/57856-6.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
Let ${\mathbb{E}}^d$ denote the $d$-dimensional Euclidean space with origin $o$. A $d$-dimensional convex body $K$ is a compact convex subset of ${\mathbb{E}}^d$ with nonempty interior. We denote the $d$-dimensional volume of $K$ by $\vol(K)$. Moreover, $K$ is $o$-\textit{symmetric} if $K=-K$. The \textit{Minkowski sum} or simply the \textit{vector sum} of two convex bodies $K,L\subseteq {\mathbb{E}}^d$ is defined by
\[
K+L=\{k+l: k\in K, l\in L\}.
\]
A \textit{homothetic copy}, or simply a \textit{homothet}, of $K$ is a set of the form $M=\lambda K+x$, where $\lambda$ is a nonzero real number and $x\in {\mathbb{E}}^d$. If $\lambda>0$, then $M$ is said to be a \textit{positive homothet} and if in addition, $\lambda < 1$, we have a \textit{smaller positive homothet} of $K$. Let $C^{d}$ denote a $d$-dimensional cube, $B^{d}$ a $d$-dimensional ball, $\Delta^{d}$ a $d$-simplex and $\ell$ a line segment (or more precisely, an affine image of any of these convex bodies). We use the symbol ${\cal{K}}^{d}$ for the metric space of $d$-dimensional convex bodies under the (multiplicative) Banach-Mazur distance $d_{BM}(\cdot,\cdot)$. That is, for any $K, L \in {\cal{K}}^{d}$,
\[d_{BM}(K, L)= \inf \left\{\delta \geq 1 : L-b\subseteq T(K-a)\subseteq \delta (L-b), a \in K, b\in L\right\},
\]
\noindent where the infimum is taken over all invertible linear operators $T:{\mathbb{E}}^{d}\longrightarrow {\mathbb{E}}^{d}$ \cite{schneider1}.
The famous Hadwiger Covering Conjecture \cite{gohberg1,hadwiger1,levi1} -- also called the Levi-Hadwiger Conjecture or the Gohberg-Markus-Hadwiger Conjecture -- states that any $K \in {\cal{K}}^{d}$ can be covered by $2^{d}$ of its smaller positive homothetic copies with $2^{d}$ homothets needed only if $K$ is an affine $d$-cube. This conjecture appears in several equivalent forms one of which we discuss here. Boltyanski \cite{boltyanski1} and Hadwiger \cite{hadwiger2} introduced two notions of illumination of a convex body, the former being `\textit{illumination by directions}' while the latter being `\textit{illumination by points}'. The two notions are actually equivalent \cite{boltyanski1} and $K$ is said to be \textit{illuminated} if all points on the boundary of $K$ are illuminated (in either sense). The \textit{illumination number} $I(K)$ of $K$ is the smallest $n$ for which $K$ can be illuminated by $n$ points (resp., directions). Furthermore, Boltyanski \cite{boltyanski1,boltyanski2} showed that $I(K)=n$ if and only if the smallest number of smaller positive homothets of $K$ that can cover $K$ is $n$. Thus the Hadwiger Covering Conjecture can be reformulated as the Boltyanski-Hadwiger Illumination Conjecture, which states that for any $d$-dimensional convex body $K$ we have $I(K)\leq 2^d$, and $I(K) = 2^d$ only if $K$ is an affine $d$-cube.
Despite the interest in these problems they have only been solved in general in two dimensions or for select few classes of convex bodies. We refer to \cite{bezdek-book,brass1,martini1} for detailed surveys of these and other related problems of homothetic covering and illumination. This apparent difficulty has recently led to the introduction of quantitative versions of illumination and covering problems. For instance, it can be seen that in the definition of illumination number $I(K)$, the light sources can be taken arbitrarily far from $K$. However, it seems natural to start with a relatively small number of light sources and quantify how far they need to be from $K$ in order to illuminate it. This is the idea behind the illumination parameter $\ill(K)$ of an $o$-symmetric convex body $K$ defined by the first named author \cite{bezdek-illumination1} as follows.
\[
\ill(K)=\inf \left\{\sum_{i}\left\|p_{i}\right\|_{K} : \{p_{i}\}\textnormal{ illuminates } K,p_{i}\in {\mathbb{E}}^{d}\right\},
\]
\noindent where $\left\|x\right\|_{K}=\inf \{\lambda>0: x\in \lambda K\}$ is the norm of $x\in {\mathbb{E}}^{d}$ generated by the symmetric convex body $K$. Clearly, $I(K)\leq \ill(K)$, for $o$-symmetric convex bodies. Several authors have investigated the illumination parameter of $o$-symmetric convex bodies \cite{bezdek-illumination1,bezdek-book,kiss1,martini1}, determining exact values in several cases.
Inspired by the above quantification ideas, Swanepoel \cite{swanepoel1} introduced the covering parameter of a $d$-dimensional convex body to quantify its covering properties. This is given by
\[
C(K)=\inf \left\{\sum_{i}(1-\lambda_{i})^{-1}:K\subseteq \bigcup_{i}(\lambda_{i}K+t_{i}), 0<\lambda_{i}<1,t_{i}\in {\mathbb{E}}^{d}\right\}.
\]
Thus large homothets are penalized in the same way as far away light sources are penalized in the definition of illumination parameter. Note here $K$ is not assumed to have any symmetry as the definition of covering parameter does not make use of the norm $\left\|\cdot\right\|_{K}$. In the same paper, Swanepoel obtained the following Rogers-type upper bounds on $C(K)$ when $d\geq 2$.
\begin{equation}\label{swanepoel1}
C(K)<\left\{\begin{split} e2^{d}d(d+1)(\ln d+\ln \ln d + 5)=O(2^{d}d^{2}\ln d), \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ & \textnormal{ if } K \textnormal{ is } o\textnormal{-symmetric},\\
e\binom{2d}{d}d(d+1)(\ln d+\ln \ln d + 5)=O(4^{d}d^{3/2}\ln d), \ \ & \ \textnormal{otherwise}.
\end{split} \right.\ \ \
\end{equation}
\noindent He further showed that if $K$ is $o$-symmetric, then
\begin{equation}\label{swanepoel2}
\ill(K) \leq 2 C(K).
\end{equation}
Despite the usefulness of the covering parameter, not much is known about it. For instance, we do not know whether $C(\cdot)$ is lower or upper semicontinuous on ${\cal{K}}^{d}$ and the only known exact value is $C(C^{d})=2^{d+1}$. The aim of this paper is to come up with a more refined quantification of covering in terms of the covering index with the Hadwiger Covering Conjecture as the eventual goal. We show that the covering index possesses a number of useful properties such as upper bounding several quantities associated with the covering and illumination of convex bodies, lower semicontinuity, compatibility with direct vector sum and Minkowski sum, a complete characterization of minimizers and the development of tools to compute its exact values for several convex bodies. Furthermore, the covering index gives rise to a number of open problems about the homothetic covering behavior of convex bodies in general, and $d$-dimensional balls and ball-polyhedra in particular. In Section \ref{variations}, we discuss a variant of the covering index that is perhaps more natural, but possesses weaker properties. Finally, in Section \ref{improved}, we obtain upper bounds on the covering and weak covering indices.
\section{The covering index} \label{prelim}
Before formally defining the covering index, we describe two other related ideas that, in addition to the covering parameter, influence our definition of the covering index.
Given a positive integer $m$, Lassak \cite{lassak-gamma} introduced the \textit{$m$-covering number} of a convex body $K$ as the minimal positive homothety ratio needed to cover $K$ by $m$ homothets. That is,
\[\gamma_{m}(K)=\inf \left\{\lambda >0: K\subseteq \bigcup_{i=1}^{m}(\lambda K+t_{i}), t_{i}\in {\mathbb{E}}^{d}, i=1,\ldots, m\right\}.
\]
Lassak showed that the $m$-covering number is well-defined and studied the special case $m=4$ for planar convex bodies. Zong \cite{zong1} studied $\gamma_{m}:{\cal{K}}^{d} \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}$ as a functional and proved it to be uniformly continuous for all $m$ and $d$. He did not use the term $m$-covering number for $\gamma_{m}(K)$ and simply referred to it as the smallest positive homothety ratio. Obviously, any $K \in {\cal{K}}^{d}$ can be covered by $2^{d}$ smaller positive homothets if and only if $\gamma_{2^{d}}(K)<1$. Zong used these ideas to propose a possible computer-based approach to attack the Hadwiger Covering Conjecture \cite{zong1}.
Given convex bodies $K, L\in {\cal{K}}^{d}$, the \textit{covering number of $K$ by $L$} is denoted by $N(K,L)$ and is defined as the minimum number of translates of $L$ needed to cover $K$. Among covering problems, the problem of covering the $d$-dimensional ball by smaller positive homothets has generated a lot of interest. One question that has been asked repeatedly is: what is the value of $N(B^{d},\lambda B^{d})$ \cite{rogers-ball,verger-gaugry}? In particular, the case $\lambda = 1/2$ has attracted special attention. Verger-Gaugry \cite{verger-gaugry} showed that
\[N\left(B^{d},\frac{1}{2}B^{d}\right) = O(2^{d} d^{3/2} \ln d).
\]
We can now present the formal definition of covering index.
\begin{definition}\label{coin-def}
Let $K$ be a $d$-dimensional convex body. We define the \textit{covering index} of $K$ as
\[
\coin(K)=\inf \left\{\frac{m}{1-\gamma_{m}(K)}: \gamma_{m}(K)\leq 1/2, m\in \mathbb{N}\right\}.
\]
\end{definition}
Intuitively, $\coin(K)$ measures how $K$ can be covered by a relatively small number of positive homothets all corresponding to the same relatively small homothety ratio. We note that $\coin(K)$ is an affine invariant quantity assigned to $K$, i.e., if $A:{\mathbb{E}}^{d}\longrightarrow {\mathbb{E}}^{d}$ is an invertible linear map then $\coin(A(K))=\coin(K)$.
We have the following relationship.
\begin{proposition}\label{bound}
For any $o$-symmetric $d$-dimensional convex body $K$,
\[ I(K)\leq \ill(K)\leq 2C(K) \leq 2\coin(K), \]
\noindent and in general for $K\in {\cal{K}}^{d}$,
\[ I(K)\leq C(K) \leq \coin(K). \]
\end{proposition}
Proposition \ref{bound} follows immediately from the definition of $\coin$, the relation (\ref{swanepoel2}) and the observation
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\coin(K) &=\inf \left\{\frac{m}{1-\gamma_{m}(K)}: \gamma_{m}(K)\leq 1/2, m\in \mathbb{N}\right\}\\
&= \inf \left\{\frac{m}{1-\lambda}: K\subseteq \bigcup_{i=1}^{m}(\lambda K+t_{i}), 0<\lambda\leq 1/2,t_{i}\in {\mathbb{E}}^{d}, m\in \mathbb{N}\right\}\\
&\geq C(K).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
We remark that the inequality $\ill(K)\leq 2\coin(K)$ can also be derived directly by suitably modifying the proof of Proposition 1 of Swanepoel \cite{swanepoel1}.
\subsection{Why $\gamma_{m}(K)\leq 1/2$?}
The reader may be a bit surprised to see the restriction $\gamma_{m}(K)\leq 1/2$. One immediate consequence of this restriction is that for any $K\in{\cal{K}}^{d}$,
\begin{equation}\label{asymptotic}
N\left(K,\frac{1}{2}K\right)\leq \coin(K) \leq 2N\left(K,\frac{1}{2}K\right),
\end{equation}
that is, $\coin(K)=\Theta(N\left(K,\frac{1}{2}K\right))$. Therefore, $\coin(B^{d})$ (resp. $\coin(K)$) can be used to estimate $N\left(B^{d},\frac{1}{2}B^{d}\right)$ (resp. $N\left(K,\frac{1}{2}K\right)$), which is a quantity of special interest, and vice versa.
However, there are other more compelling reasons for choosing $1/2$ as the threshold. To understand these better, we define
\[
f_{m}(K)=\left\{\begin{split} \frac{m}{1-\gamma_{m}(K)}, \ \ \ \ \ & \ \textnormal{ if } 0< \gamma_{m}(K)\leq \frac{1}{2},\\
+\infty, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ & \ \textnormal{ if } \frac{1}{2}< \gamma_{m}(K)\leq 1.
\end{split}\right.
\]
Thus $\coin(K)=\inf \left\{f_{m}(K): m\in {\mathbb{N}}\right\}$. Later in Theorem \ref{continuity}, we show that for any $K,L\in {\cal{K}}^{d}$ and $m\in \mathbb{N}$ such that $\gamma_{m}(K)\leq 1/2$ and $\gamma_{m}(L)\leq 1/2$,
\begin{equation}\label{half}
f_{m}(K)\leq d_{BM}(K,L) f_{m}(L),
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{dim}
f_{m}(K)\geq \frac{d_{BM}(K,L)}{2d_{BM}(K,L)-1} f_{m}(L),
\end{equation}
establishing a strong connection with the Banach-Mazur distance of convex bodies. The proofs of relations (\ref{half}) and (\ref{dim}) make extensive use of homothety ratios to be less than or equal to half. This shows that the `half constraint' in the definition of covering index results in a quantity with potentially nicer properties. In particular, relation (\ref{half}) is important as for each $m$, it implies Lipschitz continuity of $f_{m}$ on the subspace
\begin{equation}\label{subspace}
{\cal{K}}^{d}_{m}:=\left\{K\in {\cal{K}}^{d}: \gamma_{m}(K)\leq 1/2\right\},
\end{equation}
which in turn leads to the continuity properties of $\coin$ discussed in Section \ref{monotonic-continuity}. We remark that from the proof of Theorem \ref{cube}, ${\cal{K}}^{d}_{m}\neq \varnothing$ if and only if $m\geq 2^{d}$.
In Section \ref{variations}, we demonstrate what happens if we remove the restriction $\gamma_{m}(K)\leq 1/2$ from the definition of covering index. The resulting quantity, which we call the \textit{weak covering index} loses some important properties satisfied by the covering index.
\section{Continuity}\label{monotonic-continuity}
In this section, we establish some important properties of $\coin$. The first observation, though trivial, helps in computing the exact values and upper estimates of $\coin$ for several convex bodies.
\begin{lemma}[Minimization lemma]\label{monotonic}
Let $l< m$ be positive integers. Then for any $d$-dimensional convex body $K$ the inequality $f_{l}(K)> f_{m}(K)$ implies $m< f_{l}(K)$.
\end{lemma}
This shows that the covering index of any convex body can be obtained by calculating a finite minimum, rather than the infimum of an infinite set. In particular, if $f_{l}(K)<\infty$ for some $l$, then $\coin(K)=\min\left\{f_{m}(K): m< f_{l}(K)\right\}$.
The next result summarizes what we know about the continuity of $f_m$ and $\coin$. Note that the restriction $\gamma_{m}(K)\leq 1/2$ plays a key role throughout the proof. We remark that without this constraint (or a constraint of the form $\gamma_{m}(K)\leq r$, where $0<r\leq 1/2$), the proof of Theorem \ref{continuity} would not hold.
\begin{theorem}[Continuity]\label{continuity} Let $d$ be any positive integer.
\item(i) For any $K,L\in {\cal{K}}^{d}_{m}$, the relations (\ref{half}) and (\ref{dim}) hold. Moreover, equality holds in (\ref{half}) if and only if $d_{BM}(K,L)=1$, i.e., $L$ is an affine image of $K$ and equality in (\ref{dim}) holds if and only if either $d_{BM}(K,L)=1$ or $d_{BM}(K,L)>1$ with
\[\gamma_{m}(K)=\frac{\gamma_{m}(L)}{d_{BM}(K,L)}=\frac{1}{2d_{BM}(K,L)}.\]
\item(ii) The functional $f_{m}:{\cal{K}}^{d}_{m}\longrightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is Lipschitz continuous with $\frac{d^2-1}{2\ln d}$ as a Lipschitz constant and $$\left|f_{m}(K)-f_{m}(L)\right|\le d_{BM}(K,L)-1\le \frac{d^2-1}{2\ln d}\ln \left(d_{BM}(K,L)\right),$$ for all $K, L \in {\cal{K}}^{d}_{m}$. On the other hand, $f_{m}:{\cal{K}}^{d}\longrightarrow {\mathbb{R}}\cup \{+\infty\}$ is lower semicontinuous, for all $d$ and $m$.
\item(iii) Define $I_{K}=\{i: \gamma_{i}(K)\leq 1/2\}=\{i: K\in {\cal{K}}^{d}_{i}\}$, for any $d$-dimensional convex body $K$. If $I_{L}\subseteq I_{K}$, for some $K, L \in {\cal{K}}^{d}$, then
\begin{equation}\label{wcoin-half}
\coin(K) \leq \frac{2d_{BM}(K,L)-1}{d_{BM}(K,L)} \coin(L) \leq d_{BM}(K,L) \coin(L).
\end{equation}
\item(iv) The functional $\coin:{\cal{K}}^{d}\longrightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is lower semicontinuous for all $d$.
\item(v) Define
\[{\cal{K}}^{d*}:=\left\{K\in {\cal{K}}^{d}: \gamma_{m}(K)\neq 1/2, m\in {\mathbb{N}} \right\}.
\]
Then the functional $\coin:{\cal{K}}^{d*}\longrightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is continuous for all $d$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
(i) We first show
\begin{proposition} \label{aux}
For any $K,L\in {\cal{K}}^{d}$,
\begin{equation}\label{gamma}
\gamma_{m}(K)\leq d_{BM}(K,L)\gamma_{m}(L)
\end{equation}
holds and so $\gamma_{m}$ is Lipschitz continuous on ${\cal{K}}^{d}$ with $\frac{d^2-1}{2\ln d}$ as a Lipschitz constant and
$$\left|\gamma_{m}(K)-\gamma_{m}(L)\right|\le d_{BM}(K,L)-1\le \frac{d^2-1}{2\ln d}\ln \left(d_{BM}(K,L)\right),$$
for all $K, L \in {\cal{K}}^{d}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Let $\delta>1$ be such that $d_{BM}(K,L)<\delta$. Now let $a\in K$, $b\in L$ and the invertible linear operator $T:{\mathbb{E}}^{d}\longrightarrow {\mathbb{E}}^{d}$ satisfy $L-b\subseteq T(K-a)\subseteq \delta (L-b)$. Moreover, let $\left\{\lambda L+x_{i}: x_{i}\in {\mathbb{E}}^{d}, i=1,\ldots,m \right\}$ be a homothetic cover of $L$, having $m$ homothets with homothety ratio $\lambda>0$. Then
\begin{align*}
T(K-a) & \subseteq \delta (L-b) \subseteq \delta \left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{m}(\lambda L+x_{i}-b) \right) = \delta \left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{m}(\lambda (L-b)+x_{i}+(\lambda -1)b) \right) \\ & \subseteq \delta \left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{m}(\lambda T(K-a)+x_{i}+(\lambda -1)b) \right) = \bigcup_{i=1}^{m}(\delta \lambda T(K-a)+\delta x_{i}+\delta (\lambda -1)b),
\end{align*}
\noindent which implies that there is a homothetic cover of $T(K-a)$ having $m$ homothets with homothety ratio $\delta \lambda$. Hence there is a homothetic cover of $K$ having $m$ homothets with homothety ratio $\delta \lambda$. This implies that $\gamma_{m}(K)\leq \delta \gamma_{m}(L)$. Therefore, by taking $\inf \delta = d_{BM}(K,L)$, we get $\gamma_{m}(K)\leq d_{BM}(K,L)\gamma_{m}(L)$.
On the other hand, $\gamma_{m}(K)\leq 1$, $\gamma_{m}(L)\leq 1$ and (\ref{gamma}) imply in a straightforward way that
\[\left|\gamma_{m}(K)-\gamma_{m}(L)\right|\leq d_{BM}(K,L)-1.
\]
If $d_{BM}(K,L)=1$, we have nothing further to prove. Otherwise, recall John's theorem (\cite{schneider1}, page 587) implying $1\le d_{BM}(K,L)\le d^2$. Thus using the concavity of $\ln (\cdot )$ one obtains $\frac{2\ln d}{d^2-1}\leq \frac{\ln \left(d_{BM}(K,L)\right)}{d_{BM}(K,L)-1}$. This completes the proof of Proposition \ref{aux}.
\end{proof}
We now return to the main proof. To prove (\ref{half}) let $K,L\in {\cal{K}}^{d}_{m}$. If $\gamma_{m}(K)\leq \gamma_{m}(L)$, then $f_{m}(K) \leq f_{m}(L) \leq d_{BM}(K,L) f_{m}(L)$, with equality if and only if $d_{BM}(K,L)=1$. Therefore, we can assume without loss of generality that $\gamma_{m}(K)> \gamma_{m}(L)$. Note that this together with $\gamma_{m}(K)\leq 1/2$ and $\gamma_{m}(L)\leq 1/2$ implies
\begin{equation}\label{assumption}
\gamma_{m}(K)-(\gamma_{m}(K))^{2} > \gamma_{m}(L)-(\gamma_{m}(L))^{2}.
\end{equation}
Thus by using (\ref{gamma}),
\[\frac{f_{m}(K)}{f_{m}(L)} = \frac{1-\gamma_{m}(L)}{1-\gamma_{m}(K)} < \frac{\gamma_{m}(K)}{\gamma_{m}(L)}\leq d_{BM}(K,L),\]
\noindent which gives (\ref{half}). In addition, equality never holds in this case. Thus equality in (\ref{half}) holds if and only if $d_{BM}(K,L)=1$.
Now to prove (\ref{dim}), we again use (\ref{gamma}).
\[
f_{m}(K) = \frac{m}{1-\gamma_{m}(K)} \geq \frac{m}{1-\frac{\gamma_{m}(L)}{d_{BM}(K,L)}} = \frac{d_{BM}(K,L)(1-\gamma_{m}(L))}{d_{BM}(K,L)-\gamma_{m}(L)} f_{m}(L),
\]
with equality if and only if $\gamma_{m}(K)=\frac{\gamma_{m}(L)}{d_{BM}(K,L)}$.
Since $\gamma_{m}(L)\leq 1/2$,
\[\frac{1-\gamma_{m}(L)}{d_{BM}(K,L)-\gamma_{m}(L)} \geq \frac{1}{2d_{BM}(K,L)-1},
\]
with equality if and only if either $d_{BM}(K,L)=1$ or $d_{BM}(K,L)>1$ with $\gamma_{m}(L)=1/2$. Thus (\ref{dim}) is satisfied and equality holds if and only if either $d_{BM}(K,L)=1$ or $d_{BM}(K,L)>1$ with $\gamma_{m}(K)=\frac{\gamma_{m}(L)}{d_{BM}(K,L)}=\frac{1}{2d_{BM}(K,L)}$.
(ii) The continuity on ${\cal{K}}^{d}_{m}$ is immediate, since $\gamma_{m}$ is continuous on ${\cal{K}}^{d}$, for all $d$ and $m$ \cite{zong1}. The Lipschitz continuity follows from (\ref{half}) in the same way as in Proposition \ref{aux}.
For the lower semicontinuity on ${\cal{K}}^{d}$, we consider two cases.
\vspace{2mm}
\noindent\textit{Case 1: }$f_{m}(K)=\frac{m}{1-\gamma_{m}(K)}$, with $0<\gamma_{m}(K)\leq \frac{1}{2}$.
\vspace{2mm}
We need to show that for every $\epsilon>0$, there exists $\delta>0$, such that $f_{m}(K')\geq f_{m}(K)-\epsilon$, for all $K'$ with $1\leq d_{BM}(K,K')\leq 1+\delta$. Our proof of this claim is indirect:
Assume that there exist $\epsilon_{0}>0$, $\delta_{1} > \delta_{2} > \cdots > \delta_{n} >\cdots > 0$ with $\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}{\delta_{n}} = 0$, and $K_{1}, K_{2}, \ldots, \break K_{n}, \ldots \in {\cal{K}}^{d}$ such that $f_{m}(K_{n})< f_{m}(K)-\epsilon_{0}$, where $1\leq d_{BM}(K,K_{n})\leq 1+\delta_{n}$, $n=1,2,\ldots$. Here
\[f_{m}(K_{n})= \frac{m}{1-\gamma_{m}(K_{n})} < \frac{m}{1-\gamma_{m}(K)} -\epsilon_{0} = f_{m}(K) - \epsilon_{0},
\]
implying that
\begin{equation}\label{small}
\gamma_{m}(K)>1-\frac{m}{\frac{m}{1-\gamma_{m}(K)} - \epsilon_{0}} > \gamma_{m}(K_{n}) > 0.
\end{equation}
As $\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}{d_{BM}(K,K_{n})}=1$ and $\gamma_{m}:{\cal{K}}^{d}\longrightarrow {\mathbb{R}}$ is continuous, therefore, $\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}{\gamma_{m}(K_{n})}=\gamma_{m}(K)$, which together with (\ref{small}) implies $\gamma_{m}(K)>\gamma_{m}(K)$, a contradiction.
\vspace{2mm}
\noindent\textit{Case 2: }$f_{m}(K)=+\infty$, with $\frac{1}{2}<\gamma_{m}(K)\leq 1$.
\vspace{2mm}
Here we need to show that for any $K_{1}, K_{2}, \ldots, K_{n}, \ldots \in {\cal{K}}^{d}$ with $\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}{d_{BM}(K,K_{n})}=1$ we have that $\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}{f_{m}(K_{n})}=+\infty$. Again, we show this via an indirect argument. First, recall that if $f_{m}(K_{n})< +\infty$, then $m<f_{m}(K_{n})=\frac{m}{1-\gamma_{m}(K_{n})}\leq 2m$ with $0<\gamma_{m}(K)\leq \frac{1}{2}$. Second, assume that for a subsequence $K_{i_1}, K_{i_2},\ldots, K_{i_{n}},\ldots \in {\cal{K}}^{d}$ with $\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}{d_{BM}(K,K_{i_n})}=1$ we have
\[\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}{f_{m}(K_{i_n})} = \lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}{\frac{m}{1-\gamma_{m}(K_{i_n})}} = \frac{m}{1-\gamma_{m}(K)} \leq 2m.
\]
(Here, we have once again used the continuity of $\gamma_{m}:{\cal{K}}^{d}\longrightarrow {\mathbb{R}}$.) Thus $\gamma_{m}(K)\leq \frac{1}{2}$ implying that $f_{m}(K)<+\infty$, a contradiction.
(iii) Note that $\coin(K)=\inf \{f_{m}(K): m\in I_{K}\}$. The result then follows from (\ref{half}) and (\ref{dim}) and the fact that $I_{L}\subseteq I_{K}$.
(iv) Let $K\in {\cal{K}}^{d}$ and $h=2^{d+1}\left( \binom{2d}{d}^{\frac{1}{d}}-\frac{1}{2}\right)^d d(\ln d + \ln\ln d + 5)$. From the proof of Lemma \ref{monotonic} and Corollary \ref{rogers}, $\coin(K)=\min\left\{f_{m}(K): m\leq h\right\}$. In fact, by referring to the volumetric arguments used in the proof of Theorem \ref{cube}, $\coin(K)=\min\left\{f_{m}(K): 2^{d}\leq m \leq h\right\}$. Thus $\coin:{\cal{K}}^{d}\longrightarrow {\mathbb{R}}$ is the pointwise minimum of finitely many lower semicontinuous functions $f_{m}:{\cal{K}}^{d}\longrightarrow {\mathbb{R}}\cup \{+\infty\}$, $2^{d}\leq m\leq h$, defined on the metric space ${\cal{K}}^{d}$. Since the minimum of finitely many lower semicontinuous functions defined on a metric space is lower semicontinuous, the result follows.
(v) It remains to establish the upper semicontinuity. Let $(K_{n})_{n\in \mathbb{N}}$ be a sequence in ${\cal{K}}^{d*}$ converging to $K\in {\cal{K}}^{d*}$. We prove that $\limsup \coin(K_{n}) \leq \coin(K)$. It suffices to show that for sufficiently large $n\in {\mathbb{N}}$, $I_{K}\subseteq I_{K_{n}}$ as, from (iii), this would imply $\coin(K_{n})\leq d_{BM}(K,K_{n})\coin(K)$.
Let $m\in I_{K}$, that is $\gamma_{m}(K)< 1/2$, as $K\in {\cal{K}}^{d*}$. Also note that since $K_{n}\in {\cal{K}}^{d*}$, either $\gamma_{m}(K_{n})>1/2$ or $\gamma_{m}(K_{n})<1/2$. Relation (\ref{gamma}) now gives
\[\gamma_{m}(K_{n})\leq d_{BM}(K, K_{n})\gamma_{m}(K),
\]
for any $n\in {\mathbb{N}}$. By choosing $n$ sufficiently large we can ensure that $\gamma_{m}(K_{n})<1/2$ and so $m\in I_{K_{n}}$.
\end{proof}
We observe that $B^{3}\in {\cal{K}}^{3*}$ (cf. Remark \ref{balls}), so ${\cal{K}}^{3*}$ is nonempty.
The lower semicontinuity of $\coin$ leads to some interesting consequences. On the one hand, it shows that there exists a $d$-dimensional convex body $M$ such that $\coin(M) = \inf\left\{\coin(K): K\in{\cal{K}}^{d} \right\}$, for all $d$. Thus there exists a minimizer of $\coin$ over all $d$-dimensional convex bodies, for all $d$. On the other hand, although lower semicontinuity does not guarantee the existence of a $\coin$-maximizer, it does show that $\sup\left\{\coin(K): K\in{\cal{K}}^{d} \right\}=\sup\left\{\coin(P): P\in{\cal{P}}^{d} \right\}$, where ${\cal{P}}^{d}$ denotes the set of all $d$-dimensional convex polytopes, which is known to be dense in ${\cal{K}}^{d}$. Therefore, in trying to compute the supremum of $\coin$ one can restrict to the class of polytopes. This is not true for the illumination number, which is known to be upper semicontinuos (see \cite{bezdek-book}, pp. 23-24) but is not lower semicontinuous.
We do not know whether $\coin$ is continuous on ${\cal{K}}^{d}$ or not. The argument used to prove the upper semicontinuity of $\coin$ on ${\cal{K}}^{d*}$ does not seem to work in general. We, therefore, propose the following problem.
\begin{problem}\label{upper}
Either prove that $\coin$ is upper semicontinuous on ${\cal{K}}^{d}$ or construct a counterexample.
\end{problem}
It would be natural to ask whether analogues of inequalities (\ref{half}) and (\ref{dim}) hold for $\coin$. The answer is negative for both. One can look at the example of a circle $B^{2}$ and a square $C^{2}$. It is well-known that $d(C^{2},B^{2})=\sqrt{2}$ and we will see in Section \ref{extreme} that $\coin(B^{2})=14$ and $\coin(C^{2})=8$. But then $\coin(B^{2}) >\sqrt{2} \coin(C^{2})$ and $\coin(C^{2})<\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2\sqrt{2}-1}\coin(B^{2})$.
\section{Compatibility with vector sums}\label{direct-vector-sum}
For the sake of brevity, we write $N_{\lambda}(K)$ instead of $N(K,\lambda K)$, for any $d$-dimensional convex body $K$ and $0< \lambda \leq 1$. Clearly, $N_{1}(K)=1$,
\begin{equation}\label{one}
N_{\gamma_{m}(K)}(K)\leq m
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{two}
\gamma_{_{N_{\lambda}(K)}}(K)\leq \lambda.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{hexagons.pdf}
\caption{Covering $H$ by six homothets with homothety ratio $\frac{1}{2}$.}
\label{fig:hexagon}
\end{figure}
Moreover, either inequality can be strict. To see that (\ref{one}) can be strict, consider the example of an affine regular convex hexagon $H$. Lassak \cite{lassak-conf} proved that $\gamma_{7}(K)=1/2$ holds for any $o$-symmetric planar convex body $K$. Thus $\gamma_{7}(H)=1/2$. On the other hand, from Figure \ref{fig:hexagon} and the monotonicity of $\gamma_{m}(K)$ in $m$ \cite{zong1} it follows that $1/2=\gamma_{7}(H)\leq \gamma_{6}(H)\leq 1/2$. Thus $\gamma_{6}(H)=1/2$ and $N_{\gamma_{_7}(H)}=N_{1/2}(H)\leq 6$.
To see that (\ref{two}) can be strict, note that it is possible to have $N_{\lambda_{1}}(K) = N_{\lambda_{2}}(K)$, for some $\lambda_{1}<\lambda_{2}$. For instance, $N_{1/2}(C^{d})=N_{\lambda}(C^{d})=2^{d}$, for any $1/2< \lambda <1$. Therefore, $\gamma_{N_{\lambda}(C^{d})}(C^{d})=\gamma_{2^{d}}(C^{d})=1/2<\lambda$, for any $1/2 < \lambda < 1$. We use these ideas in the remainder of this section.
We now present some results showing that $\coin$ behaves very nicely with certain binary operations of convex bodies. The first five concern direct vector sums and will be used extensively in computing the exact values and estimates of $\coin$ for higher dimensional convex bodies from the covering indices of lower dimensional convex bodies. To state these results, we introduce the notion of tightly covered convex bodies.
\begin{definition}\label{tight}
We say that a convex body $K\in {\cal{K}}^{d}$ is \textit{tightly covered} if for any $0<\lambda <1$, $K$ contains $N_{\lambda}(K)$ points no two of which belong to the same homothet of $K$ with homothety ratio $\lambda$.
\end{definition}
For instance, $\ell\in {\cal{K}}^{1}$ is tightly covered since for any $0<\lambda <1$, the line segment $\ell$ contains $N_{\lambda}(\ell)=\left\lceil \lambda^{-1} \right\rceil$ points, no two of which can be covered by the same homothet of the form $\lambda \ell + t$, $t\in {\mathbb{E}}^{1}$. Later we will see that for any $d\geq 2$, the $d$-dimensional cube $C^{d}$ is also tightly covered. Furthermore, not all convex bodies are tightly covered as will be seen through the example of the circle $B^{2}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{productnew}
Let ${\mathbb{E}}^{d}={\mathbb{L}}_{1} \oplus \cdots \oplus {\mathbb{L}}_{n}$ be a decomposition of ${\mathbb{E}}^{d}$ into the direct vector sum of its linear subspaces ${\mathbb{L}}_{i}$ and let $K_{i}\subseteq {\mathbb{L}}_{i}$ be convex bodies such that $\coin(K_{i})=f_{m_{i}}(K_{i})$, $i=1,\ldots, n$, and $\Gamma=\max\{ \gamma_{m_{i}}(K_{i}):1\leq i\leq n\}$. If some $n-1$ of the $K_{i}'s$ are tightly covered, then
\begin{equation}\label{eq:product1new}
\begin{split}
\max \{\coin(K_{i}): 1\leq i\leq n\} &\leq \\
\coin(K_{1}\oplus \cdots \oplus K_{n}) &= \inf_{\lambda \leq \frac{1}{2}} \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{n} N_{\lambda}(K_{i})}{1-\lambda} \\
& \leq \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{n} N_{\Gamma}(K_{i})}{1-\Gamma} \leq \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{n} m_{i}}{1-\Gamma} < \prod_{i=1}^{n} \coin(K_{i}),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $K_{1}\oplus \cdots \oplus K_{n}$ stands for the direct sum of the convex bodies $K_{1}\subseteq {\mathbb{L}}_{1}$,\ldots, $K_{n}\subseteq {\mathbb{L}}_{n}$. Moreover, the first two upper bounds in (\ref{eq:product1new}) are tight.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
First, we prove the lower bound for $\coin(K_{1}\oplus \cdots \oplus K_{n})$. Let $P_{{\mathbb{L}}_{i}}:{\mathbb{E}}^{d}\longrightarrow {\mathbb{L}}_{i}$ denote the projection of ${\mathbb{E}}^{d}$ onto ${\mathbb{L}}_{i}$ parallel to the linear subspace ${\mathbb{L}}_{1}\oplus \cdots \oplus {\mathbb{L}}_{i-1} \oplus {\mathbb{L}}_{i+1}\oplus \cdots \oplus {\mathbb{L}}_{n}$, $i=1,\ldots, n$. Let $\{\lambda K+x_{j}: x_{j}\in {\mathbb{E}}^{d}, j=1,\ldots, m\}$ be a homothetic covering of $K=K_{1}\oplus \cdots \oplus K_{n} \subseteq {\mathbb{E}}^{d}$ with homothety ratio $0<\lambda \leq 1/2$. As $\left\{ P_{{\mathbb{L}}_{i}}(\lambda K+x_{j}) = \lambda K_{i} + P_{{\mathbb{L}}_{i}}(x_{j}): x_{j}\in {\mathbb{E}}^{d}, j=1,\ldots, m \right\}$ is a homothetic covering of $K_{i}$ with homothety ratio $\lambda$ in ${\mathbb{L}}_{i}$, $1\leq i\leq n$, the lower bound follows.
Second, we prove the formula and the upper bounds on $\coin(K_{1}\oplus \cdots \oplus K_{n})$.
\begin{proposition}\label{numbers}
If some $n-1$ of the $K_{i}'s$ are tightly covered, then for all $0 < \lambda < 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:numbers}
N_{\lambda}(K_{1}\oplus\cdots\oplus K_{n}) = \prod_{i=1}^{n} N_{\lambda}(K_{i}).
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Let $N_{i}=N_{\lambda}(K_{i})$, $i=1,\ldots, n$, and let $\{ \lambda K_{i} + t_{ij_{i}} : t_{ij_{i}}\in {\mathbb{L}}_{i}, j_{i}=1, \ldots, N_{i}\}$ be a homothetic covering of $K_{i}$ with homothety ratio $\lambda$ in ${\mathbb{L}}_{i}$, for $i=1,\ldots, n$.
Clearly,
\begin{align*}
&\left\{ \left( \lambda K_{1}+t_{1j_{1}}\right) \oplus \cdots \oplus \left(\lambda K_{n}+ t_{nj_{n}}\right): t_{ij_{i}}\in {\mathbb{L}}_{i}, i=1,\ldots, n, j_{i}=1,\ldots, N_{i} \right\} \\
=&\left\{ \lambda \left( K_{1} \oplus \cdots \oplus K_{n} \right) + t_{1j_{1}}+\cdots+t_{nj_{n}}: i=1,\ldots, n, j_{i}=1,\ldots, N_{i} \right\}
\end{align*}
is a homothetic covering of $K_{1} \oplus \cdots \oplus K_{n}$ with homothety ratio $\lambda$ in ${\mathbb{E}}^{d}$ having cardinality $\prod_{i=1}^{n}N_{i}$. Thus $N_{\lambda}(K_{1}\oplus\cdots\oplus K_{n}) \leq \prod_{i=1}^{n} N_{\lambda}(K_{i})$.
Next, let ${\cal{C}} = \left\{ \lambda\left( K_{1}\oplus\cdots\oplus K_{n} \right) + t_{j}: t_{j}\in {\mathbb{E}}^{d}, j=1,\ldots, N \right\}$ be a minimal cardinality homothetic covering of $K_{1}\oplus\cdots\oplus K_{n}$ with homothety ratio $\lambda$ in ${\mathbb{E}}^{d}$. Let us assume without loss of generality that $K_{1},\ldots, K_{n-1}$ are tightly covered. So, for $i=1,\ldots, n-1$ and $j_{i}=1, \ldots, N_{\lambda}(K_{i}) $, there exist points $x_{ij_{i}}\in K_{i}$ such that for any fixed $i$ and $1\leq j_{i}\neq j'_{i}\leq N_{\lambda}(K_{i})$, $x_{ij_{i}}$ and $x_{ij'_{i}}$ cannot both be contained in a homothet of $K_{i}$ with homothety ratio $\lambda$. Therefore, no homothet in ${\cal{C}}$ intersects any two of the $\prod_{i=1}^{n-1}N_{\lambda}(K_{i})$ cross sections $x_{1j_{1}} + \cdots + x_{n-1j_{n-1}} + K_{n}$ of $K_{1}\oplus\cdots\oplus K_{n}$. In order to cover each such cross section, we require at least $N_{\lambda}(K_{n})$ homothets from ${\cal{C}}$. Thus $N_{\lambda}(K_{1}\oplus\cdots\oplus K_{n}) = N \geq \prod_{i=1}^{n} N_{\lambda}(K_{i})$.
\end{proof}
Hence, for any $0<\lambda < 1$,
\[\frac{N_{\lambda}(K_{1}\oplus\cdots\oplus K_{n})}{1-\lambda} = \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{n} N_{\lambda}(K_{i})}{1-\lambda}.
\]
Thus,
\begin{align*}
\coin(K_{1}\oplus\cdots\oplus K_{n}) &= \inf_{m\in \mathbb{N}} \left\{\frac{m}{1-\gamma_{m}(K_{1}\oplus\cdots\oplus K_{n})}: \gamma_{m}(K_{1}\oplus\cdots\oplus K_{n})\leq \frac{1}{2}, \right\}\\
&= \inf_{\lambda\leq \frac{1}{2}}\frac{N_{\lambda}(K_{1}\oplus\cdots\oplus K_{n})}{1-\lambda}\\
&= \inf_{\lambda\leq \frac{1}{2}} \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{n} N_{\lambda}(K_{i})}{1-\lambda},
\end{align*}
completing the proof of the equality appearing in (\ref{eq:product1new}).
The upper bounds in (\ref{eq:product1new}) now follow from the definition of $\Gamma$ and $m_{i}$, $i=1,\ldots, n$. Moreover, the example of $d$-cubes, considered as direct vector sums of $d$ 1-dimensional line segments, shows that the first two upper bounds in (\ref{eq:product1new}) are tight (cf. Theorem \ref{cube}).
\end{proof}
We have the following immediate corollary of Proposition \ref{numbers}, which shows that $d$-cubes are tightly covered.
\begin{corollary}\label{tight-cube}
Let ${\mathbb{E}}^{d}={\mathbb{L}}_{1} \oplus \cdots \oplus {\mathbb{L}}_{n}$ be a decomposition of ${\mathbb{E}}^{d}$ into the direct vector sum of its linear subspaces ${\mathbb{L}}_{i}$ and let $K_{i}\subseteq {\mathbb{L}}_{i}$, $i=1,\ldots, n$, be tightly covered convex bodies. Then $K_{1}\oplus \cdots \oplus K_{n}$ is tightly covered.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
For any $0<\lambda<1$, allowing $K_{n}$ to be tightly covered in the proof of Proposition \ref{numbers} yields $\prod_{i=1}^{n} N_{\lambda}(K_{i})=N_{\lambda}(K_{1}\oplus \cdots \oplus K_{n})$ points in the convex body $K_{1}\oplus \cdots \oplus K_{n}$, no two of which belong to the same homothet of $K_{1}\oplus \cdots \oplus K_{n}$ with homothety ratio $\lambda$.
\end{proof}
Boltyanski and Martini \cite{boltyanski-directsum} showed that $I(K_{1}\oplus \cdots \oplus K_{n})\leq \prod_{j=1}^{n}I(K_{j})$, but that the equality does not hold in general since $I(B^{2}\oplus B^{2})=7<9=(I(B^{2}))^{2}$. Thus there exists $\lambda <1$ such that $N_{\lambda}(B^{2}\oplus B^{2})=7$, whereas $N_{\lambda}(B^{2})=3$. Hence, relation (\ref{eq:numbers}) does not hold and by Proposition \ref{numbers}, $B^2$ is not tightly covered.
Although the inequality $N_{\lambda}(K_{1}\oplus\cdots\oplus K_{n})\leq \prod_{i=1}^{n}N_{\lambda}(K_{i})$ always holds, the example of $B^{2}\oplus B^{2}$ shows that the equality (\ref{eq:numbers}) is not satisfied in general. We have the following general result on the covering index of direct vector sums of convex bodies.
\begin{corollary}\label{product}
Let ${\mathbb{E}}^{d}={\mathbb{L}}_{1} \oplus \cdots \oplus {\mathbb{L}}_{n}$ be a decomposition of ${\mathbb{E}}^{d}$ into the direct vector sum of its linear subspaces ${\mathbb{L}}_{i}$ and let $K_{i}\subseteq {\mathbb{L}}_{i}$ be convex bodies such that $\coin(K_{i})=f_{m_{i}}(K_{i})$, $i=1,\ldots, n$, and $\Gamma=\max\{ \gamma_{m_{i}}(K_{i}):1\leq i\leq n\}$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{eq:product1}
\begin{split}
\max \{\coin(K_{i}): 1\leq i\leq n\} &\leq \\
\coin(K_{1}\oplus \cdots \oplus K_{n}) &\leq \inf_{\lambda \leq \frac{1}{2}} \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{n} N_{\lambda}(K_{i})}{1-\lambda} \\
& \leq \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{n} N_{\Gamma}(K_{i})}{1-\Gamma} \leq \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{n} m_{i}}{1-\Gamma} < \prod_{i=1}^{n} \coin(K_{i}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Moreover, the first three upper bounds in (\ref{eq:product1}) are tight.
\end{corollary}
Let
\[K\subseteq {\mathbb{E}}^{d-k}\subseteq {\mathbb{E}}^{d-k}\oplus \underbrace{{\mathbb{E}}^{1}\oplus \cdots \oplus {\mathbb{E}}^{1}}_{k}= {\mathbb{E}}^{d}
\]
be a $(d-k)$-dimensional convex body and $\ell\subseteq {\mathbb{E}}^{1}\subseteq {\mathbb{E}}^{d}$ denote a line segment that can be optimally covered (in the sense of $\coin$) by two homothets of homothety ratio $1/2$. We say that the $d$-dimensional convex body
\[K\oplus \underbrace{\ell\oplus \cdots \oplus \ell}_{k} \subseteq {\mathbb{E}}^{d}
\]
is a (bounded) \textit{$k$-codimensional cylinder}. We have seen that the covering index behaves nicely with direct vector sums. We now show that in case of 1-codimensional cylinders it behaves even nicer.
\begin{corollary}\label{cylinder}
For any $1$-codimensional $d$-dimensional cylinder $K\oplus \ell$, the first two upper bounds in (\ref{eq:product1new}) become equalities and
\[\coin(K\oplus \ell) = 4N_{1/2}(K).
\]
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
First note that since $\ell$ is tightly covered, Theorem \ref{productnew} is applicable. From (\ref{eq:product1new}),
\begin{align*}
\coin(K\oplus \ell) &= \inf_{\lambda\leq \frac{1}{2}} \frac{N_{\lambda}(K)N_{\lambda}(\ell)}{1-\lambda} = \inf_{\lambda\leq \frac{1}{2}} \frac{N_{\lambda}(K)\lceil \lambda^{-1}\rceil }{1-\lambda} \\
&\leq \frac{N_{1/2}(K)N_{1/2}(\ell)}{1-\frac{1}{2}}= 4N_{1/2}(K).
\end{align*}
Suppose for some $0 < \lambda < 1/2$, $\frac{N_{\lambda}(K)\left\lceil \lambda^{-1}\right\rceil }{1-\lambda} < 4N_{1/2}(K)$. Then
\[\left\lceil \lambda^{-1}\right\rceil \frac{N_{\lambda}(K)}{N_{1/2}(K)}<4(1-\lambda),
\]
which is impossible, since, for $0 < \lambda < 1/2$, $\left\lceil \lambda^{-1}\right\rceil \geq 4(1-\lambda)$ and $N_{\lambda}(K)\geq N_{1/2}(K)$.
Thus
\[\coin(K\oplus \ell) = 4N_{1/2}(K).
\]
\end{proof}
In addition to direct vector sum, $\coin$ displays a compatibility with Minkowski sum (or simply vector sum) of convex bodies. We note that the upper bounds appearing here are the same as in Corollary \ref{product}.
\begin{theorem}\label{minkowski}
Let the convex body $K$ be the vector sum of the convex bodies $K_{1}, \ldots , K_{n}$ in ${\mathbb{E}}^{d}$, i.e., let $K=K_{1} + \cdots + K_{n}$ such that $\coin(K_{i})=f_{m_{i}}(K_{i})$, $i=1,\ldots, n$, and $\Gamma=\max\{ \gamma_{m_{i}}(K_{i}):1\leq i\leq n\}$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{mink}
\coin(K) \leq \inf_{\lambda \leq \frac{1}{2}} \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{n} N_{\lambda}(K_{i})}{1-\lambda} \leq \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{n} N_{\Gamma}(K_{i})}{1-\Gamma} \leq \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{n} m_{i}}{1-\Gamma} < \prod_{i=1}^{n} \coin(K_{i}).
\end{equation}
Moreover, equality in (\ref{mink}) does not hold in general.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Given homothetic coverings of $K_{i}$, $i=1,\ldots, n$, with homothety ratio $0< \lambda \leq 1/2$, one can construct a homothetic covering of $K=K_{1}+\cdots+K_{n}$ with the same homothety ratio $\lambda$ in a natural way. The proof of the upper bounds follows on the same lines as in Theorem \ref{productnew} and Corollary \ref{product}.
Furthermore, to show that equality in (\ref{mink}) does not hold in general, we consider the example of an affine regular convex hexagon $H=\Delta^{2}+(-\Delta^{2})$ and the corresponding triangle $\Delta^{2}$ .
Belousov \cite{belousov1} showed that $\gamma_{6}(\Delta^{2})=1/2$ and $\gamma_{m}(\Delta^{2})>1/2$, for $1\leq m<6$. By Lemma \ref{monotonic}, $\coin(\Delta^{2})=\inf\{f_{m}(\Delta^{2}): 6\leq m<12\}\leq f_{6}(\Delta^{2})=12$. But Fudali \cite{fudali1} determined $\gamma_{m}(\Delta^{2})$, for $7\leq m\leq 15$, and routine calculations show that the corresponding $f_{m}'s$ satisfy $f_{m}(\Delta^{2})>12$. Thus $\coin(\Delta^{2})=12$. Now, Figure \ref{fig:hexagon} shows that $H$ can be covered by 6 half-sized homothets. Thus $\coin(H)\leq 12=\coin(\Delta^{2})$.
\end{proof}
It is, in fact, easy to show that $\coin(H)=12$. First, observe that any translate of $\frac{1}{2}H$ can cover at the most one-sixth of the boundary of $H$. Therefore, $\gamma_{m}(H)>1/2$, for $m=1,\ldots, 5$. Thus, as in the case of $\Delta^{2}$, $\coin(H)=\inf\{f_{m}(H): 6\leq m<12\}\leq 12$. If $f_{m}(H)<12$, for some $7\leq m\leq 11$, then by definition of $f_{m}(\cdot)$, $\gamma_{m}(H)<\frac{12-m}{12}$, and by the definition of covering, $m\gamma_{m}(H)^{2}\vol(H)\geq \vol(H)$. Therefore, $m\left(\frac{12-m}{12}\right)^{2}> 1$, which is impossible for $8\leq m\leq 11$. This only leaves the case $m=7$, but it is known \cite{lassak-conf} that (cf. the remarks immediately following (\ref{two})) $\gamma_{7}(H)=1/2$ and as a result, $f_{7}(H)=14$. We conclude that $\coin(H)=12$. This kind of `volumetric' argument will remain useful throughout the next section in determining covering index values for convex bodies. Also Lemma \ref{monotonic} plays an important role, reducing the problem to finding the minimum of a finite set.
We now present an application of Theorem \ref{minkowski} to the difference body $K-K = K+(-K)$ of a convex body $K$. The result is quite useful for non-symmetric convex bodies. Once again, from the example of an affine regular convex hexagon and a triangle we note that equality does not hold in general.
\begin{corollary}\label{difference}
If $K$ is any $d$-dimensional convex body, such that $\coin(K)=f_{m}(K)$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{diff}
\coin(K-K) \leq \frac{\left(N_{\gamma_{m}(K)}(K)\right)^{2}}{1- \gamma_{m}(K)} \leq \frac{ m^{2}}{1- \gamma_{m}(K)} < (\coin(K))^{2}.
\end{equation}
Moreover, equality in (\ref{diff}) does not hold in general.
\end{corollary}
Since the upper bounds given in relations (\ref{mink}) and (\ref{diff}) match the upper bounds in (\ref{eq:product1}), it is natural to ask if the same is true for the lower bounds. However, the arguments used in the proof of Theorem \ref{productnew} and Theorem \ref{minkowski} do not seem to settle this question.
\begin{problem}\label{lowerbounds}
Let $K_{1}, \ldots , K_{n}$ be $d$-dimensional convex bodies, for some $d\geq 2$. Then prove (disprove) that
\begin{equation}\label{mink2}
\max\{\coin(K_{i}): i=1,\ldots, n\} \leq \coin(K_{1} + \cdots + K_{n}).
\end{equation}
If this does not hold, one can try proving the following weaker lower bound.
\begin{equation}\label{mink3}
\min\{\coin(K_{i}): i=1,\ldots, n\} \leq \coin(K_{1} + \cdots + K_{n}).
\end{equation}
\end{problem}
\vspace{2mm}
The example of a triangle and a hexagon considered above indicates that either lower bound, if it holds, would be tight. The conjectured relations (\ref{mink2}) and (\ref{mink3}) both lead to interesting consequences, which we discuss below.
If the weaker result (\ref{mink3}) is satisfied, combining it with Corollary \ref{difference} would give $\coin(K)\leq \coin(K-K)$. This would show that for any convex body $K$, the $o$-symmetric convex body $K-K$ has a covering index at least as large as $\coin(K)$. This, in turn, would imply that in computing the supremum of $\coin(K)$ over all $d$-dimensional convex bodies one could restrict to the class of $o$-symmetric convex polytopes.
If the stronger result (\ref{mink2}) holds, we would be able to say even more. It is known that any nonempty intersection of translates of $B^{d}$ is a Minkowski summand of $B^{d}$ (see \cite{schneider1}, Theorem 3.2.5). This includes the class of all $d$-dimensional ball-polyhedra \cite{bezdek-ball-polyhedra}, which are nonempty intersections of finitely many translates of $B^{d}$. Result (\ref{mink2}) would imply that $\coin(B^{d})$ upper bounds the covering indices of ball-polyhedra, or more generally of nonempty intersections of translates of $B^{d}$.
\section{Extremal bodies}\label{extreme}
The aim of this section is to characterize the convex bodies that maximize or minimize the covering index among all $d$-dimensional convex bodies. In addition, we compute exact values and estimates of the covering index for a number of convex bodies.
Since $\coin$ is a lower semicontinuous functional defined on the compact space ${\cal{K}}^{d}$, it is guaranteed to achieve its infimum over ${\cal{K}}^{d}$, that is, there exists $M\in {\cal{K}}^{d}$ such that $\coin(M)=\inf \left\{\right. \coin(K): K\in {\cal{K}}^{d}\left. \right\}$. We have the following assertion about the minimizers of $\coin$.
\begin{theorem}\label{cube}
Let $d$ be any positive integer and $K\in {\cal{K}}^{d}$. Then $\coin(C^{d})=2^{d+1}\leq \coin(K)$ and thus (affine) $d$-cubes minimize the covering index in all dimensions.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Clearly, $C^{d}$ can be covered by $2^d$ homothets of homothety ratio $1/2$, and cannot be covered by fewer homothets. Therefore, $\coin(C^{d})\leq f_{2^{d}}(C^{d})=2^{d+1}$. Let $p$ be a positive integer. If there exists a homothetic covering of $C^{d}$ by $m=2^{d}+p$ homothets giving $f_{m}(C^{d})<2^{d+1}$, then
\[\gamma_{m}(C^{d})<\frac{1}{2}-\frac{p}{2^{d+1}}.
\]
However,
\[
m \vol(\gamma_{m}(C^{d})C^{d}) = m \gamma_{m}(C^{d})^{d} \vol(C^{d}) < (2^{d}+p) \left[\frac{1}{2}-\frac{p}{2^{d+1}}\right]^{d} \vol(C^{d}) < \vol(C^{d}),
\]
\noindent a contradiction, showing that $\coin(C^{d})=2^{d+1}$.
Now consider an arbitrary $d$-dimensional convex body $K$. By repeating the above calculations for $K$ we see that for $m> 2^{d}$, $f_{m}(K)$ cannot be smaller than $2^{d+1}$. A similar volumetric argument shows that $K$ cannot be covered by $2^{d}$ homothets having homothety ratio less than $1/2$. Likewise, it is impossible to cover $K$ by fewer than $2^{d}$ homothets if the homothety ratio does not exceed $1/2$. Thus $\coin(K)\geq 2^{d+1}$.
\end{proof}
It is known that $C(C^{d})=2^{d+1}$ \cite{swanepoel1}. Thus $\coin(C^{d})=C(C^{d})$. Do affine $d$-cubes also minimize the covering parameter? The answer is negative in general and open for $d=2,3$. An affine regular $d$-simplex $\Delta^{d}$ can be covered by $d+1$ homothetic copies each with homothety ratio $d/(d+1)$. Thus $C(\Delta^{d})\leq (d+1)^{2}$, which is less than $C(C^{d})$ for $d>3$. The question which convex bodies minimize (or maximize) the covering parameter is wide open, even in the plane. Restricting the homothety ratio to not exceed half plays a crucial role in determining the optimizers of the covering index.
The case of $\coin$-maximizers is more involved. Indeed, since we have not established the upper semicontinuity of $\coin$, it may be the case that for some $d$, $\sup \left\{\coin(K): K\in {\cal{K}}^{d}\right\}$ is not achieved by any $d$-dimensional convex body. However, this is not the case for $d=2$.
\begin{theorem}\label{circle}
If $K$ is a planar convex body then $\coin(K)\leq \coin(B^{2})=14$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} First, we show that $\coin(B^{2})=14$. It is rather trivial that $\gamma_{1}(B^{2})=\gamma_{2}(B^{2})=1$, $\gamma_{3}(B^{2})=\sqrt{3}/2 = 0.866\ldots$, and $\gamma_{4}(B^{2})=1/ \sqrt{2} = 0.707 \ldots$. Hence, $f_{1}(B^{2})=f_{2}(B^{2})=f_{3}(B^{2})=f_{4}(B^{2})=+\infty$. Moreover, the first named author \cite{bezdek2} showed that $\gamma_{5}(B^{2}) = 0.609 \ldots$ and $\gamma_{6}(B^{2}) = 0.555 \ldots$, implying that $f_{5}(B^{2})=f_{6}(B^{2})=+\infty$. On the other hand, it is easy to see that $\gamma_{7}(B^{2})=1/2$ and therefore $f_{7}(B^{2})=14$. Hence Lemma \ref{monotonic} implies that $\coin(B^{2}) = \min \left\{f_{m}(B^{2}): 7 \leq m < 14\right\}$.
Next, recall G. Fejes T\'{o}th's result \cite{fejestoth1} according to which $\gamma_{8}(B^{2})=0.445\ldots$ and $\gamma_{9}(B^{2})=1/(1+\sqrt{2}) = 0.414\ldots$. This implies $f_{8}(B^{2})=14.420\ldots >14$ and $f_{9}(B^{2})=15.363\ldots >14$.
We claim that $f_{m}(B^{2})>14$, for all $10\leq m < 14$. Suppose for some $10 \leq m< 14$, $f_{m}(B^{2})\leq 14$. In this case, we must have $\gamma_{m}(B^{2}) \leq \frac{14-m}{14}$ and $m \vol(\gamma_{m}(B^{2})B^{2}) > \vol(B^{2})$. This implies $m \left(\frac{14-m}{14}\right)^{2} > 1$. But, routine calculations show that the latter inequality fails to hold for all $10\leq m\leq 13$. Thus $\coin(B^{2})=14$.
Levi \cite{levi2} showed that any planar convex body $K$ can be covered by $7$ homothets of homothety ratio $1/2$. Thus $\coin(K)\leq 14$, proving that circle maximizes the covering index in the plane.
\end{proof}
Although the question of maximizers is open in general, we can use Corollary \ref{cylinder} and Theorem \ref{circle} to determine the maximizer among $1$-codimensional cylinders in ${\cal{K}}^{3}$. In addition, we determine the covering indices of several $1$-codimensional cylinders.
\begin{corollary}
We have the following:
\item(i) $\coin(\Delta^{2}\oplus \ell)= 24$.
\item(ii) $\coin(H \oplus \ell) = 24$.
\item(iii) $\coin(B^{2}\oplus \ell) = 28$.
\item(iv) If $K\oplus \ell$ is a $1$-codimensional cylinder in ${\cal{K}}^{3}$, then $\coin(K\oplus \ell)\leq 28$, that is $B^{2}\oplus \ell$ maximizes $\coin$ among 3-dimensional $1$-codimensional cylinders.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The assertions (i)-(iii) follow immediately from Corollary \ref{cylinder} and the values of $\coin(\Delta^{2})$, $\coin(H)$ and $\coin(B^{2})$ determined earlier. For (iv), recall that \cite{levi2} for a planar convex body $K$, $\max N_{1/2}(K)=7$.
\end{proof}
We remark that the process can be continued in higher dimensions to obtain exact values or estimates of the covering index of convex bodies that are vector sums or direct vector sums of lower dimensional convex bodies.
\begin{table}[ht]\label{table:values}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
$K$ & $m$ & $\gamma_{m}(K)$ & $\coin(K)$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
$\ell$ & $2$ & $1/2$ & $4$ \\
$H$ & $6$ & $1/2$ & $12$ \\
$\Delta^{2}$ & $6$ & $1/2$ & $12$ \\
$B^{2}$ & $7$ & $1/2$ & $14$ \\
$B^{3}$ & $\geq 21$ & $\leq 0.49439$ & $\leq 41.53398\ldots$ \\
$B^{d}$ & $O(2^{d}d^{3/2}\ln d)$ & $\leq 1/2$ & $O(2^{d}d^{3/2}\ln d)$ \\
$C^{d}$ & $2^{d}$ & $1/2$ & $2^{d+1}$ \\
$H\oplus \ell$ & $12$ & $1/2$ & $24$ \\
$\Delta^{2}\oplus \ell$ & $12$ & $1/2$ & $24$ \\
$B^{2}\oplus \ell$ & $14$ & $1/2$ & $28$ \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Known values (or estimates) of $\coin$. The table can be extended indefinitely by including values (or estimates) of $\coin(K\oplus L)$ and by including upper bounds on $\coin(K+L)$, for any convex bodies $K$ and $L$ appearing in the table.}
\end{table}
So far, we have computed covering index mostly for planar convex bodies. Since in higher dimensions very little is known about $\gamma_{m}(K)$, it is a lot harder to determine exact values of $\coin$. In some cases it is possible to derive upper bounds. For instance, we make the following observation for $d$-dimensional balls.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\label{fig:balls}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{balls-green.pdf}
\vspace{4mm}
\caption{A covering of $B^{3}$ by 21 homothets of homothety ratio $0.49439$. One homothet is centered at the center of $B^{3}$, while the centers of the other $20$ homothets lie at a distance of $0.8595$ from the center of $B^{3}$ (see Remark \ref{balls}).}
\end{figure}
\begin{remark}\label{balls}
Recently, O'Rourke \cite{orourke} raised the question as to what is the minimum number of homothets of homothety ratio $1/2$ needed to cover $B^{3}$. Using spherical cap coverings, Wynn \cite{orourke} showed this number to be $21$. Thus $N_{1/2}(B^{3})=21$. In fact, Wynn also demonstrated that if the homothety ratio is decreased to $0.49439$, we can still cover $B^{3}$ by 21 homothets. Figure \ref{fig:balls} illustrates such a covering. (On request one can obtain the Mathematica code to generate this covering from the second named author.) Therefore, $\coin(B^{3})\leq f_{21}(B^{3}) \leq 41.5339886473764$. Moreover, by applying Corollary \ref{cylinder}, $\coin(B^{3}\oplus \ell) = 84$.
In general, Verger-Gaugry \cite{verger-gaugry} showed that in any dimension $d\geq 2$ one can cover a ball of radius $1/2<r\leq 1$ with $O((2r)^{d-1}d^{3/2}\ln d)$ balls of radius $1/2$. Substituting $r=1$ and performing the standard covering index calculations shows that $\coin(B^{d})=O(2^{d}d^{3/2}\ln d)$.
\end{remark}
The above remark is interesting for three different reasons. First, we observed that for $B^{2}$, $C^{2}$ and $\Delta^{2}$, the value of covering index is associated with the homothety ratio $1/2$. Theorem \ref{balls} provides us an example, namely $B^{3}$, where covering index is associated with a homothety ratio strictly less than $1/2$. Thus half-sized homothets do not always correspond to the covering index values. Second, Remark \ref{balls} provides another example of a situation when inequality (\ref{two}) is strict, as $\gamma_{N_{1/2}(B^{3})}(B^{3})=\gamma_{21}(B^{3})<1/2$. Finally, since $B^{2}$ maximizes the covering index in the plane, it can be asked if the same is true for $B^{d}$ in higher dimensions.
\begin{problem}\label{ball-max}
For any $d$-dimensional convex body $K$, prove or disprove that $\coin(K)\leq \coin(B^{d})$ holds.
\end{problem}
An affirmative answer to Problem \ref{ball-max} would considerably improve the known general (Rogers-type) upper bound on the illumination number. It is known (e.g., see \cite{bezdek-book}) that for any $d$-dimensional convex body $K$, in general
\begin{equation}\label{illumination}
I(K)\leq \binom{2d}{d} d(\ln d + \ln\ln d + 5)=O(4^{d}\sqrt{d} \ln d),
\end{equation}
\noindent and if, in addition, $K$ is $o$-symmetric, then
\begin{equation}\label{symmetric}
I(K)\leq 2^{d} d(\ln d + \ln\ln d + 5)=O(2^{d}d \ln d).
\end{equation}
If $B^{d}$ maximizes the covering index, then the general asymptotic bound in (\ref{illumination}) would improve to within a factor $\sqrt{d}$ of the bound (\ref{symmetric}) in the $o$-symmetric case.
We conclude by listing some of the known values (or estimates) of the covering index. We remark that Table 1 can be continued indefinitely by using the operations of direct vector addition and the Minkowski addition, resulting in infinitely many convex bodies for which we know exact values of $\coin$, and infinitely many convex bodies for which we can estimate $\coin$.
\section{The weak covering index}\label{variations}
In this section, we introduce a variant of the covering index, which we call the \textit{weak covering index}.
\begin{definition}\label{wcoin-def}
Let $K$ be a $d$-dimensional convex body. We define the \textit{weak covering index} of $K$ as
\[
\wcoin(K)=\inf \left\{\frac{m}{1-\gamma_{m}(K)}: \gamma_{m}(K)<1, m\in \mathbb{N}\right\}.
\]
\end{definition}
Let us define
\[
g_{m}(K)=\left\{\begin{split} \frac{m}{1-\gamma_{m}(K)}, \ \ \ \ \ & \ \textnormal{ if } 0< \gamma_{m}(K)<1,\\
+\infty, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ & \ \textnormal{ if } \gamma_{m}(K)=1.
\end{split}\right.
\]
Then $\wcoin(K)=\inf \left\{g_{m}(K): m\in {\mathbb{N}}\right\}$.
Some properties of the weak covering index naturally mirror the corresponding properties of the covering index. These include Proposition \ref{bound}, Lemma \ref{monotonic}, Theorem \ref{productnew}, Corollary \ref{product} and Theorem \ref{minkowski}. The corresponding statements can be obtained by replacing $\coin$ with $\wcoin$ and $f_{m}$ by $g_{m}$ throughout.
However, no suitable analogue of Corollary \ref{cylinder} exists for $\wcoin$. As a result, we can only estimate the weak covering index of 1-codimensional cylinders in Table 2. Also
the discussed aspects of continuity of the covering index (Section \ref{monotonic-continuity}) seem to be lost for the weak covering index.
\begin{table}[htb]\label{table:wvalues}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
$K$ & $m$ & $\gamma_{m}(K)$ & $\wcoin(K)$\\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
$\ell$ & $2$ & $1/2$ & $4$\\
$H$ & $3$ & $2/3$ & $9$ \\
$\Delta^{2}$ & $3$ & $2/3$ & $9$ \\
$B^{2}$ & 5 & $0.609\ldots$ & $12.800\ldots$\\
$C^{d}$ & $2^{d}$ & $1/2$ & $2^{d+1}$ \\
$\Delta^{d}$ & $\geq d+1$ & $\leq \frac{d}{d+1}$ & $\leq (d+1)^{2}$ \\
$H\oplus \ell$ & $\geq 6$ & $\leq 2/3$ & $\leq 18$\\
$\Delta^{2}\oplus \ell$ & $\geq 6$ & $\leq 2/3$ & $\leq 18$ \\
$B^{2}\oplus \ell$ & $\geq 10$ & $\leq 0.609\ldots$ & $\leq 25.60\ldots$ \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots\\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Known values (or estimates) of $\wcoin(\cdot)$ together with the corresponding $m$ and $\gamma_{m}(\cdot)$.}
\end{table}
More importantly, the problem of finding the maximizers and minimizers of $\wcoin$ seems a lot harder than the corresponding problem for $\coin$. We only know a minimizer for $d=2$.
\begin{theorem}\label{wcube}
Let $K\in {\cal{K}}^{2}$, then $\wcoin(K)\geq \wcoin(C^{2}) = 8$. Thus the (affine) square minimizes the weak covering index in the plane.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
If $K$ is such that $\wcoin(K)=g_{m}(K)< 8$, then from the proof of Theorem \ref{cube}, $m<4$. Since any convex body in ${\cal{K}}^{2}$ requires at least 3 smaller positive homothets to cover it, we only need to consider the case $m=3$. But Belousov \cite{belousov1} showed that
\[\min_{K\in {\cal{K}}^{2}} \gamma_{3}(K)=\frac{2}{3}
\]
and so, $g_{3}(K)\geq 9 > \wcoin(C^{2})$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
It is worth noting that for $d\geq 3$, the simplex $\Delta^{d}$ gives a smaller value ($\leq (d+1)^{2}$) of $\wcoin$ than the $d$-cube $C^{d}$. Thus $\wcoin$ has different minimizers in different dimensions.
\section{Bounds on the covering indices}\label{improved}
In this section, we obtain upper bounds on the covering and weak covering index in the spirit of Rogers' bounds on covering numbers. The main ingredients include Rogers' estimate \cite{rogers} of the infimum $\theta(K)$ of the covering density of ${\mathbb{E}}^{d}$ by translates of the convex body $K$, namely, for $d\geq 2$,
\[\theta(K)\leq d(\ln d + \ln\ln d + 5),
\]
the Rogers-Shephard inequality \cite{rogers-shephard}
\[\vol(K-K)\leq \binom{2d}{d}\vol(K)
\]
on the volume of the difference body, and a well-known result of Rogers and Zong \cite{rogers-zong}, which states that for $d$-dimensional convex bodies $K$ and $L$, $d\geq 2$,
\begin{equation}\label{roger-zong}
N(K,L)\leq \frac{\vol(K - L)}{\vol(L)}{\theta}(L),
\end{equation}
with $K-L=K+(-L)$.
The above inequalities yield the well-known upper bounds (\ref{illumination}) and (\ref{symmetric}) on the illumination number. In addition, we mention Lassak's general upper bound \cite{lassak-bound} on the illumination number
\begin{equation}\label{eq:lassak}
I(K)\leq (d+1)d^{d-1} - (d-2)(d-1)^{d-1},
\end{equation}
which is sharper than (\ref{illumination}) for small $d$, although we do not use it here.
\begin{theorem}\label{wrogers}
Given $K\in {\cal{K}}^{d}$, $d\geq 2$ and a real number $0<\lambda<1$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:main}
\wcoin(K) \leq \frac{N_{\lambda}(K)}{1-\lambda} \leq \left\{\begin{split} & \frac{(1+\lambda)^{d}}{\lambda^{d}(1-\lambda)}d(\ln d + \ln\ln d + 5) , \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \textnormal{ if } K \textnormal{ is } o\textnormal{-symmetric},\\
& \frac{1}{\lambda^{d}(1-\lambda)}\left(\binom{2d}{d}^{1/d} - 1 +\lambda\right)^{d} d(\ln d + \ln\ln d + 5), \ \ \ \textnormal{otherwise}.
\end{split}\right.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Consider a minimal cardinality covering of $K$ by homothets $\lambda K+t_{i}$, for some $t_{i}\in {\mathbb{E}}^{d}$, $i=1,\ldots,\break N_{\lambda}\left(K\right)$. By (\ref{roger-zong}), we have
\begin{align*}
N_{\lambda}\left(K\right) &\leq \frac{\vol\left(K - \lambda K\right)}{\vol\left(\lambda K\right)}{\ \theta}\left(\lambda K\right) = \frac{\vol\left(K - \lambda K\right)}{\vol\left(\lambda K\right)}{\ \theta}(K)
\\&= \frac{\vol\left(K - \lambda K\right)}{\vol\left(\lambda K\right)}d(\ln d + \ln\ln d + 5). \numberthis \label{eq:inter}
\end{align*}
If $K$ is $o$-symmetric, then $\vol(K-\lambda K) = \vol((1+\lambda)K)=\frac{(1+\lambda)^{d}}{\lambda^{d}}\vol(\lambda K)$ and so, (\ref{eq:inter}) implies
$$N_{\lambda}\left(K\right) \leq \frac{(1+\lambda)^{d}}{\lambda^{d}}d(\ln d + \ln\ln d + 5)\ .$$
In the general case, applying the Brunn-Minkowski inequality gives
\begin{align*}
\lambda^{-1} \vol(K-K)^{1/d} &= \vol\left(\left(\lambda^{-1}K-K\right)+\left(-(\lambda^{-1}-1)K\right)\right)^{1/d} \\
&\geq \vol\left(\lambda^{-1}K-K\right)^{1/d} + \vol((\lambda^{-1}-1)K)^{1/d} \\
&= \lambda^{-1} \vol\left(K-\lambda K\right)^{1/d} + (\lambda^{-1}-1)\vol(K)^{1/d},
\end{align*}
which gives
\[\vol\left(K-\lambda K\right)^{1/d} \leq \vol(K-K)^{1/d} - (\lambda^{-1}-1)\lambda \vol(K)^{1/d}.
\]
By the Rogers-Shephard inequality, we have
\[\vol\left(K-\lambda K\right)^{1/d} \leq \binom{2d}{d}^{1/d}\vol(K)^{1/d} - (1 - \lambda)\vol(K)^{1/d}=\lambda^{-1}\left( \binom{2d}{d}^{1/d} - 1 + \lambda\right)\vol(\lambda K)^{1/d} .
\]
Substituting for $\vol\left(K-\lambda K\right)$ in (\ref{eq:inter}) gives
\[N_{\lambda}\left(K\right) \leq \lambda^{-d} \left(\binom{2d}{d}^{1/d} - 1 + \lambda\right)^{d} d(\ln d + \ln\ln d + 5).
\]
Finally, note that clearly $\wcoin(K) \leq \frac{N_{\lambda}\left(K\right)}{1-\lambda}$. The upper bounds in (\ref{eq:main}) follow.
\end{proof}
For $\lambda = \frac{d}{d+1}$, Theorem~\ref{wrogers} gives the following upper bounds on the weak covering index.
\begin{corollary}\label{swanepoel3}
Let $K\in {\cal{K}}^{d}$, $d\geq 2$. Then
\[\wcoin(K) < \left\{\begin{split} & 2^{d} \sqrt{e} (d+1) d(\ln d + \ln\ln d + 5) = O(2^{d}d^{2}\ln d) , \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \textnormal{ if } K \textnormal{ is } o\textnormal{-symmetric},\\
& e(d+1)\left(\binom{2d}{d}^{1/d} - 1 +\frac{d}{d+1}\right)^{d} d(\ln d + \ln\ln d + 5)
\\ & \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ = O(4^{d}d^{3/2}\ln d), \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \textnormal{otherwise}.
\end{split}\right.
\]
\end{corollary}
Finally, in order to determine an upper bound on $\coin$, one only needs to apply \eqref{eq:main} with $\lambda=1/2$.
\begin{corollary}\label{rogers}
Given $K\in {\cal{K}}^{d}$, $d\geq 2$, we have
\[
\coin(K) \leq 2N_{1/2}(K) \leq \left\{\begin{split}&3^d(2d)(\ln d + \ln\ln d + 5) = O(3^{d}d\ln d),\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \textnormal{ if } K \textnormal{ is } o\textnormal{-symmetric},\ \ \ \ \ \
\\ &2^{d+1}\left( \binom{2d}{d}^{\frac{1}{d}}-\frac{1}{2}\right)^d d(\ln d + \ln\ln d + 5)
\\ &\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ = O(7^{d}\sqrt{d}\ln d) , \ \ \ \ \ \ \textnormal{otherwise}.
\end{split}\right.
\]
\end{corollary}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The first author is partially supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Discovery Grant. The second author is supported by a Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship (NSERC), an Izaak Walton Killam Memorial Scholarship and Alberta Innovates Technology Futures (AITF).
|
\section{Introduction}
Since the discovery by Bardeen, Bekenstein, Hawking\cite{key-1,key-2,key-3}
in the 1970s, the relationship
between black hole physics and thermodynamics
have been generally accepted by physicists. Decades of research shows
that the formula of black hole entropy $S=A/4$ where
$A$ is the area of the horizon and the temperature $T=|\kappa|/(2\pi)$
where $\kappa$ is the surface gravity have a certain universality.
In 1995, Jacobson\cite{key-4} argued that Einstein equation could
be derived from the relation of thermodynamics(Clausius relation\footnote{This relation is also
called as the first law of thermodynamics (see, for example, Refs.\cite{key-5,key-6}),
so we use terms Clausius relation and the first law of thermodynamics interchangeably in this paper.})
and pointed out that Einstein equation is an equation of state. This
is an important discovery that there exists a deep connection between
Einstein gravity theory and thermodynamics. Besides, in a 4-dimensional
de Sitter space, analysis of quantum field theory shows that the temperature
of the horizon of spacetime
is $T=\kappa/(2\pi)=1/(2\pi R)$ and the total entropy is $S=\pi R^{2}$
where $R$ is the radius of the horizon\cite{key-7}. This
implies that there exists a closed relationship between the horizon
of spacetime and thermodynamics. Based on above research results, we know that
thermodynamics has a certain universality in describing the horizons
of spacetime.
For the dynamic black hole, Hayward\cite{key-8,key-9,key-10} introduced
the notion of trapping horizon in the 4-dimensional Einstein gravity
and showed that Einstein equation is equivalent to the unified first
law. Based on these facts, the authors\cite{key-11,key-12} generalized
these concepts to the FRW universe and investigated the relationship
between the unified first law and thermodynamics of the horizon
in the FRW universe. Especially, in Ref.\cite{key-11}, they considered
the FRW universe as a dynamical spherically symmetric spacetime and
defined a trapping horizon. In this way, they showed the equivalency between the
unified first law and thermodynamics of the apparent horizon in
the FRW universe.
In addition, regarding thermodynamics of the horizon, Padmanabhan\cite{key-13,key-14}
has shown that the field equations in Einstein gravity and Lanczos-Lovelock
gravity for a spherically symmetric spacetime can be expressed as the
thermodynamic identity $dE=TdS-PdV$, where the quantities $E$, $T$, $S$
and $V$ are related to the horizon and have the interpretation for
energy, temperature, entropy and volume.
So Clausius relation $\delta Q=TdS$ holds on the horizon.
On the other hand, in cosmology, there exists an event horizon
since the universe is in accelerated expansion according to astronomical observation.
Indeed, Li\cite{key-15} predicted the equation of state of the dark energy and resolved the cosmic
coincidence problem by introducing the event horizon in the model of holographic dark energy.
Besides, The event horizon of the universe is the largest comoving distance
from which light emitted now can ever reach the observer in the future
and very similar to the event horizon of the black hole whose thermodynamics
have been accepted generally. Therefore, it is natural and interesting to
investigate laws of thermodynamics related to the event horizon in the FRW universe.
For the researches about thermodynamics on the event horizon,
though Wang et al.\cite{key-16} claimed the event
horizon is unphysical from the point of view of the laws of thermodynamics,
Chakraborty\cite{key-6} concluded that the universe bounded by the event
horizon may be a Bekenstein system by redefining a Hawking temperature.
Based on the temperature defined in Ref.\cite{key-6}, we\cite{key-17}
investigated thermodynamics of the universe
bounded by the event horizon and dominated by the tachyon fluid and found
that there exists a good thermodynamic description in such universe.
However, the definition of the temperature on the event horizon
is not general in Ref.\cite{key-6,key-17}, and the thermodynamical description
is reasonable just in the flat universe and some models.
So does there exist a general thermodynamic description of the event horizon
in the FRW universe with any spatial curvature?
Indeed, we obtain the first law of thermodynamics on the event horizon
by redefining a Hawking temperature in Einstein gravity.
Now we can ask the question whether the first law of thermodynamics can hold
on the event horizon in other gravity theories such as the $f(R)$ gravity. In fact,
in the $f(R)$ gravity, Eling et al.\cite{key-18} have shown that the correct equation
of motion can not be obtained if one uses Hawking temperature, the entropy assumption $S=\alpha Af'(R)$
and the first law of thermodynamics. An entropy production term has
to be added to the first law of thermodynamics in order to obtain
the correct equation. Thus the $f(R)$ gravity is described by the
nonequilibrium thermodynamics of spacetime.
So the above question turns into the question whether the first law of thermodynamics on the event horizon
which is obtained by redefining the Hawking temperature in Einstein gravity can hold
in the $f(R)$ gravity.
In other words, can thermodynamics of the spacetime in the
$f(R)$ theory be described by the equilibrium thermodynamics?
Through the investigation, we find that the first law of thermodynamics on the event horizon is
also held in the $f(R)$ theory. Therefore, we may conclude that the
first law of thermodynamics on the event horizon has a general description
in respect of the evolution of the FRW universe.
The present paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we show
that the first law of thermodynamics on the event horizon holds
by redefining a Hawking temperature. In Section 3, we derive the evolution equations of
the universe based on the first law of thermodynamics on the event horizon where the quantum
correction of the entropy is included. These evolution equations of the universe
can not be obtained just by Einstein equation, so the method of thermodynamical
description is more general. In Section 4, we study the evolution of the universe based on
the first law of thermodynamics on the event horizon in the $f(R)$ gravity. In Section 5,
we investigate the generalized second law of thermodynamics of the universe
bounded by the event horizon in Einstein gravity and the $f(R)$ gravity.
We end our paper with the conclusion in Section 6.
Throughout the paper, the Greek indices, $\mu,\nu,...$,
etc. run over $0,1,2,3$ and the units are chosen with $c=\hbar=k_{B}=1$
and the signature of the spacetime is taken as $(-,+,+,+)$.
\section{Redefinition of the Hawking temperature on the event horizon}
In the homogenous and isotropic universe, the metric can be expressed
as
\begin{equation}
ds^{2}=h_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j}+R^{2}d\Omega_{2}^{2},
\end{equation}
where $i$, $j$ can take value $0$ and $1$, $R=a(t)r$ in which
$a(t)$ is the scale factor and the 2-dimensional metric $h_{ij}=diag(-1,a^{2}/(1-kr^{2}))$
in which $k$ is the spatial curvature constant. A scalar quantity
is defined as
\begin{equation}
\chi=h^{ij}\partial_{i}R\partial_{j}R.
\end{equation}
The apparent horizon is defined by the scalar quantity $\chi=0$, which
gives $R_{A}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{H^{2}+\frac{k}{a^{2}}}}$. Then the surface
gravity on the apparent horizon is defined as\cite{key-5,key-6,key-19,key-20}
\begin{equation}
\kappa_{A}=-\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial\chi}{\partial R}\Big|_{R=R_{A}}=\frac{1}{R_{A}}
\end{equation}
and the corresponding Hawking temperature is
\begin{equation}
T_{A}=\frac{|\kappa_{A}|}{2\pi}=\frac{1}{2\pi R_{A}}.
\end{equation}
The study of thermodynamics of the apparent horizon
has made great progress in the FRW universe\cite{key-11,key-12,key-16,key-21,key-22,key-23,key-24}.
In Refs.\cite{key-11,key-12}, it was shown that the function of the
surface gravity for any horizon of the FRW universe depends on these
variables\footnote{The trapping horizon coincides with the apparent horizon $R_{A}$
in the context of the FRW universe, so we use $R_{A}$ to denote the radius of the trapping horizon.}
$R_{A}$ and $\dot{R}_{A}$ and is related
to the ratio $\dot{R}_{A}/R_{A}$ under the frame of the unified
first law. On the other hand, Bousso\cite{key-25} pointed out that
a thermodynamic description of the horizon would be approximately
valid and it does not matter whether one uses the apparent or the event
horizon in the quintessence dominated spacetime(Q-spacetime).
Therefore, we assume that the surface gravity on the event horizon (with the
radius $R_{E}$) should have the following form
\begin{equation}
\kappa_{E}=-\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial\chi}{\partial R}\Big|_{R=R_{E}}\frac{\dot{R}_{A}}{R_{A}}g(R_{E}),
\end{equation}
where $g(R_{E})$ is the function which is related to the variable
$R_{E}$.
Now let's determine the form of the function $g(R_{E})$. In the model
of the flat Q-spacetime(the scale factor $a(t)$ is $t^{\alpha}(\alpha>1)$
and the spatial curvature constant $k$ is $0$), the radius of the apparent horizon is $R_{A}=\frac{t}{\alpha}$
and the radius of the event horizon is $R_{E}=\frac{t}{\alpha-1}$, and
the surface gravity
on the event horizon can be reduced to the following form\cite{key-6}
\begin{equation}
\kappa_{E}=-\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial\chi}{\partial R}\Big|_{R=R_{E}}.
\end{equation}
So the simplest form of the
function $g(R_{E})$ is
\begin{equation}
g(R_{E})=\frac{R_{E}}{\dot{R}_{E}}.
\end{equation}
Up to now, we obtain the surface gravity on the event horizon
\begin{equation}
\kappa_{E}=-\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial\chi}{\partial R}\Big|_{R=R_{E}}\frac{\dot{R}_{A}}{R_{A}}\frac{R_{E}}{\dot{R}_{E}}.
\end{equation}
According to the relation between Hawking temperature and the surface
gravity on spacetime horizons, we get the temperature on the event
horizon
\begin{equation}
T_{E}=\frac{|\kappa_{E}|}{2\pi}=\frac{H}{2\pi}(\frac{k}{a^{2}}-\dot{H})\frac{R_{E}^{2}}{\dot{R}_{E}}.
\end{equation}
Now we would like to show the universality of this temperature on
the event horizon. The energy flux across the event horizon during
an infinitesimal time interval $dt$ can be calculated as\cite{key-6,key-16,key-24,key-25}
\begin{equation}
\delta Q=AT_{\mu\nu}k^{\mu}k^{v}dt\mid_{r=R_{E}},
\end{equation}
where $k^{\mu}$ is a null vector and $T_{\mu\nu}=(\rho+p)u_{\mu}u_{\nu}+pg_{\mu\nu}$
is the energy-momentum tensor. Thus, we can get the energy flux
\begin{equation}
\delta Q=4\pi R_{E}^{3}H(\rho+p)dt.
\end{equation}
Using the Friedmann equation $\dot{H}-\frac{k}{a^{2}}=-4\pi G(\rho+p)$,
the energy flux turns into
\begin{equation}
\delta Q=\frac{HR_{E}^{3}}{G}(\frac{k}{a^{2}}-\dot{H})dt.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, we use the Bekenstein entropy-area relation and
get
\begin{equation}
T_{E}dS_{E}=\frac{H}{2\pi}(\frac{k}{a^{2}}-\dot{H})\frac{R_{E}^{2}}{\dot{R}_{E}}\cdot2\pi R_{E}dR_{E}=\frac{HR_{E}^{3}}{G}(\frac{k}{a^{2}}-\dot{H})dt.
\end{equation}
From Eq.(12) and Eq.(13), we can see the first law of thermodynamics
$\delta Q\mid_{R_{E}}=T_{E}dS_{E}$ holds on the event horizon. In return,
we can also obtain the Friedmann equation in the FRW universe with
any spatial curvature based on the first law of thermodynamics. This is
an important result describing the event horizon of the universe.
There are some comments we would like to make regarding the thermodynamic
description on the event horizon. Firstly, obtaining Eq.(8) is based
on the following clues: (i) The FRW universe is a dynamic spherically
symmetric spacetime, so the horizon of its spacetime should be related
to the trapping horizon(analogous to the dynamic black hole).
(ii) Furthermore, the surface gravity defined
under the frame of the unified first law\cite{key-11,key-12} is related
to the ratio $\dot{R}_{A}/R_{A}$,
so it is reasonable that we assume the surface gravity on the event
horizon is related to the ratio $\dot{R}_{A}/R_{A}$ in the frame
of Clausius relation.
(iii) The concept of the event horizon of the FRW universe is
similar to that of the black hole whose thermodynamics
have been accepted generally, so the event horizon of the universe
should be described by thermodynamics.
Secondly, the form of Eq.(8) is simple and can
be reduced to the form which has been obtained in Ref.\cite{key-8}
in the model of the flat Q-spacetime, so Eq.(8) is the correct choice
and has the physical explanation of the surface gravity.
Thirdly, we get the conclusion that the first law of thermodynamics holds on
the event horizon based on Eq.(8). This is an important result which
shows the equivalency between the first law of thermodynamics on the
event horizon and Einstein equation in Einstein gravity. Because of
the conceptual similarity between the black hole horizon and the event
horizon of the universe, if we accept the thermodynamic description
of the black hole horizon, then we should agree with
the thermodynamic description of the event horizon of the universe.
What's more, we have successfully constructed the Hawking temperature
and shown the validity of the first law of thermodynamics on the event
horizon in the FRW universe.
\section{Evolution of the universe based on the first law of thermodynamics
on the event horizon including the quantum correction}
By redefining Hawking temperature(Eq.(9)), we confirm the validity
of the first of thermodynamics on the event horizon in the above section.
In the following sections, we take the first law of thermodynamics
$\delta Q=TdS$ on the event horizon as the fundamental starting point
to derive the dynamic evolution equations of the universe.
In this section, we will consider the quantum correction of the entropy
of the event horizon and derive these evolution equations of the
universe including quantum correction effects.
As we have pointed out in Introduction, the property of the event horizon of
spacetime is similar to that of black hole. Due to the similarity,
we take the form of the quantum corrected entropy of black hole as
the entropy of the event horizon\cite{key-26,key-27,key-28,key-29,key-30}
\begin{equation}
S=\frac{A}{4L_{p}^{2}}+\alpha\ln(\frac{A}{4L_{p}^{2}}),
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ is a constant and $L_{p}=\sqrt{\hbar G/c^{3}}$ is the Planck length. According to Ref.\cite{key-26}, $\alpha\sim O(1)$.
Thus we obtain
\begin{equation}
TdS=\frac{HR_{E}^{3}}{G}(1+\frac{\alpha L_{p}^{2}}{\pi R_{E}^{2}})(\frac{k}{a^{2}}-\dot{H})dt,
\end{equation}
and the energy flux is
\begin{equation}
\delta Q=4\pi R_{E}^{3}H(\rho+p)dt.
\end{equation}
Based on the first law of thermodynamics $\delta Q=TdS$, we get
\begin{equation}
(\frac{k}{a^{2}}-\dot{H})(1+\frac{\beta}{R_{E}^{2}})=4\pi L_{p}^{2}(\rho+p),
\end{equation}
where $\beta=\frac{\alpha L_{p}^{2}}{\pi}$ is a constant. This is the Friedmann
equation with quantum correction describing the evolution of the universe. (we will discuss it later.)
Now, in order to see the evolution properties of the universe clearly, we take the
scale factor $a(t)=t^{c}(c>1)$ and employ $G$ to denote $L_{p}^{2}$. Thus, the radius of the event horizon
turns into $R_{E}=\frac{c}{c-1}H^{-1}$ and Eq.(17) turns into
\begin{equation}
(\frac{k}{a^{2}}-\dot{H})(1+\lambda H^{2})=4\pi G(\rho+p),
\end{equation}
where $\lambda=\beta\left(\frac{c-1}{c}\right)^{2}$ is a constant.
Compared with the standard Friedmann equation, we see that this equation
has an extra term $\lambda H^{2}$ which is caused by the quantum
correction. At present, this term is very small, that's $\lambda H^{2}\ll1$,
so we can obtain
\begin{equation}
\frac{k}{a^{2}}-\dot{H}=4\pi G(\tilde{\rho}+\tilde{p}),
\end{equation}
where we redefine the effective energy density $\tilde{\rho}$ and
the effective pressure $\tilde{p}$,
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\rho}=(1-\lambda H^{2})\rho
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\tilde{p}=(1-\lambda H^{2})p,
\end{equation}
respectively. On the other hand, the continuity equation for the effective
perfect fluid is
\begin{equation}
\dot{\tilde{\rho}}+3H(\tilde{\rho}+\tilde{p})=0.
\end{equation}
Substituting Eq.(20), Eq(21), Eq(22) into Eq.(19) and integrating
the resulting equation, we finally obtain
\begin{equation}
H^{2}+\frac{k}{a^{2}}=\frac{8\pi G}{3}(1-\lambda H^{2})\rho.
\end{equation}
This is another Friedmann equation under the quantum correction.
In order to see the properties of the accelerated expansion of the
universe clearly, we combine Eq.(19) and Eq.(23), and get the result
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\ddot{a}}{a} &=& -\frac{4}{3}\pi G(\rho+3p)(1-\lambda H^{2})\nonumber\\
&=& -\frac{4}{3}\pi G(\rho+3p)+\frac{4}{3}\pi G(\rho+3p)(\lambda H^{2}).
\end{eqnarray}
Comparing with the equation $\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}=-\frac{4}{3}\pi G(\rho+3p)$
which can be obtained by Einstein equation, we find Eq.(24) has an
extra term $\frac{4}{3}\pi G(\rho+3p)(\lambda H^{2})$. From the above derivation,
we know $\lambda\sim O(L_{p}^{2})$, so the extra term contains the factor $L_{p}^{2}H^{2}$
which represents quantum correction effects.
It should be noticed that the equation describing the evolution of the universe in the whole history is
Eq.(17). From this equation,
we know that the evolution of the universe depends on the event horizon $R_{E}$
and the term $\beta/{R_{E}^{2}}$ can not be ignored at the early time.
So this equation does not only show physical consistency with
classical limit but also describes quantum effects which are described by the event horizon.
Hence we can conclude that the thermodynamical description based on the event horizon under the redefinition
of Hawking temperature is more general than Einstein equation in
describing the dynamic evolution of the universe.
\section{Evolution of the universe based on the first law of thermodynamics
on the event horizon in the $f(R)$ theory }
In this section, we will investigate the evolution property of the
universe in the theory of $f(R)$ gravity. According to Eq.(10), the
energy flux is
\begin{equation}
\delta Q=4\pi R_{E}^{3}H(\bar{\rho}+\bar{p})dt,
\end{equation}
where $\bar{\rho}=\rho+\rho_{g}$ is the total energy density of the
matter energy density $\rho$ and the effective gravity energy density
$\rho_{g}$, and $\bar{p}=p+p_{g}$ is the total pressure of the matter
pressure $p$ and the effective gravity pressure $p_{g}$. In this
gravity theory the relation of entropy-area\cite{key-5,key-31} is
\begin{equation}
S=\frac{Af'(R)}{4G}.
\end{equation}
Hence
\begin{equation}
TdS=f'(R)H(\frac{k}{a^{2}}-\dot{H})\frac{R_{E}^{3}}{G}dt.
\end{equation}
Based on the first law of thermodynamics, we get the following
equation
\begin{equation}
(\frac{k}{a^{2}}-\dot{H})f'(R)=4\pi G(\bar{\rho}+\bar{p}).
\end{equation}
However, $\bar{\rho}$ and $\bar{p}$ can't be determined just by
the first law of thermodynamics. So this evolution equation of the
universe can't be also determined just by thermodynamics alone.
In order to determine the total energy density $\bar{\rho}$ and the
total pressure density $\bar{p}$, we employ the variational principle.
In the $f(R)$ theory, the Einstein-Hilbert action can be written
as
\begin{equation}
S=\int d^{4}x\sqrt{-g}\left(f(R)+2\kappa^{2}L_{m}\right),
\end{equation}
where $\kappa^{2}=8\pi G$. We employ $f$ to denote the function $f(R)$ in the following content.
Using the variational principle $\delta S=0$,
we obtain
\begin{equation}
G_{\mu\nu}=\kappa^{2}\left(\frac{1}{f'}T_{\mu\nu}^{(m)}+\frac{1}{8\pi G}T_{\mu\nu}^{(g)}\right)\equiv\kappa^{2}T_{\mu\nu}.
\end{equation}
where $G_{\mu\nu}=R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu\nu}R$ is the Einstein
tensor, $T_{\mu\nu}^{(m)}=(\rho+p)u_{\mu}u_{\nu}+pg_{\mu\nu}$ is
the energy-momentum tensor of the matter, and
\begin{equation}
T_{\mu\nu}^{(g)}=\frac{1}{f'}\left[\frac{f-Rf'}{2}g_{\mu\nu}+\nabla_{\mu}\nabla_{\nu}f'-g_{\mu\nu}\nabla^{2}f'\right]
\end{equation}
is the energy-momentum tensor of the gravity. Then we get the effective
gravity energy density $\rho_{g}$ and the effective gravity pressure
$p_{g}$
\begin{equation}
\rho_{g}=\frac{1}{8\pi G}\left(\frac{Rf'-f}{2}-3Hf''\dot{R}\right)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
p_{g}=\frac{1}{8\pi G}\left(\frac{f-Rf'}{2}+f'''\dot{R}^{2}+f''\ddot{R}+2Hf''\dot{R}\right),
\end{equation}
respectively.
Thus, substituting Eq.(32) and Eq(33) into Eq.(28), we finally get
the Friedmann equation in the FRW universe
\begin{equation}
(\frac{k}{a^{2}}-\dot{H})f'+\frac{1}{2}(Hf''\dot{R}-f'''\dot{R}^{2}-f''\ddot{R})=4\pi G(p+p).
\end{equation}
On the other hand, the continuity equation for the effective perfect
fluid in the $f(R)$ gravity is
\begin{equation}
\dot{\bar{\rho}}+3H(\bar{\rho}+\bar{p})=0.
\end{equation}
Combining Eq.(34) and Eq.(35), we obtain another Friedmann equation
\begin{equation}
H^{2}+\frac{k}{a^{2}}=\frac{8\pi G}{3f'}\left[\rho+\frac{1}{8\pi G}\left(\frac{Rf'-f}{2}-3Hf''\dot{R}\right)\right].
\end{equation}
These Friedmann equations Eq.(34) and Eq.(36) are the same as those
of Refs.\cite{key-5,key-32} which describe the evolution of
the universe in other ways. Therefore, the equivalency
between the first law of thermodynamics on the event horizon and Friedmann
equations of the FRW universe with any spatial curvature holds not
only in Einstein gravity but also in the $f(R)$ theory. This implies
that the thermodynamical description is general in describing the evolution
of the universe. Besides, it is also indicated that the FRW universe can be described
by the equilibrium thermodynamics on the event horizon in the $f(R)$ gravity.
\section{Generalized second law of thermodynamics of the universe bounded by the event horizon}
The generalized second law of thermodynamics of the universe bounded by the event horizon
in Einstein gravity has been investigated in Ref.\cite{key-33}, in which the authors
assume that the universe can be described by the equilibrium thermodynamics. But in this paper,
we have shown the validity of the first law of thermodynamics on the event horizon in Section 2, namely
the universe bounded by the event horizon can be described by the equilibrium thermodynamics.
This conclusion is particularly important for the $f(R)$ gravity, because it has been pointed
out that the spacetime in the $f(R)$ gravity is described by the nonequilibrium thermodynamics
if one uses the usual Hawking temperature\cite{key-18}.
Next, using the method of Ref.\cite{key-33}, we will present the generalized second law of
equilibrium thermodynamics of the universe bounded by the event horizon in Einstein gravity and the $f(R)$ gravity.
For the holographic dark energy (DE) model\cite{key-15} the density of holographic
DE of the universe bounded by the event horizon is
\begin{equation}
\rho_{D}=\frac{3c^{2}}{8\pi G}R_{E}^{-2},
\end{equation}
where $c$ is a numerical constant. And the equation of state of
holographic DE can be written as
\begin{equation}
p_{D}=\omega_{D}\rho_{D},
\end{equation}
where $p_{D}$ is the thermodynamic pressure of the holographic DE
and $\omega_{D}$ is not necessarily a constant.
The two components in the matter system are non-interacting, so they satisfy
the energy conservation equations
\begin{equation}
\dot{\rho}_{d}+3H\rho_{d}=0
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\dot{\rho}_{D}+3H(\rho_{D}+p_{D})=0,
\end{equation}
separately, where $\rho_{d}$ is the energy density of dust matter (for the dust
matter, its pressure $p_{d}$ is $0$).
According to Eq.(10), the energy flux is
\begin{equation}
\delta Q=4\pi R_{E}^{3}H(\rho_{d}+\rho_{D}+p_{D})dt.
\end{equation}
In Section 2, we have shown the validity of the first law of thermodynamics
on the event horizon, so it is the equilibrium thermodynamics
and the effective temperature of the matter (dust matter and DE) distribution
can be considered to be the same as that of the event horizon\cite{key-33,key-34,key-35}.
Thus we can use the following Gibbs's relation\cite{key-34,key-35,key-36}
\begin{equation}
T_{E}dS_{m}=dE_{m}+p_{D}dV,
\end{equation}
where $S_{m}$ and $E_{m}$ are the entropy and energy of the matter
distribution. We obtain the following equation
\begin{equation}
dS_{m}=\frac{4\pi R_{E}^{2}}{T_{E}}(\rho_{d}+\rho_{D}+p_{D})dR_{E}+\frac{HR_{E}^{3}}{T_{E}}\left(\dot{H}-\frac{k}{a^{2}}\right)dt,
\end{equation}
where these relations $E_{m}=\frac{4}{3}\pi R_{E}^{3}(\rho_{d}+\rho_{D})$
and $V=\frac{4}{3}\pi R_{E}^{3}$ are used. Substituting Eq.(37) and
Eq.(38) into Eq.(40), we get
\begin{equation}
dR_{E}=\frac{3}{2}R_{E}H(1+\omega_{D})dt.
\end{equation}
Hence the change of the total entropy $S_{tot}=S_{m}+S_{E}$ where $S_{E}$ is
the entropy of the event horizon which is determined by Eq.(13) is
\begin{equation}
\frac{dS_{tot}}{dt}=\frac{6\pi R_{E}^{3}H}{T_{E}}(\rho_{d}+\rho_{D}+p_{D})(1+\omega_{D}).
\end{equation}
We see that the result is the same as that of Ref.\cite{key-33}.
When the holographic DE satisfies the weak energy condition
\begin{equation}
\rho_{D}+p_{D}=(1+\omega_{D})\rho_{D}\geq 0,
\end{equation}
the generalized second law of thermodynamics will be valid for the universe bounded by the event horizon.
For the $f(R)$ gravity, as we have shown in Section 4, the first
law of thermodynamics holds on the event horizon, so Gibbs's relation
(42) can be used. Thus we obtain
\begin{equation}
dS_{m}=\frac{4\pi R_{E}^{2}}{T_{E}}(\rho_{d}+\rho_{g}+p_{g})dR_{E}+\frac{HR_{E}^{3}}{T_{E}}\left(\dot{H}-\frac{k}{a^{2}}\right)dt,
\end{equation}
where we employ the dust as the matter. According to the definition
of the event horizon $R_{E}=a(t)\int_{t}^{\infty}\frac{dt'}{a(t')}$,
we get
\begin{equation}
dR_{E}=(HR_{E}-1)dt,
\end{equation}
so the change of the total entropy is
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{dS_{tot}}{dt}&=&\frac{4\pi R_{E}^{2}}{T_{E}}(\rho_{d}+\rho_{g}+p_{g})(HR_{E}-1)\nonumber\\
&+&(1-f')\frac{HR_{E}^{3}}{GT_{E}}\left(\dot{H}-\frac{k}{a^{2}}\right).
\end{eqnarray}
Substituting Eq.(32) and Eq.(33) into Eq.(49), we get
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{dS_{tot}}{dt}&=&\frac{R_{E}^{2}}{2GT_{E}}(\rho_{d}+f'''\dot{R}^{2}+f''\ddot{R}-Hf''\dot{R})(HR_{E}-1)\nonumber\\
&+&(1-f')\frac{HR_{E}^{3}}{GT_{E}}\left(\dot{H}-\frac{k}{a^{2}}\right).
\end{eqnarray}
So the generalized second law of thermodynamics can be satisfied
as long as the above expression is not less than 0.
Now we would like to make some remarks regarding the generalized second
law of thermodynamics. (i) From the above derivation, we know that
the Gibbs's relation (42) is important in order to obtain the change
of the total entropy. Indeed, we have established the Gibbs's relation on the event
horizon in Section 2, i.e. the first law of thermodynamics on the event horizon.
By contrast, the authors in Ref.\cite{key-33} just assumed the validity of the first law of thermodynamics on
the event horizon and a temperature of the event horizon whose expression is unknown.
(ii) For the $f(R)$ gravity, if one does not redefine the Hawking
temperature, then the horizon is described by the nonequilibrium thermodynamics\cite{key-11,key-18}.
As we have known, the Gibbs's relation (42) can not be used for the
nonequilibrium thermodynamics, so the method in Ref.\cite{key-33}
is invalid. However, the first law of thermodynamics on the event
horizon holds and the Gibbs's relation (42) can be used in this paper.
(iii) For the $f(R)$ gravity, the form of the change of the total entropy
is analytical, so it is convenient to discuss the generalized second
law of thermodynamics if some physical quantities are given.
\section{Conclusion}
So far, the study of thermodynamics of the event horizon is
rare while the research of thermodynamics of the apparent horizon
has made great progress in the FRW universe. However, there exists
an event horizon since the universe is in accelerated expansion. What is more,
the concept of the event horizon of the universe is very similar to the horizon of the black hole
whose thermodynamics have been accepted generally. Hence it is natural and important to study thermodynamics
of the event horizon in the FRW universe. As far as we know, the difficulty
of studying thermodynamics on the event horizon is the definition
of the temperature. For example, in Ref.\cite{key-16} the authors employed
the temperature on the event horizon $T_{E}=1/(2\pi R_{E})$ whose
form is similar to that of the apparent horizon and showed that the first
law of thermodynamics on the event horizon is out of work. In Ref.\cite{key-6},
the author redefined the Hawking temperature but the Hawking temperature
is not general, and his conclusions are only suitable for the flat
spacetime and some models.
In order to solve these difficulties, we redefine the surface gravity
and the corresponding Hawking temperature on the event horizon. Subsequently, we
show the equivalency between the first law of thermodynamics on the
event horizon and Friedmann equations of FRW universe with any spatial
curvature in Einstein gravity. That is to say, the first law of thermodynamics
on the event horizon holds in the FRW universe with any spatial
curvature in Einstein gravity. This is a very important property which
indicates the event horizon can be described by equilibrium thermodynamics.
Then, starting with the first law of thermodynamics on the event horizon,
we obtain Friedmann equation including the quantum correction
and show that the evolution of
the universe is related to the event horizon. As an example, we present the evolution
of the universe at present and get corresponding quantum
corrected Friedmann equations which are consistent with the standard
Friedmann equations under classical limit. Furthermore, we obtain
Friedmann equations of the FRW universe with any spatial curvature in
the $f(R)$ gravity based on the first law of thermodynamics.
Subsequently, we explore the generalized second law
of thermodynamics of the universe bounded by the event horizon and
get these conditions which satisfy the generalized second law
of thermodynamics in Einstein gravity and the $f(R)$ gravity.
In summary, we conclude that the first law of thermodynamics on the event
horizon has a general description in respect of the evolution of the FRW
universe.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work is supported by the NNSF of China, Grant No. 11375150.
|
\section{Introduction}
First of all, we use a simple argument to show that their examples cannot be true if $K(r)=K(\frac{1}{r}).$ So the counter examples constructed by G.Bianchi and E.Egnell in [1] do not exist on $RP^n.$
We regard $RP^n$ as the quotient space of the standard sphere $S^n$ under the antipodal map. $RP^n$ has a canonical conformal class inheriting from the standard class of $S^n.$
As in [1], by the north pole projection which projects the equator of $S^n$ onto the unit sphere of $\mathbb{R}^n$, the prescribing scalar curvature problem on $S^n$ is reduced to the following differential equation on $\mathbb{R}^n$
$$\Delta u+Ku^p=0\ \ ,\ \ p=\frac{n+2}{n-2}\ \ ,$$
where $K$ is a radial continuous function and $v^p=sgn(v)|v|^p$. We could write it down using polar coordinates as
$$v''(r)+\frac{n-1}{r}v'(r)+Kv^p(r)=0.$$
Due to the symmetry, we should have $v'(0)=0.$ So we consider the initial value problem of the ODE:
$$\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
v''(r)+\frac{n-1}{r}v'(r)+Kv^p(r)=0, & \hbox{} \\
v(0)=\lambda,\ v'(0)=0, & \hbox{}
\end{array}
\right.
$$
Noticing that this initial value problem always has a short time solution, we write it as $v_\lambda.$
As we assume K is the prescribing scalar curvature on $RP^n$, $K(r)=K(\frac{1}{r})$ and u should be invariant under the Kelvin transformation. Namely,
$$v(r)=r^{2-n}v(\frac{1}{r})\ \ .$$
Thus, we need to solve the equation system
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
v''(r)+\frac{n-1}{r}v'+Kv^p=0, & \hbox{}\\
v(0)=\lambda,\ v'(0)=0, \\
v(r)=r^{2-n}v(\frac{1}{r}).
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
When we take the derivative on $r=1,$ we get
$$(n-2)v(1)+2v'(1)=0$$
called gluing equation. So we can define the gluing function
$$G(\lambda):=(n-2)v_\lambda(1)+2v'_\lambda(1)\ \ .$$
We define the following quantities as in [1]:
$$\lambda_0:=\sup\{\alpha:v_\lambda(r)\ exists\ and\ is\ positive\ for\ all\ \lambda\in(0,\alpha),\ r\in[0,1]\},$$
$$\lambda_\infty:=\sup\{\alpha:v_\lambda(r)\ exists\ and\ is\ positive\ for\ all\ \lambda\in(\alpha,\infty),\ r\in[0,1]\}.$$
In this paper, we always assume $K(0)>0, K\geq0$ and K is continuous.
We restate some results in [1] first.
\begin{lem}
For any $\varepsilon\in[0,1],$
$$a(\varepsilon):=v_\lambda(\varepsilon)+\frac{\varepsilon v'_\lambda(\varepsilon)}{n-2}\ \ ,$$
$$b(\varepsilon):=-\frac{\varepsilon^{n-1}v'_\lambda(\varepsilon)}{n-2}\ \ ,$$
$$\gamma(\varepsilon):=|a(\varepsilon)|+|b(\varepsilon)\varepsilon^{n-2}|=|v_\lambda(\varepsilon)+\frac{\varepsilon v'_\lambda(\varepsilon)}{n-2}|+|\frac{\varepsilon v'_\lambda(\varepsilon)}{n-2}|\ \ .$$
Then we have the integral formulae
$$v_\lambda(r)=a(\varepsilon)+b(\varepsilon)r^{2-n}-\int_\varepsilon^rs^{1-n}\int_\varepsilon^st^{n-1}v_\lambda^pKdtds\ \ ,$$
$$v'_\lambda(r)=(2-n)b(\varepsilon)r^{1-n}-r^{1-n}\int_\varepsilon^rt^{n-1}v_\lambda^pKdt$$
and
$$\gamma(\varepsilon)<\frac{1}{2}(\frac{n}{\|K\|_\infty})^\frac{1}{p-1}\Longrightarrow|v_\lambda(r)|<2\gamma(\varepsilon),\ \forall r\in[\varepsilon,1]\ \ .$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The integral formulae follow from the following identity
$$(r^{n-1}v'_\lambda)'=r^{n-1}(v''_\lambda+\frac{n-1}{r}v'_\lambda)=r^{n-1}(-Kv_\lambda^p)=-Kr^{n-1}v_\lambda^p\ \ .$$
Suppose there is some value $r\in[\varepsilon,1]$ such that $|v_\lambda(r)|\geq2\gamma(\varepsilon),$ then we could pick the smallest $r_0$ among such values. The integral formula for $v_\lambda(r)$ implies
$$2\gamma(\varepsilon)=\sup\limits_{r\in[\varepsilon,r_0]}|v_\lambda(r)|\leq\gamma(\varepsilon)+(2\gamma(\varepsilon))^p\|K\|_\infty\frac{r_0^2}{2n}\leq\gamma(\varepsilon)+(2\gamma(\varepsilon))^p\frac{\|K\|_\infty}{2n}<2\gamma(\varepsilon)$$
which is a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
When $\lambda\downarrow0,$ we have the following uniform asymptotic formulae on $[0,1]$
$$v_\lambda(r)=\lambda-\lambda^p\int_0^rs^{1-n}\int_0^st^{n-1}Kdtds+O(\lambda^{2p-1})\ \ ,$$
$$v'_\lambda(r)=-\lambda^p\int_0^rt^{n-1}Kdt+O(\lambda^{2p-1})\ \ .$$
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Using the integral formula for $\varepsilon=0,$ we have
$$v_\lambda(r)=\lambda-\int_0^rs^{1-n}\int_0^st^{n-1}v_\lambda^pKdtds\ \ .$$
When $\lambda\downarrow0,$ we know $v_\lambda(r)<2\lambda, r\in[0,1],$ which implies $v_\lambda(r)=\lambda+O(\lambda^p)$ uniformly on $[0,1]$ by the integral formula. Thus $v_\lambda^p(r)=\lambda^p+O(\lambda^{2p-1})$ uniformly on $[0,1].$ We use this in the integral formula to obtain
$$v_\lambda(r)=\lambda-\lambda^p\int_0^rs^{1-n}\int_0^st^{n-1}Kdtds+O(\lambda^{2p-1})\ \ , uniformly\ on\ [0,1].$$
The asymptotic formula for $v'_\lambda$ is deduced analogously.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
$\lambda_0>0.$
\end{cor}
By Lemma 3.1 of [1] or our Corollary 1, we have when $0<\lambda<<1,$
$$(n-2)v_\lambda(1)+2v'_\lambda(1)=(n-2)\lambda+o(\lambda)>0\ \ .$$
If $K\in C^1, K(r)=K(0)+K_\rho r^\rho+o(r^\rho),K_\rho\neq0,\rho\in(\frac{n(n-2)}{n+2},n],$ by Lemma 3.4 in [1], we have $\lambda_\infty=\infty$ or
$$(n-2)v_\lambda(1)+2v'_\lambda(1)=[\frac{n(n-2)}{K(0)}]^\frac{n-2}{2}(2-n)\lambda^{-1}+o(\lambda^{-1})<0,\ \ when\ \lambda\uparrow\infty\ .$$
\begin{lem}
If $\exists\lambda>0$ s.t. $(n-2)v_\lambda(1)+2v'_\lambda(1)=0,$ then the equation has a positive solution on $[0,\infty)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
If $v_\lambda>0$ in [0,1], one could use the Kelvin transformation
$$v_\lambda(r)=r^{2-n}v_\lambda(\frac{1}{r})$$
to expand the solution from $[0,1]$ to $[0,\infty).$\\
Now we could assume the smallest $\lambda$ such that the gluing equation holds is $\lambda_1.$ If $\lambda_0=\infty,$ then $v_\lambda>0$ in [0,1] always holds.
If $\lambda_0<\infty,$ from the definition, we know
$$v_{\lambda_0}(r)\geq0,\ \ \forall r\in[0,1]\ \ .$$
Thus, by the integral formula
$$v_{\lambda_0}'(r)=-r^{1-n}\int_0^rt^{n-1}v_{\lambda_0}^pKdtds$$
we know $v_{\lambda_0}'(1)<0.$ Thus
$$(n-2)v_{\lambda_0}(1)+2v'_{\lambda_0}(1)<0\ \ .$$
Meanwhile, we know
$$(n-2)v_\lambda(1)+2v'_\lambda(1)=(n-2)\lambda+o(\lambda)>0,\ \ when\ \lambda\downarrow0\ \ .$$
Hence $0<\lambda_1<\lambda_0$ and $v_{\lambda_1}>0$ in [0,1] by the definition of $\lambda_1.$
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
If $\lambda_0<\infty,$ then (1.1) has a positive solution on $[0,\infty)$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Since $v_{\lambda_0}$ is decreasing and non-negative from the continuous reliability on parameters, we know $v_{\lambda_0}$ exists on $[0,1]$. As in the proof of Lemma 2, $G(\lambda_0)<0$ and $G(\lambda)<0$ for small $\lambda.$ Thus $\exists\lambda_1\in(0,\lambda_0)$ such that $G(\lambda_1)=0$ and $v_{\lambda_1}$ is the desired solution.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}
If $K\in C^1(0,1], K(r)=K(0)+K_\rho r^\rho+o(r^\rho),K_\rho\neq0,\rho\in(\frac{n(n-2)}{n+2},n],$ then a positive solution of (1.1) on $[0,\infty)$ exists.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
From Lemma 3.4 in [1],
$$(n-2)v_\lambda(1)+2v'_\lambda(1)=[\frac{n(n-2)}{K(0)}]^\frac{n-2}{2}(2-n)\lambda^{-1}+o(\lambda^{-1})<0,\ \ \lambda\uparrow\infty\ .$$
If $\lambda_\infty=\infty$, then $\lambda_0<\infty$. So the result follows from Corollary 3.\\
If
$$(n-2)v_\lambda(1)+2v'_\lambda(1)=[\frac{n(n-2)}{K(0)}]^\frac{n-2}{2}(2-n)\lambda^{-1}+o(\lambda^{-1})<0,\ \ \lambda\uparrow\infty\ ,$$
from
$$(n-2)v_\lambda(1)+2v'_\lambda(1)=(n-2)\lambda+o(\lambda)>0,\ \ when\ \lambda\downarrow0\ \ $$
we know that there exists one $\lambda>0$ such that $(n-2)v_\lambda(1)+2v'_\lambda(1)=0$. Thus the result follows from Lemma 1.
\end{proof}
\section{Main result}
One could check that the solution of
$$\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
v''(r)+\frac{n-1}{r}v'+K(0)v^p=0, & \hbox{} \\
v(0)=\lambda,\ v'(0)=0, & \hbox{}
\end{array}
\right.
$$
is
$$V_\lambda(r)=\frac{\lambda}{[1+\frac{\lambda^{2\beta}K(0)}{n(n-2)}r^2]^\frac{1}{\beta}},\ \ \beta=\frac{p-1}{2}=\frac{2}{n-2}.$$
\begin{lem}
If $\exists \varepsilon>0$ such that $K\in C^\infty[0,\varepsilon)$ and $v_\lambda$ exists on $[0,1]$ for all $\lambda>0$, then $G(\lambda)>0$ for $\lambda$ large enough.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Consider $T_\lambda:=\frac{v_\lambda}{V_\lambda}.$ Since $v_\lambda=V_\lambda T_\lambda,$ we know that $T_\lambda$ satisfies the equation
$$V_\lambda'' T_\lambda+(2V_\lambda'+\frac{n-1}{r}V_\lambda)T_\lambda'+(V_\lambda''+\frac{n-1}{r}V_\lambda')T_\lambda+KV_\lambda^pT_\lambda^p=0$$
$$\Longleftrightarrow V_\lambda'' T_\lambda+(2V_\lambda'+\frac{n-1}{r}V_\lambda)T_\lambda'-KV_\lambda^pT_\lambda+KV_\lambda^pT_\lambda^p=0$$
$$\Longleftrightarrow r^5T_\lambda''+[n-1-\frac{2K(0)}{n}\frac{\lambda^{2\beta}r^2}{1+\frac{K(0)}{n(n-2)}r^2\lambda^{2\beta}}]r^4T_\lambda'+K\frac{\lambda^{2\beta}r^2}{[1+\frac{K(0)}{n(n-2)}r^2\lambda^{2\beta}]^2}r(-T_\lambda+T_\lambda^p)=0.$$
Thus, when $\lambda\rightarrow+\infty,$ the ODEs uniformly converge to
$$r^5T_\infty''+(3-n)r^4T_\infty'=0\ \ .$$
This equation has all solutions of the form
$$T_\infty=Cr^{n-2}+D.$$
Now we need the assumption $K\in C^\infty[0,\varepsilon).$
Since the family of ODEs are degenerate at $r=0,$ we should consider the initial value data $P=\{T(0)=1,\ T^{(k)}(0)=0,\ k=1,2,\cdots\}.$ Being subject to the initial data P, all the ODEs have only one solution. As $v_\lambda(0)=V_\lambda(0), v_\lambda'(0)=V_\lambda'(0),$ we know from the equation that $v_\lambda^{(k)}(0)=V_\lambda^{(k)}(0)$ and hence $T_\lambda^{(k)}(0)=0,\ \forall k=1,2,\cdots$ for $\log T_\lambda=\log v_\lambda-\log V_\lambda.$ Thus the unique solution is $T_\lambda$ and for the limit equation, the unique solution is $T_\infty=1.$ Thus, we know that
$$T_\lambda\longrightarrow1\ \ and\ \ T'_\lambda\longrightarrow0,$$
$$\frac{v_\lambda'}{v_\lambda}-\frac{V_\lambda'}{V_\lambda}=\frac{T_\lambda'}{T_\lambda}\longrightarrow0.$$
Since
$$\lim_{\lambda\rightarrow\infty}\frac{V_\lambda'(1)}{V_\lambda(1)}=2-n\ \ ,$$
we have
$$\lim_{\lambda\rightarrow\infty}\frac{v_\lambda'(1)}{v_\lambda(1)}=2-n\ \ .$$
Consequently, for $\lambda$ large enough, we have $G(\lambda)=(n-2)v_\lambda(1)+2v_\lambda'(1)<0.$
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}
If $K(0)>0,K\geq0,$ K is continuous and $\exists \varepsilon>0$ s.t. $K\in C^\infty[0,\varepsilon)$, then the equation (1.1) has a positive solution on $[0,\infty)$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
If $\lambda_0<\infty, $ we already know the existence from Corollary 3. So we only need to treat the case $\lambda_0=\infty$ which means $v_\lambda$ exists and is positive on $[0,1]$ for every $\lambda>0.$ In this case, Lemma 2 and Lemma 3 deduce the result.
\end{proof}
\section{Acknowledgement}
The author is grateful to Professor Xingwang Xu for useful discussions and support all along.
|
\section{introduction}
\label{sec:Intro}
Due to the growing amount of data exchange over wireless networks and increasing number of mobile clients, the base-station-to-peer (B2P) links are severely overloaded. It is called the `last mile' bottleneck problem in wireless transmissions. Cooperative peer-to-peer (P2P) communications is proposed for solving this problem. The idea is to allow mobile clients to exchange information with each other through P2P links instead of solely relying on the B2P transmissions. If the clients are geographically close to each other, the P2P transmissions could be more reliable and faster than B2P ones.
Consider the situation when a base station wants to deliver a set of packets to a group of clients. Due to the fading effects of wireless channels, after broadcast via B2P links, there may still exist some clients that do not obtain all the packets. However, the clients' knowledge of the packet set may be complementary to each other. Therefore, instead of relying on retransmissions from the base station, the clients can broadcast linear packet combinations of the packets they know via P2P links so as to help the others recover the missing packets. We call this kind of transmission method cooperative data exchange (CDE) and the corresponding system CDE system.
Let the \textit{universal recovery} be the situation that all clients obtain the entire packet set and the \textit{sum-rate} be the total number of linear combinations sent by all clients. In CDE systems, the most commonly addressed problem is to find the minimum-sum rate strategy, the transmission scheme that achieves universal recovery and has the minimum sum-rate. This problem was introduced in \cite{Roua2010}. Randomized and deterministic algorithms for solving this problem have been proposed in \cite{SprintRand2010,AbediniNonMinRank2012} and \cite{MiloDivConq2011,CourtIT2014}, respectively. The idea of the randomized algorithms in \cite{SprintRand2010,AbediniNonMinRank2012} is to choose a client with the maximal or non-minimal rank of the received encoding vectors and let him/her transmit once by using random coefficients from a large Galois field. But, these randomized algorithms repetitively call the rank function, the complexity of which grows with both the number of clients and the number of packets. On the other hand, the authors in \cite{MiloDivConq2011,CourtIT2014} propose deterministic algorithms where the complexity only grows with the number of clients. But, we will show in this paper that the divide-and-conquer (DV) algorithm proposed in \cite{MiloDivConq2011} can not be applied to CDE systems that do not allow packet-splitting (NPS-CDE). Although the deterministic algorithm in \cite{CourtIT2014} can solve NPS-CDE problems, it relies on the submodular function minimization (SFM) algorithm, and the complexity of SFM algorithms is not low.\footnote{There are many algorithms proposed for solving SFM problems. To our knowledge, the algorithm proposed in \cite{Goemans1995} has the lowest complexity $O(K^5\cdot\gamma+K^6)$, where $K$ is the number of clients, and $\gamma$ is the complexity of evaluating a submodular function.}
In this paper, we first use a counter example to show that the DV algorithm in \cite{MiloDivConq2011} can not solve the NPS-CDE problems. We then propose an iterative merging (IM) algorithm, a deterministic algorithm, for finding the minimum sum-rate and corresponding strategy in NPS-CDE systems. The IM algorithm starts with an initial lower estimate of the minimum sum-rate. It recursively merges the clients that require the least number of transmissions for both the local recovery and the recovery of the collectively missing packets.\footnote{Local recovery means the merged clients exchange whatever missing in the packet set that they collectively know so that they share the same common knowledge and can be treated as a single entity.} The IM algorithm updates the estimate of minimum sum-rate whenever it finds that the universal recovery is not achievable. We prove that the minimum sum-rate can be found by starting the IM algorithm. We also show that a minimum sum-rate strategy can be determined by allocating transmission rates for the local recovery in each merged client sets in IM algorithm. We run an experiment to show that the complexity of the IM algorithm is lower than that of the deterministic algorithm proposed in \cite{CourtIT2014} when the number of clients is lower than $94$.
\section{System Model and Problem Statement}
\label{sec:system}
Let $\Pak=\{\pv_1,\dotsc,\pv_L\}$ be the packet set containing $L$ linearly independent packets. Each packet $\pv_i$ belongs to the finite field $\F_q$. The system contains $K$ geographically close clients. Let $\C=\{1,\dotsc,K\}$ be the client set. Each client $j\in\C$ initially obtains $\Has_j\subset\Pak$. Here, $\Has_j$ is called the \textit{has-set} of client $j$. The clients are assumed to collectively know the packet set, i.e., $\cup_{j\in\C}\Has_j=\Pak$. The P2P wireless links between clients are error-free, i.e., information broadcast by any client can be heard losslessly by all other clients. The clients broadcast linear combinations of the packets in their has-sets in order to help each other recover $\Pak$. For example, in the CDE system in Fig.~\ref{fig:CDESystem}, client $1$ broadcasting $\pv_1+\pv_6$ helps client $2$ and client $4$ recover $\pv_6$ and $\pv_1$, respectively. Assume packet-splitting is not allowed. Let $\rv=(r_1,\dotsc,r_K)$ be a transmission strategy with $r_j\in\N$ being the total number of linear combinations transmitted by client $j$. We call $\sum_{j\in\C}r_j$ the \textit{sum-rate} of strategy $\rv$. Let the \textit{universal recovery} be the situation that all clients in $\C$ obtains the entire packet set $\Pak$. The problem is to find a \textit{minimum sum-rate transmission strategy}, a strategy that has the minimum sum-rate among all strategies that achieve universal recovery.
\begin{figure}[tpb]
\centering
\scalebox{0.9}{\input{figures/CDE.tex}}
\caption{An example of CDE system where there are four clients that want to obtain eight packets. $\Has_j$ is the has-set of client $j$.}
\label{fig:CDESystem}
\end{figure}
\section{Minimum Sum-rate Strategy}
\label{sec:pre}
In this section, we first clarify the notations, or definitions, that used in this paper and then discuss how to determine the minimum sum-rate and a minimum sum-rate strategy.
Denote $\W$ a \textit{partition} of the client set $\C$.\footnote{A partition $\W$ satisfies $\emptyset\neq\X\subseteq\C$, $\X\cap\X'=\emptyset$ and $\cup_{\X\in\W}\X=\C$ for all $\X,\X'\in\W$.} Let $|\W|$ be the cardinality of $\W$. We call $\W$ a $|\W|$-partition of $\C$. For example, $\W=\{\{1,2\},\{3\},\{4\}\}$ is a $3$-partition of client set $\C=\{1,2,3,4\}$. Let $\Y\subseteq\W$. We call $\Y$ the \textit{$k$-subset} of partition $\W$ if $|\Y|=k$, e.g., $\{\{2\},\{3,4\}\}$ is a $2$-subset of partition $\W=\{\{1\},\{2\},\{3,4\}\}$. Let $\tilde{\Y}=\cup_{\X\in\Y}\X$, e.g., if $\Y=\{\{2\},\{3,4\}\}$, $\tilde{\Y}=\{2,3,4\}$.
For $\Set\subseteq\C$, denote $\rv_{\Set}=\sum_{j\in\Set}r_j$ and $\Has_\Set=\cup_{j\in\Set}\Has_j$. We define the \textit{local recovery} in $\Set$ as the situation such that all clients $j\in\Set$ obtain $\Has_\Set$. For example, in Fig.~\ref{fig:CDESystem}, for $\Set=\{3,4\}$, the problem of local recovery is how to let both client $3$ and client $4$ obtain the packet set $\Has_{\{3,4\}}=\{\pv_1,\pv_3,\pv_5,\pv_6\}$. The minimum sum-rate $\AlphaSO$ for the local recovery in $\Set$ is determined by \cite{Ding2015}
\begin{multline} \label{eq:MinSumRate}
\AlphaSO = \max \Big\{ \Big\lceil \sum_{\X\in\WS}\frac{|\Has_\Set|-|\Has_\X|}{|\WS|-1} \Big\rceil \colon \WS \text{ is a partition} \\ \text{ of } \Set
\text{ that satisfies } 2\leq{|\WS|}\leq|\Set|\Big\}.
\end{multline}
\eqref{eq:MinSumRate} is based on the condition that $\rv_\X\geq|\Has_{\Set}|-|\Has_{\Set\setminus\X}|$ must be satisfied for all $\X\subset\Set$ for the local recovery in $\Set$ \cite{CourtIT2014}.\footnote{A brief proof of \eqref{eq:MinSumRate} is given in Appendix~\ref{app:MinSumRateProof}.} An equivalent interpretation of \eqref{eq:MinSumRate} is that $\alpha_\Set^*$ is the minimum integer that satisfies
\begin{multline} \label{eq:MinSumRate1}
\AlphaSO \leq \min \{ \sum_{\X\in\WS}(\AlphaSO-|\Has_\Set|+|\Has_\X|) \colon \WS \text{ is a partition} \\ \text{ of } \Set
\text{ that satisfies } 2\leq{|\WS|}\leq|\Set|\Big\}.
\end{multline}
\begin{proposition} \label{prop1}
In an NPS-CDE system, let $\Set\subseteq\C$, $\Delta{\alpha}_{\Set} = \sum_{\X\in\WSO}(\AlphaSO-|\Has_\Set|+|\Has_\X|) - \AlphaSO$ and $\X'$ be any subset in $\WSO$. A strategy that achieves local recovery in $\Set$ satisfies
\begin{align}
&\rv_{\X}=\AlphaSO-|\Has_\Set|+|\Has_\X|, \forall{\X\in\WSO\setminus\X'}, \nonumber \\
&\rv_{\X'}=\AlphaSO-|\Has_\Set|+|\Has_\X|-\Delta{\alpha}_{\Set}. \nonumber
\end{align}
\end{proposition}
\begin{IEEEproof}
The constraint conditions $\{\rv_\X\geq|\Has_{\Set}|-|\Has_{\Set\setminus\X}|,\forall{\X}\subset\C, \rv_\C=\AlphaSO\}$ are equivalent to $\{\rv_\X\leq\AlphaSO-|\Has_{\Set}|+|\Has_{\X}|,\forall{\X}\subset\C, \rv_\C=\AlphaSO\}$. Among all these constraints, the tightest ones are $\{\rv_\X\leq\AlphaSO-|\Has_{\Set}|+|\Has_{\X}|,\forall{\X}\subset\WSO,\rv_\C=\AlphaSO\}$, and the excessive rate $\Delta{\alpha}_{\Set}$ can be reduced from any client set in $\WSO$. So, proposition holds.
\end{IEEEproof}
It can be seen that the universal recovery is also the local recovery in $\C$, i.e., \eqref{eq:MinSumRate} and Proposition~\ref{prop1} can be applied for universal recovery by letting $\Set=\C$. We call $\WSO$ the minimum sum-rate partition for the local recovery in $\Set$. Let $\WSD$ be the maximizer of \eqref{eq:MinSumRate}. It should be noted that $\WSD$ and $\WSO$ are not necessarily equal and $\WSD$ can not be used for determining the minimum sum-rate for the local recovery in $\Set$. See the Example~\ref{ex:counter} in the next section.
\section{Errors in Divide-and-conquer Algorithm}
\label{sec:DV}
The authors in \cite{MiloDivConq2011} proposed a divide-and-conquer (DV) algorithm for finding the minimum sum-rate strategy in NPS-CDE systems.\footnote{See details of DV algorithm in Appendix~\ref{app:DV}.} In Theorem 1 in \cite{MiloDivConq2011}, it states that the minimum sum-rate for the local recovery in $\Set$ is given by
\begin{multline} \label{eq:MinSumRateWr}
\AlphaSD = \max \Big\{ \sum_{\X\in\WS}\frac{|\Has_\Set|-|\Has_\X|}{|\WS|-1} \colon \WS \text{ is a partition} \\ \text{ of } \Set
\text{ that satisfies } 2\leq{|\WS|}\leq|\Set|\Big\}.
\end{multline}
In Lemma 1 in \cite{MiloDivConq2011}, it states that the minimum sum-rate transmission strategy for the local recovery in $\Set$ can be determined by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:lemma}
\sum_{j\in\X}r_j=\AlphaSD-|\Has_\Set|+|\Has_\X|, \forall\X\in\WSD,
\end{equation}
where $\WSD$ is the maximizer of \eqref{eq:MinSumRateWr}. However, in most of the cases, $\AlphaSD$ is not an integer and Lemma 1 in \cite{MiloDivConq2011} is not correct. For NPS-CDE systems, the minimum sum-rate must be an integer since every client must transmit integer number of times. So, $\AlphaSD$ determined by \eqref{eq:MinSumRateWr} can not necessarily be the minimum sum-rate. It should be round up to a closest integer as in \eqref{eq:MinSumRate}.\footnote{In fact, $\AlphaSO$ determined by \eqref{eq:MinSumRateWr} is the minimum sum-rate for CDE systems that allow packet-splitting (PS-CDE). There is a study in \cite{Ding2015} shows how to determine minimum sum-rate for both PS-CDE and NPS-CDE systems.} One may suggest replacing $\AlphaSD$ by $\AlphaSO$ in \eqref{eq:lemma}. However, if so, Lemma 1 in \cite{MiloDivConq2011} does not hold. See the example below.
\begin{example} \label{ex:counter}
Consider a CDE system in Fig.~\ref{fig:CDESystem}. For the universal recovery, the maximum and the maximizer of \eqref{eq:MinSumRateWr} are $\AlphaSD=13/3$ and $\WSD=\{\{1\},\{2\},\{3\},\{4\}\}$, respectively. The corresponding transmission strategy is $\rv=(7/3,4/3,1/3,1/3)$ by using \eqref{eq:lemma}. This strategy can not be implemented in an NPS-CDE system. Therefore, Lemma 1 in \cite{MiloDivConq2011} is not correct in this case. In addition, if we use $\AlphaSO$ instead of $\AlphaSD$ in \eqref{eq:lemma}, we get $\rv=(3,2,1,1)$, which achieves universal recovery but has a sum-rate greater than $\alpha_\C^*=5$, i.e., it is not a minimum sum-rate strategy. Therefore, Lemma 1 does not hold, either. One may think that reducing $2$ transmissions from any client in strategy $\rv=(3,2,1,1)$ will result in a minimum sum-rate transmission strategy. This is also not true. For example, if we reduce the transmission rate of client 1 by $2$, we get $\rv=(1,2,1,1)$. It has sum-rate equals $\alpha_\C^*=5$. But, the universal recovery is not achievable since constraint $r_1\geq L-|\Has_{\{2,3,4\}}|=2$ is breached. In fact, the correct way is to break $\C$ into $\WSO=\{\{1,2,3\},\{4\}\}$ and determine the individual rates of the clients in $\{1,2,3\}$ for the local recovery in $\{1,2,3\}$.\footnote{See the explanation in Appendix~\ref{app:counter}.} We will show that this can be accomplished by IM algorithm in Example~\ref{ex:1} in the next section.
\end{example}
\section{Iterative Merging Scheduling Method}
\label{sec:idea}
In this section, we propose a greedy scheduling method for the universal recovery in CDE systems. We assume that the clients in CDE system can form coalitions, or groups. A coalition can contain just one client, and each client must appear in no more than one coalition. Any form of coalition in $\C$ can be represented by a partition $\W$, and any $k$-subset $\Y$ of $\W$ contains $k$ coalitions in $\W$. The idea of this scheduling method is to iteratively merge coalitions and check if condition~\eqref{eq:MinSumRate1} holds.
Let $\alpha$ be a lower estimate of $\alpha_\C^*$, e.g., the lower bound on $\alpha_\C^*$ proposed in \cite{SprintRand2010,Ding2015}. At the beginning, we assume that each client forms one coalition, which can be denoted by a $K$-partition $\W=\{\{j\} \colon j\in\C\}$. We start an iterative procedure. In each iteration, we perform two steps:
\begin{enumerate}[1.]
\item If $\alpha > \sum_{\X\in\W} (\alpha - L + |\Has_{\X}|) $, terminate iteration, increase $\alpha$ by one and start the IM scheduling method (from $K$-partition) again; Otherwise, go to step $2$.
\item Let $k\in\{2,\cdots,|\W|\}$. We choose $\Y$ as a $k$-subset with the minimum value of $k$ that satisfies the conditions
\begin{equation}
\sum_{\X\in\Y}\frac{|\Has_{\tilde{\Y}}|-|\Has_{\X}|}{|\Y|-1} + L -|\Has_{\tilde{\Y}}| < \alpha, \label{eq:cond1}
\end{equation}
\begin{align}
& \sum_{\X\in\Y}\frac{|\Has_{\tilde{\Y}}|-|\Has_{\X}|}{|\Y|-1} + L-|\Has_{\tilde{\Y}}| \nonumber \\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad \leq \sum_{\X\in\Y'}\frac{|\Has_{\tilde{\Y}'}|-|\Has_{\X}|}{|\Y'|-1} + L - |\Has_{\tilde{\Y'}}|, \label{eq:cond2}
\end{align}
for all other subsets $\Y'$ such that $|\Y|=|\Y'|$. Achieve local recovery in $\tilde{\Y}$, and update $\W$ by merging all coalitions $\X$ in $\Y$ into one coalition.
\end{enumerate}
The iteration terminates whenever we find that $|\W|=2$ or there is no $k$-subset $\Y$ satisfies conditions~\eqref{eq:cond1} and \eqref{eq:cond2} in step $2$.
Consider step $1$. As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:pre}, if we find that condition
\begin{equation} \label{eq:cond3}
\alpha \leq \sum_{\X\in\W} (\alpha - L + |\Has_{\X}|)
\end{equation}
does not hold for some partition $\W$, it means $\alpha<\alpha_\C^*$ and universal recovery is not possible with the sum-rate $\alpha$. Therefore, $\alpha$ should be increased.
In step $2$, the interpretations of the conditions \eqref{eq:cond1} and \eqref{eq:cond2} are as follows. Based on Condition~\eqref{eq:cond2}, $\Y$ must be the minimum sum-rate partition for the local recovery of the collectively known packets in $\tilde{\Y}$, i.e., $\Y=\mathcal{W}_{\tilde{\Y}}^*$.\footnote{We will show that this is the case in the proof of Theorem~\ref{theo:main} in Section~\ref{sec:algo}}. So, $\sum_{\X\in\Y}\frac{|\Has_{\tilde{\Y}}|-|\Has_{\X}|}{|\Y|-1}$ incurs the minimum sum-rate for the local recovery in $\tilde{\Y}$. $L-|\Has_{\tilde{\Y}}|$ is the number of collectively missing packets the recovery of which relies on the transmissions in client set $\C\setminus\tilde{\Y}$. If condition~\eqref{eq:cond1} is breached, it means that universal recovery with sum-rate $\alpha$ is not possible if the coalitions in $\Y$ are merged to form one coalition $\tilde{\Y}$. Therefore, it is better for them to work individually than together. Condition~\eqref{eq:cond2} means that $\Y$ require less number of transmissions for the recovery of both collectively known and collectively missing packets than any other $\Y'$ such that $|\Y'|=|\Y|$.
\begin{example} \label{ex:1}
Consider the CDE system in Fig.~\ref{fig:CDESystem} and assume packet-splitting is not allowed. Let $\alpha=5$ and apply IM scheduling method. We get the procedure below.
\begin{itemize}
\item Assume that each client works individually at the beginning and initiate $\W=\{\{1\},\{2\},\{3\},\{4\}\}$. In this case, we have $\sum_{\X\in\W}(\alpha - L + |\Has_{\X}|)=7>\alpha$, we continue to step $2$ to consider conditions~\eqref{eq:cond1} and \eqref{eq:cond2} to determine which coalitions should be merged. It can be shown that there is no $2$-subset but one $3$-subset $\{1,2,3\}$ satisfies both conditions. Therefore, coalitions $\{1\}$, $\{2\}$ and $\{3\}$ should be merged to form one coalition $\{1,2,3\}$. Consider how to achieve the local recovery in $\{1,2,3\}$. It can be shown that $\alpha_{\{1,2,3\}}^*=\lceil\sum_{\X\in\{\{1\},\{2\},\{3\}\}}\frac{|\Has_{\{1,2,3\}}|-|\Has_\X|}{|\{\{1\},\{2\},\{3\}\}|-1}\rceil=5$ and the minimizer of \eqref{eq:MinSumRate1} is $\mathcal{W}_{\{1,2,3\}}^*=\{\{1\},\{2\},\{3\}\}$. In this case, $\Delta{\alpha}_{\{1,2,3\}} = \sum_{\X\in\mathcal{W}_{\{1,2,3\}}^*}(\alpha_{\{1,2,3\}}^*-|\Has_\Set|+|\Has_\X|) - \alpha_{\{1,2,3\}}^*=1$. According to Proposition~\ref{prop1}, we choose to subtract $\Delta{\alpha}_{\{1,2,3\}}$ from the rate of client $3$ and get rates
\begin{align}
&r_1=\alpha_{\{1,2,3\}}^*-|\Has_\{1,2,3\}|+|\Has_1|=3, \nonumber \\
&r_2=\alpha_{\{1,2,3\}}^*-|\Has_\{1,2,3\}|+|\Has_2|=2, \nonumber \\
&r_3=\alpha_{\{1,2,3\}}^*-|\Has_\{1,2,3\}|+|\Has_3|-\Delta{\alpha}_{\{1,2,3\}}=0. \nonumber
\end{align}
\item For $\W=\{\{1,2,3\},\{4\}\}$, $\sum_{\X\in\W}(\alpha - L + |\Has_{\X}|)=6>\alpha$. However, we do not need to determine the merging candidates since the $2$-partition will be necessarily merged to form coalition $\{1,2,3,4\}$. It is straightforward to see that coalition $\{1,2,3\}$ transmitting $4$ times and coalition $\{4\}$ keeping silent achieve universal recovery. But, there are already $5$ transmissions in $\{1,2,3\}$ when achieving local recovery, which means that client $4$ has recovered the missing packets by listening to the transmissions for the local recovery in $\{1,2,3\}$, i.e., $\rv=(3,2,0,0)$ achieves universal recovery.
\end{itemize}
\end{example}
We will show that $\rv=(3,2,0,0)$ is a minimum sum-rate strategy and $\alpha_\C^*=5$ in Theorem~\ref{theo:main} in the next sections. Note, this procedure also shows a method to determine a minimum strategy: allocate the transmission rates for local recovery in each merged coalition. In Fig.~\ref{fig:bottomup_topdownMain}, we show the merging and dividing processes incurred by IM and DV algorithms, respectively.
\begin{figure}[tpb]
\centering
\subfigure[IM algorithm]{\scalebox{0.65}{\input{figures/IMmergeMain.tex}}} \quad
\subfigure[DC algorithm]{\scalebox{0.65}{\input{figures/DVdivideMain.tex}}}
\caption{The merging process results from iterative merging (IM) algorithm and dividing process results from divide-and-conquer (DC) algorithm when they are applied to find the minimum sum-rate strategy in the CDE system in Fig.~\ref{fig:CDESystem}. Note, final merging to one coalition $\{1,2,3,4\}$ does not happen but is implied in the IM algorithm. In each figure, the minimum sum-rate $\alpha_\C^*$ is shown beside the coalition $\{1,2,3,4\}$, and the rates of clients in minimum sum-rate strategy are shown beside singleton coalitions. Note, the strategy determined by DC algorithm can not be implemented in an NPS-CDE system.}
\label{fig:bottomup_topdownMain}
\end{figure}
\begin{example}
Consider applying the IM scheduling method in the CDE system in Fig.~\ref{fig:CDESystem} with $\alpha=4$. For $\W=\{\{1\},\{2\},\{3\},\{4\}\}$, $\sum_{\X\in\W}(\alpha - L + |\Has_{\X}|)=3<\alpha$. $\alpha$ will be increased to $5$ in the first iteration and IM algorithm starts over again where the same procedure as in Example~\ref{ex:1} is repeated.
\end{example}
\subsection{Iterative Merging Algorithm}
\label{sec:algo}
We describe the IM scheduling method as the IM algorithm in Algorithms 1, 2 and 3. In Algorithm 1, $\Vu$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
\Vu(\X) = \alpha - L + | \Has_\X|,
\end{equation}
and $\alpha>\sum_{\X\in\W}\Vu(\X)$ is equivalent to the breach of condition~\eqref{eq:cond3}. In Algorithm 2,
\begin{equation}
\Xu(\Y)=\Vu(\tilde{\Y})-\sum_{\X\in\Y}\Vu(\X).
\end{equation}
$\Xu(\Y)<0$ and $\Xu(\Y)\leq\Xu(\Y')$ are equivalent to conditions~\eqref{eq:cond1} and \eqref{eq:cond2}, respectively.
\begin{algorithm} [t]
\label{algo:IM}
\small
\SetAlgoLined
\SetKwInOut{Input}{input}\SetKwInOut{Output}{output}
\SetKwFor{For}{for}{do}{endfor}
\SetKwRepeat{Repeat}{repeat}{until}
\SetKwIF{If}{ElseIf}{Else}{if}{then}{else if}{else}{endif}
\BlankLine
\Input{$\alpha$, a lower bound on $\alpha_\C^*$}
\Output{updated $\alpha$, a transmission strategy $\rv$}
\BlankLine
$\alpha=\max\{ \alpha,\sum_{j\in\C}\frac{L-|\Has_j|}{K-1}, \sum_{j\in\C} 2L-|\Has_j|-|\Has_{\C\setminus\{j\}}|\}$\; \label{algo:step1}
initiate a $K$-partition $\W=\{\{j\} \colon j\in\C\}$ and a $K$-dimension transmission strategy $\rv=(0,\cdots,0)$\; \label{algo:start}
\Repeat{$|\W|=2$ or $\U=\emptyset$}{
$\U=\text{FindMergeCand}(\W,\alpha)$\;
$\rv=\text{UpdateRates}(\rv,\U)$\;
update $\W$ by merging all $\X\in\U$\;
\If{$\alpha>\sum_{\X\in\W}\Vu(\X)$}{
$\alpha=\alpha+1$\;
terminate \lq{repeat}\rq\ loop and go to step~\ref{algo:start}\;
}
}
$\rv=\text{UpdateRates}(\rv,\W)$\;
$\Delta{r}=\max\{\rv_{\C}-\alpha,0\}$\; \label{algo:steplast1}
choose $j'\in\tilde{\Y}$ such that $r_{j'}-(L-|\Has_{\C\setminus\{j'\}}|)\geq\Delta{r}$\;
$r_{j'}=r_{j'}-\Delta{r}$\; \label{algo:steplast2}
\caption{Iterative Merge (IM)}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{algorithm} [t]
\label{algo:FindMergeCand}
\small
\SetAlgoLined
\SetKwInOut{Input}{input}\SetKwInOut{Output}{output}
\SetKwFor{For}{for}{do}{endfor}
\SetKwRepeat{Repeat}{repeat}{until}
\SetKwIF{If}{ElseIf}{Else}{if}{then}{else if}{else}{endif}
\BlankLine
\Input{a partition of client set $\W$, sum-rate $\alpha$}
\Output{$\U$, a set contains all candidates for merge}
\BlankLine
$k=1$\;
\Repeat{$k=|\W|-1$ or $\U$ is assigned (i.e., $\ZSet\neq\emptyset$)}{
$k=k+1$\;
$\ZSet=\{\Y \colon \Xu(\Y)<0, \Y \text{ is a } k \text{-subset of } \W \}$\;
\If{$\ZSet\neq\emptyset$}{
$\U=\Y$, where $\Xu(\Y)\leq\Xu(\Y'), \forall \Y'\in\ZSet$\;}
}
\caption{FindMergeCand (find merging candidate)}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{algorithm} [t]
\label{algo:UpdateRate}
\small
\SetAlgoLined
\SetKwInOut{Input}{input}\SetKwInOut{Output}{output}
\SetKwFor{For}{for}{do}{endfor}
\SetKwRepeat{Repeat}{repeat}{until}
\SetKwIF{If}{ElseIf}{Else}{if}{then}{else if}{else}{endif}
\BlankLine
\Input{merge candidate set $\U$, transmission strategy $\rv$}
\Output{updated transmission strategy $\rv$}
\BlankLine
$\alpha_{\tilde{\Y}}=\big\lceil \sum_{\X\in\Y}\frac{|\Has_{\tilde{\Y}}|-|\Has_\X|}{|\Y|-1} \big\rceil$\;
$\Delta{\alpha}_{\tilde{\Y}}=\sum_{\X\in\Y}(\alpha_{\tilde{\Y}}-|\Has_{\tilde{\Y}}|-|\Has_\X|)-\alpha_{\tilde{\Y}}$\;
choose $\X'\in\Y$ such that the rates of clients in $\X'$ have not been assigned\;
\ForAll{$\X\in\U$}{
$R=\alpha_{\tilde{\Y}}-|\Has_{\tilde{\Y}}|-|\Has_\X|$\;
\lIf{$\X=\X'$}{$R=R-\Delta{\alpha}_{\tilde{\Y}}$}
$\Delta{r}=\max\{R-\rv_\X,0\}$\;
$r_{j'}=r_{j'}+\Delta{r}$, where $j'$ is the client that is randomly chosen in set $\X$\;
}
\caption{UpdateRates (update rates)}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{theorem} \label{theo:main}
The IM algorithm returns $\alpha_\C^*$ and a minimum sum-rate strategy if the input $\alpha\leq\alpha_\C^*$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Consider the Queyranne's algorithm \cite{Queyranne}
\begin{equation}
\M \colonequals \M\cup\{e\} \nonumber
\end{equation}
where $e=\arg\min\{\Vu(\M\cup\{u\})-\Vu(\{u\}) \colon u\in\C\setminus\M\}$. Let $\W$ be a partition generated by the IM algorithm. For any $\X\in\W$ such that $\X$ is not a singleton, if we start the Queyranne's algorithm with $\M^{(0)}=\Set\subset\X$, we will get $\M^{(|\X|-|\Set|)}=\X$.\footnote{See Appendix~\ref{app:QueyProof} for the proof and examples.} Due to the crossing submodularity of $\Vu$\cite{CourtIT2014}, at any iteration $m\in\{2,\cdots,K-1\}$ of Queyranne's algorithm \cite{Queyranne}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Quey}
\Vu(\M^{(m)}) + \Vu(\{j\}) \leq \Vu(\M^{(m)}\setminus\Set) + \Vu(\Set\cup\{j\}),
\end{equation}
for all $j\in\C\setminus\M^{(m)}$ and $\Set$ such that $\emptyset\neq\Set\subseteq\M^{(m-1)}$.\footnote{See the examples in Appendix~\ref{app:MinPart}.} Also, the clients in $\Y$ merges only if $\Xu(\Y)<0$. $\W$ satisfies $\sum_{\X\in\W}\Vu(\X)\leq\sum_{\X\in\W'}\Vu(\X)$ for all other $\W'$ such that $|\W|=|\W'|$. Alternatively speaking, $\W$ generated by the IM algorithm incurs the minimum values of $\sum_{\X\in\W}\Vu(\X)$. So, if $\alpha\leq\sum_{\X\in\W}\Vu(\X)$ holds for all $\W$ in IM algorithm, it means universal recovery is achievable with sum-rate $\alpha$. Since $\alpha$ is increased by $1$ if condition $\alpha\leq\sum_{\X\in\W}\Vu(\X)$ is breached, the output must equal to $\alpha_\C^*$ if the the input $\alpha\leq\alpha_\C^*$.\footnote{Also note that after step~\ref{algo:step1} in IM algorithm, condition~\eqref{eq:cond3} holds for all $2$- and $K$-partitions of $\C$. Therefore, we do not need to check condition~\ref{eq:cond3} for $2$- and $K$-partitions in the rest steps of IM algorithm.}
Consider an NPS-CDE system having $|\U|$ clients and has-sets $\Has_\X,\forall{\X\in\U}$. Based on \eqref{eq:Quey}, we have $\U=\mathcal{W}_{\tilde{\U}}^*$. According to~\eqref{eq:MinSumRate1}, in UpdtateRates algorithm, $\Delta{r}$ for each $\X\in\U$ determines the number of transmissions required from coalition $\X$ for the local recovery in $\U$ in addition to the local recovery in $\X$. The local recovery is achieved in every merged coalition in IM algorithm. Steps~\ref{algo:steplast1} to \ref{algo:steplast2} in IM algorithm are to reduce the excessive rates $\max\{R-\rv_\X,0\}$ from the client $j'$ such that the current rate $r_{j'}$ is greater than $L-|\Has_{\C\setminus\{j'\}}|$, the lower bound on the rate of client $j'$ for universal recovery. Therefore, the output $\rv$ achieves universal recovery and has sum-rate equal to $\alpha_\C^*$.
\end{IEEEproof}
\section{Complexity}
\label{sec:complexity}
The complexity of the IM algorithm depends on two aspects. One is how close the input lower bound $\alpha$ is to $\alpha_\C^*$, since the IM algorithm will be repeated for $\alpha-\alpha_\C^*+1$ times until it updates $\alpha$ to $\alpha_\C^*$. The other is the complexity of FindMergeCand algorithm which may vary with different NPS-CDE systems. For example, if FindMergeCand returns $\U$ containing $2$-subsets, $\beta$ is $O(K^2\cdot\gamma)$. Here, $\gamma$ is the complexity of running the cardinality function $|\Has_\X|$. The authors in \cite{CourtIT2014} also proposed a deterministic algorithm with complexity $O(K\cdot\SFM(K))$ for searching the the minimum sum-rate and minimum sum-rate strategy in CDE systems. Here, $\SFM(K)$ is the complexity of solving a submodular function minimization problem. To our knowledge, the algorithm proposed in \cite{Goemans1995} has the lowest complexity of $\SFM(K)$ is $O(K^5\cdot\gamma+K^6)$. An experiment in \cite{CourtIT2014} shows that the actual runtime by using MATLAB code is $4 \cdot 10^{-3} \cdot K^{1.85}$ seconds on average.
We run an experiment to show the actual complexity of the IM algorithm. We set the number of packets $L=50$ and vary the number of clients $K$ from $5$ to $120$. For each value of $K$, we repeat the procedure below for $100$ times.
\begin{itemize}
\item randomly generate the has-sets $\Has_j$ for all ${j\in\C}$ subject to the condition $\cup_{j\in\C}\Has_j=\Pak$;
\item set $\alpha$ to be the lower bound on $\alpha_\C^*$ derived in \cite{Ding2015}; run the IM algorithm in MATLAB.
\end{itemize}
In each repetition, we count the actual complexity in terms of $\gamma$ and runtime (including the complexity of using algorithm in \cite{Ding2015} to determine the lower bound on $\alpha_\C^*$). We plot the average complexity over $100$ repetitions in Fig.~\ref{fig:ComplexityIM}. It shows that the average complexity is about $O(K^{3.15}\cdot\gamma)$. The runtime of the IM algorithm is less than that of the deterministic algorithm in \cite{CourtIT2014} when the number of clients is no greater than $94$.
\begin{figure}[tpb]
\centering
\subfigure[The average complexity in terms of $\gamma$]{\scalebox{0.8}{\input{figures/ComplexityIM.tex}}} \quad
\subfigure[The average complexity in terms of runtime in MATLAB]{\scalebox{0.8}{\input{figures/RuntimeIM.tex}}}
\caption{The average complexity over $100$ repetitions in experiment in Section~\ref{sec:complexity}. }
\label{fig:ComplexityIM}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
This paper proposed an IM algorithm that found the minimum sum-rate and a minimum sum-rate strategy in NPS-CDE systems. The IM algorithm started with a sum-rate estimate, a lower bound on the minimum sum-rate. It recursively formed client sets into coalitions and updated the estimate to the value of minimum sum-rate. We proved that a minimum sum-rate strategy could be found by determine individual rate for achieving local recovery in each merged coalitions in the IM algorithm. Based on experiment results, we showed that the complexity of the IM algorithm was lower than the complexity of existing algorithms when the number of clients is below $94$.
\bibliographystyle{ieeetr}
|
\section*{Acknowledgement}
\begin{acknowledgments}
This work was supported in part by the Army Research
Office Grant No. W911NF-09-1-0254 and W911NF-12-
1- 467 0546. The views and conclusions contained in
this document are those of the authors and should not
be interpreted as representing the official policies, either
expressed or implied, of the Army Research Office or the
U.S. Government.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
\IEEEPARstart{B}{lind} deconvolution is a challenging open problem in signal processing that manifests itself in a host of applications like image de-blurring, blind system identification, and blind equalization.
The difficulty of blind deconvolution stems from its ill-posedness in the sense of Hadamard~\cite{Hadamard1902,Tikhonov1986} as well as non-linearity of the problem.
In practice, additional application specific prior information on the unknown signals is necessary to render this inverse problem better behaved.
\emph{Sparsity} based models have been used extensively in the past decade to capture hidden signal structures in many applications of interest.
While there have been a few attempts at exploiting sparsity based priors for blind deconvolution type of problems~\cite{ahmed2012blind,kammoun2010robustness,herrity2008blind,barchiesi2011dictionary,hegde2011sampling,grady2005survey}, strong theoretical guarantees on signal identifiability for such sparse models are largely missing with the exception of \cite{ahmed2012blind} (which proves an interesting positive result under idealized assumptions).
Exploring more realistic sparsity assumptions pertaining to multi-hop channel estimation, we prove some surprising negative results for signal identifiability in the present article.
\partname~I of this paper~\cite{choudhary2014limitsBDambiguity} was devoted to the characterization of the ambiguity space associated with blind deconvolution and the proof of a strong unidentifiability result.
\partname~II of the paper utilizes the results in \partname~I to characterize the ambiguity space for sparsity constrained blind deconvolution problems.
In particular, canonical-sparse blind deconvolution is considered and a trade-off is derived between the level of sparsity in the unknown signals and the dimension of the ambiguity space.
Unfortunately, the derived scaling laws turn out to be unfavorable when compared to analogous results in compressed sensing~\cite{donoho2006compressed}.
Furthermore, an application of the methodology to a theoretical abstraction of the second-hop channel estimation problem, yields an unfavorable sparsity-ambiguity trade-off for a family of subspace coded signals that include repetition coding and geometrically decaying signals.
\subsection{Related Work}
\label{sec:prior art}
We briefly reviewed prior research on the multi-channel version of blind deconvolution~\cite{meraim1997blind,johnson1998blind,liu1996recentblind} in \partname~I (see~\cite{choudhary2014limitsBDambiguity} for details).
We briefly recap prior art discussed in \partname~I of the paper that pertains specifically to blind deconvolution in single-input-single-output (SISO) systems, before mentioning more related research.
For SISO blind deconvolution (\ie~blind channel estimation),~\cite{manton2003totallyblind} showed that input signal realizations with no inter-symbol-interference (ISI) could be uniquely recovered up to scalar multiplicative ambiguities.
In contrast, we showed in \partname~I of the paper that if ISI were allowed, blind deconvolution is ill-posed to the point of almost every input signal pair being unidentifiable.
In the papers~\cite{asif2009random,ahmed2012blind}, blind deconvolution was cast as a rank one matrix recovery problem for the development of convex programming based computational heuristics and a proof of correctness was provided assuming a random subspace precoding with sufficient redundancy.
We adopted this framework in our earlier works~\cite{choudhary2012onidentifiability,choudhary2012identifiabilitybounds,choudhary2013bilinear} on an information theoretic characterization of identifiability of the solution to general bilinear inverse problems and showed good predictive performance of the theory for blind deconvolution with Gaussian/Rademacher inputs.
Whereas~\cite{choudhary2013bilinear} derived conditions for identifiability (analogous to achievability results in information theory) and developed an abstract theory of regularized bilinear inverse problems, making assumptions no more specific than non-convex cone constrained priors, the present paper makes a significant departure in the sense that more explicit sparsity and subspace priors are considered that are motivated by applications in multi-hop channel estimation~\cite{richard2008sparse,choudhary2012sparse,michelusi2011HSD} and the focus is on characterizing the inherent \textit{unidentifiability} of blind deconvolution (akin to converse/impossibility results in information theory).
We point out that beside multi-hop communications, convolution with sparse vectors is an intuitive modeling assumption in other applications as well, \eg~high resolution astronomical imaging~\cite{hegde2011sampling}, modeling echoing audio signals~\cite{barchiesi2013LearningIncoherentDictionaries}, ultrasound imaging~\cite{tur2011Innovationratesampling}, and sporadic communications in 5G systems~\cite{jung2014SparseModelUncertainties}.
A promising identifiability analysis was proposed in~\cite{kammoun2010robustness}, leveraging results from~\cite{gribonval2010dictionary} on matrix factorization for sparse dictionary learning using the \lonenorm{} and $\ell_q$ quasi-norm for $0 < q < 1$.
Their approach and formulation differ from ours in two important aspects.
Firstly, we are interested in single-in-single-out (SISO) systems whereas~\cite{kammoun2010robustness} deals with single-in-multiple-out (SIMO) systems.
Secondly,~\cite{kammoun2010robustness} analyzes identifiability as a \textit{local} optimum to a \textit{non-convex} $\ell_1$ (or $\ell_q$ for $0 < q < 1$) optimization and hence is heavily dependent on the algorithmic formulation, whereas we consider the solution as the local/global optimum to the $\ell_0$ optimization problem and our impossibility results are information theoretic in nature, implying that they hold regardless of algorithmic formulation.
We emphasize that the constrained $\ell_{1}$ optimization formulation in \cite{kammoun2010robustness} is non-convex and therefore does not imply existence of provably correct and efficient recovery algorithms, despite identifiability of the channel.
Although it would be interesting to try and extend their approach to SISO systems and compare with our results, this is non-trivial and beyond the scope of the present paper.
An inverse problem closely related to blind deconvolution is the Fourier phase retrieval problem~\cite{jaganathan2013phase,fannjiang2012phase,candes2013phase} where a signal has to be reconstructed from its autocorrelation function.
This is clearly a special case of the blind deconvolution problem with much fewer degrees of freedom and allows identifiability and tractable recovery with a sparsity prior on the signal~\cite{jaganathan2013phase}.
A second important difference is that after \emph{lifting}~\cite{balas2005projection}, the Fourier phase retrieval problem has one linear constraint involving a positive semidefinite matrix.
This characteristic is known to be helpful in the conditioning of the inverse problem and in the development of recovery algorithms~\cite{beck2009matrixQP}.
While the blind deconvolution problem does not enjoy the same advantage, this approach seems to be a good avenue to explore if additional constraints are allowed.
This is a future direction of research.
As in \partname~I, we rely on the \emph{parameter counting} heuristic to quantify `dimension' of a set/space.
The parameter counting heuristic can be made rigorous using the framework of \emph{Hausdorff dimension}~\cite{mattila1995geometryofsets}, but we shall not bridge this gap in the present paper owing to space limitations.
\subsection{Contributions and Organization}
\label{sec:contributions}
In this work, we quantify unidentifiability for certain families of noiseless sparse blind deconvolution problems under a \emph{non-asymptotic} and \emph{non-statistical} setup.
Specifically, given model orders $m,n \in \setZ_{+}$, we investigate the trade-off between the level of sparsity in the unknown signal pair $\bb{\vec{x}_{\ast}, \vec{y}_{\ast}} \in \mathcal{K} \subseteq \setR^{m} \times \setR^{n}$ and the dimension of the unidentifiable subset of signals in $\mathcal{K}$.
While \partname~I of the paper focused on developing a description of the ambiguity space, \partname~II studies the interaction of this ambiguity space with canonical-sparse vectors and further extends the techniques to consider repetition coded and geometrically decaying vectors.
To motivate our signal choices, the specific application we consider is multi-hop sparse channel estimation for relay assisted communication described in \sectionname~\ref{sec:results with coding}.
Like \partname~I, our focus is on an \emph{algorithm independent} identifiability analysis and hence we shall \emph{not} examine efficient/polynomial-time algorithms, but rather show information theoretic impossibility results.
Our approach leads to the following novelties for \partname~II (refer to~\cite{choudhary2014limitsBDambiguity} for contributions of \partname~I of the paper).
\begin{enumerate}
\item We show that sparsity in the canonical basis is not sufficient to ensure identifiability, even in the presence of perfect model order information, and we construct non-zero dimensional unidentifiable subsets of the domain $\mathcal{K}$ for any given support set of $\vec{x}_{\ast}$ (or $\vec{y}_{\ast}$) as evidence to quantify the sparsity-ambiguity trade-off.
This is the content of \theoremname~\ref{thm:sparse unident moderate} in \sectionname~\ref{sec:sparse deconv}.
\item We consider a theoretical abstraction to a multi-hop channel estimation problem and extend our unidentifiability results to this setting.
Specifically, we show that other types of side information like repetition coding or geometric decay for the unknown vectors are still insufficient for identifiability, and exhibit an ambiguity trade-off analogous to the case of canonical-sparsity.
This is the content of \theoremname~\ref{thm:sparse cooperative coding unident} and \corollariesname~\ref{cor:repetition coding unident} and~\ref{cor:sparse geometric unident} in \sectionname~\ref{sec:results with coding}.
\end{enumerate}
The rest of the paper is organized as follows.
\sectionname~\ref{sec:overview} presents constructive numerical examples illustrating the nature of unidentifiable inputs for blind deconvolution.
\sectionname~\ref{sec:model} recaps the system model, the notion of identifiability, and the lifted reformulation of the blind deconvolution problem from \partname~I of the paper.
\sectionname~\ref{sec:results without coding} presents the key unidentifiability results for canonical-sparse blind deconvolution and contrasts them against results from \partname~I of the paper.
\sectionname~\ref{sec:results with coding} extends the techniques and results in \sectionname~\ref{sec:results without coding} to more general families of subspace based structural priors, including repetition coding and geometrically decaying canonical representations.
\sectionname~\ref{sec:conclusion} concludes the paper.
Detailed proofs of the major results in the paper appear in \appendicesname~\ref{sec:sparse unident moderate proof}-\ref{sec:sparse cooperative coding unident proof}.
\subsection{Notational Conventions}
\label{sec:notation}
We shall closely follow the notation used in \partname~I of the paper which is recapped below.
All vectors are assumed to be column vectors unless stated otherwise and denoted by lowercase boldface alphabets~(\eg~$\vec{a}$).
Matrices are denoted by uppercase boldface alphabets~(\eg~$\mat{A}$).
The MATLAB\textsuperscript{\circledR} indexing rules are used to denote parts of a vector~(\eg~$\vec{a}\bb{4:6}$ denotes the sub-vector of $\vec{a}$ formed by the $4^{\thp}$, $5^{\thp}$ and $6^{\thp}$ elements of $\vec{a}$).
The all zero vector/matrix (respectively all one vector) shall be denoted by $\vec{0}$ (respectively $\vec{1}$) and its dimension would be clear from the usage context.
For vectors and/or matrices, $\tpose{\bb{\cdot}}$ and $\rank{\cdot}$ respectively return the transpose and rank of their argument, whenever applicable.
Special sets are denoted by uppercase blackboard bold font~(\eg~$\setR$ for real numbers) and a subscripted `$+$' sign would denote the non-negative subset whenever applicable~(\eg~$\setR_{+}$ for non-negative real numbers).
Other sets are denoted by uppercase calligraphic font~(\eg~$\mathcal{S}$).
For any set $\mathcal{S}$, $\card{\mathcal{S}}$ shall denote its cardinality.
Linear operators on matrices are denoted by uppercase script font~(\eg~$\mathscr{S}$).
To avoid unnecessarily heavy notation, we shall adopt the following convention: The scope of both vector variables (like $\vec{x}$, $\vec{y}$, $\vec{u}$, $\vec{v}$, \etc) as well as matrix variables (like $\mat{X}$, $\mat{Y}$, \etc) are restricted to individual theorems and/or proofs.
Their meanings are allowed to differ \emph{across} theorems and proofs (and even across disjoint subparts of the same proof when there is no risk of confusion), thus facilitating the reuse of variable names across different theorems and avoiding heavy notation.
\section{Background}
\label{sec:background}
In this section, we review the system model from \partname~I of the paper and overview a new result from \partname~II of the paper with a numerical example.
The results in \partname~II of the paper continue to use the same system model, but with a different feasible set of signals.
\subsection{System Model}
\label{sec:model}
We consider the noiseless linear convolution observation model
\begin{equation}
\vec{z} = \vec{x} \star \vec{y},
\label{eqn:model}
\end{equation}
where $\star \colon \setR^{m} \times \setR^{n} \to \setR^{m + n - 1}$ denotes the linear convolution map, $\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}} \in \mathcal{K} \subseteq \setR^{m} \times \setR^{n}$ denotes the pair of input signals from a restricted domain $\mathcal{K}$, and $\vec{z} \in \setR^{m+n-1}$ is the vector of observations given by
\begin{equation}
\vec{z}\bb{l} = \begin{cases}
{\displaystyle \sum_{j = 1}^{\min\bb{l,m}} \vec{x}\bb{j} \vec{y}\bb{l+1-j}},
& 1 \leq l \leq n, \\
{\displaystyle \sum_{j = l+1-n}^{\min\bb{l,m}} \vec{x}\bb{j} \vec{y}\bb{l+1-j}},
& 1 \leq l-n \leq m-1.
\end{cases}
\label{eqn:conv defn}
\end{equation}
The corresponding inverse problem of constrained blind linear deconvolution is to find the vector pair $\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}} \in \mathcal{K}$ given the noiseless observation $\vec{z}$ and is symbolically represented by the feasibility problem
\find{\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}}}
{\vec{x} \star \vec{y} = \vec{z}, \sep \bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}} \in \mathcal{K}.}
{\label{prob:find_xy}}
Assuming that the model orders $m$ and $n$, respectively, of vectors $\vec{x}$ and $\vec{y}$ are fixed and known \textit{a priori}, we are concerned with whether \problemname~\eqref{prob:find_xy} admits a unique solution.
Since bilinearity of the convolution operator implies the inherent scaling ambiguity in \problemname~\eqref{prob:find_xy} given by
\begin{equation}
\vec{x} \star \vec{y} = \alpha \vec{x} \star \frac{1}{\alpha} \vec{y}, \quad \forall \alpha \neq 0,
\label{eqn:scaling ambiguity}
\end{equation}
the question of uniqueness only makes sense modulo such scalar multiplicative factors.
This leads us to the definition of identifiability in \partname~I that we restate below.
\begin{definition}[Identifiability]
\label{defn:identifiability}
A vector pair $\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}} \in \mathcal{K} \subseteq \setR^{m} \times \setR^{n}$ is identifiable within $\mathcal{K}$ with respect to the linear convolution map~$\star$, if $\forall \bb{\vec{x}', \vec{y}'} \in \mathcal{K}$ satisfying $\vec{x} \star \vec{y} = \vec{x}' \star \vec{y}'$, $\exists \alpha \neq 0$ such that $\bb{\vec{x}', \vec{y}'} = \bb{\alpha \vec{x}, \frac{1}{\alpha} \vec{y}}$.
\end{definition}
It is easy to see that \definitionname~\ref{defn:identifiability} induces an equivalence structure on the set of identifiable pairs in $\mathcal{K}$.
For future reference, we define the equivalence relation $\IdR \fcolon \mathcal{K} \times \mathcal{K} \to \cc{0,1}$ as follows.
Given any $\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}}, \bb{\vec{x}', \vec{y}'} \in \mathcal{K}$, $\IdR \bb[\big]{\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}}, \bb{\vec{x}', \vec{y}'}} = 1$ if and only if $\exists \alpha \neq 0$ such that $\bb{\vec{x}', \vec{y}'} = \bb{\alpha \vec{x}, \frac{1}{\alpha} \vec{y}}$.
It is straightforward to check that $\IdR\bb{\cdot,\cdot}$ is indeed an equivalence relation.
Let $\mathcal{K}/\IdR$ denote the set of equivalence classes of $\mathcal{K}$ induced by $\IdR\bb{\cdot,\cdot}$, and for any $\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}} \in \mathcal{K}$ let $\BB{\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}}} \in \mathcal{K}/\IdR$ denote the equivalence class containing $\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}}$.
Then \definitionname~\ref{defn:identifiability} amounts to declaring a vector pair $\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}} \in \mathcal{K}$ as identifiable if and only if every $\bb{\vec{x}', \vec{y}'} \in \mathcal{K}$ with $\BB{\bb{\vec{x}', \vec{y}'}} \neq \BB{\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}}}$ satisfies $\vec{x} \star \vec{y} \neq \vec{x}' \star \vec{y}'$.
Using the \emph{lifting} technique from optimization~\cite{balas2005projection}, \problemname~\eqref{prob:find_xy} can be reformulated as a rank minimization problem subject to linear equality constraints~\cite{choudhary2012onidentifiability,asif2009random}
\minimize{\mat{W}}
{\rank{\mat{W}}}
{\mathscr{S}\bb{\mat{W}} = \vec{z}, \sep \mat{W} \in \mathcal{W},}
{\label{prob:rank}}
where $\mathcal{W} \subseteq \setR^{m \times n}$ is \emph{any} set satisfying
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{W} \bigcap \set{\mat{W} \in \setR^{m \times n}}{\rank{\mat{W}} \leq 1}
= \set{\vec{x} \tpose{\vec{y}}}{\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}} \in \mathcal{K}},
\label{eqn:set change}
\end{equation}
and $\mathscr{S} \colon \setR^{m \times n} \to \setR^{m+n-1}$ is the unique linear operator (henceforth referred to as the \emph{lifted linear convolution operator}) satisfying
\begin{equation}
\mathscr{S}\bb{\vec{x} \tpose{\vec{y}}} = \vec{x} \star \vec{y}, \quad \forall \bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}} \in \setR^{m} \times \setR^{n}
\label{eqn:lifted op}
\end{equation}
and admitting an explicit closed form specification (see \partname~I~\cite{choudhary2014limitsBDambiguity}, \remarkname~1).
\problemsname~\eqref{prob:find_xy} and~\eqref{prob:rank} are equivalent for $\vec{z} \neq \vec{0}$ (see~\cite{choudhary2013bilinear} for details).
Hence, owing to the analytical simplicity of \problemname~\eqref{prob:rank}, identifiability of the solution to \problemname~\eqref{prob:find_xy} is derived using the properties of \problemname~\eqref{prob:rank}.
By construction, the optimal solution to \problemname~\eqref{prob:rank} is a rank one matrix $\mat{W}_{\opt}$ and its singular value decomposition $\mat{W}_{\opt} = \sigma_{\opt} \vec{u}_{\opt} \tpose{\vec{v}_{\opt}}$ yields a solution $\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}}_{\opt} = \bb{\sqrt{\sigma_{\opt}} \vec{u}_{\opt}, \sqrt{\sigma_{\opt}} \vec{v}_{\opt}}$ to \problemname~\eqref{prob:find_xy}.
\subsection{An Overview of the Results}
\label{sec:overview}
Let us interpret the role of $\mathcal{K} \subseteq \setR^{m} \times \setR^{n}$ for the discrete-time blind linear deconvolution problem~\eqref{prob:find_xy}.
Suppose that $\bb{\vec{x}_{\ast}, \vec{y}_{\ast}} \in \mathcal{K}$ is the ground truth resulting in the observation $\vec{z} = \vec{x}_{\ast} \star \vec{y}_{\ast}$.
The set $\mathcal{K}$ captures application specific constraints on the signal pair $\bb{\vec{x}_{\ast}, \vec{y}_{\ast}}$ (in our case, sparsity constraints on the true solution $\bb{\vec{x}_{\ast}, \vec{y}_{\ast}}$) by restricting the feasible set of signal choices in \problemname~\eqref{prob:find_xy}.
Without such a restriction, the solution to \problemname~\eqref{prob:find_xy} would most likely be unidentifiable (infact, \theoremname~2 in \partname~I shows that almost every ground truth $\bb{\vec{x}_{\ast}, \vec{y}_{\ast}}$ \wrt~the Lebesgue measure is unidentifiable in the absence of constraints).
In the sequel, we solely consider $\mathcal{K}$ to be a separable cone in $\setR^{m} \times \setR^{n}$, \ie~there exist sets $\mathcal{D}_{1} \subseteq \setR^{m}$ and $\mathcal{D}_{2} \subseteq \setR^{n}$ such that $\mathcal{K} = \mathcal{D}_{1} \times \mathcal{D}_{2}$ and for every $\alpha > 0$, $\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}} \in \mathcal{K}$ implies that $\bb{\alpha \vec{x}, \alpha \vec{y}} \in \mathcal{K}$.
Such a separability of $\mathcal{K}$ is motivated by the observation that in many applications of interest $\vec{x}_{\ast}$ and $\vec{y}_{\ast}$ are unrelated (like $\vec{x}_{\ast}$ and $\vec{y}_{\ast}$ may respectively represent the unknown source and the unknown channel in a blind channel estimation problem).
\theoremname~\ref{thm:sparse cooperative coding unident} in \sectionname~\ref{sec:partial cooperation} is the most general result of this part of the paper.
However, we shall not state it here since it requires some technical definitions that would appear unmotivated at this stage.
Instead, we shall succinctly overview the results pertaining to the special case of canonical-sparse blind deconvolution.
We revisit the numerical example from \partname~I of the paper and examine its identifiability (according to \definitionname~\ref{defn:identifiability}) under discrete-time blind linear deconvolution with canonical-sparsity constraints.
In preparation for the result, we first define a parameterized family of canonical-sparse cones for an arbitrary integer $d \geq 3$ and any index set $\Lambda \subseteq \cc{2,3,\dotsc,d-1}$ as
\begin{equation}
\Kzero\bb{\Lambda,d} \triangleq \set{\vec{w} \in \setR^{d}}{\vec{w}\bb{1} \neq 0, \vec{w}\bb{d} \neq 0, \vec{w}\bb{\Lambda} = \vec{0}},
\label{eqn:sparse domain}
\end{equation}
\ie~$\Lambda$ denotes the set of indices that are \emph{zero} across \emph{all} vectors in $\Kzero\bb{\Lambda,d}$.
Secondly, let us denote the Minkowski sum of the sets $\cc{-1}$ and $\Lambda$, by the shorthand notation $\Lambda - 1$, defined as
\begin{equation}
\Lambda - 1 = \cc{-1} + \Lambda \triangleq \set{j - 1}{j \in \Lambda}.
\end{equation}
Jumping ahead to provide a concrete example, the following unidentifiability result can be obtained as a corollary to \theoremname~\ref{thm:sparse unident moderate} in \sectionname~\ref{sec:sparse deconv}.
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:mixed unident moderate}
Let $m \geq 5$ and $n \geq 2$ be arbitrary integers and $\emptyset \neq \Lambda \subseteq \cc{3,4,\dotsc,m-2}$ denote a set of indices.
Let $\mathcal{K} = \Kzero\bb{\Lambda,m} \times \setR^{n}$ be the structured feasible set in \problemname~\eqref{prob:find_xy} and define $p \triangleq \card{\Lambda \bigcup \bb{\Lambda - 1}}$.
Then there exists a set $\mathcal{G}_{\ast} \subseteq \mathcal{K}/\IdR$ of dimension $\bb{m+n-p-1}$ such that every signal pair $\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}} \in \mathcal{G}_{\ast}$ is unidentifiable by \definitionname~\ref{defn:identifiability}.
\end{corollary}
\corollaryname~\ref{cor:mixed unident moderate} cannot be checked in its full generality by considering examples, since it is a statement about an uncountably infinite number of vectors.
However, we will re-analyze the numerical example in \partname~I of the paper (within canonical-sparse feasible sets) to capture the ideas behind \corollaryname~\ref{cor:mixed unident moderate}.
As in \partname~I, consider the vectors
\begin{subequations}
\begin{alignat}{2}
\vec{x}_{1} & = \tpose{\bb{1,0,1,0,0,0,0,0,1,0,1}}, & \quad \vec{y}_{1} & = \tpose{\bb{1,0,0,0,1,0,0}}, \\
\vec{x}_{2} & = \tpose{\bb{1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,0,0}}, & \quad \vec{y}_{2} & = \tpose{\bb{1,0,1,0,1,0,1}},
\end{alignat}
\end{subequations}
resulting in
\begin{equation}
\vec{x}_{1} \star \vec{y}_{1} = \vec{x}_{2} \star \vec{y}_{2} = \tpose{\bb{1,0,1,0,1,0,1,0,1,0,1,0,1,0,1,0,0}}
\label{eqn:common convolved output}
\end{equation}
with $\vec{x}_{1}$ and $\vec{x}_{2}$ being non-collinear.
Clearly, the pairs $\bb{\vec{x}_{1}, \vec{y}_{1}}$ and $\bb{\vec{x}_{2}, \vec{y}_{2}}$ are unidentifiable within the domain $\setR^{11} \times \setR^{7}$.
Setting $d = 11$ and $\Lambda = \cc{4,5,6,7,8}$ in \eqref{eqn:sparse domain} gives $\vec{x}_{1}, \vec{x}_{2} \in \Kzero\bb{\Lambda,11}$ and therefore $\bb{\vec{x}_{1}, \vec{y}_{1}}, \bb{\vec{x}_{2}, \vec{y}_{2}} \in \Kzero\bb{\Lambda,11} \times \setR^{7}$ are still unidentifiable within $\mathcal{K} = \Kzero\bb{\Lambda,11} \times \setR^{7}$.
Next, we show that the \emph{rotational ambiguity} over $\setR^{11} \times \setR^{7}$ (discussed in \partname~I) stays valid over $\Kzero\bb{\Lambda,11} \times \setR^{7}$ and leads to an uncountable set of unidentifiable pairs in $\mathcal{K}$.
Let $\vec{z}_{0} = \vec{x}_{1} \star \vec{y}_{1} = \vec{x}_{2} \star \vec{y}_{2}$ denote the common convolved output in \eqref{eqn:common convolved output} and consider the parameterized vectors
\begin{subequations}
\label{eqn:rotational transform}
\begin{alignat}{2}
\vec{x}_{1}' & = \vec{x}_{1} \cos \theta - \vec{x}_{2} \sin \theta, & \quad \vec{y}_{1}' & = \vec{y}_{1} \sin \phi - \vec{y}_{2} \cos \phi, \\
\vec{x}_{2}' & = \vec{x}_{1} \cos \phi - \vec{x}_{2} \sin \phi, & \quad \vec{y}_{2}' & = \vec{y}_{1} \sin \theta - \vec{y}_{2} \cos \theta,
\end{alignat}
\end{subequations}
where $\theta \neq \phi$ are the parameters, and $\cc{\vec{x}_{1}, \vec{x}_{2}, \vec{y}_{1}, \vec{y}_{2}}$ acts as the set of seed vectors for the above transformation.
Clearly, $\theta \neq \phi$ and non-collinearity of $\vec{x}_{1}$ and $\vec{x}_{2}$ imply that $\vec{x}_{1}'$ and $\vec{x}_{2}'$ are linearly independent.
A simple algebraic manipulation reveals that
\makeatletter
\if@twocolumn
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\MoveEqLeft \vec{z}_{0} \sin \bb{\theta + \phi} - \vec{x}_{2} \star \vec{y}_{1} \sin \theta \sin \phi - \vec{x}_{1} \star \vec{y}_{2} \cos \theta \cos \phi \\
& = \vec{x}_{1}' \star \vec{y}_{1}' = \vec{x}_{2}' \star \vec{y}_{2}',
\end{split}
\label{eqn:parametrized example cos sin}
\end{equation}
\else
\begin{equation}
\vec{x}_{1}' \star \vec{y}_{1}' = \vec{x}_{2}' \star \vec{y}_{2}' = \vec{z}_{0} \sin \bb{\theta + \phi} - \vec{x}_{2} \star \vec{y}_{1} \sin \theta \sin \phi - \vec{x}_{1} \star \vec{y}_{2} \cos \theta \cos \phi,
\label{eqn:parametrized example cos sin}
\end{equation}
\fi
\makeatother
rendering both $\bb{\vec{x}_{1}', \vec{y}_{1}'}$ and $\bb{\vec{x}_{2}', \vec{y}_{2}'}$ unidentifiable within $\setR^{11} \times \setR^{7}$.
Since $\vec{x}_{1}, \vec{x}_{2} \in \Kzero\bb{\Lambda,11}$, \eqref{eqn:rotational transform} implies that $\vec{x}_{1}', \vec{x}_{2}' \in \Kzero\bb{\Lambda,11}$, thus rendering $\bb{\vec{x}_{1}', \vec{y}_{1}'},\bb{\vec{x}_{2}', \vec{y}_{2}'} \in \Kzero\bb{\Lambda,11} \times \setR^{7}$ unidentifiable within $\mathcal{K} = \Kzero\bb{\Lambda,11} \times \setR^{7}$.
Since $\bb{\theta, \phi} \in [0, \pi)^{2}$ describes a two dimensional parameter space, \eqref{eqn:rotational transform} and \eqref{eqn:parametrized example cos sin} imply that the unidentifiable subset of $\Kzero\bb{\Lambda,11} \times \setR^{7}$ is at least two dimensional and therefore hints towards \corollaryname~\ref{cor:mixed unident moderate}.
Thus, having a sparse support does not help with identifiability here.
\section{Unidentifiability under Canonical Sparsity}
\label{sec:results without coding}
We shall use \emph{identifiability} in the sense of \definitionname~\ref{defn:identifiability}.
In \sectionname~\ref{sec:supporting lemmas}, we recap the partially parametric characterization of the ambiguity space of unconstrained blind deconvolution (\lemmaname~\ref{lem:rank-2 nullspace}), the pathological cases for unidentifiability, and a rotation based representation cum decomposition result (\lemmaname~\ref{lem:finite quotient set}) discussed in \partname~I of the paper.
In \sectionname~\ref{sec:sparse deconv}, we state our main unidentifiability result for canonical-sparse blind deconvolution as \theoremname~\ref{thm:sparse unident moderate} and contrast it with the almost everywhere unidentifiability result for non-sparse blind deconvolution from \partname~I of the paper.
\sectionname~\ref{sec:mixed extensions} states a stronger result for the feasible set in \corollaryname~\ref{cor:mixed unident moderate}.
Throughout this section, we assume that $\mathcal{K}$ represents the (not necessarily convex) feasible \emph{cone} in \problemname~\eqref{prob:find_xy}, \ie~$\forall \bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}} \in \mathcal{K}$ one has $\bb{\alpha\vec{x}, \alpha\vec{y}} \in \mathcal{K}$ for every $\alpha \neq 0$, but $\mathcal{K}$ is allowed to change from theorem to theorem.
\subsection{Representation Lemmas and Pathological Cases}
\label{sec:supporting lemmas}
Let $\mathscr{S}\bb{\cdot}$ denote the lifted linear convolution operator as described in \sectionname~\ref{sec:model}.
We denote the rank-$k$ null space of $\mathscr{S}\bb{\cdot}$ by $\mathcal{N}\bb{\mathscr{S}, k}$ and define it as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{N}\bb{\mathscr{S}, k} \triangleq \set{\mat{Q} \in \setR^{m \times n}}{\rank{\mat{Q}} \leq k,\, \mathscr{S}\bb{\mat{Q}} = \vec{0}}.
\end{equation}
We note that the rank one null space of $\mathscr{S}\bb{\cdot}$ is trivial, \ie~$\mathcal{N}\bb{\mathscr{S}, 1} = \cc{\mat{0}}$, and this property of linear convolution is implicitly used to prove equivalence of \problemsname~\eqref{prob:find_xy} and~\eqref{prob:rank} for $\vec{z} \neq \vec{0}$ in~\cite{choudhary2013bilinear}.
$\mathcal{N}\bb{\mathscr{S}, 1} = \cc{\mat{0}}$ follows from interpreting convolution as polynomial multiplication, since the product of two real polynomials is identically zero if and only if at least one of them is identically zero.
The following lemma (borrowed from \partname~I of this paper) describes a subset of $\mathcal{N}\bb{\mathscr{S}, 2}$, the rank two null space of $\mathscr{S}\bb{\cdot}$, and is used in the proofs of the results in the sequel.
\begin{lemma}[from~\cite{choudhary2014limitsBDambiguity}]
\label{lem:rank-2 nullspace}
Let $m,n \geq 2$ and $\mat{Q} \in \setR^{m \times n}$ admit a factorization of the form
\begin{equation}
\mat{Q} = \begin{bmatrix}
\vec{u} & 0 \\
0 & -\vec{u}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & \tpose{\vec{v}} \\
\tpose{\vec{v}} & 0
\end{bmatrix},
\label{eqn:rank-2 nullspace}
\end{equation}
for some $\vec{v} \in \setR^{n-1}$ and $\vec{u} \in \setR^{m-1}$.
Then $\mat{Q} \in \mathcal{N}\bb{\mathscr{S}, 2}$.
\end{lemma}
We refer the reader to \remarkname~2 in~\cite{choudhary2014limitsBDambiguity} for correct parsing of the symbolic shorthand on the \rhs{} of \eqref{eqn:rank-2 nullspace}.
We shall also need the following non-linear re-parameterization cum decomposition result (borrowed from \partname~I of this paper) to serve as a building block for constructing adversarial instances of input signals for which deconvolution fails the identifiability test.
We point out the symbolic connection to the transformation in \eqref{eqn:rotational transform} and the representation in \eqref{eqn:rank-2 nullspace}.
\begin{lemma}[from~\cite{choudhary2014limitsBDambiguity}]
\label{lem:finite quotient set}
Let $d \geq 2$ be an arbitrary integer and $\vec{w} \in \set{\vec{w}' \in \setR^{d}}{\vec{w}'(1) \neq 0, \vec{w}'(d) \neq 0}$ be an arbitrary vector.
The quotient set $\mathcal{Q}_{\sim}\bb{\vec{w}, d}$ defined as
\makeatletter
\if@twocolumn
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{Q}_{\sim}\bb{\vec{w}, d}
& \triangleq \mleft\{\bb{\vec{w}_{\ast},\gamma} \in \setR^{d-1} \times \setA \, \middle| \vphantom{\begin{bmatrix} \cos \gamma \\ \sin \gamma \end{bmatrix}} \mright. \\
& \qquad \quad \mleft. \vec{w} = \begin{bmatrix}
\vec{w}_{\ast} & 0 \\
0 & -\vec{w}_{\ast}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\cos \gamma \\
\sin \gamma
\end{bmatrix} \mright\},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\else
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{Q}_{\sim}\bb{\vec{w}, d}
\triangleq \set{\bb{\vec{w}_{\ast},\gamma} \in \setR^{d-1} \times \setA}
{\vec{w} = \begin{bmatrix}
\vec{w}_{\ast} & 0 \\
0 & -\vec{w}_{\ast}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\cos \gamma \\
\sin \gamma
\end{bmatrix}},
\end{equation}
\fi
\makeatother
is finite (possibly empty) with cardinality at most $\bb{2d-2}$.
If $d$ is an even integer then $\mathcal{Q}_{\sim}\bb{\vec{w}, d}$ is non-empty.
\end{lemma}
We briefly recap the pathological cases discussed in \partname~I, \sectionname~IV-A that we shall exclude from consideration in rest of the paper.
This serves to remove the most straightforward delay ambiguities at an intuitive level, as well as to simplify the arguments in our proofs by excluding special cases that are best considered separately.
It was shown in \partname~I that for identifiability of $\bb{\vec{x}_{\ast}, \vec{y}_{\ast}} \in \setR^{m} \times \setR^{n}$ within $\setR^{m} \times \setR^{n}$, it is necessary that both $\cc{\vec{x}_{\ast}(m), \vec{y}_{\ast}(1)} \neq \cc{0}$ and $\cc{\vec{x}_{\ast}(1), \vec{y}_{\ast}(n)} \neq \cc{0}$ must be true.
In the sequel, we shall consider the stronger restriction $0 \not \in \cc{\vec{x}_{\ast}(1), \vec{x}_{\ast}(m), \vec{y}_{\ast}(1), \vec{y}_{\ast}(n)}$ to automatically eliminate the pathological cases.
Implicitly, this is also the reason for requiring $\vec{w}(1) \neq 0$ and $\vec{w}(d) \neq 0$ for any vector $\vec{w} \in \setR^{d}$ in the premise of \lemmaname~\ref{lem:finite quotient set} as well as in the definition of the canonical-sparse domain $\Kzero\bb{\Lambda,d}$ in \eqref{eqn:sparse domain}.
\subsection{Canonical-sparse Blind Deconvolution}
\label{sec:sparse deconv}
To be consistent with the notation for canonical-sparse cones in \eqref{eqn:sparse domain}, we denote the set of unconstrained non-pathological $d$ dimensional vectors by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{K}\bb{\emptyset,d} \triangleq \set{\vec{w} \in \setR^{d}}{\vec{w}\bb{1} \neq 0, \vec{w}\bb{d} \neq 0}.
\end{equation}
For subsequent comparison we recall below, the unidentifiability result from \partname~I of the paper adapted for the domain $\mathcal{K}\bb{\emptyset,d}$.
\begin{theorem}[adapted from~\cite{choudhary2014limitsBDambiguity}]
\label{thm:ae unident}
Let $m,n \geq 4$ be even integers and $\mathcal{K} = \mathcal{K}\bb{\emptyset,m} \times \setR^{n}$.
For any $\vec{x} \in \mathcal{K}\bb{\emptyset,m}$, $\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}} \in \mathcal{K}$ is unidentifiable almost everywhere \wrt~any measure over $\vec{y}$ that is absolutely continuous \wrt~the $n$ dimensional Lebesgue measure.
\end{theorem}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\figwidth]{SampleVecKzero}
\caption{An arbitrary vector $\vec{s} \in \Kzero\bb{\Lambda, d}$ with $\Lambda = \cc{3,4,7,8,9,12}$ and $d = 14$.
Every $\vec{s} \in \Kzero\bb{\Lambda, d}$ is zero on the index set $\Lambda$ (indicated by blue dots).
Heights of the black dashed stems, indicating values on $\Lambda^{\comp}$, can vary across different vectors in $\Kzero\bb{\Lambda, d}$.}
\label{fig:sample-K0}
\end{figure}
In the presence of a sparsity prior on $\vec{y} \in \setR^{n}$, \theoremname~\ref{thm:ae unident} does not apply anymore, since a sparsity prior is necessarily generated from a measure that is \emph{not} absolutely continuous \wrt~the $n$ dimensional Lebesgue measure.
Assuming that the sparsity prior is \wrt~the canonical basis, we prove the following unidentifiability result (recall that $\mathcal{K}/\IdR$ denotes the set of all equivalence classes induced by the equivalence relation $\IdR\bb{\cdot,\cdot}$ on $\mathcal{K}$).
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:sparse unident moderate}
Let $m,n \geq 5$ be arbitrary integers.
For any given index sets $\emptyset \neq \Lambda_{1} \subseteq \cc{3,4,\dotsc,m-2}$ and $\emptyset \neq \Lambda_{2} \subseteq \cc{3,4,\dotsc,n-2}$, let $\mathcal{K} = \Kzero\bb{\Lambda_{1},m} \times \Kzero\bb{\Lambda_{2},n}$ and define $p_{j} \triangleq \card{\Lambda_{j} \bigcup \bb{\Lambda_{j} - 1}}$ for $j \in \cc{1,2}$.
Then there exists a set $\mathcal{G}_{\ast} \subseteq \mathcal{K}/\IdR$ of dimension $\bb{m+n-1 - p_{1} - p_{2}}$ such that every $\bb{\vec{x}, \vec{y}} \in \mathcal{G}_{\ast}$ is unidentifiable.
\end{theorem}
\begin{IEEEproof}
|
\section{Introduction}
The radio emission associated with Active Galactic Nuclei (AGNs)
is synchrotron emission, which can be linearly polarized up to about
75\% in optically thin regions, where the polarization angle
$\chi$ is orthogonal to the projection of the magnetic field
{\bf B} onto the plane of the sky, and
up to 10--15\% in optically thick regions, where $\chi$ is parallel to
the projected {\bf B} (Pacholczyk 1970). Linear polarization measurements thus
provide direct information about both the degree of order and the
direction of the {\bf B} field giving rise to the observed synchrotron
radiation.
Multi-frequency Very Long Baseline Interferometry (VLBI) polarization
observations also provide information about the parsec-scale
distribution of the spectral index (optical depth) of the emitting
regions, as well as Faraday rotation occurring between the source
and observer. Faraday rotation of the plane of linear polarization
occurs during the passage of the associated electromagnetic wave
through a region with free electrons and a {\bf B} field with a
non-zero component along the line of sight. When the Faraday rotation
occurs outside the emitting region in regions of non-relativistic
(``thermal'') plasma, the amount of rotation is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\chi_{obs} - \chi_o =
\frac{e^3\lambda^{2}}{8\pi^2\epsilon_om^2c^3}\int n_{e}
{\mathbf B}\cdot d{\mathbf l} \equiv \textrm{RM}\lambda^{2}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\chi_{obs}$ and $\chi_o$ are the observed and intrinsic
polarization angles, respectively, $-e$ and $m$ are the charge and
mass of the particles giving rise to the Faraday rotation, usually
taken to be electrons, $c$ is the speed of light, $n_{e}$ is the
density of the Faraday-rotating electrons, $\mathbf{B}$ is the
magnetic field, $d\mathbf{l}$ is an element along the line of
sight, $\lambda$ is the observing wavelength, and RM (the coefficient of
$\lambda^2$) is the Rotation Measure (e.g., Burn 1966). Simultaneous
multifrequency observations thus allow the determination of both
the RM, which carries information about the electron density and
the line-of-sight {\bf B} field in the region of Faraday rotation,
and $\chi_o$, which carries information about the intrinsic {\bf B}-field
geometry associated with the source projected onto the plane of the sky.
As was pointed out by Blandford (1993), the presence of a helical
{\bf B} field threading the jet of an AGN should give rise to a
gradient in the observed RM across the jet, due to the associated
systematic change
in the line-of-sight {\bf B} field. Further, such fields
would come about in a natural way as a result of the ``winding up'' of
an initial ``seed'' field by the rotation of the central accreting
objects (e.g. Nakamura et al. 2001; Lovelace et al. 2002).
The first report of an actual detection of such a transverse RM gradient
was made by Asada et al. (2002), for the VLBI jet of 3C273; this result
was later confirmed by Zavala \& Taylor (2005) and Hovatta et al.
(2012). Transverse RM gradients were subsequently reported across
the parsec-scale jets of a number of other AGN (e.g.,
Gabuzda et al. 2004, 2008; Asada et al. 2008, 2010; Kharb et al. 2009;
Mahmud et al. 2009; Croke et al. 2010), and
interpreted as reflecting the systematic change in the line-of-sight
component of a toroidal or helical jet {\bf B} field across the jets.
\begin{center}
\begin{table*}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
\multicolumn{8}{c}{Table 1: Source properties}\\
Source & Redshift & Optical & pc/mas & Ref & Integrated RM & Ref & Original RM \\
& & ID & & & (rad/m$^2$) & & Map Ref \\\hline
0256+075 & 0.89 & BL & 7.78 & S89, KS90 & $-13$ & P & * \\
0355+508 & 1.52 & Q & 8.54 & M & $-17$ & R & ZT \\
0735+178 & 0.45 & BL & 5.73 & M & $+9$ & R & G2 \\
0745+241 & 0.41 & HPQ& 5.42 & M & $+21$ & P & G1 \\
0748+126 & 0.89 & Q & 7.78 & M & $+14$ & T & ZT \\
0820+225 & 0.95 & BL & 7.93 & S93, KS90 & $+81$ & P & G1 \\
0823+033 & 0.50 & BL & 6.12 & M & $+1$ & P & * \\
1156+295 & 0.72 & HPQ & 7.25 & M & $-32$ & T & G2 \\
1219+285 & 0.10 & BL & 1.87 & M & $-1$ & R & * \\
1334$-$127& 0.54 & HPQ & 6.33 & M & $-23$ & P & * \\
1652+398 & 0.034& BL & 0.66 & M & $+42$ & R & G1 \\
1749+096 & 0.32 & BL & 4.64 & M & $+94$ & P & G2\\
1807+698 & 0.051& BL & 0.98 & M & $+11$ & T & G1 \\
2007+777 & 0.34 & BL & 4.83 & M & $-20$ & R & * \\
2155$-$152& 0.67 & HPQ & 7.02 & M & $+19$ & P & * \\ \hline
\multicolumn{8}{l}{BL = BL Lac object; Q = Quasar with no optical
polarization data; HPQ = Quasar with}\\
\multicolumn{8}{l}{fractional linear polarization in the optical above
3\% on at least one occasion; M = MOJAVE }\\
\multicolumn{8}{l}{website; S89 = Stickel et al. 1989;
S93 = Stickel et al. 1993; KS90 = K\"{u}hr \& Schmidt 1990;}\\
\multicolumn{8}{l}{R = Rusk 1988; P = Pushkarev 2001; T = Taylor et al. 2009;
ZT = Zavala \& Taylor (2004);}\\
\multicolumn{8}{l}{G1 = Gabuzda et al. (2004); G2 = Gabuzda et al. (2008); * =
Not previously published in the}\\
\multicolumn{8}{l}{refereed literature}\\
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{table*}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
\multicolumn{8}{c}{Table 2: Map properties}\\
Source & Figure & Freq & Peak & Lowest contour & BMaj & BMin & BPA \\
& & (GHz) & (Jy) & (\%) & (mas) & (mas) & (deg) \\\hline
0256+075 & 1a & 4.6 & 0.38 & 0.25 & 3.35 & 1.69 & -3.2 \\
0355+508 & 3a & 8.1 & 4.42 & 0.50 & 1.98 & 0.94 & 21.7 \\
0748+126 & 3b & 8.1 & 0.90 & 0.25 & 2.25 & 0.86 & -7.7 \\
0823+033 & 1b & 5.0 & 1.16 & 0.25 & 3.67 & 1.64 & -0.1 \\
1219+285 & 1c & 5.0 & 0.28 & 0.50 & 3.68 & 2.58 & -13 \\
1334$-$127 & 2a & 4.6 & 3.30 & 0.25 & 3.76 & 1.49 & -0.9 \\
1334$-$127 & 2d & 4.6 & 3.27 & 0.25 & 2.00 & 2.00 & 0 \\
2007+777 & 1d & 5.0 & 0.95 & 0.25 & 1.82 & 1.66 & -20.4 \\
2155$-$152 & 2b,c & 4.6 & 1.02 & 0.25 & 4.24 & 1.68 & -1.7 \\
2155$-$152 & 2e & 4.6 & 1.01 & 0.50 & 2.66 & 2.66 & 0 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\end{center}
However, there were three main difficulties with these measurements, which
led to skepticism about these results among some researchers. One was
that it seemed non-intuitive that it could be possible to detect these
RM gradients when the intrinsic widths of the jets were sometimes
appreciably smaller than the widths of the beams with which they were
observed; this was expressed by Taylor \& Zavala (2010) through their
proposed criterion that an observed transverse RM gradient must have a
width of at least three ``resolution elements'' (usually taken to mean
three beamwidths) in order to be considered reliable. This criterion
was presented without justification, but if it was correct, it would
invalidate nearly all the previously published reports of transverse
RM gradients, as well as make it very difficult to identify new cases.
The second difficulty was that determining the significance of observed
gradients required reasonably accurate estimation of the uncertainties
in the RM value being compared. The standard practice at the time was
to assign an uncertainty to the Stokes $Q$ and $U$ values in individual
pixels equal to the off-source rms in the corresponding $Q$ and $U$
images, $\sigma_{Q,rms}$ and $\sigma_{U,rms}$, then propagate these
uncertainties to determine the corresponding
uncertainties in the polarization angles $\chi = 0.5 \arctan U/Q$; however,
this approach had never been tested. In addition, attempts were made to
assign uncertainties to RM values averaged over several pixels based on
the standard deviation of the values being averaged, but this ignored the
presence of correlations in the values measured in neaby pixels due to
convolution with the CLEAN beam used. Further, residual instrumental
polarizations remaining in the polarization data after calibration could
potentially add additional uncertainty to the measured polarization
angles, and this had not been taken into account.
A third difficulty was that there can, in some cases, be small but
significant relative shifts between the polarization angle images
obtained at different frequencies, due to the frequency dependence of
the position of the VLBI core (Blandford \& K\"{o}nigl 1979). This led
to concerns about whether apparent Faraday rotation gradients could arise
due to incorrect relative alignment of the polarization images. The necessary
shifts can be determined and corrected for, but this had not been done
in a number of studies.
Thus, there was a need to clarify whether there was a minimum resolution
required to reliably detect Faraday-rotation structure, to identify
a suitable approach for accurately estimating uncertainties in quantities
at individual locations in VLBI images and to ensure that any small relative
shifts between the polarization angle images used to construct the RM
maps were correctly taken into account (or that they were small enough for
their effect on the RM images to be negligible).
A first important step was taken by Hovatta et al. (2012), who carried
out Monte Carlo simulations based on realistic ``snapshot'' baseline coverage
for VLBA observations at 7.9, 8.4, 12.9 and 15.4~GHz, aimed at investigating
the statistical occurrence of spurious RM gradients across jets with
intrinsically constant polarization profiles. Inspection of the
right-hand panel of Fig. 30 of Hovatta et al. (2012) shows that the
fraction of spurious $3\sigma$ gradients was no more than about 1\%,
even for the smallest observed RM-gradient widths they considered,
about 1.4 beamwidths. Relatively few $2\sigma$ gradients were also
found, although this number reached about 7\% for observed jet widths of about
1.5 beamwidths; nevertheless, Hovatta et al. (2012) point out that
$2\sigma$ gradients are potentially also of interest if confirmed over
two or more epochs.
The results of Hovatta et al. (2012) have also now been confirmed by
similar Monte Carlo simulations carried out by Algaba (2013) for simulated
data at 12, 15 and 22~GHz and by Murphy \& Gabuzda (2013) for simulated
data at 1.38, 1.43, 1.49 and 1.67~GHz and at the same frequencies as
those considered by Hovatta et al. (2012). The 1.38-–1.67~GHz frequency range
considered by Murphy \& Gabuzda (2013) yielded a negligible number of
spurious $3\sigma$ gradients (and fewer than 1\% spurious $2\sigma$
gradients), even for observed jet widths of only 1 beamwidth (i.e., for
poorly resolved jets).
Two more sets of Monte Carlo simulations based on realistic snapshot VLBA
baseline coverage adopted a complementary approach: instead
of considering the occurrence of spurious RM gradients across jets with
constant polarization, they considered simulated jets with various widths
and with transverse RM gradients of various strengths, convolved with
various size beams. Mahmud et al. (2013) carried out such simulations for
4.6, 5.0, 7.9, 8.4, 12.9 and 15.4~GHz VLBA data, and Murphy \&
Gabuzda (2013) for 1.38, 1.43, 1.49 and 1.67~GHz VLBA data.
These simulations clearly showed that, with realistic noise and baseline
coverage, the simulated RM gradients could remain clearly visible, even
when the jet width was as small as 1/20 of a beam width.
All these simulations clearly demonstrate that the width spanned
by an RM gradient is not a crucial criterion for its reliability,
at least down to 1/20 of a beam width. This
counterintuitive result essentially comes about because polarization is
a vector quantity, while the intensity is a scalar. A difference in the
polarization angles across the jet can be detected in situations where
intensity structure could not be. Alternatively, thinking of the polarization
as being composed of Stokes $Q$ and $U$, this enhanced sensitivity to
closely spaced structures comes about because both $Q$ and $U$ can be
positive or negative. It is important to bear in mind that we are not
speaking here of being able to accurately deconvolve the observed
RM profiles to determine the intrinsic transverse RM structure --- only of
the ability to detect the presence of a systematic transverse RM
gradient.
Another key outcome of the Monte Carlo simulations of Hovatta et al. (2012)
is an empirical formula that can be used to estimate the uncertainties
in intensity (Stokes $I$, $Q$ or $U$) images, including the uncertainty due to
residual instrumental polarization (``D-terms'') that has been incompletely
removed from the visibility data. In regions of source emission where the
contribution of the residual instrumental polarization is negligible,
the typical uncertainties in individual pixels are approximately 1.8
times the rms deviations of the flux about its mean value far from regions
of source emission, $\sigma_{rms}$. This is roughly a factor of two greater
than the uncertainties that have been assigned to intensities measured
in individual pixels as standard practice in past studies, indicating
that the past uncertainties have been somewhat underestimated. These
results have recently been
confirmed by the Monte Carlo simulations of Coughlan (2014), which
likewise indicate that the typical intensity uncertainties in individual
pixels are of order twice the off-source rms, with significant pixel-to-pixel
variations in the uncertainties appearing in the case of well resolved
sources.
New Faraday-rotation analyses based on the error formulation of
Hovatta et al. (2012), focusing on monotonicity and a significance of
at least $3\sigma$ as the key criteria for reliability of observed
transverse RM gradients, and ensuring that the RM images analyzed are not
significantly affected by relative shifts between the polarization-angle
images at different frequencies have begun to appear
(Mahmud et al. 2013, Gabuzda et al. 2014a, 2014b).
There is also a need to verify the reliability of previously published
results. In the current
paper, we present the results of new analyses of the 7 RM maps previously
published by Gabuzda et al. (2004, 2008), and confirm
that the previously reported RM gradients are significant. We also report 8
new cases of monotonic, statistically significant transverse RM gradients
across AGN jets, based on both published maps and maps not previously
published in the refereed literature, constructed using a variety of datasets
with three to seven frequencies.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.28\textwidth,angle=90]{0256+075intbm-fin.eps}
\includegraphics[width=.28\textwidth,angle=90]{0823+033-fin.eps}
\vspace*{0.8cm}
\includegraphics[width=.28\textwidth,angle=90]{1219+285-fin.eps}
\includegraphics[width=.28\textwidth,angle=90]{2007+777-fin.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{(a) 4.6-GHz intensity map of 0256+075 and 5.0-GHz intensity
maps of (b) 0823+033, (c)
1219+285, and (d) 2007+777 with the corresponding RM distributions
superposed (left panels). The lines drawn
across the RM distributions show the locations of the RM slices shown in the
corresponding right-hand panels; the letter ``S'' at one end of these
lines marks the side corresponding to the starting point for the slice.
The bold horizontal bars shown with the slice profiles indicate the beam
full widths at half maximum in the direction of the slices, which are
(a) 1.7~mas, (b) 1.65~mas, (c) 2.7~mas and (d) 1.7~mas. }
\label{fig:rmmaps5-1}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\vspace*{0.2cm}
\includegraphics[width=.30\textwidth,angle=0]{1334-a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=.28\textwidth,angle=0]{2155-c-b.eps}
\includegraphics[width=.28\textwidth,angle=0]{2155-j-c.eps}
\vspace*{0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=.35\textwidth,angle=90]{1334-127cbm-rev.eps}
\vspace*{0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=.35\textwidth,angle=90]{2155-152-rev.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{4.6-GHz intensity maps of
(a) 1334$-$127 (intrinsic beam), (b) 2155$-$152 core region (intrinsic beam),
(c) 2155$-$152 jet (intrinsic beam), (d) 1334$-$127 (circular beam)
(e) 2155$-$152 core region (circular beam). The lines drawn across the
superposed RM distributions in
panels (d) and (e) show the locations of the RM slices shown in the
corresponding right-hand panels; the letter ``S'' at one end of these
lines marks the side corresponding to the starting point for the slice.
The bold horizontal bars shown with the slice profiles indicate the beam
full widths at half maximum in the direction of the slices, which are
(d) 2.0~mas and (e) 2.7~mas. }
\label{fig:rmmaps5-2}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.30\textwidth,angle=90]{0355+508ellip-rev.eps}
\vspace*{0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=.30\textwidth,angle=90]{0748+126-fin.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{8.1-GHz intensity maps of (a) 0355+508 and (b) 0748+126
with the corresponding
RM distributions superposed (left panels). The lines drawn across the
RM distributions show the locations of the RM slices shown in the
corresponding right-hand panels; the letter ``S'' at one end of these
lines marks the side corresponding to the starting point for the slice.
The bold horizontal bars shown with the slice profiles indicate the beam
full widths at half maximum in the direction of the slices, which are
(a) 1.0~mas and (b) 1.3~mas. }
\label{fig:rmmaps8}
\end{figure*}
\section{Observations }
We consider here both new analyses of previously published Faraday RM
maps and RM images published here for the first time. In all cases,
the observations were obtained on the NRAO Very Long Baseline Array.
We have applied the error estimation formula of Hovatta
et al. (2012) to determine the uncertainties in the polarization angles
in individual pixels.
The observed Faraday rotation occurs predominantly in two
locations: in the immediate vicinity of the AGN and in our Galaxy. The
latter contribution must be estimated and removed if we wish to isolate
Faraday rotation occurring in the vicinity of the AGN itself. The effect
of the integrated (Galactic) RM is usually small, but can be substantial
for some sources, e.g. those lying near the plane of the Galaxy.
We used various integrated RM measurements obtained using the Very Large
Array, indicated in Table~1, to remove the effect of the Galactic RM from
the observed polarization angles, when significant, before making our RM maps.
When required, we corrected for any significant relative
shifts between the polarization angle images used to make the RM maps.
We determined these relative shifts using the cross-correlation approach
of Croke \& Gabuzda (2008); the shifts were tested by making
spectral-index maps taking into account the relative shifts,
to ensure that they did not show any spurious features due to residual
misalignment between the maps.
The maps were made with natural weighting. In a number of cases when the
beams obtained were fairly elongated, we also made versions of the RM
maps using circular beams with areas (roughly) equal to those of the intrinsic
elliptical beams, to test the robustness of gradients detected in the
original images.
\subsection{5--15~GHz, February 1997}
We consider the RM maps published by Gabuzda et al. (2004), as well as
several RM maps for other objects for which data were taken in the same
set of observations. These observations focused on objects in the sample
of 34 BL Lac objects defined by K\"uhr \& Schmidt (1990).
The observations were carried out on 9th February 1997 at 5, 8.4 and
15~GHz. The procedures used to
calibrate the data and construct the published RM maps are described by
Gabuzda et al. (2004). When the original RM maps were published, no
attempt to check the alignment of the polarization angle images at
the three frequencies was made, and we correct this here. Gabuzda et al.
(2004) removed the Galactic RM values from their RM maps; we have done
this for the new RM maps analyzed here as well.
\subsection{5--15~GHz, April 1997}
Six compact BL Lac objects were observed with the VLBA on 6th April 1997,
simultaneously at 22.2, 15.3, 8.4 and 5.0~GHz; we consider here only the
lower three frequencies, since the difference in resolution between the
22-GHz and 5-GHz data is quite large. The procedures used to calibrate
the data are described by Reynolds et al. (2001) and Gabuzda \& Chernetskii
(2003). The procedures used to construct the RM map for 1219+285
considered here were the same as those used by Gabuzda et al. (2004). We
have taken into
account the correct alignment between the polarization angle images at the
different frequencies in the RM map presented here. We have not attempted
to correct for the effect of Galactic Faraday rotation, as the integrated
RM is negligible in this case ($-1\pm 3$~rad/m$^2$; Rusk 1988).
\subsection{8.1--15.2~GHz, June 2001}
Zavala \& Taylor (2004) present 15.2-GHz total intensity maps with
superposed polarization sticks and Faraday RM maps based on 7 well-spaced
frequencies between 8.1 and 15.2~GHz for 17 AGN.
These observations were carried out on 20th June 2001 at 8.1, 8.2, 8.4,
8.6, 12.1, 12.6 and 15.2~GHz. The procedures used to
calibrate the data and construct the published RM maps are described by
Zavala \& Taylor (2004). The final fully calibrated and self-calibrated
visibility data were kindly provided by R. Zavala, and it is these data
that we used to make the RM images analyzed here.
A visual inspection of the published RM images indicated the possible
presence of transverse RM gradients across the jets of
0355+508 and 0748+126, as well as 1749+096, whose transverse RM
gradient was previously reported by Gabuzda et al. (2008).
We made stokes $Q$ and $U$ maps in AIPS for each of these two
sources at each of the frequencies,
ensuring that the image parameters (cell size, image
size, beam parameters) were the same for all 7 frequencies, and
taking the errors to be given by the approach of Hovatta et al. (2012).
We then used these to obtain matched-resolution polarization-angle (``PANG'')
and polarization-angle noise (``PANGN'') images, which were used to
construct RM maps after removing the effect of integrated (Galactic)
Faraday rotation when significant. These essentially reproduced the
RM maps published by Zavala \& Taylor (2004), but with the more
conservative errors of Hovatta et al. (2012) and with the Galactic
RM values removed.
Note that the procedure described above for matching the resolutions
of the images at the different frequencies was different from the approach
adopted by Zavala \& Taylor (2004), who applied tapers to the 12 and
15~GHz data used to produce the polarization-angle maps so as to approximate
the 8-GHz resolution, and then used a restoring beam matched to the
8-GHz beam. Although the procedure used by Zavala \& Taylor (2004) is
formally more correct, we did not find any significant differences between
our RM maps and those of Zavala \& Taylor (2004); it is likely that any
differences in the polarization maps due to the application of these
different approaches appear at lower flux and polarization levels than
those contributing to the RM images.
No mention of
image alignment is made in the original publication, and the published
spectral-index maps suggest that no image alignment was done (they
often show a band of seemingly optically thin emission on the side of the
core opposite the jet); we have ensured correct alignment of the
polarization-angle images in our analysis.
\subsection{4.6--15.1~GHz, August 2003, March 2004 and September 2004}
We consider here the published RM maps of Gabuzda et al. (2008), as well
as RM maps for several other objects for which data were taken in the
same sets of observations.
The observations were carried out at 4.6, 5.1, 7.9, 8.9, 12.9 and
15.4~GHz on 22nd August 2003, 22nd March 2004 and 10th September 2004.
The procedures used to calibrate the data and construct the published
RM maps are described by Gabuzda et al. (2008).
When the original RM maps were published, no
attempt to check the alignment of the polarization angle images at
the three frequencies was made, and we address this here. Gabuzda et al.
(2008) removed the Galactic RM values from their RM maps; we have done
this for the new RM maps analyzed here as well.
\section{Results}
The source names, redshifts, optical identifications, pc/mas values and
integrated rotation measures are summarized
in Table~1. The pc/mas were determined assumed a cosmology with $H_o =
71$~km\,s$^{-1}$Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_{\Lambda} = 0.73$ and $\Omega_{m} =
0.27$; the redshifts and pc/mas values were taken from the MOJAVE project
website when available (http://www.physics.purdue.edu/MOJAVE/).
RM maps together with slices in regions of detected transverse RM
gradients are shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:rmmaps5-1}--\ref{fig:rmmaps8}.
The frequencies, peaks and bottom contours of the intensity maps shown in
these figures are given in Table~2; in all cases, the contour levels
increase in steps of a factor of two. The ranges of the RM maps are
indicated by the colour wedges shown with the maps.
For consistency, in each case, the RM slices were taken in the clockwise
direction relative to the base of the
jet (located upstream from the observed core). The lines
drawn across the RM distributions show the locations of the slices; the
letter ``S'' at one end of these lines marks the side corresponding to
the starting point for the slice (a slice distance of 0). The
slices were taken in regions where the significance of the RM gradients
was highest. The
full width at half maximum of the beam in the direction of the slice
is shown together with the slices by a bold bar.
The statistical significance of transverse gradients detected in our
RM maps are summarized in Table~3. When plotting the slices in
Figs.~\ref{fig:rmmaps5-1}--\ref{fig:rmmaps8} and finding the difference
between the RM values at two ends of a gradient, $\Delta$RM, we did not
include uncertainty
in the polarization angles due to EVPA calibration uncertainty; this
is appropriate, since EVPA calibration uncertainty affects all
polarization angles for the frequency in question equally, and so
cannot introduce spurious RM gradients, as is discussed by Mahmud
et al. (2009) and Hovatta et al. (2012). The contribution of uncertainty
in the polarization angles due to residual D-terms described by Hovatta
et al. (2012) has been included. Hovatta et al. (2012) defined the
uncertainty in $\Delta$RM to be the largest RM uncertainty at the edge
of the jet; instead, we have taken the uncertainty $\Delta$RM to be
the sum of the two RM uncertainties added in quadrature. While not
strictly correct mathematically due to the effects of convolution,
this at least takes into account the uncertainties at both ends of the
slice, and is more conservative than the approach of Hovatta et al.
(2012). In most cases, the RM values used to
calculate $\Delta$RM are located at or near the ends of the slices
shown; in some cases, we used values somewhat farther from the ends
of the slices because the increase in the uncertainties at the slice
ends appreciably reduced the statistical significance of the RM
difference. In all cases, the RM slices showed monotonic changes in
the RM across the slices right to the slice ends.
Note that we do not reproduce
the RM maps previously published by Gabuzda et al. (2004, 2008) here,
as an initial analysis of the transverse RM structure was already carried
out in those papers; however,
our results for those sources are included in Table~3.
Results for each of the AGN considered here are summarized briefly below.
We took a transverse RM gradient to be
across the core if it was located within the 50\% intensity contour;
otherwise, we took the gradient to be across the jet.
\subsection{5--15~GHz, February 1997}
These RM maps are based on simultaneous VLBA observations at 15, 8 and
5~GHz.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf 0745+241.}
This RM map was originally published by Gabuzda et al. (2004). Our results
confirm that the previously reported RM gradient is monotonic; the
significance of this transverse gradient is about $4\sigma$.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf 0820+225.}
This RM map was originally published by Gabuzda et al. (2004). Our results
confirm that the previously reported RM gradient is monotonic; the significance
of this transverse gradient is $3.4\sigma$.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf 0823+033.}
This RM map, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:rmmaps5-1}b, has not been published
previously. It shows a monotonic transverse RM gradient with a significance
of about $4\sigma$.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf 1652+398.}
This RM map was originally published by Gabuzda et al. (2004). Our results
confirm
that the previously reported RM gradient is monotonic; the significance of
the transverse gradient is $4.8\sigma$. Note that a transverse RM gradient with
the same direction on somewhat larger scales has been reported by Croke et al.
(2010).
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf 1807+698.}
This RM map was originally published by Gabuzda et al. (2004). Our results
confirm that the previously reported RM gradient is monotonic; the
significance of the transverse gradient is $3.5\sigma$.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf 2007+777.}
This RM map, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:rmmaps5-1}d, has not been published
previously. It shows a monotonic transverse RM gradient with a significance
of $5.5\sigma$.
\subsection{5--15~GHz, April 1997}
\noindent
{\bf 1219+285.}
This RM map, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:rmmaps5-1}c, has not been published
previously. It shows a monotonic transverse RM gradient with a significance
of about $3\sigma$.
\subsection{8.1--15.2~GHz, June 2001}
RM maps of these sources based on the same visibility data but with somewhat
different weighting were originally published by Zavala \& Taylor (2004). They
were chosen for our analysis because possible RM gradients across the jet
structure are visible by eye in the RM maps
of Zavala \& Taylor (2004).
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf 0355+508.}
Our map in Fig.~\ref{fig:rmmaps8}a shows a monotonic transverse RM gradient
across the core region, with a significance of $4.2\sigma$. The
orientation of the beam in our image is roughly along the jet, making it
possible that the significance of the gradient has been artificially increased
by this effective averaging along the jet. The RM gradient remains visible
when the RM map is made using a circular beam, with a significance of
about $3\sigma$.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf 0748+126.}
Our map in Fig.~\ref{fig:rmmaps8}b shows a transverse RM gradient across the
core region, with a significance of nearly $6\sigma$.
\subsection{4.6--15.1~GHz, August 2003, March 2004 and September 2004}
\noindent
{\bf 0256+075.}
An RM map made from the same visibility data was published by Mahmud \&
Gabuzda (2008), but without any error analysis. Our map in
Fig.~\ref{fig:rmmaps5-1}a shows a monotonic transverse RM gradient across the
inner jet, whose significance is $2.9\sigma$. We also made this RM map
using a circular beam; the RM gradient remains visible, and its
significance increases to $3.2\sigma$.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf 0735+178.}
An RM map made from the same visibility data was published by Gabuzda et al.
(2008). Our analysis shows that the previously reported monotonic, transverse
RM gradient across the jet has a significance of $5.5\sigma$.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf 1156+295.}
An RM map made from the same visibility data was published by Gabuzda et al.
(2008). Our analysis shows that the previously reported monotonic, transverse
RM gradient across the core region has a significance of $5.8\sigma$.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf 1334$-$127.}
Our map in Fig.~\ref{fig:rmmaps5-2} is the first RM map published for this
source in this frequency range. It shows a nearly monotonic transverse RM
gradient across the core region, whose significance is $4.6\sigma$.
We also constructed a version of this map with a circular beam, to ensure
that the apparent transverse gradient was not an artefact of the low
declination of the source; the RM gradient remained visible in this
map, became monotonic, and had a similar significance, $5.0\sigma$.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf 1749+096.}
An RM map made from the same visibility data was published by Gabuzda et al.
(2008). Our analysis shows that the previously reported monotonic, transverse
RM gradient across the core has a significance is $5.5\sigma$. This gradient
is also visible in the 8.1--15.2~GHz RM image of Zavala \& Taylor (2004).
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf 2155$-$152.}
An RM map made from the same visibility data was published by Mahmud \&
Gabuzda (2008), but without any error analysis. Mahmud \& Gabuzda (2008)
suggested the presence of two oppositely directed transverse RM gradients ---
one in the core region and one in the jet. Due to the rather different
RM ranges for the core region and jet, we show separate RM maps for these
two regions in Figs.~\ref{fig:rmmaps5-2}b,c. There appears to be a
transverse RM gradient across the core, but it is difficult to estimate
its significance due to the elongated beam. A version of this map made
with a circular beam shows a clear, monotonic RM gradient with a
significance of $5.0\sigma$. The possible oppositely directed gradient
further out in the jet reported by Mahmud et al. (2008) is not monotonic
in either the map made with the intrinsic beam or the circular beam,
and we therefore do not consider it to be convincing.
\begin{center}
\begin{table*}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
\multicolumn{6}{c}{Table 3: Summary of transverse RM gradients}\\
Source & Location & RM$_1$ & RM$_2$ & $|\Delta$RM$|$ & Significance \\
& & rad/m$^2$ & rad/m$^2$ & rad/m$^2$ & \\
0256+075 -- EB & Jet & $-107\pm 69$ & $165\pm 63$ & $272\pm 93$ & $2.9\sigma$\\
0256+075 -- CB & Jet & $-75\pm 46$ & $142\pm 49$ & $217\pm 67$ & $3.2\sigma$\\
0355+508 & Core & $-662\pm 109$& $-1283\pm 99$& $621\pm 147$& $4.2\sigma$\\
0735+178 & Jet & $-408\pm 86$& $187\pm 63$ & $595\pm 107$& $5.5\sigma$\\
0745+241 & Jet &$-99\pm 15$ & $34\pm 28$ & $133\pm 32$ & $4.2\sigma$\\
0748+126 & Core & $824\pm 166$ & $2172\pm 160$ &$1348\pm230$ & $5.9\sigma$\\
0820+225 & Jet &$26\pm 16$ & $140\pm 30$ &$114\pm 34$ & $3.4\sigma$\\
0823+033 & Jet & $-93\pm 18$ & $-216\pm 25$ & $123\pm 31$ & $4.0\sigma$ \\
1156+295 & Core & $117\pm31$ & $345\pm 24$ & $228\pm 39$ & $5.8\sigma$\\
1219+285 & Jet & $-5\pm 19$ & $89\pm 25$ & $94\pm 31$ & $3.0\sigma$ \\
1334$-$127 -- EB & Jet & $-86\pm48$ & $-367\pm37$ & $281\pm 61$ & $4.6\sigma$\\
1334$-$127 -- CB & Jet & $-62\pm38$ & $-333\pm38$ & $271\pm 54$ & $5.0\sigma$\\
1652+398 & Jet & $167\pm 35$ & $-41\pm 26$ & $167\pm 35$ & $4.8\sigma$\\
1749+096 & Core & $53\pm 48$ & $394\pm 40$ & $341\pm 62$ & $5.5\sigma$\\
1807+698 & Jet & $225\pm 49$ & $501\pm 62$ & $276\pm 79$ & $3.5\sigma$\\
2007+777 & Core & $-60\pm 28$ & $-241\pm 18$ & $181\pm 33$ & $5.5\sigma$\\
2155$-$152 -- CB & Core & $-566\pm13$ & $-303\pm50$ & $263\pm 52$ & $5.0\sigma$\\
\\ \hline
\multicolumn{6}{l}{EB denotes elliptical beam and CB a circular beam of
roughly the same area as the intrinsic elliptical beam.}\\
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\end{center}
\section{Discussion}
\subsection{Reliability and Significance of the Transverse RM Gradients}
Table~3 gives a summary of the transverse Faraday rotation measure gradients
detected in the images presented here. The statistical significances of
these gradients range from $3\sigma$ to nearly $6\sigma$. This
indicates that these transverse RM gradients are not likely to be spurious
(i.e., due to inadequacy of the $uv$ coverage and noise): the Monte Carlo
simulations of Hovatta et al. (2012) and
Murphy \& Gabuzda (2013) have shown that spurious gradients at the
$3\sigma$ level should arise for 4--6-frequency VLBA observations in the
frequency interval considered here with a probability of no more than about
1\%, with this probability being even lower for monotonic gradients
encompassing differences of greater than $3\sigma$. Although the occurrence
of spurious gradients rises substantially for VLBA observations of
low-declination sources, the significances of the gradients observed
across the cores/inner jets of 1334$-$127 and 2155$-$152 ($4.5-5\sigma$)
are high enough to make it quite improbable that these gradients are spurious.
Sign changes are observed in the transverse RM gradients detected in
0256+075, 0735+178, 0745+241 and 1652+398. This strengthens the case that
these gradients are due to helical (or toroidal) magnetic fields associated
with these jets, since a sign change cannot be caused by gradients in the
electron density, and must be associated with a change in the direction of
the line-of-sight magnetic field.
Note, however, that the absence of a sign change in the transverse RM profile
does not rule out the possibility that a transverse gradient is due
to a helical or toroidal field component in the region of Faraday
rotation, since gradients encompassing only one sign can be observed
for some combinations of helical pitch angle and viewing angle.
\subsection{Core-Region Transverse RM Gradients}
In the standard theoretical picture, the VLBI ``core'' represents
the ``photosphere'' at the base of the jet, where the optical depth is
roughly unity. However, in images with the resolution of those presented
here, the observed core is actually a blend of this (partially) optically
thick region and optically thin regions in the innermost jet. Since these
optically thin regions are characterized by degrees of linear polarization
that are typically a factor of 10 or more higher than at the optically thick
base of the jet, they likely dominate the
overall observed ``core'' polarization in many cases. Therefore, we have
supposed that the polarization angles observed in the core are most likely
orthogonal to the local magnetic field, as expected for predominantly
optically thin regions. We have not observed
any sudden jumps in polarization
position angle by roughly $90^{\circ}$ suggesting the presence of optically
thick--thin transitions in the cores in our frequency ranges at the
observing epochs.
This picture of the observed VLBI core at centimeter wavelengths corresponding
to a mixture of optically thick and thin regions, with the observed core
polarization contributed predominantly by optically thin regions, also
impacts our interpretation of the core-region Faraday rotation measures.
Monotonic transverse RM gradients with significances of at least $3\sigma$
are observed across the core regions of
0355+508, 0748+126, 1156+295, 1749+096, 2007+777 and 2155$-$152.
The simplest approach to interpreting
these gradients is to treat them in the same way as transverse gradients
observed outside the core region, in the jet. While the simulations of
Broderick \& McKinney (2010) show that relativistic and optical depth effects
can sometimes give rise to non-monotonic transverse RM gradients in core
regions containing helical magnetic fields, there are also cases when these
helical fields give rise to monotonic RM gradients, as they would in a fully
optically thin region. In addition, most of the non-monotonic behaviour
that can arise will be smoothed by convolution with a typical
centimeter-wavelength VLBA beam [see, for example, the lower right panel in
Fig.~8 of Broderick \& McKinney (2010)].
Therefore, when a smooth, monotonic,
statistically significant transverse RM gradient is observed across the
core region, it is reasonable to interpret this as evidence for
helical/toroidal fields in this region (i.e., in the innermost jet).
\section{Conclusion}
We have confirmed previous reports of transverse Faraday RM gradients across
the jet structures of 7 AGNs (4.6--15.4~GHz data; Gabuzda et al. 2004, 2008),
applying the error-estimation approach of Hovatta et al. (2012) and ensuring
correct alignment of the polarization-angle images at the different frequencies
used to construct the RM maps. Our analysis indicates all of these gradients
to be monotonic and to have significances of at least $3.4\sigma$.
We have also investigated the reality of transverse RM gradients visible
in the previously published RM maps for 2 additional AGNs (8.1--15.2~GHz data;
Zavala \& Taylor 2004), which are likewise monotonic and have significances
of at least $3\sigma$.
Finally, we have reported new monotonic transverse Faraday RM gradients with
significances of $3\sigma$ or more in another 6 AGNs for which maps were
not published previously in the refereed literature (4.6--15.4~GHz data).
In all, the analysis carried out in this study has added 15 sources to the list
of AGNs whose jet structures display monotonic transverse RM gradients with
significances of at least $3\sigma$, based on the most up-to-date methods for
error estimation and image analysis. One reasonable interpretation of these
gradients is that they reflect the presence of helical or toroidal magnetic
fields, which form due to the combination of the rotation of the central black
hole and accretion disk and the jet outflow, and then travel outward with the
jet material. Four of these gradients encompass RM
values of both signs, strengthening the case that they are associated
with a toroidal magnetic-field component, since they cannot be explained
by gradients in the electron density.
It would be of interest to investigate systematic changes in the
transverse RM gradients along the jet. Unfortunately, this is hindered
by the superposition of a more random RM component, presumably due to
turbulence in the medium surrounding the jet, through which the polarized
jet radiation passes. In the few cases when a transverse RM gradient is
clearly observed over a range of distances from the jet base spanning more
than a beamwidth, as in 0820+225 (Gabuzda et al. 2004), 3C273 (e.g. Hovatta
et al. 2012) and 3C380 (Gabuzda et al. 2014a), the gradient appears to be
fairly uniform in the region where it is observed. More detailed analyses
of variations in the RM gradients along the jet will be carried out in a
separate study. We are also currently
engaged in a project to investigate transverse RM gradients farther from
the jet base than those considered here, using longer-wavelength VLBA and
VLA data.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We thank Robert Zavala for providing the version of the AIPS
task RM used for this work. We are also grateful to the anonymous referee
for his or her quick, thorough and helpful reviews.
The National Radio Astronomy Observatory is a facility of the National
Science Foundation operated under cooperative agreement by Associated
Universities, Inc.
|
\section{Introduction}
The study of bosons in one dimension has been of great interest in both theoretical and experimental physics for many years due in part to the existence of a quantum phase transition from a superfluid to insulator at zero temperature \cite{GreMEH02}.
The introduction of disorder causes a further phase transition into a localised \emph{Bose glass} phase, which is insulating but remains compressible \cite{FisWGF89}.
The experimental study of phase transitions in bosonic systems is possible using Helium in porous media \cite{CroHST83,CroVR97}, Josephson junction arrays \cite{VanEGM96}, thin films \cite{HavLG89,Pan89} and, more recently, optical lattices \cite{GreMEH02,BakGPF09}.
It is now possible to introduce disorder in a controlled manner to optical lattices using speckle potentials \cite{HorC98,BilJZB08} to study these transitions directly \cite{WhiPMZ09,PasMWD10}.
Analytical results even for clean systems are limited. There is an approximate Bethe-ansatz solution \cite{Kra91}, where the maximum number of bosons per site is set to two.
For disordered systems Giamarchi and Schulz used renormalization group (RG) techniques to determine the weak disorder physics given the Luttinger parameter $K$ \cite{GiaS87,RisPLG12}.
There are further real-space RG results for the case of strong disorder \cite{AltKPR10,PieA13}.
Numerical approaches provide some of the most effective means of garnering information.
Quantum Monte Carlo has been employed in 1, 2 and 3 dimensions \cite{ScaBZ91,ProS98,KraTC91,SoyKPS11,GurPPS09,Pol13}, but these methods become difficult in the limit of zero temperature.
An ideal method for analysing one dimensional systems is the density-matrix RG (DMRG) \cite{Whi92}. It has been applied with great success to a number of physical systems from quantum chemistry \cite{ShaC12} to quantum information\cite{PerVWC07}, including the disordered Bose-Hubbard model \cite{PaiPKR96,RapSZ99}.
The phase diagrams obtained using these methods for the one dimensional case \cite{ProS98,RapSZ99}, whilst qualitatively agreeing, are quantitatively quite different.
This difference could be down to the choice of different observables and the difficulties each has with finite size effects.
In recent years the use of entanglement properties as a means of deciphering phase has become commonplace \cite{LiH08,EisCP10,PolTBO10,DenS11,DenCOM13,KjaBP14}.
Entanglement is a measurement of a wavefunction's non-locality and as such it is an ideal means of analysing various phases.
Modern numerical techniques such as \emph{tensor networks} and DMRG obtain entanglement information as part of the update algorithms, so large amounts of information about the phase is gathered automatically in the course of the RG iterations \cite{Sch11}.
In this paper we perform a DMRG simulation of the disordered Bose-Hubbard model in the form of a variational update of a matrix product state (MPS) \cite{OstR95,Sch11} implemented in the {\sc ITensor} libraries \cite{Itensor023}.
The disordered Bose-Hubbard model is made up of bosonic creation, $b_{i}^{\dagger}$, and annihilation operators, $b_{i}$, on sites of a linear lattice.
The Hamiltonian is \cite{RapSZ99}
\begin{equation}
H= - \sum_{i}^{L-1} \frac{t}{2} (b^{\dagger}_{i} b_{i+1} + \mbox{h.c.} ) + \sum_{i}^{L} \frac{U}{2} n_{i}(n_{i}-1) + \mu_{i} n_{i},
\end{equation}
where $n_{i}=b^{\dagger}_{i}b_{i}$ is the local occupation or \emph{number operator} that gives the number of bosons on site $i$.
The potential disorder is modelled via uniformly distributed random chemical potentials $\mu_i\in [-\Delta \mu/2, \Delta \mu/2]$.
For ease of comparison, we have adopted prior conventions \cite{RapSZ99} for hopping $t$ and interaction $U$ and throughout the rest of the analysis $t=1$.
\section{Observables}
The Mott insulator can be differentiated from the Bose glass phase by the existence of the \emph{Mott gap}, $E_{g}$, between the ground and first excited
state. While DMRG ordinarily finds the ground state of the system, low lying excited states have to be constructed iteratively by
orthogonalising with respect to the lower lying states \cite{Sch11}. For the Bose-Hubbard chain it is numerically more convenient to use the fact that the energy of
the excited state is equal to the difference in energy between the chemical potential for particle, $\mu_{p} = E_{N+1}-E_{N}$, and hole, $
\mu_{h} = E_{N}-E_{N-1}$, excitations \cite{RapSZ99}.
This means that $E_{g}$ can be found by calculating the energies $E_{N+1}$, $E_{N}$ and $E_{N-1}$ of the $N+1$, $N$ and $N-1$ particle sectors, respectively, as
\begin{equation}
E_{g} = E_{N+1}-2E_{N}+E_{N-1}.
\end{equation}
Hence the determination of $E_{g}$ requires a DMRG run for each of the three different particle numbers and each set of parameters.
The superfluid phase is determined by a non-zero \emph{superfluid fraction} $\rho_{s}$. This is defined as the difference between the ground state energies of a chain with periodic boundaries and anti-periodic boundaries,
\begin{equation}
\rho_{s} = \frac{2L^{2}}{\pi^{2}N} \left( E_{N}^{\mathrm{anti-periodic}} - E_{N}^{\mathrm{periodic}} \right),
\end{equation}
where $L$ is the chain length and $N$ the number of bosons \cite{RapSZ99}.
For Mott insulator and Bose glass phases, we have $\rho_{s}=0$, so a finite $\rho_{s}$ indicates superfluidity in the phase diagram. From a computational point of view, $\rho_{s}$ is not an easy quantity to determine as it requires the use of periodic boundaries, which are well-known to converge slower and be less accurate than for open systems when using DMRG \cite{Sch11}. Furthermore, as $\rho_{s}$ is the difference between two energies, two such periodic DMRG calculations have to be performed for each set of parameters.
The two-point correlation function $\langle b_{i}^{\dagger} b_{j} \rangle$
provides information regarding the localisation of the wavefunction. For the Bose glass and Mott insulating phases the correlation function decays exponentially,
$\langle \langle b_{i}^{\dagger} b_{j} \rangle \rangle \propto e^{-|i-j|/\xi}$,
where $\xi$ is the correlation length and $\langle \langle \dots \rangle \rangle$ denotes the expectation value when averaged over all pairs of sites separated by $|i-j|$ and all disorder realisations \cite{RouBMK08}.
Extended phases like the superfluid are not localised so $\xi$ diverges in the thermodynamic limit.
In the absence of disorder the superfluid phase will be described by Luttinger liquid theory \cite{Voi95}, hence the correlation function will admit a power law decay
\begin{equation}
\langle \langle b_{i}^{\dagger} b_{j} \rangle \rangle \propto |i-j|^{-1/2K},
\label{eq-pld-poly}
\end{equation}
where $K$ is the Luttinger parameter.
$K$ takes the value $2$ for a Kosterlitz-Thouless (KT) transition from superfluid to Mott insulator \cite{Gia97,KuhWM00}.
By utilizing an RG approach, Giamarchi and Schulz \cite{GiaS87} showed that disorder scales to zero in the weak disorder regime when $K>3/2$, giving a superfluid phase. On the other hand, disorder grows for $K<3/2$ signifying a Bose glass.
This was later extended \cite{RisPLG12} to the \emph{medium disorder} case ($U \sim \Delta\mu$).
Instead of the infinite-system size result \eqref{eq-pld-poly} we use the conformal field theory (CFT) expression \cite{RouBMK08} for an open chain of size $L$,
\begin{equation}
\langle b_{i}^{\dagger} b_{j} \rangle \propto \left[ \frac{\pi}{2L} \frac{ \sqrt{ \left| \sin \left( \frac{\pi i}{L} \right) \right| \left| \sin \left( \frac{ \pi j}{L} \right) \right| }}{ \left| \sin \frac{ \pi (i+j)}{2L} \right| \left| \sin \frac{ \pi (i-j)}{2L} \right|} \right]^{{1}/{2K}}.
\end{equation}
The expression has to be averaged over all $i$ and $j$ with separation $|i-j|$ and, of course, also averaged over disorder realisations.
Calculating correlation functions does not require multiple DMRG runs, but requires the calculation of an expectation value for each combination of $i$ and $j$, of which there are $L(L-1)/2$.
Furthermore, the accuracy of locating the KT transition from correlation functions for the Bose-Hubbard model has previously been questioned \cite{KuhM98,RouBMK08}.
In each DMRG run, bipartitioning the chain into \emph{system} and \emph{environment} blocks is done routinely to compute singular-value decompositions \cite{Sch11}.
These singular values, $s_{a}$, can themselves be used to obtain information regarding the phase \cite{PolTBO10,DenS11,DenCOM13} without the need for multiple DMRG runs, thus saving substantial numerical costs.
The most common such measure is the \emph{entanglement entropy} or \emph{Von Neumann entropy} defined as
\begin{equation}
S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}} = -\mathrm{Tr} \rho_{\mathrm{A}} \log_{2} \rho_{\mathrm{A}} = - \sum_{a=1} s_{a}^{2} \log_{2} s_{a}^{2},
\label{eq:entropy}
\end{equation}
which gives the entanglement between regions A and B \cite{Sch11}.
The reduced density matrix, $\rho_{\mathrm{A}}$, for region A is obtained from the density matrix by tracing over degrees of freedom from region B. Its eigenvalues are given as squares of the $s_a$'s.
Hence $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$ is a measure of the spread of the $s_a$ values.
If there is one non-zero singular value then the regions are in a product state of the two regions.
The other extreme is if all singular values are equal, in which case the subsystems are \emph{maximally entangled}.
In the subsequent analysis we shall average the entanglement entropy over all possible bipartitions along the chain.
This averaged entanglement entropy can distinguish between phases with high and low entanglement, for example the superfluid and Mott insulating phases.
\begin{figure*}[bt]
\centerline{
(a)\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{./sf_0,5_1_1.pdf}
(b)\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{./mi_4,5_1_1.pdf}
(c)\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{./bg_4,5_7_3.pdf}}
\caption{(Color online)
(Top) the largest four singular values, $s_{1}$ (black $\circ$), $s_{2}$ (red $\square$), $s_{3}$ (green $+$), and $s_{4}$ (blue $\times$) and (Bottom) the entanglement entropy $S_{\mathrm{A}\mathrm{B}}$ (black $\triangle$) for all possible bipartition positions, $L_{\mathrm{A}}$, along a chain of length $L=50$ for
(a) superfluid with $U = 0.5$, $\Delta\mu = 1$,
(b) Mott insulator with $U = 4.5$, $\Delta\mu = 1$, and
(c) Bose glass with $U = 4.5$, $\Delta\mu = 7$.
The dashed horizontal line in the top (bottom) graph shows the average value of $s_1$ ($S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$) while the grey shading indicates its standard deviation when averaged over all $L_{\mathrm{A}}$ positions.
Solid lines connecting symbols are guides to the eye.
}
\label{fig:eespecs}
\end{figure*}
Deng et.\ al.\ \cite{DenCOM13} used the \emph{entanglement spectral parameter}, $\zeta$, to obtain the phase diagram for an extended Bose-Hubbard model.
The $\zeta$ parameter is defined as the sum of the difference between the first and second, and third and fourth, respectively, eigenvalues $s_a^2$ of $\rho_{\mathrm{A}}$ when averaged over all bipartition positions such that $L_{\mathrm{A}}+L_{\mathrm{B}} = L$, i.e.\
\begin{equation}
\zeta = \overline{\lambda}_{1} - \overline{\lambda}_{2} + \overline{\lambda}_{3} - \overline{\lambda}_{4},
\label{eq:zeta}
\end{equation}
with
$
\overline{\lambda}_{a}
\equiv \sum_{L_{\mathrm{A}}=1}^{L-1} s^{2}_{a}(L_{\mathrm{A}})/({L-1})$, $a= 1, 2, 3, 4$,
the bipartition-averaged $a$-th eigenvalue.
In fig.\ \ref{fig:eespecs} we show the typical behaviour of the four lowest $s_{a}$ values in the superfluid, fig.\ \ref{fig:eespecs}(a), Mott insulator, fig.\ \ref{fig:eespecs}(b), and Bose glass, fig.\ \ref{fig:eespecs}(c), regimes
We see that the entanglement spectrum of the superfluid phase is somewhat noisy with the four singular values being of the same order of magnitude.
Therefore the resulting $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$ is large, $\zeta$ is small, but neither have too much variation along $L_{\mathrm{A}}$.
One of the striking features of the entanglement spectrum for the Mott insulator regime is that $s_{1} \approx 1$ while $s_{2} \approx s_{3} \approx s_{4} \approx 0$ for \emph{all} bipartitions, even in the presence of disorder.
This means that the average $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$ will be low and $\zeta \approx 1$, with a negligible deviation.
Last, entanglement spectra of the Bose-glass show pronounced localised regions separated by areas of low entanglement.
This results in a much larger variation of $\zeta$ and $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$ than in the superfluid phase, with $\zeta$ and average $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$, between the other phases.
These findings suggest that the average and spatial variations of $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$ and $\zeta$ might also be used to distinguish the phases of the disordered Bose-Hubbard model.
\section{Results}
\label{results}
We use $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$ and $\zeta$ to create qualitative phase diagrams for a modest size of $L=50$, disorder-averaged over $100$ samples using as our DMRG implementation the {\sc ITensor} libraries \cite{Itensor023}.
The finite-size scaling (FSS) behaviour of $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$ and $\zeta$ is currently not well understood, thus to find the phase boundaries for $L\rightarrow\infty$, we perform scaling with $K$ and $E_g$ from estimates up to $L=200$.
This is a numerically more expensive procedure, so we concentrate on a small number of points with positions motivated by the phase diagram from the entanglement properties.
For disordered systems, getting stuck in local minima is particularly problematic, so we use a relatively large bond dimension $\chi=200$ and perform $20$ DMRG sweeps of the chain for each sample. Our truncation error is less than $10^{-10}$.
We also introduce a small noise term for the first few sweeps; this perturbs a perhaps bad initial wavefunction, allowing faster convergence into the ground state.
Bosons do not obey the Pauli exclusion principle and hence can condense onto a single site.
In order to capture such a behaviour, the one-site basis dimension should to be as large as the number of particles in the system. This is numerically infeasible and it is necessary to introduce a finite maximum number of bosons that can occupy each site.
We use $\max (n_i) = 5$, consistent with ref.\ \cite{KuhWM00} who find that a higher particle number does not effect the results appreciably for $U>0$ \cite{RouBMK08,PaiPKR96,RapSZ99}.\footnote{Five is the current hard limit in the {\sc ITensor} code.}
\subsection{Density = 1}
For particle density ${N}/{L} = 1$, in the clean case, the system is in a superfluid phase for small $U$ but transitions into a Mott insulating phase at a critical $U_c$.
Introducing disorder enables the existence of a localized \emph{Bose glass} phase \cite{FisWGF89}.
The possibility of a direct transition from superfluid to Mott insulator has been discussed extensively (see references in \cite{PolPST09}). In one dimension it was shown \cite{Svi96} that the transition necessarily goes via the Bose glass phase.
This is now also the accepted picture for any dimension \cite{PolPST09}.
We show our results based on $\zeta$ and $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$ for $L=50$ in fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds}, (a) and (b), respectively.
\begin{figure*}[tb]
\center{
(a)\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{./zetapd_list.pdf}
(b)\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{./eepd_list.pdf}
(c)\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{./zetapderror_list.pdf}
(d)\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{./eepderror_list.pdf}}
\caption{(Color online)
Phase diagrams for the disordered Bose-Hubbard model at $N/L=1$ given as contour plots of (a) $\zeta$, (b) $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$, (c) $\Delta \zeta$ and (d) $\Delta S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$.
The color shading goes from low (orange/dark) to high (blue/white) value and its coarse-graining reflects the $(U,\Delta \mu)$ resolution of our calculations for $L=50$.
The contour lines correspond to (a) $\zeta=0.1, 0.2, \ldots, 0.9$, (b) $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}= 1.4, \ldots, 0.4, 0.3$, (c) $\Delta \zeta/10^{-4}= 0.1, 1, 2, \ldots, 10$ and (d) $\Delta S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}/10^{-4}=0.1, 1, 2, \ldots, 10$. In all cases the two extreme contours values are shown as dashed lines. Note that regions of high $\zeta$ corresponds to low $S_{A|B}$.
The circles (white) and squares (blue) denote estimations of $K$ and $E_g$ from FSS for $L\rightarrow\infty$ while the stars (red) indicate the $K=2$ values for $L=50$ as discussed in the text. The arrow (black) denotes the expected transition in the clean case at $U_c$.
The dotted straight line indicates $\Delta\mu= 2U$.
Error bars (white) show the standard error of the mean in all cases. They are within symbol size if not shown.
We emphasize that the color shading does not directly indicate the transitions, but rather quantifies the change in entanglement measures.
The grey line highlights the start of the shaded region where the probability of $\langle n_{i} \rangle \ge 4.9$ is greater than $10^{-3}$.
}
\label{fig:eepds}
\end{figure*}
The superfluid, small $U\lesssim 1.5$, and the Mott insulator, $U \gtrsim 2$, are clearly distinguishable in both panels.
The boundary of the superfluid to the Bose glass is less well defined and it is not clear that there is a Bose glass region between the Mott insulator and the superfluid --- very different wavefunctions give similar average entanglement entropy.
Following on from our prior discussion of fig.\ \ref{fig:eespecs}, we also plot in fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds}(c) the standard error\footnote{We note that for larger system sizes the variance or standard deviation may be better measures of distribution width as they do not approach zero in the infinite system limit.} of $\zeta$, $\Delta \zeta$, and, similarly, (d) $\Delta S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$.
In these plots the phases become clear and their boundaries are consistent with earlier work \cite{RapSZ99}.
In particular, a Bose glass phase can be easily identified between Mott insulator and superfluid.
Furthermore, we see that the contours for $\zeta$ and $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$ in fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds} are qualitatively similar, just as those for $\Delta \zeta$ and $\Delta S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$.
We emphasize that for the entanglement-based measures present here, it is in fact
possible to discern all of the phases with just a \emph{single} DMRG run for each $(U, \Delta \mu$, disorder realisation) data point. This is a clear advantage in terms of numerical costs when compared to calculations based on $E_g$, $\rho_s$ or $K$.
In order to augment the finite-size phases identified in fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds}, we now perform runs with larger $L$ and employ FSS.
To find the superfluid-Bose glass transition in the thermodynamic limit we calculate $K$ for various points along the boundary for system sizes $L = 30$, $50$, $100$ and $150$. The transition is of KT type at $K=3/2$. The corresponding points in $(U, \Delta\mu)$ which are shown as filled circles in fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds}.
For reference, we also plot the points where $K=3/2$ for $L=50$ (stars).
Similarly, the superfluid-Mott insulator transition point $U_c$ is the point on the zero disorder axis where $K=2$. We estimate it value as $U_{c} = 1.634 \pm 0.002$.
We also calculate $E_g$ for the same system sizes and use FSS to find the Mott insulator-Bose glass boundary indicated as squares in fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds}.
The superfluid region we find is significantly smaller than that of ref.\ \cite{RapSZ99} but matches ref.\ \cite{ProS98}; the position of Mott insulator-Bose glass boundary is very similar to \cite{RapSZ99} and different to \cite{ProS98}.
The RG analysis of Refs.\ \cite{GiaS87} and \cite{RisPLG12} suggests that there may be a further \emph{Anderson glass} phase in the low $U < \Delta\mu / 2$ region of the Bose glass phase highlighted by the dashed line in fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds}.
This would imply a critical point along the superfluid boundary at which point $K$ at the transition becomes disorder dependent.
Our entanglement analysis shows no sign of such a transition either within the Bose glass phase or on the boundary with the superfluid.
However, when $U \ll \Delta\mu$ the truncation of the basis, i.e. $\max (n_i) \leq 5$, becomes more problematic so we cannot rule out the existence of another phase in this region.
\subsection{Density = 1/2}
The clean case for $N/L=1/2$ remains a superfluid for all values of $U$ \cite{FisWGF89}.
When $\Delta\mu$ is increased, our entanglement measures indicate the eventual emergence of a Bose glass phase as shown in fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds_half}(a+b).
\begin{figure*}[bt]
\center{
(a)\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{./zetapd-eepd-half.pdf}
(b)\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{./zetapd-eepd-error-half.pdf}
(c)\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{./zetapd-eepd-two.pdf}
(d)\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{./zetapd-eepd-error-two.pdf}
}
\caption{(Color online)
Phase diagrams for the disordered Bose-Hubbard model at (a+b) $N/L=1/2$ and (c+d) $N/L=2$ given as contour plots of (a+c) $\zeta$ and $S_{A|B}$, (b+d) $\Delta \zeta$ and $\Delta S_{A|B}$.
Colors, symbols and lines (solid and dashed) denote corresponding estimates as in fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds}.
The black contour lines correspond to (a) $\zeta=0.2, 0.3, \ldots, 0.8$, (b) $\Delta \zeta/10^{-3}= 0.1, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4$ for $N/L=1/2$ and (c) $\zeta= 0.1, 0.2, \ldots, 0.9$, (d) $\Delta \zeta/10^{-4}= 0.1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10$ for $N/L=2$.
The white contour lines represent the results for (a+c) $S_{A|B}$, (b+d) $\Delta S_{A|B}$.
For $S_{A|B}$, the contour values are $1.2, \ldots, 0.4, 0.3$ in (a), while they are $1.4, \ldots, 0.3, 0.2$ for (c);
for $\Delta S_{A|B}$ the values are as for $\Delta\zeta$. High $\zeta$ corresponds to low $S_{A|B}$.
The black arrow corresponds to $U_c$ for both densities as discussed in the text.
The two dotted straight lines indicates $\Delta\mu= 2U$ and $4U$.
The grey line and area have the same meaning as in fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds}.
}
\label{fig:zeta_eepds_half_two}
\label{fig:eepds_half}
\label{fig:eepds_two}
\end{figure*}
Still, the superfluid phase for $L=50$ seems to extend up to $\Delta\mu \lesssim 1$ for $U \lesssim 5$ as shown by all four entanglement measures.
The Giamarchi-Schulz criterion \cite{GiaS87,RapSZ99} implies that the Bose-Hubbard model should be in a Bose glass phase for $K<3/2$. In fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds_half}(a+b) we show that the resulting boundaries indicate that the superfluid phase extends as far as $U_{K=3/2}=3.5\pm 0.1$, i.e.\ it ends somewhat earlier for low $\Delta\mu$ than suggested by our entanglement measures.
In order to explore this region further, we have also calculated $\rho_{s}$ for fixed $\Delta\mu = 0.5$ and sizes $L=50$, $100$, $150$, and $200$ as shown in fig.\ \ref{fig:stiffness_half}(a).
The results for $\rho_{s}$ have been computed for increased bond dimension $\chi=400$ with $40$ DMRG sweeps and $20$ disorder configuration to offset the reduction in precision due to periodic boundaries.
The figure shows that for $U\gtrsim 3$, $\rho_{s}$ decreases when increasing $L$ as expected in the Bose glass phase. However, the decrease is very slow and, for the system sizes attainable by us, even seems to saturate at non-zero values.
These results suggest that for finite systems, the $K=3/2$ criterion significantly underestimates the extent of the superfluid phase, while our four entanglement measures and $\rho_{s}$ predict a much larger region.
Performing a FSS analysis for $K$ as shown in fig.\ \ref{fig:stiffness_half}(a) we find the $U$ values, for which $K = 3/2$ in the limit $L\rightarrow\infty$, converge towards a limiting value of $U_{c} = 3.09 \pm 0.01$ (see also fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds_half}). This again indicates that in an infinite system, we expect the superfluid to Bose glass transition to take place at much lower values of $U_c$ than observed for $L=50$.
The relevance of this result is of course that experimental realizations of the Bose-Hubbard model are typically in cold atom systems, which are limited to finite system sizes, currently a typical lattice dimension is $\sim 50-100$ \cite{GreMEH02}.
For values of $\Delta\mu\gtrsim 1$, the situation is less severe and we see in fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds_half}(a+b) that our entanglement-based measures again qualitatively agree with the Giamarchi-Schulz criterion, both for $L=50$ and estimated via FSS at $L\rightarrow\infty$.
\subsection{Density = 2}
To the best of our knowledge, the phases for $N/L = 2$ have not been shown before in the literature.
Due to our numerical restriction of five bosons per site, this regime is close to the limit of what can be studied reliably, particularly for small $U$ where the occupancy per site should be large.
For large $U$, one might expect that we will have a Mott insulator of boson \emph{pairs}, while a superfluid of boson pairs emerges for small $U$ and small $\Delta\mu$.
As before, we envisage a disordered Bose glass phase for large $\Delta\mu$.
With more particles per site than in the $N/L=1$ case, we could furthermore expect that onset of the Mott transition at $\Delta\mu=0$ is at larger values of $U$, since there is a larger energy penalty to pay for a doubly occupied site \cite{FisWGF89}.
Similarly, as the cost for two boson pairs to go onto the same site is $2U$, we expect the $2 U = \Delta\mu/2$ line to characterize the superfluid phase as in the $N/L=1$ case. In addition, one might conjecture to see a remnant of the $U = \Delta\mu/2$ condition.
In fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds_two}(c+d), we show that our expectations are largely validated. In particular, a double lobe shape for the superfluid phase emerges and allows a possible re-entrant behaviour given a suitable cut across parameter space. The gradient of the Mott insulating phase boundary is shallower ($\sim 4/3$) when compared to $N/L=1$.
Furthermore, both the $\zeta$ and $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$ based entanglement measures, as well as their errors, $\Delta\zeta$ and $\Delta S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$, capture the phases equally well and agree with the $K$ and $E_g$ estimates.
Note that for $N/L=2$, the KT superfluid-to-Mott transition at $\Delta\mu=0$ corresponds to $K=2$ and we finite-size scale the Luttinger parameter to find $U_{c} = 2.75 \pm 0.03$.
We emphasize that the points for small $U$, see top left of the phase diagram in fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds_two}(c+d), should be viewed with caution as the basis truncation will affect the results.
The grey line in fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds_two} --- as in fig.\ \ref{fig:eepds} --- indicates the points at which the probability of obtaining a site with $\langle n_{i} \rangle \ge 4.9$ reaches $10^{-3}$.
This clearly shows that for the Bose glass with small $U$ all wavefunctions are beginning to reach the limit five of bosons per site, however in the bulk of the phase diagram the results are not affected.
\begin{figure}[bt]
\center{
(a)\hspace*{-2ex}\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{./stiffness_mudis_0,5.pdf}}
(b)\hspace*{-2ex}\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{./lutt_clean+finite_half.pdf}
\caption{(Color online)
(a) Superfluid fraction $\rho_{s}(U)$ for $N/L = 1/2$ with $\Delta\mu = 0.5$ for lengths $50$--$200$. The vertical line indicates $U_c= 3.09$. The inverted triangles give the finite-size scaled $L\rightarrow\infty$ limit with the dashed line a guide to the eye.
(b) Luttinger parameter $K$ for various lengths $30$--$150$ at $N/L=1/2$. The horizontal line highlights $K = 3/2$. The inset shows the FSS analysis.
}
\label{fig:stiffness_half}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
We have analysed the phase diagrams of the disordered Bose-Hubbard model for fillings $N/L = 1/2$, $1$ and $2$ using the entanglement-based measures $\zeta$, $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$, $\Delta\zeta$ and $\Delta S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$.
We find that despite success in ref.\ \cite{DenCOM13}, $\zeta$ or $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$ alone do not always faithfully reproduce the phase diagrams.
The error-based measures, $\Delta\zeta$ and $\Delta S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$, provide a much clearer picture --- the distributions of the values contain more information regarding the nature of the phase than the mean values alone.
These measures are an excellent means of quickly identifying the different phases of the system while removing the need for multiple DMRG runs per measurement and special boundary conditions.
Unfortunately, they do not seem to exhibit a simple FSS behavior, at least for the system size up to $L=200$ used here. While $\zeta$ and $S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$ and, in particular, $\Delta\zeta$ and $\Delta S_{\mathrm{A}|\mathrm{B}}$ provide a numerically convenient, qualitative outline of the phase boundaries, it seems still necessary to apply FSS to $K$ and $E_g$ for estimates of the boundaries in the $L\rightarrow\infty$ limit.
For $N/L = 1$ our phase diagram is found to complement the results of refs.\ \cite{ProS98,RapSZ99}.
For $N/L = 1/2$ the diagram shows strong finite-size effects and the critical $U$ defined by the Giamarchi-Schulz criterion is not apparent for these finite systems.
Finally, for $N/L = 2$ the superfluid phase has a \emph{double-lobed} appearance giving rise to re-entrance phenomena.
\acknowledgments
We would like to thank Miles Stoudenmire for help with {\sc ITensor}. We gratefully acknowledge discussions with Kai Bongs and Nadine Meyer. We are grateful to the EPSRC for financial support (EP/J003476/1) and provision of computing resources through the MidPlus Regional HPC Centre (EP/K000128/1).
The supporting data for this research is openly available from the University of Warwick research archive portal at http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/71189/.
|
\section{Heuristic Algorithm}
\label{sec:algo}
To deploy our algorithm in dense scenarios with hotspots of CBSs, we extend the heuristic algorithm from our previous work \cite{draexlerew2014} by a CBS prioritization mechanism.
This mechanism is explained in detail in this section together with a brief explanation of the whole algorithm.
The inputs for the heuristic are the backhaul network as an annotated graph $G = (V,E)$, a set of available wavelengths per link $K$ and the desired CBS $W$ with each $W_i \subset V$ together with their constraints on data rate and latency.
An overview of the heuristic is depicted in \refFig{tab:bfsclust} and the individual steps are explained below.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\fbox{%
\parbox{0.469\textwidth}{%
\small
\textbf{CBS Prioritization}\\
$\rhd$ decide for each CBS if it belongs to a hotspot\\
$\rhd$ \emph{output}: list of hotspot CBSs and normal CBSs
\textbf{For each CBS in $\text{W}_\text{hotspot}$, then for each CBS in $\text{W}_\text{normal}$}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Maximum-Path BFS}\\
$\rhd$ start modified BFS from each vertex\\
$\rhd$ \emph{output}: BFS tree for each vertex
\item \textbf{Match CBS}\\
$\rhd$ match BFS trees against CBS\\
$\rhd$ \emph{output}: possible candidate BFS trees for CBS
\item \textbf{Back-Track BFS Trees}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Check constraints}\\
$\rhd$ recheck constraints on candidate BFS trees
\item \textbf{Wavelength Assignment}\\
$\rhd$ determine wavelengths for all candidate BFS trees
\end{enumerate}
$\rhd$ \emph{output}: possible candidate BFS trees and their wavelength assignment for CBS
\item \textbf{Match CBS}\\
$\rhd$ match BFS trees against CBS again\\
$\rhd$ \emph{output}: confirmed candidate BFS trees for CBS
\item \textbf{Find Best BFS Tree}\\
$\rhd$ compare candidate BFS trees\\
$\rhd$ \emph{output}: best BFS tree for CBS
\end{enumerate}
}
}
\caption{Heuristic algorithm overview}
\label{tab:bfsclust}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection*{CBS Prioritization}
This new step of the algorithm divides the desired CBS into two sets $\text{W}_\text{hotspot}$ and $\text{W}_\text{normal}$.
The calculations in this step use two threshold values $t_v$, which determines how strict the filtering of hotspot vertices should be, and $t_h$, which determines how strict the filtering of hotspot CBS should be. The numbers for the threshold values depend on the scenario and can be determined using a parameter study.
The algorithm first calculates for each vertex $v$ from the backhaul graph in how many CBS the vertex is present as:
\begin{align*}
h_v = \mathbbm{1}_{v \in W_i}
\end{align*}
$\mathbbm{1}_{X}$ denotes an indicator variable with value $1$ if condition $X$ is true and value $0$ otherwise.
Each vertex $v$ is considered a hotspot vertex if
\begin{align*}
h_v > |W| \cdot t_v
\end{align*}
and is added to the set of hotspot vertices $V_h$. Now each CBS $W_i$ is added to $\text{W}_\text{hotspot}$ if
\begin{align*}
\frac{\sum_{v \in W_i} \mathbbm{1}_{v \in V_h}}{|W_i|} \geq t_h
\end{align*}
otherwise it is added to $\text{W}_\text{normal}$.
Now the actual algorithm for BBU/LC placement and backhaul resource allocation has to be executed for each CBS. The following steps are executed per CBS, starting with the CBSs from $\text{W}_\text{hotspot}$ and the CBSs from $\text{W}_\text{normal}$:
\subsubsection{Maximum-Path BFS}
The heuristic performs a modified breadth-first search from each vertex of the graph as the start node. Whenever a new tree edge $(u,v)$ is discovered, the constraints for the new edge are checked in the following way:
\begin{itemize}
\item Does the latency to the new vertex $v$ via the whole path from the root via $u$ and the new edge $(u,v)$ not exceed the maximum round-trip latency?
\item Are there any wavelengths on $(u,v)$ with enough free capacity to connect $v$ to the root vertex, if $v$ is part of the CBS?
\end{itemize}
If these checks are not successful, the new vertex $v$ is discarded, otherwise it is added to the tree.
The result of this step is a set $T$ of BFS trees, which only contain vertices that meet the constraints within the tree. This does not yet take into account reciprocal effects between multiple BSs in the CBS.
\subsubsection{Match CBS}
The heuristic checks for every BFS tree $T_i$ from step \emph{2)}, whether it contains all BSs from the desired CBS. The result is a set of only these BFS trees $T$ that match the desired CBS.
\subsubsection{Back-Track BFS Trees}
In the constraint checking in step \emph{1)} vertices were discarded based on the latency for the full paths to the start
node and the link capacity for only single links and not the full paths.
Here the capacity constraints are checked again taking into account the capacities on full paths.
If the constraints are not violated a wavelength assignment for all routing paths between the BSs from the CBS and the BFS tree root has to be determined. Because the required data structures for this step can easily be constructed in the back-tracking phase, the back-tracking and the wavelength assignment are executed in one step.
Details on the implementation of the wavelength assignment can be found in our previous work \cite{draexlerew2014}.
\subsubsection{Match CBS}
After removing vertices in the previous step, the data on trees matching the CBS is not valid anymore. Thus, step \emph{2)} is repeated. If a tree still matches the CBS, the starting node is a valid candidate for a controller location for that CBS.
\subsubsection{Find Best BFS Tree}
Finally, the best BFS tree from the remaining candidates has to be determined. The algorithm calculates three different costs per candidate tree and sums them up in a weighted sum $n$ per tree
\begin{align*}
n = \sum (w_g \cdot n_g + w_a \cdot n_a + w_l \cdot n_l)
\end{align*}
with
\begin{itemize*}
\item $n_g$ as the total number of wavelengths used in the tree
\item $n_a$ as the number of wavelengths that have to assigned additionally for using that tree
\item $n_l$ as the number of used links
\end{itemize*}
and $w_g$, $w_a$ and $w_l$ as weight factors.
The algorithm then selects the tree with the lowest total cost, sets the root BS as the controller, stores the routing paths and updates the annotations on $G$ for running the next iteration for the next CBS.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:concl}
We have presented an extended approach to verify the feasibility of base station coordination in a centralized RAN environment considering capacity and latency constraints with a backhaul network with limited resources. This approach includes the dynamic assignment of backhaul resources, which we call backhaul network \emph{configuration}, as well as the dynamic instantiation of BBUs or local controllers (LCs).
Our simulation shows that our extension enables the use of our approach in \emph{dense} wireless access networks with hotspots of users, and furthermore increases the feasibility of base station coordination in networks without hotspots. This is a significant improvement compared to our previous work \cite{draexlerew2014}.
We have also presented a prototype implementation for a real-world deployment of our approach in a testbed. Our testbed measurements show that our approach is able to guarantee the availability of the desired resources for each feasible CBSs, and increase the feasibility of CBSs compared to a static assignment of backhaul resources.
\section{Evaluation}
\label{sec:eval}
In this section we present (a) simulation results that show how our new algorithm performs compared to the algorithm from our previous work \cite{draexlerew2014} in \refSec{sec:evalprio}. And (b) a testbed evaluation to show how our prototype implementation works in \refSec{sec:evalproto}.
\subsection{CBS Prioritization Simulation}
\label{sec:evalprio}
\subsubsection{Simulation Scenario}
A fixed number of BSs are placed on a regular grid, with a mean inter-BS distance of $\bar{s} = 1000\,\mathrm{m}$ (urban scenario \cite{6629714}), and are then shifted in both x and y direction according to two independent, normally distributed random variables with zero mean and standard deviation $\frac{\bar{s}}{8}$.
The backhaul network is created as a mesh topology where two BSs are connected by a link if their distance is less than or equal to $1.5 \cdot \bar{s}$. This value produces a partially connected mesh network; smaller or larger values result in too sparse or too dense topologies, which are not realistic.
All links in the backhaul network are assigned the same set of available wavelengths $K=4$ and each wavelength is assigned the same fixed capacity of 2.5\,Gb/s.
The latency for each link is determined by the distance multiplied by 1.45 divided by the speed of light as we are modeling an optical backhaul network.
In order to create a hotspot of CBSs, a x,y coordinate is selected uniformly as the hotspot center. Now a fraction $h$ of all CBSs is placed around the hotspot center based on a normal distribution with the hotspot coordinate as the mean and standard deviation $\frac{\bar{s}}{4}$ as the desired hotspot CBSs. All other desired CBSs are generated by placing then uniformly at random on the plane covered by the placed BSs. The BSs which are considered as the CBS are all BSs located inside a circle around the coordinates of the CBS with a given radius. We determine this radius by multiplying the mean inter-BS distance with a factor $r=1.5$, which results in 5 BSs per CBS on average.
The capacity demand $d$ for each BS in the CBS is set to the same value and is either 0.625\,Gb/s, 1.25\,Gb/s or 2.5\,Gb/s. This implies that at a demand of 2.5\,Gb/s one complete wavelength is required to connect a BS to the controller.
To determine the threshold values for the CBS prioritization $t_v$ and $t_h$, we performed a parameter study and identified $t_v=0.1$ and $t_h=0.9$ as the best values to maximize the number of feasible CBSs in this scenario.
\input{simfigure}
\subsubsection{Simulation Results}
The results for the simulation are shown in \refFig{fig:sim}, where we investigate the influence of different hotspot CBS fractions $h$. For $h=0$ no hotspot CBSs exist and for $h=1$ all CBSs are hotspot CBSs. Solid lines are our new algorithm with the CBS prioritization step, dashed lines the algorithm from our previous work as a reference.
In Figures \ref{fig:simfeas0} to \ref{fig:simfeas1} we show the resulting feasibility of the CBS, i.e. the fraction of desired CBSs that were successfully established. Even for a scenario with no hotspots ($h=0$) the CBS prioritization step increases the CBS feasibility to $100\%$ for all capacity demands and all numbers of desired CBSs. In the scenarios with $h=0.5$ and $h=0.75$, the feasibility drops as the number of desired CBSs increases. Still the CBS prioritization step increases the CBS feasibility by over $20\%$. In the scenario with all desired CBSs in the hotspot ($h=1$), there is no significant improvement from prioritizing CBSs, which is the expected outcome.
Figures \ref{fig:simwl0} to \ref{fig:simwl1} show the results for the overall number of used wavelengths and Figures \ref{fig:simwpl0} to \ref{fig:simwpl1} show the results for the number of used wavelengths per link. In the scenario with no hotspot CBSs ($h=0$) the CBS prioritization significantly improves the efficient use of wavelengths, as both the total number of used wavelengths and the number of wavelengths per link are significantly lower when using the CBS prioritization. This effect is also evident in the scenarios with $h=0.5$ and $h=0.75$. For $h=1$ there is again no significant difference.
\subsection{Prototype Evaluation}
\label{sec:evalproto}
\input{tbfigure}
The prototype evaluation uses our testbed implementation described in \refSec{sec:testbed}.
\subsubsection{Prototype Scenario}
As a scenario for the prototype evaluation we use a smaller scenario with only 16 BSs. To avoid a bottleneck from the Maxinet worker interconnect, a CBS can only contain BSs being emulated on the same worker machine. Apart from this limitation, CBSs are generated in the same random way as in the simulation (\refSec{sec:evalprio}). All emulated links also have a capacity of 2.5\,Gb/s, and for the demand per BS we only consider 1.25\,Gb/s, because the other values from the simulation (0.625\,Gb/s and 2.5\,Gb/s) do not provide additional insights from the evaluation results.
We also use three different implementations for the application to compare the performance of our algorithm:
\begin{itemize*}
\item \emph{Full Backhaul Reconfiguration} uses our full algorithm described in \refSec{sec:algo} with the full flexibility in terms of backhaul network configuration and BBU/LC placement.
\item \emph{Static Backhaul Reconfiguration} uses a limited version of our algorithm, where the BBU/LC is placed on a fixed BS and the algorithm only performs the flow routing and wavelength assignment.
\item \emph{Static Backhaul} does not use our algorithm at all and relies on a fixed BBU/LC placement, a static assignment of wavelengths and always uses shortest paths for the flow routing.
\end{itemize*}
\subsubsection{Prototype Results}
For the prototype evaluation, we consider three different metrics.
The \emph{a priori feasibility} is calculated from the output of the application. In \refFig{fig:tbfeas} we can see that the \emph{a priori feasibility} decreases for both applications that are based on our algorithm as the number of desired CBSs increases. This is due to the limited available resources in the backhaul network. The results also show that using the full flexibility of our algorithm yields a better \emph{a priori feasibility} than using the limited version. The \emph{a priori feasibility} for the static backhaul implementation is always 100\%, because this implementation does not consider any resource constraints in an a priori way.
In order to measure the \emph{a posteri feasibility} of all implementations we perform a UDP throughput measurement using iperf \cite{iperf} with a desired throughput of 1.25\,Gb/s. As results from this measurement we obtain both the achieved throughput (\refFig{fig:tbbw}) and the packet loss (\refFig{fig:tbloss}). We can see that both implementations with our algorithm achieve the desired throughput and do not cause any packet loss. In contrast to that the static implementation is not able to achieve the desired throughput and causes a significant packet loss.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
To handle the increasing wireless data rate demands of users in 5G mobile networks \cite{CiscoVNImobile}, it is not only important to efficiently utilize the available wireless resources to provide high data rates but also to coordinate wireless transmissions to reduce harmful interference.
Such coordination mechanisms require a set of base stations (BSs) that implement a coordination scheme to serve one or a group of user equipments (UEs). We call this set of BSs a \emph{coordinated base station set (CBS)}. Hence, as the coordination mechanisms are implemented in the wireless domain, the selection of BSs for the CBSs has to be decided based on the characteristics of the wireless channel\cite{6472201,6328484}. Implementing coordination among BSs is only possible if capacity and low-latency connections are provided by the backhaul network that
interconnects the BSs. Thus, the constraints on the backhaul network have to be considered in addition to the wireless characteristics when implementing BS coordination mechanisms \cite{6649363,Biermann2011a,Biermann2012662}.
In our previous work \cite{draexlerew2014}, we have shown how dynamic backhaul reconfiguration can increase the feasibility of base station coordination in networks with limited backhaul network resources, but we did not take the new challenges from very dense wireless access networks into account. Thus, in this paper we extend our dynamic backhaul reconfiguration approach to handle hotspot areas with a high density of users, i.e. a high density of desired CBS. We also show that this extension is beneficial for scenarios without hotspots and how it dynamically adapts to the density of hotspots.
We furthermore present a prototype implementation of our approach that is based on OpenDaylight \cite{odl}, a production-grade SDN controller, and Maxinet \cite{maxinet}, a distributed emulation framework for OpenFlow SDNs.
Base station coordination can be implemented in different ways. A very promising implementation strategy is to include the coordination into the baseband unit (BBU) of a Cloud RAN. Existing work \cite{chinacran,6736747,ijoincommag,6923535,6897914} has already shown that using Cloud-RAN is a good option to implement in future dense wireless access networks, in particular in conjunction with the SDN paradigm \cite{6845049,CrowdEWSDN,onfsdn}.
Another approach to base station coordination is the idea to apply the software defined networking (SDN) paradigm also to the control and coordination of BSs. There the control of coordination mechanisms is also moved to a local controller (LC) node, thus constraints similar to CoMP between the controller node and the BSs also apply here. Different approaches for that have been proposed \cite{CrowdEWSDN,Bansal2012}.
The required flexibility and capacity in the backhaul network for our approach can be provided by optical backhaul networks based on WDM-PON.
WDM-PON \cite{RamaswamiOptical10} is an optical fiber technology that multiplexes optical carrier signals on an optical fiber using different wavelengths or colors of laser light.
This allows great flexibility in deploying and operating backhaul networks: wavelengths can be added, dropped or manipulated in network
nodes, allowing to build dynamic topologies in the backhaul network. This flexibility is mainly enabled by the fact that
WDM allows operations like multiplexing different wavelengths and converting wavelengths in a purely optical way, avoiding slow and energy-consuming optical-electrical-optical conversion. Using optical links in a Cloud RAN backhaul has also been recommended by existing work \cite{6897914,6692220}.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows: We first discuss related approaches in \refSec{sec:relwork}. Then we describe our extended algorithm in \refSec{sec:algo} and our prototype implementation in \refSec{sec:prototype} including an overall system architecture. In \refSec{sec:eval} we provide both simulation results on the performance of our approach and on the feasibility of our prototype implementation. Finally, we conclude our work in \refSec{sec:concl}.
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:relwork}
Bartelt et al. \cite{6692220} analyze the challenges for backhaul networks arising from a cloud-based RAN and conclude that optical networks are a promising technology for Cloud RAN backhauls, if the data rate and latency demands are included into a joint optimization of radio access and backhaul.
The challenges of the backhaul connection of small cells in heterogeneous mobile access networks is studied in \cite{6666414}, resulting in a novel CBS selection algorithm to include the backhaul constraints.
Liu et al. \cite{6566903} investigate a dynamic backhaul network for the dynamic assignment of base stations to BBU pools with a reconfigurable backhaul architecture, including a small testbed evaluation.
The issues in backhaul networks with limited resources together with implementing wireless coordination have been investigated in in existing work:
Evaluations from Biermann et al. \cite{Biermann2011a} show how a limited backhaul network reduces the efficiency of CoMP.
Soliman et al. \cite{6666286} analyze how the backhaul resources have to be shared to achieve a feasible data exchange between coordinated BSs, but their model only considers two BSs.
The effects of a constrained backhaul on different BSs coordination schemes are investigated in \cite{6213935}, but without considering the selection of feasible CBSs.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement n$^\circ$ 318115.
\section{Prototype}
\label{sec:prototype}
In this section we first describe the architecture of a real-world implementation of our approach and then introduce how we implemented our prototype.
\subsection{System Architecture}
\label{sec:system}
Our system architecture is based on the decoupling of the following three components of the overall system:
\begin{itemize*}
\item Application
\item Controller
\item Network
\end{itemize*}
The architecture of our system is shown in \refFig{fig:architecture}.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figures/architecture.pdf}
\caption{System architecture}
\label{fig:architecture}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The application is essentially the algorithm from \refSec{sec:algo} together with necessary data structures to store the input and output data at runtime. The application is decoupled from the controller by accessing two different APIs of the controller. With the OpenFlow API the application can both query the topology and flow configuration of the backhaul network and modify the flow configuration according to the algorithm outputs. In addition to this API, the application also needs to access the BBU/LC API in order to query the status of running BBUs/LCs and to start or stop BBUs/LCs.
The controller acts as the centralized link between the application and the backhaul network, like the controller in an SDN network \cite{onfsdn}. It exposes the previously described northbound APIs to the application and controls both the backhaul network and the BBU/LC instances via its southbound plugins. Consistent with the northbound APIs the controller needs both an OpenFlow plugin and a BBU/LC control plugin.
Of course the backhaul network has to be based on OpenFlow-enabled hardware, i.e. switches, otherwise the controller could not use the OpenFlow plugin to reconfigure the backhaul network. Also all potential nodes for hosting a BBU/LC have to run a hypervisor to allow the dynamic instantiation of BBU/LC instances.
\subsection{Implementation}
\label{sec:impl}
Our reference implementation of the described system architecture is based on the OpenDaylight controller platform \cite{odl}. OpenDaylight already includes a fully featured OpenFlow plugin, thus no additional implementation is required for this part. Also the model-based design behind OpenDaylight facilitated the implementation of a BBU/LC control plugin. A core concept with OpenDaylight is the implementation of REST-based northbound APIs. The OpenFlow plugin already provides APIs for both querying the topology and configuring flows within the backhaul network. For our BBU/LC control plugin, we implemented REST APIs accordingly.
Our implementation of the application is based on Python and solely relies on the REST APIs of the controller. A small wrapper converts data between the OpenDaylight API format and the data structures for our algorithm. This wrapper is tailored to the OpenDaylight API format, but it could in principle be adapted to any other OpenFlow controller, making our algorithm implementation independent of the controller platform.
\subsection{Testbed}
\label{sec:testbed}
Because we cannot test our application and controller on a real-world OpenFlow enabled backhaul network, we have to use an emulated network to test and evaluate our implementation.
For this we use Maxinet \cite{maxinet}, an extension to the well known Mininet emulator \cite{mininet} for distributed emulation, to emulate a fully functional, virtual OpenFlow enabled network on a cluster of physical machines. We use a small setup with four physical machines, as shown in \refFig{fig:testbed}. One machine hosts the application, OpenDaylight and the Maxinet frontend, the three other machines are used as Maxinet workers to emulate the backhaul network.
Since we do not have any wireless interface integrated into the testbed, the traffic between the BSs and the BBUs/LCs is emulated using iperf \cite{iperf}.
\begin{figure}[bt]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{figures/testbed.pdf}
\caption{Testbed}
\label{fig:testbed}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
|
\section{Introduction}
Hashing is the fundamental operation of mapping data objects to fixed-size hash values. For example, all objects in the Java programming language can be hashed to 32-bit integers.
Many algorithms and data structures rely on hashing: e.g., authentication codes, Bloom filters and hash tables. We typically assume that given two data objects, the probability that they have the same hash value (called a \emph{collision}) is low.
When this assumption fails, adversaries can negatively impact the performance of these
data structures or even create denial-of-service attacks. To mitigate such problems, we can pick hash functions at random (henceforth called \emph{random hashing}).
Random hashing is standard in Ruby, Python and Perl. It is allowed explicitly in Java and C++11.
There are many fast random hash families --- e.g., MurmurHash, Google's CityHash~\cite{cityhash}, SipHash~\cite{siphash2012} and \textsc{VHASH}~\cite{dai2007vhash}.
Cryptographers have also designed fast hash families with strong theoretical guarantees~\cite{Bernstein2005,MMH1997,krovetz2007message}. However, much of this work predates the introduction of the CLMUL instruction set in commodity x86 processors. Intel and AMD added CLMUL and its \texttt{pclmulqdq} instruction to their processors to accelerate some common
cryptographic operations.
Although the \texttt{pcl\-mul\-qdq} instruction first became available
in 2010, its high cost in terms of CPU cycles --- specifically an 8-cycle throughput on pre-Haswell Intel microarchitectures and a 7-cycle throughput on pre-Jaguar AMD microarchitectures --- limited its usefulness outside of cryptography.
However, the throughput of the instruction on the newer Haswell architecture is down to 2~cycles, even though it remains a high latency operation (7 cycles)~\cite{fog2014instruction,intelintrin}.\footnote{The low-power AMD Jaguar microarchitecture does even better with a throughput of 1~cycle and a latency of 3~cycles.
} See Table~\ref{ref:simdinstructions}.
Our main contribution is to show that the \texttt{pclmulqdq} instruction can be used to produce a 64-bit string hash family that is faster
than known approaches
while offering stronger theoretical guarantees.
\begin{table*}
\caption{\label{ref:simdinstructions}Relevant SIMD intrinsics and instructions on \emph{Haswell} Intel processors, with latency and reciprocal throughput in CPU cycles per instruction~\cite{fog2014instruction,intelintrin}.
}\centering
\begin{tabular}{lcp{1.6in}cc}
\toprule
intrinsic & instruction & description & latency & rec.\ thr.
\\\midrule
\_mm\_clmulepi64\_si128 & \texttt{pclmulqdq} & 64-bit carry-less multiplication & 7 &2 \\
\_mm\_or\_si128 & \texttt{por} & bitwise OR & 1 & 0.33\\
\_mm\_xor\_si128 &\texttt{pxor} & bitwise XOR & 1 & 0.33\\
\_mm\_slli\_epi64 & \texttt{psllq} & shift left two 64-bit integers & 1 & 1 \\
\_mm\_srli\_si128 & \texttt{psrldq} & shift right by $x$ bytes & 1 & 0.5\\
\_mm\_shuffle\_epi8 & \texttt{pshufb} & shuffle 16 bytes & 1 & 0.5\\
\_mm\_cvtsi64\_si128 & \texttt{movq} & 64-bit integer as 128-bit reg. & 1 & --\\
\_mm\_cvtsi128\_si64 & \texttt{movq} & 64-bit integer from 128-bit reg. & 2 & --\\
\_mm\_load\_si128 & \texttt{movdqa} & load a 128-bit reg.\ from memory (aligned) & 1 & 0.5\\
\_mm\_lddqu\_si128 & \texttt{lddqu} & load a 128-bit reg.\ from memory (unaligned) & 1 & 0.5\\
\_mm\_setr\_epi8 & -- & construct 128-bit reg.\ from 16~bytes & -- & --\\
\_mm\_set\_epi64x & -- & construct 128-bit reg.\ from two 64-bit integers & -- & --\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\section{Random Hashing}
In random hashing, we pick a hash function at random from some family,
whereas an adversary might pick the data inputs.
We want distinct objects to be unlikely to hash to the same value. That is, we want a low collision probability.
We consider hash functions from $X$ to $[0,2^L)$. An $L$-bit family is
\emph{universal}~\cite{carter1979universal,Cormen:2009:IAT:1614191} if the probability of a collision is no more than $2^{-L}$. That is, it is universal if
\begin{align*}P\left (h(x)=h(x')\right )\leq 2^{-L}\end{align*}
for any fixed $x,x' \in X$ such that $x \neq x'$, given that we pick $h$ at random from the family.
It is \emph{$\epsilon$-almost universal}~\cite{188765} (also written $\epsilon$-AU) if
the probability of a collision is bounded by $\epsilon$. I.e.,
$P\left (h(x)=h(x')\right )\leq \epsilon$,
for any $x,x' \in X$ such that $x \neq x'$. (See Table~\ref{tab:notation}.)
\begin{table}
\caption{\label{tab:notation} Notation and basic definitions }
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l|p{4cm}} \toprule
$h: X \to \{0,1,\ldots, 2^L-1\}$ & $L$-bit hash function\\[5pt]
universal & $P\left (h(x)=h(x')\right )\leq 1/2^{L}$
for $x \neq x'$\\[5pt]
$\epsilon$-almost universal & $P\left (h(x)=h(x')\right )\leq \epsilon$
for $x \neq x'$\\[5pt]%
XOR-universal & $P\left (h(x) = h(x') \oplus c \right ) \leq 1/2^{L}$ for any $c \in [0,2^L)$ and distinct $x,x' \in X$ \\[5pt]
$\epsilon$-almost XOR-universal & $P\left (h(x) = h(x') \oplus c \right ) \leq \epsilon$ for any integer $c \in [0,2^L)$ and distinct $x,x' \in X$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Safely Reducing Hash Values}
Almost universality can be insufficient to prevent frequent collisions since a given algorithm might only use the first few bits of the hash values. Consider hash tables. A hash table might use as a key only the first $b$~bits of the hash values when its capacity is $2^b$. Yet even if a hash family is $\epsilon$-almost universal, it could still have a high collision probability on the first few bits.
For example, take any $32$-bit universal family $\mathcal{H}$, and derive the new $64$-bit $1/2^{32}$-almost universal $64$-bit family
by taking the functions from $\mathcal{H}$ and multiplying them by $2^{32}$:
$h'(x) = h(x) \times 2^{32}$. Clearly, all functions from this new family collide with probability 1 on the first 32~bits, even though the collision probability on the full hash values is low ($1/2^{32}$).
Using the first bits of
these hash functions could have disastrous consequences in the implementation of a hash table.
Therefore,
we consider stronger forms of universality.
\begin{itemize}
\item A family is \emph{$\Delta$-universal}~\cite{stinson1996connections,squarehash} if
\begin{align*}P(h(x) = h(x') + c \bmod 2^{L}) \leq 2^{-L}\end{align*} for any constant $c$
and any $x,x' \in X$ such that $x \neq x'$. It is $\epsilon$-almost $\Delta$-universal if
$P(h(x) = h(x') + c \bmod 2^{L} \leq \epsilon$ for any constant $c$ and any $x,x' \in X$ such that $x \neq x'$.
\item A family is
$\epsilon$-almost XOR-universal if
\begin{align*}P\left (h(x) = h(x') \oplus c \right ) \leq \epsilon\end{align*} for any integer constant $c\in [0,2^L)$ and any $x,x' \in X$ such that $x \neq x'$ (where $\oplus$ is the bitwise XOR). A family that is
$1/2^{L}$-almost XOR-universal is said to be XOR-universal~\cite{stinson1996connections}.
\end{itemize}
Given an $\epsilon$-almost $\Delta$-universal family $\mathcal{H}$ of hash functions $h:X \to [0,2^L)$, the family of hash functions
\begin{align*}\{ h(x) \bmod 2^{L'} \given h \in \mathcal{H}\}\end{align*} from $X$ to $[0,2^{L'})$ is
$2^{L-L'} \times \epsilon$-almost $\Delta$-universal~\cite{dai2007vhash}. The next lemma shows that a similar result applies to almost XOR-almost universal families.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:xorismarvellous}
Given an $\epsilon$-almost XOR-universal family $\mathcal{H}$ of hash functions $h:X \to [0,2^L)$ and any positive integer $L'<L$, the family of hash functions
$\{ h(x) \bmod 2^{L'} \given h \in \mathcal{H}\}$ from $X$ to $[0,2^{L'})$ is
$2^{L-L'} \times \epsilon$-almost XOR-universal.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For any integer constant $c\in [0,2^L)$, consider the equation $h(x) = (h(x') \oplus c )\bmod 2^{L'}$ for $x \neq x'$ with $h$ picked from $\mathcal{H}$. Pick any positive integer $L'<L$. We have \begin{align*}P( &h(x) = (h(x') \oplus c \mod 2^{L'}) ) \\
& = \sum_{z \given z \bmod 2^{L'}=0 } P(h(x) = h(x')\oplus c \oplus z )\end{align*} where the sum is over $2^{L-L'}$ distinct $z$ values. Because $\mathcal{H}$ is $\epsilon$-almost XOR-universal, we have that
$P(h(x) = h(x')\oplus c \oplus z ) \leq \epsilon$ for any $c$ and any $z$.
Thus, we have that $P( h(x) = h(x') \oplus c \mod 2^{L'} ) \leq 2^{L-L'} \epsilon$, showing the result.
\end{proof}
It follows from Lemma~\ref{lemma:xorismarvellous} that if a family is XOR-universal, then its modular reductions are XOR-universal as well.
As a straightforward extension of this lemma, we could show that
when picking any $L'$~bits (not only
the least significant), the result is $2^{L-L'} \times \epsilon$-almost XOR-universal.
\subsection{Composition}
It can be useful to combine different hash families to create new ones. For example, it is common to compose hash families.
When composing hash functions ($h=g \circ f$), the universality degrades linearly: if $g$ is picked from an $\epsilon_g$-almost universal family and
$f$ is picked (independently) from
an $\epsilon_f$-almost universal family, the result is $\epsilon_g+\epsilon_f$-almost universal~\cite{188765}.
We sketch the proof. For $x\neq x'$, we have that $g(f(x))=g(f(x'))$ collides if $f(x)=f'(x)$. This occurs with probability at most $\epsilon_f $ since $f$ is picked from an $\epsilon_f$-almost universal family. If not, they collide if $g(y)=g(y')$ where $y=f(x)$ and $y'=f(x')$, with probability bounded by $\epsilon_g$. Thus, we have bounded the collision probability by $\epsilon_f +(1-\epsilon_f) \epsilon_g \leq \epsilon_f+\epsilon_g$, establishing the result.
By extension, we can show that if $g$ is picked from an $\epsilon_g$-almost XOR-universal family, then the composed result ($h=g \circ f$) is going to be $\epsilon_g+\epsilon_f$-almost XOR-universal. It is not required for $f$ to be almost XOR-universal.
\subsection{Hashing Tuples}\label{sec:hashingtuples}
If we have universal hash functions from $X$ to $[0,2^L)$, then we can construct hash functions from $X^m$ to $[0,2^L)^m$ while preserving universality. The construction is straightforward: $h'(x_1, x_2,\ldots, x_m)= (h(x_1), h(x_2),\ldots, h(x_m))$. If $h$ is picked from an $\epsilon$-almost universal family, then the result is $\epsilon$-almost universal. This is true even though a single $h$ is picked and reused $m$~times.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:hashingtuples}Consider an $\epsilon$-almost universal family $\mathcal{H}$ from $X$ to $[0,2^L)$. Then
consider
the family of functions
$\mathcal{H}'$
of the form $h'(x_1, x_2,\ldots, x_m)= (h(x_1), h(x_2),\ldots, h(x_m))$ from $X^m$ to $[0,2^L)^m$, where $h$ is in $\mathcal{H}$.
Family $\mathcal{H}'$
is $\epsilon$-almost universal.
\end{lemma}
The proof is not difficult.
Consider two distinct values from $X^m$, $x_1, x_2,\ldots, x_m$ and $x'_1, x'_2,\ldots, x'_m$. Because the tuples are distinct, they must differ in at least one component: $x_i \neq x'_i$. It follows that
$h'(x_1, x_2,\ldots, x_m)$ and $h'(x'_1, x'_2,\ldots, x'_m)$
collide with probability at most $P(h(x_i)=h(x'_i))\leq \epsilon$, showing the result.
\subsection{Variable-Length Hashing From Fixed-Length Hashing}\label{sec:var}
Suppose that we are given a family $\mathcal{H}$ of hash functions that is XOR universal over fixed-length strings. That is, we have that
$P\left (h(s) = h(s') \oplus c \right ) \leq 1/2^{L}$ if the length of $s$ is the same as the length of $s'$ ($|s|=|s'|$). We can create a new family that is XOR universal
over variable-length strings by introducing a hash family on string lengths. Let $\mathcal{G}$ be a family of XOR universal hash functions $g$ over length values. Consider the new family of hash functions of the form $h(s) \oplus g (|s|)$ where $h \in \mathcal{H}$ and $g \in \mathcal{G}$. Let us consider two distinct strings $s$ and $s'$. There are two cases to consider.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $s$ and $s'$ have the same length so that $g (|s|)=g (|s'|)$ then we have XOR universality since \begin{align*}&P\left (h(s) \oplus g (|s|) = h(s')\oplus g (|s'|) \oplus c \right ) \\&= P\left (h(s) = h(s')\oplus c \right )\\ &\leq 1/2^{L}\end{align*} where the last inequality follows because $h\in \mathcal{H}$, an XOR universal family over fixed-length strings.
\item If the strings have different lengths ($|s|\neq|s'|$), then we again have XOR universality because
\begin{align*}&P\left (h(s) \oplus g (|s|) = h(s')\oplus g (|s'|) \oplus c \right )\\ &= P\left (g (|s|) = g (|s'|)\oplus ( c \oplus h(s) \oplus h(s'))\right )\\
&= P\left (g (|s|) = g (|s'|)\oplus c'\right )\\
&\leq 1/2^{L}\end{align*}
where we set $c'=c \oplus h(s) \oplus h(s')$, a value independent from $|s|$ and $|s'|$. The last inequality follows because $g$ is taken from a family $\mathcal{G}$ that is XOR universal.
\end{itemize}
Thus the result ($h(s) \oplus g (|s|)$) is XOR universal. We can also generalize the analysis. Indeed, if $\mathcal{H}$ and $\mathcal{G}$ are $\epsilon$-almost universal, we could show that the result is $\epsilon$-almost universal. We have the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:fromfixedtovariable}
Let $\mathcal{H}$ be an XOR universal family of hash functions over fixed-length strings. Let $\mathcal{G}$ be an XOR universal family of hash functions over integer values. We have that the family of hash functions of the form $s\to h(s) \oplus g (|s|)$ where $h \in \mathcal{H}$ and $g \in \mathcal{G}$ is XOR universal over all strings.
Moreover, if $\mathcal{H}$ and $\mathcal{G}$ are merely $\epsilon$-almost universal, then the family of hash functions of the form $s\to h(s) \oplus g (|s|)$ is also $\epsilon$-almost universal.
\end{lemma}
\subsection{Minimally Randomized Hashing}
Many
hashing algorithms --- for instance,
CityHash~\cite{cityhash} ---
rely on a small random \emph{seed}. The 64-bit version of CityHash takes a 64-bit integer as a seed.
Thus, we effectively have a family of $2^{64}$~hash functions --- one for each possible seed value.
Given such a small family (i.e., given few random bits), we can prove that it must have high collision probabilities.
Indeed, consider the set of all strings of $m$~64-bit words. There are $2^{64 m}$ such strings.
\begin{itemize}
\item Pick one hash function from the CityHash family.
This function hashes every one of the $2^{64 m}$~strings to one of $2^{64}$~hash values. By a pigeonhole argument~\cite{Ros128}, there must be at least one hash value where at least $2^{64 m}/2^{64}=2^{64 (m-1)}$~strings collide.
\item Pick another hash function. Out of the $2^{64 (m-1)}$~strings colliding when using the first hash function, we must have $2^{64 (m-2)}$~strings also colliding when using the second hash function.
\end{itemize}
We can repeat this process $m-1$~times until we find
$2^{64}$~strings colliding when using any of these
$m-1$~hash functions. If an adversary picks
any two of our $2^{64}$~strings and we pick the hash function at random in the whole family of $2^{64}$~hash functions, we get a collision with a probability of at least $(m - 1)/2^{64}$.
Thus, while we do not have a strict bound on the collision probability of the CityHash family, we know just from the small size of its seed that it must have a relatively high collision probability for long strings.
In contrast, \textsc{VHASH} and
our
\textsc{CLHASH}
(see \S~\ref{sec:clhash})
use more than 64~random bits and have correspondingly better collision bounds (see Table~\ref{table:comparison}).
\section{\textsc{VHASH}}
The \textsc{VHASH} family~\cite{dai2007vhash,vhashimpl} was designed
for 64-bit processors. By default, it operates over 64-bit words. Among hash families offering good almost universality for large data inputs, \textsc{VHASH} might be the fastest 64-bit alternative on x64 processors --- except for our own proposal (see \S~\ref{sec:clhash}).
\textsc{VHASH} is $\epsilon$-almost $\Delta$-universal and builds on the 128-bit NH family~\cite{dai2007vhash}:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:nh}
\mathrm{NH}(s)=\sum_{i=1}^{l/2}\big (&(s_{2i-1}+k_{2i-1} \bmod 2^{64}) \\
&\times (s_{2i}+k_{2i} \bmod 2^{64})\big ) \bmod 2^{128}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
NH is $1/2^{64}$-almost $\Delta$-universal with hash values in $[0,2^{128})$. Although the NH family is defined only for inputs containing an even number of components, we can extend it to include
odd numbers of components by padding the input with a zero component.
We can summarize \textsc{VHASH} (see Algorithm~\ref{alg:vhash}) as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
NH is used to generate a 128-bit hash value for each block of 16~words. The result is $1/2^{64}$-almost $\Delta$-universal on each block.
\item These hash values are mapped to a value
in $[0,2^{126})$ by applying a modular reduction.
These reduced hash values are then aggregated with a polynomial hash and finally reduced to a 64-bit value.
\end{itemize}
In total, the \textsc{VHASH} family is $1/2^{61}$-almost $\Delta$-universal over $[0,2^{64}-257)$ for input strings of up to $2^{62}$~bits~\cite[Theorem~1]{dai2007vhash}.
For long input strings, we expect that much of the running time of \textsc{VHASH} is in the computation of NH on blocks of 16~words. On recent x64 processors, this computation involves 8~multiplications using the \texttt{mulq} instruction (with two 64-bit inputs and two 64-bit outputs). For each group of two consecutive words ($s_i$ and $s_{i+1}$), we also need two 64-bit additions. To sum
all results, we need 7~128-bit additions that can be implemented using two 64-bit additions (\texttt{addq} and \texttt{adcq}). All of these operations have a throughput of at least 1~per cycle on Haswell processors.
We can expect NH and, by extension, VHASH to be fast.
\textsc{VHASH} uses only 16~64-bit random integers for the NH family. As in \S~\ref{sec:hashingtuples}, we only need one specific NH function irrespective of the length of the string. \textsc{VHASH} also uses a 128-bit random integer $k$ and two more 64-bit random integers $k'_1$ and $k'_2$. Thus \textsc{VHASH} uses slightly less than 160~random bytes.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{\textsc{VHASH} algorithm}\label{alg:vhash}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]\small
\REQUIRE 16 randomly picked 64-bit integers $k_1, k_2, \ldots, k_{16}$ defining a
128-bit NH hash function (see Equation~\ref{eqn:nh}) over inputs of length 16
\REQUIRE $k$, a randomly picked element of $\{w 2^{96}+x 2^{64}+y 2^{32}+z \given \text{integers } w,x,y,z \in [0,2^{29}) \}$
\REQUIRE $k'_1, k'_2$, randomly picked integers in $[0,2^{64}-258]$
\STATE \textbf{input}: string $M$ made of $|M|$~bytes
\STATE Let $n$ be the number of 16-word blocks ($\lceil |M| / 16 \rceil$).
\STATE Let $M_i$ be the substring of $M$ from index $i$ to $i+16$, padding with zeros if needed.
\STATE Hash each $M_i$ using the NH function, labelling the result 128-bit results $a_i$ for $i=1,\ldots,n$.
\STATE Hash the resulting $a_i$ with a polynomial hash function and store the value in a 127-bit hash value $p$: $p=k^n +a_1 k^{n-1}+\cdots + a_n + (|M| \bmod 1024) \times 2^{64} \bmod {(2^{127}-1)}$.\label{line:vhashfin}
\STATE Hash the 127-bit value $p$ down to a 64-bit value: $z=(p_1+k'_1) \times (p_2 +k'_2) \bmod {(2^{64}-257)}$, where $p_1 = p \div (2^{64}-2^{32)}$ and $p_2 = p \bmod (2^{64}-2^{32})$.
\RETURN the 64-bit hash value $z$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Random Bits}
Nguyen and Roscoe showed
that
at least $\log (m/\epsilon)$~random bits are required~\cite{Ros128},\footnote
{In the present paper, $\log n$ means $\log_2 n$.} where $m$ is the maximal string length in bits and $\epsilon$ is the collision bound.
For \textsc{VHASH}, the string length is limited to $2^{62}$~bits and the collision bound is $\epsilon = 1/2^{61}$. Therefore,
for hash families offering the bounds of \textsc{VHASH}, we have that
$\log m/\epsilon = \log (2^{62} \times 2^{61})=123$~random bits are required.
That is, 16~random bytes are theoretically required to achieve the same collision bound as \textsc{VHASH} while many more are used (160~bytes)
This suggests that we might be able to find families using far fewer random bits while maintaining the same good bounds.
In fact, it is not difficult to modify \textsc{VHASH} to reduce the use of random bits. It would
suffice to reduce the size of the blocks down from 16~words. We could
show that it cannot increase the bound on the collision probability by more than $1/2^{64}$.
However, reducing the size of the blocks has an adverse effect on speed. With large blocks and long strings,
most of the input is processed with the NH function before the more expensive polynomial hash
function is used.
Thus, there is a trade-off between speed and the number of random bits, and \textsc{VHASH} is designed for speed on long strings.
\section{Finite Fields}
Our proposed hash family (\textsc{CLHASH}, see \S~\ref{sec:clhash}) works over a binary finite field.
For completeness,
we review field theory briefly, introducing (classical) results as needed for our purposes.
The real numbers form what is called a \emph{field}. A field is such that addition and multiplication are associative, commutative and distributive. We also have identity elements (0 for addition and 1 for multiplication).
Crucially, all non-zero elements $a$ have an inverse $a^{-1}$
(which is
defined by $a \times a^{-1} = a^{-1} \times a =1$).
Finite fields (also called Galois fields) are fields containing a finite number of elements. All finite fields have cardinality $p^n$ for some prime $p$. Up to an \emph{algebraic isomorphism} (i.e., a one-to-one map preserving addition and multiplication), given a cardinality $p^n$, there is only one field (henceforth $GF(p^n)$). And for any power of a prime, there is a corresponding field.
\subsection{Finite Fields of Prime Cardinality}
\label{sec:finitefieldsprime}
It is easy to create finite fields
that have
prime cardinality ($GF(p)$).
Given $p$, an instance of $GF(p)$ is given by the set of integers in $[0,p)$ with additions and multiplications completed by a modular reduction:
\begin{itemize}
\item
$a \times_{GF(p)} b \equiv a \times b \bmod p$
\item and $a +_{GF(p)} b \equiv a+b \bmod p$.
\end{itemize}
The numbers 0 and 1 are the identity elements. Given an element $a$, its additive inverse is $p-a$.
It is not difficult to check that all non-zero elements have a multiplicative inverse. We review this classical result for completeness. Given a non-zero element $a$ and two distinct $x, x'$, we have that $a x \bmod p \neq a x' \bmod p$ because $p$ is prime. Hence, starting with a fixed non-zero element $a$, we have that the set $\{a x \bmod p \, \mid \, x \in[0,p) \} $ has cardinality $p$ and must contain 1; thus, $a$ must have a multiplicative inverse.
\subsection{Hash Families in a Field}
\label{sec:hasfamexampleinfield}
Within a field, we can easily construct hash families having strong theoretical guarantees, as the next lemma illustrates.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:simpledeltauniversal}
The family of functions of the form
\begin{align*}h(x)=a x\end{align*}
in a finite field ($GF(p^n)$) is $\Delta$-universal, provided that the key $a$ is picked from all values of the field.
\end{lemma}
As another example, consider hash functions of the form $h(x_1, x_2,\ldots, x_m)=a^{m-1} x_1 + a^{m-2} x_2+\cdots+ x_m$ where $a$ is picked at random (a \emph{random input}).
Such \emph{polynomial hash functions} can be computed efficiently using Horner's rule: starting with $r=x_1$, compute $r\leftarrow a r + x_i$ for $i=2, \ldots, m$. Given any two distinct inputs, $x_1, x_2,\ldots, x_m$ and $x'_1, x'_2,\ldots, x'_m$, we have that $h(x_1, \ldots, x_m)-h(x'_1, \ldots, x'_m)$ is a non-zero polynomial of degree at most $m-1$ in $a$. By the fundamental theorem of algebra, we have that it is zero for at most $m-1$~distinct values of $a$.
Thus we have that the probability of a collision is bounded by $(m-1)/p^n$ where $p^n$ is the cardinality of the field. For example, \textsc{VHASH} uses polynomial hashing with $p=2^{127}-1$
and $n=1$.
We can further reduce the collision probabilities if we use $m$~random inputs $a_1, \ldots, a_m$ picked in the field to compute a \emph{multilinear} function: $h(x_1, \ldots, x_m)=a_1 x_1 + a_2 x_2 + \cdots + a_m x_m$. We have $\Delta$-universality. Given two distinct inputs, $x_1, \ldots, x_m$ and $x'_1, \ldots, x'_m$, we have that $x_i \neq x'_i$ for some $i$. Thus we have that
$h(x_1, \ldots, x_m)=c+h(x'_1, \ldots, x'_m)$ if and only if
$a_i = (x_i - x'_i)^{-1} (c + \sum_{j\neq i} a_j (x'_j -x_j))$.
If $m$ is even, we can get the same bound on the collision probability with half the number of multiplications~\cite{703969,Lemire10072013,motzkin1955evaluation}:
\begin{align*}&h(x_1, x_2,\ldots, x_m)\\&=(a_1 + x_1) ( a_2 + x_2) + \cdots + (a_{m-1} + x_{m-1}) (a_m + x_m).\end{align*}
The argument is similar.
Consider that \begin{align*}& (x_i+a_i) (a_{i+1}+x_{i+1})
- (x'_i+a_i) (a_{i+1}+x'_{i+1})\\
& = a_{i+1} (x_i-x'_i) +a_i (x_{i+1}-x'_{i+1})+x_{i+1} x_i +x'_i x'_{i+1}.\end{align*}
Take two distinct inputs, $x_1, x_2,\ldots, x_m$ and $x'_1, x'_2,\ldots, x'_m$.
As before, we have that $x_i \neq x'_i$ for some $i$. Without loss of generality, assume that $i$ is odd; then we can
find a unique solution
for $a_{i+1}$:
to do this, start
from $h(x_1, \ldots, x_m)=c+h(x'_1, \ldots, x'_m)$ and solve for $a_{i+1} (x_i-x'_i)$ in terms of an expression that does not depend on $a_{i+1}$. Then use the fact that $x_i-x'_i$ has an inverse.
This shows that the collision probability is bounded by $1/p^n$ and we have $\Delta$-universality.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:halfisdeltauniversal}
Given an even number $m$, the family of functions of the form
\begin{align*}h(x_1, x_2,\ldots, x_m)=&(a_1 + x_1) ( a_2 + x_2) \\
& + (a_3 + x_3) ( a_4 + x_4) \\
& + \cdots \\
& + (a_{m-1} + x_{m-1}) (a_m + x_m)\end{align*}
in a finite field ($GF(p^n)$) is $\Delta$-universal, providing that the keys $a_1, \ldots, a_m$ are picked from all values of the field.
In particular, the collision probability between two distinct inputs is bounded by $1/p^n$.
\end{lemma}
\subsection{Binary Finite Fields}
\label{sec:binaryfinitefields}
Finite fields having prime cardinality are simple (see \S~\ref{sec:finitefieldsprime}), but we would prefer to work with fields having a power-of-two cardinality (also called binary fields) to match common computer architectures.
Specifically, we are interested in $GF(2^{64})$ because our desktop processors
typically have
64-bit architectures.
We can implement such a field over the integers in $[0,2^L)$ by using the following two operations.
Addition is defined as the bitwise XOR
($\oplus$) operation, which is fast on most computers: \begin{align*}a +_{GF(2^L)} b \equiv a \oplus b.\end{align*}
The number 0 is the additive identity element ($a \oplus 0 = 0 \oplus a = a$), and
every number is its own additive inverse: $a \oplus a = 0$. Note that because binary finite fields use XOR as an addition, $\Delta$-universality and XOR-universality are effectively equivalent for our purposes in binary finite fields.
Multiplication is defined as a carry-less multiplication followed by a reduction. We use the convention that $a_i$ is the $i^{\mathrm{th}}$ least significant bit of integer $a$ and $a_i= 0$ if $i$ is larger than the most significant bit of $a$. The $i^{\mathrm{th}}$ bit of the carry-less multiplication $a \star b$ of $a$ and $b$ is given by
\begin{align}\label{eqn:carrylessmult}(a \star b)_i \equiv
\bigoplus_{k=0}^i a_{i-k} b_k\end{align}
where $a_{i-k} b_k$ is just a regular multiplication between two integers in $\{0,1\}$ and $\bigoplus_{k=0}^i$ is the bitwise XOR of a range of values.
The carry-less product of two $L$-bit integers is a $2L$-bit integer.
We can check that the integers with $\oplus$ as addition and $\star$ as multiplication form a \emph{ring}:
addition and multiplication are associative, commutative and distributive, and there is an additive identity element.
In this instance, the number 1 is a multiplicative identity element ($a \star 1 = 1 \star a = a$).
Except for the number 1, no number has a multiplicative inverse
in this ring.
Given the ring determined by $\oplus$ and $\star$, we can derive a corresponding finite field. However, just as with finite fields of prime cardinality, we need some kind of modular reduction and a concept equivalent to that of prime numbers\footnote{%
The general construction of a finite field of cardinality $p^n$ for $n>1$ is commonly explained in terms of polynomials with
coefficients from $GF(p)$. To avoid unnecessary abstraction, we present finite fields of cardinality $2^L$ using regular $L$-bit integers. Interested readers can see Mullen and Panario~\cite{Mullen:2013:HFF:2555843}, for the
alternative development.
}.
Let us define $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(x)$ to be the position of the most significant non-zero bit of $x$, starting at 0 (e.g., $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(1)=0$, $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(2)=1$, $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(2^j)=j$). For example, we have $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(x)\leq 127$ for any 128-bit integer $x$. Given any two non-zero integers $a,b$, we have that $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(a \star b) = \mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(a) + \mathop{\mathrm{degree}} (b)$ as a straightforward consequence of Equation~\ref{eqn:carrylessmult}. Similarly, we have that \begin{align*}\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(a \oplus b) \leq \max (\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(a),\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(b)).\end{align*}
Not unlike regular multiplication, given integers $a,b$ with $b\neq 0$, there are unique integers $\alpha, \beta$ (henceforth the \emph{quotient} and the \emph{remainder}) such that
\begin{align}a = \alpha \star b \; \oplus \; \beta \label{eqn:boring} \end{align}
where $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(\beta)<\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(b)$.
The uniqueness of the quotient and the remainder is easily shown. Suppose that there is another
pair of values $\alpha',\beta'$ with the same property. Then $\alpha' \star b \; \oplus \; \beta' = \alpha \star b \; \oplus \; \beta$ which implies that $(\alpha' \oplus \alpha) \star b = \beta' \oplus \beta$. However, since $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(\beta' \oplus \beta)< \mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(b)$ we must have that $\alpha=\alpha'$. From this it follows that $\beta=\beta'$, thus establishing uniqueness.
We define $\div$ and $\bmod$ operators as giving respectively the quotient ($a\div b = \alpha$) and remainder ($a\mod b = \beta$) so that the equation
\begin{align}a \equiv a\div b \star b \; \;\oplus \; \; a\bmod b\label{eqn:id}\end{align}
is an identity equivalent to Equation~\ref{eqn:boring}. (To avoid unnecessary parentheses, we use the following operator precedence convention: $\star$, $\bmod$ and $\div$ are executed first, from left to right, followed by $\oplus$.)
In the general case, we can compute $a \div b $ and $a \bmod b$ using a straightforward variation on
the Euclidean division algorithm (see Algorithm~\ref{alg:division}) which proves the existence of the remainder and quotient.
Checking the correctness of the algorithm is straightforward. We start initially with values $\alpha$ and $\beta$ such that $a=\alpha\star b \oplus \beta$.
By inspection, this equality is preserved throughout the algorithm. Meanwhile, the algorithm only terminates when the degree of $\beta$ is less than
that of
$b$, as required. And the algorithm must terminate, since the degree of $q$ is reduced by at least one each time it is updated (for a maximum of $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(a)-\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(b)+1$~steps).
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Carry-less division algorithm}\label{alg:division}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]\small
\STATE \textbf{input:} Two integers $a$ and $b$, where $b$ must be non-zero
\STATE \textbf{output:} Carry-less quotient and remainder: $\alpha = a \div b $ and $\beta = a \bmod b$, such that $a=\alpha \star b \oplus \beta$ and $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(\beta)<b$
\STATE Let $\alpha \leftarrow 0$ and $\beta \leftarrow a$
\WHILE {$\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(\beta)\geq \mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(b)$}
\STATE let $x\leftarrow 2^{\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(\beta)-\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(b)}$
\STATE $\alpha \leftarrow x\; \oplus \; \alpha$,
$\beta \leftarrow x \star b \; \oplus \; \beta$
\ENDWHILE
\RETURN $\alpha$ and $\beta$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Given $a = \alpha \star b \; \oplus \; \beta$ and $a' = \alpha' \star b \; \oplus \; \beta'$, we have that $a \oplus a' = (\alpha \oplus \alpha') \star b \; \oplus \; (\beta \oplus \beta')$. Thus,
it can be checked that divisions and modular reductions are distributive:
\begin{align}\label{eqn:distributive}(a \oplus b) \bmod p =( a \bmod p ) \oplus ( b \bmod p),\end{align}
\begin{align}\label{eqn:distributivediv}(a \oplus b) \div p = (a \div p) \oplus (b \div p).\end{align}
Thus, we have $(a \oplus b) \bmod p = 0 \Rightarrow a \bmod p = b \bmod p $.
Moreover, by inspection, we have that $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(a\bmod b)<\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(b)$ and $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(a\div b)=\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(a)-\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(b)$.
The carry-less multiplication by a power of two is equivalent to regular multiplication. For this reason, a modular reduction by a power of two (e.g., $a \bmod{2^{64}}$) is just the regular integer modular reduction. Idem for division.
There are non-zero integers $a$ such that there is no integer $b$ other than 1 such that $a\bmod b=0$; effectively $a$ is a prime number under the carry-less multiplication interpretation. These ``prime integers'' are more commonly known as \emph{irreducible polynomials} in the ring of polynomials $GF2[x]$, so we call them \emph{irreducible} instead of prime. Let us pick such an irreducible integer $p$ (arbitrarily) such that
the degree of $p$ is 64.
One such integer is
$2^{64}+2^{4}+2^{3}+2 +1$.
Then we can finally define the multiplication operation in $GF(2^{64})$:
\begin{align*}a \times_{GF(2^{64})} b \equiv
(a \star b) \bmod p.\end{align*}
Coupled with the addition $+_{GF(2^{64})}$ that is just a bitwise XOR, we have an implementation of the field $GF(2^{64})$ over integers in $[0,2^{64})$.
We call the index of the second most significant bit the \emph{subdegree}. We chose an irreducible $p$ of degree 64 having minimal subdegree (4).\footnote{This can be readily verified using a mathematical software package such as Sage or Maple.} We use the fact that this subdegree is small to accelerate the computation of the modular reduction in the next section.
\subsection{Efficient Reduction in $GF(2^{64})$}
\label{sec:efficient}
AMD and Intel have introduced a fast instruction that can compute a carry-less multiplication between two 64-bit numbers, and it generates a 128-bit integer. To get the multiplication in $GF(2^{64})$, we must still reduce this 128-bit integer to a 64-bit integer.
Since there is no equivalent fast modular instruction, we need to derive an efficient algorithm.
There are efficient reduction algorithms used in cryptography (e.g., from 256-bit to 128-bit integers~\cite{gueron2010efficient}), but they do not suit our purposes: we have to reduce to 64-bit integers.
Inspired by the classical Barrett reduction~\cite{Barrett:1987:IRS:36664.36688},
Kne\v{z}evi\'{c} et al.\ proposed a generic modular reduction algorithm in $GF(2^n)$, using no more than two multiplications~\cite{springerlink:10.1007/978-3-540-69499-1_7}.
We put this to good use in previous work~\cite{Lemire10072013}. However, we can do the same reduction using a single multiplication.
According to our tests, the reduction technique presented next
is \SI{30}{\percent} faster than an optimized implementation based on Kne\v{z}evi\'{c} et al.'s algorithm.
Let us write $p = 2^{64} \; \oplus \; r$. In our case, we have $r=2^{4}+2^{3}+2+1=27$ and $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(r)=4$.
We are interested in applying a modular reduction by $p$ to the result of the multiplication of two integers in $[0,2^{64})$, and the result of such a multiplication is an integer $x$ such that $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(x)\leq 127$.
We want to compute $x \bmod p $ quickly. We begin with the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:firstone}
Consider any 64-bit integer $p=2^{64}\oplus r$.
We define the operations $\bmod$ and $\div$ as the counterparts of the carry-less multiplication $\star$ as in \S~\ref{sec:binaryfinitefields}.
Given any $x$, we have that
\begin{align*}&x \bmod p \\ &=
((z\div 2^{64}) \star 2^{64}) \bmod p \; \oplus \; z\bmod 2^{64} \; \oplus \; x\bmod 2^{64}
\end{align*}
where $z\equiv (x\div 2^{64}) \star r$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have that
$x = (x\div 2^{64}) \star 2^{64} \;\oplus \; x\bmod 2^{64}
$
for any $x$ by definition. Applying the modular reduction on both sides of the equality, we get
\begin{align*}x \bmod p &= (x\div 2^{64}) \star 2^{64} \bmod p \; \oplus \; x\bmod 2^{64} \bmod p &\\
&= (x\div 2^{64}) \star 2^{64} \bmod p \; \oplus \; x\bmod 2^{64} \\ &\text{\textit{by Fact 1} }\\
& = (x\div 2^{64}) \star r \bmod p \; \oplus \; x\bmod 2^{64} \\&\text{\textit{by Fact 2} }\\
& = z \bmod p \; \oplus \; x\bmod 2^{64} \\ &\text{\textit{by z's def.} }\\
& =
((z\div 2^{64}) \star 2^{64}) \bmod p \; \oplus \; z\bmod 2^{64} \\& \; \oplus \; x\bmod 2^{64} \\&\text{\textit{by Fact 3} }
\end{align*}
where Facts 1, 2 and 3 are as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item (Fact 1) For any $x$, we have that $(x \bmod {2^{64}}) \bmod p = x \bmod {2^{64}}$.
\item (Fact 2)
For any integer $z$, we have that $(2^{64}\; \oplus \; r) \star z \bmod p = p \star z \bmod p = 0$ and therefore
\begin{align*}2^{64}\star z \bmod p = r \star z \bmod p\end{align*}
by the distributivity of the modular reduction (Equation~\ref{eqn:distributive}).
\item (Fact 3) Recall that by definition $z=(z\div 2^{64}) \star 2^{64} \; \oplus \; z\bmod 2^{64} $. We can substitute this equation in the equation from Fact 1. For any $z$ and any non-zero $p$, we have that
\begin{align*}
z \bmod p & =((z\div 2^{64}) \star 2^{64} \; \oplus \; z\bmod 2^{64}) \bmod p\\
& = ((z\div 2^{64}) \star 2^{64}) \bmod p \; \oplus \; z\bmod 2^{64}
\end{align*}
by the distributivity of the modular reduction (see Equation~\ref{eqn:distributive}).
\end{itemize}
Hence the result is shown. \end{proof}
Lemma~\ref{lemma:firstone} provides a formula to compute $x\bmod p$.
Computing $z= (x\div 2^{64}) \star r$ involves a carry-less multiplication, which can be done efficiently on recent Intel and AMD processors. The computation of
$z\bmod 2^{64}$ and $ x\bmod 2^{64}$ is trivial. It remains to compute
$((z\div 2^{64}) \star 2^{64}) \bmod p $. At first glance, we still have a modular reduction. However, we can easily memoize the result of
$((z\div 2^{64}) \star 2^{64}) \bmod p$.
The next lemma shows that there are only 16~distinct values to memoize (this
follows from the low subdegree of $p$).
\begin{lemma}
Given that $x$ has degree less than 128,
there are only 16~possible values of $(z\div 2^{64}) \star 2^{64} \bmod p$, where $z\equiv (x\div 2^{64}) \star r$ and $r=2^{4}+2^{3}+2+1$. \end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Indeed, we have that
\begin{align*}\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(z) = \mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(x) -64 + \mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(r).\end{align*}
Because
$\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(x)\leq 127$, we have that
$\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(z) \leq
127 - 64 + 4
=67$. Therefore, we have $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(z \div 2^{64})\leq 3$. Hence, we can represent $z \div 2^{64}$ using 4~bits: there are only 16 4-bit integers.
\end{proof}
Thus, in the worst possible case, we would need to memoize 16~distinct 128-bit integers to represent $((z\div 2^{64}) \star 2^{64}) \bmod p $. However, observe that the degree of $z\div 2^{64}$ is bounded by $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(x)-64+4-64\leq 127-128+4=3$ since $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(x)\leq 127$. By using Lemma~\ref{lemma:notsobad}, we show that each integer $((z\div 2^{64}) \star 2^{64}) \bmod p $ has degree bounded by 7 so that it can be represented using no more than
8~bits: setting $L=64$ and $w \equiv z\div 2^{64}$, $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w)\leq 3$, $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(r)=4$ and $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w)+\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(r)\leq 7$.
Effectively, the lemma says that if you take a value of small degree $w$, you multiply it by $2^{{L}}$ and then compute the modular reduction on the result and a value $p$ that is almost $2^{L}$ (except for a value of small degree $r$), then the result has small degree: it is bounded by the sum of the degrees of $w$ and $r$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:notsobad}
Consider
$p = 2^L \; \oplus \; r$,
with $r$ of degree less than $L$.
For any $w$, the degree of
$w \star 2^{L} \bmod p$ is bounded by $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w) + \mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(r)$.
Moreover, when $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w) + \mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(r)<L$ then the degree of
$w \star 2^{L} \bmod p$ is exactly $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w) + \mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(r)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The result is trivial if $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w)+\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(r)\geq L$, since the degree of $w \star 2^{L} \bmod p$ must be smaller than the degree of $p$.
So let us assume that $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w)+\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(r)<L$. By the definition of the modular reduction (Equation~\ref{eqn:id}), we have
\begin{align*}w \star 2^{L} &= w \star 2^{L} \div p \star p \; \;\oplus \; \; w \star 2^{L}\bmod p.
\end{align*}
Let $w'=w \star 2^{L} \div p$, then
\begin{align*}
w \star 2^{L} &= w' \star p \; \;\oplus \; \; w \star 2^{L}\bmod p\\
&= w' \star r \; \;\oplus \; \; w' \star 2^{L} \; \;\oplus \; \; w \star 2^{L}\bmod p.
\end{align*}
The first $L$~bits of
$w \star 2^{L}$ and $w' \star 2^{L}$ are zero. Therefore, we have
\begin{align*}
( w' \star r )\bmod 2^{L} &= (w \star 2^{L}\bmod p) \bmod 2^{L}.
\end{align*}
Moreover, the degree of $w'$ is the same as the degree of $w$: $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w')=\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w)+\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(2^{L})+\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(p)=\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w)+L-L=\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w)$. Hence, we have
$\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w'\star r)=\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w)+\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(r)<L$. And, of course, $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w \star 2^{L}\bmod p)<L$. Thus, we have that
\begin{align*}
w' \star r = w \star 2^{L}\bmod p.
\end{align*}
Hence, it follows that $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w \star 2^{L}\bmod p)= \mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w' \star r)=\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(w) +\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(r)$.
\end{proof}
Thus the memoization requires access to only 16~8-bit values. We enumerate the values in question ($w \star 2^{64} \bmod p$ for $w = 0,1, \ldots, 15$) in Table~\ref{table:fact4}.
It is convenient that $16\times 8 =
128$~bits:
the entire table fits in a 128-bit word. It means that if the list of 8-bit values are stored using one byte each, the SSSE3 instruction \texttt{pshufb} can be used for fast look-up. (See Algorithm~\ref{alg:modulo}.)
\begin{table}[thb]
\caption{\label{table:fact4}Values of $w \star 2^{64} \bmod p$ for $w=0,1,\ldots, 15$ given $p=2^{64}+2^{4}+2^{3}+3$.}\centering \small
\begin{tabular}{cl|cl}
\toprule
\multicolumn{2}{c}{$w$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$w \star 2^{64} \bmod p$} \\
decimal & binary & decimal & binary \\\midrule
0 & $0000_2$& 0 & $00000000_2$\\
1 & $0001_2$&27& $00011011_2$\\
2 & $0010_2$&54 & $00110110_2$\\
3 & $0011_2$&45 & $00101101_2$\\
4 & $0100_2$&108 & $01101100_2$\\
5 & $0101_2$&119& $01110111_2$\\
6& $0110_2$&90& $01011010_2$\\
7 & $0111_2$&65& $01000001_2$\\
8& $1000_2$&216& $11011000_2$\\
9& $1001_2$&195& $11000011_2$\\
10& $1010_2$&238& $11101110_2$\\
11& $1011_2$&245& $11110101_2$\\
12& $1100_2$&180& $10110100_2$\\
13& $1101_2$&175& $10101111_2$\\
14& $1110_2$&130& $10000010_2$\\
15 & $1111_2$&153& $10011001_2$\\\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Carry-less division algorithm}\label{alg:modulo}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]\small
\STATE \textbf{input:} A 128-bit integer $a$
\STATE \textbf{output:} Carry-less modular reduction $a \bmod p$ where $p=2^{64}+27$
\STATE $z \leftarrow (a\div 2^{64}) \star r$
\STATE $w \leftarrow z\div 2^{64}$
\STATE Look up $w \star 2^{64} \bmod p$ in Table~\ref{table:fact4}, store result in $y$
\RETURN $a \bmod 2^{64} \oplus z \bmod 2^{64} \oplus y$
\end{algorithmic}
\centering\vspace{1em}
\begin{minipage}{0.9\textwidth}
Corresponding C implementation using x64 intrinsics:
\lstset{%
keywordstyle=\color{black}\bfseries\underbar,
commentstyle=\color{gray},
stringstyle=\ttfamily,
showstringspaces=false,
morekeywords={uint64_t, __m128i,uint32_t},
language=C
}
\begin{lstlisting}
uint64_t modulo( __m128i a) {
__m128i r = _mm_cvtsi64_si128(27);
__m128i z =
_mm_clmulepi64_si128( a, r, 0x01);
__m128i table = _mm_setr_epi8(0, 27, 54,
45, 108,119, 90, 65, 216, 195, 238,
245,180, 175, 130, 153);
__m128i y =
_mm_shuffle_epi8(table
,_mm_srli_si128(z,8));
__m128i temp1 = _mm_xor_si128(z,a);
return _mm_cvtsi128_si64(
_mm_xor_si128(temp1,y));
}
\end{lstlisting}
\end{minipage}
\end{algorithm}
\section{\textsc{CLHASH}}
\label{sec:clhash}
The \textsc{CLHASH} family resembles the \textsc{VHASH} family --- except that
members work in a binary finite field. The \textsc{VHASH} family has the 128-bit NH family (see Equation~\ref{eqn:nh}), but we instead use the 128-bit CLNH family:
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:clnh}
\mathrm{CLNH}(s)=
\bigoplus_{i=1}^{l/2}\big ((s_{2i-1}\oplus k_{2i-1}) \star (s_{2i} \oplus k_{2i} )\big )
\end{equation}
where the $s_i$ and $k_i$'s are 64-bit integers and $l$ is the length of the string $s$. The formula assumes that $l$ is even: we pad odd-length inputs with a single zero word.
When an input string $M$ is made of $|M|$~bytes, we can consider it as string of 64-bit words $s$ by padding it with up to 7~zero bytes so that $|M|$ is divisible by 8.
On x64 processors with the CLMUL instruction set, a single term $ ((s_{2i-1}\oplus k_{2i-1}) \star (s_{2i} \oplus k_{2i} ))$
can be computed using one 128-bit XOR instructions (\texttt{pxor} in SSE2) and one carry-less multiplication using the \texttt{pclmulqdq} instruction:
\begin{itemize}
\item load $(k_{2i-1}, k_{2i})$ in a 128-bit word,
\item load $(s_{2i-1}, s_{2i})$ in another 128-bit word,
\item compute \begin{align*}(k_{2i-1}, k_{2i}) \oplus (s_{2i-1}, s_{2i}) \equiv (k_{2i-1} \oplus s_{2i-1}, k_{2i} \oplus s_{2i})\end{align*} using one \texttt{pxor} instruction,
\item compute $(k_{2i-1} \oplus s_{2i-1}) \star (k_{2i} \oplus s_{2i})$ using one \texttt{pcl\-mul\-qdq} instruction (result is a 128-bit word).
\end{itemize}
An additional \texttt{pxor} instruction is required per pair of words to compute CLNH, since we need to aggregate the results.
We have that the family $s \to \mathrm{CLNH}(s) \bmod p$ for some irreducible $p$ of degree 64 is XOR universal over same-length strings. Indeed, $\Delta$-universality in the field $GF(2^{64})$ follows from Lemma~\ref{lemma:halfisdeltauniversal}. However, recall that $\Delta$-universality in a binary finite field (with operations $\star$ and $\oplus$ for multiplication and addition) is the same as XOR universality --- addition is the XOR operation ($\oplus$).
It follows that the CLNH family must be $1/2^{64}$-almost universal for same-length strings.
Given an arbitrarily long string of 64-bit words, we can divide it up into blocks of 128~words (padding
the last block
with zeros if needed). Each block can be hashed using CLNH and the result is $1/2^{64}$-almost universal by Lemma~\ref{lemma:hashingtuples}.
If there is a single block, we can compute $\mathrm{CLNH}(s) \bmod p$ to get an XOR universal hash value. Otherwise, the resulting 128-bit hash values $a_1, a_2, \ldots, a_n$ can then be hashed once more.
For this we use
a polynomial hash function, $k^{n-1} a_1 + k^{n-2} a_2+\cdots+ a_n$, for some random input $k$
in some finite field.
We choose the field $GF(2^{127})$ and use the irreducible $p=2^{127}+2+1$. We compute such a polynomial hash function by using
Horner's rule: starting with $r=a_1$, compute $r\leftarrow k \star r \oplus a_i$ for $i = 2, 3, \ldots , n$.
For this purpose, we need carry-less multiplications between pairs of 128-bit integers: we can achieve the desired result with 4~\texttt{pclmulqdq} instructions, in addition to some shift and XOR operations. The multiplication generates a 256-bit integer $x$ that must be reduced. However, it is not necessary to reduce it to
a 127-bit integer (which would be the result if we applied a modular reduction by $2^{127}+2+1$). It is enough to reduce it to a 128-bit integer $x'$
such that $x' \bmod (2^{127}+2+1) = x \bmod (2^{127}+2+1)$. We get the desired result by setting $x'$ equal to the \emph{lazy} modular reduction~\cite{bluhm2013fast}
$x \bmod_{\mathrm{lazy}} (2^{127}+2+1)$ defined as
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned} \label{eq:lazymod}
& x \bmod_{\mathrm{lazy}} (2^{127}+2+1) \\ &\equiv x \bmod ((2^{127}+2+1)\star 2) \\
& = x \bmod (2^{128}+4+2)\\
&= (x \bmod 2^{128}) \oplus (( x \div 2^{128} ) \star 4 \oplus ( x \div 2^{128} ) \star 2).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
It is computationally convenient to assume that $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(x)\leq 256-2$ so that $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(( x \div 2^{128} ) \star 4)\leq 128$. We can achieve this degree bound by picking the polynomial coefficient $k$ to have $\mathop{\mathrm{degree}}(k)\leq 128-2$.
The resulting polynomial hash family is $(n-1)/2^{126}$-almost universal for strings having the same length where $n$ is the number of 128-word blocks ($\lceil |M| / 1024 \rceil$ where $|M|$ is the string length in bytes), whether we use the actual modular or the lazy modular reduction.
It remains to reduce the final output $\mathcal{O}$ (stored in a 128-bit word) to a 64-bit hash value. For this purpose, we can use $s \to \mathrm{CLNH}(s) \bmod p$ with $p=2^{64}+27$ (see \S~\ref{sec:efficient}),
and where $k''$ is a random 64-bit integer.
We treat
$\mathcal{O}$
as a string containing two 64-bit words. Once more,
the reduction
is XOR universal by an application of Lemma~\ref{lemma:halfisdeltauniversal}.
Thus, we have the composition of three hash functions with collision probabilities $1/2^{64}$, $(n-1)/2^{126}$ and $1/2^{64}$. It is reasonable to bound the string length by $2^{64}$~bytes: $n\leq 2^{64}/1024=2^{54}$.
We have that $ 2/2^{64} + (2^{54}-1)/2^{126} < 2.004/2^{64}$. Thus, for same-length strings, we have
$2.004/2^{64}$-almost XOR universality.
We further ensure that the result is XOR-universal over all strings: $P\left (h(s) = h(s') \oplus c \right ) \leq 1/2^{64}$ irrespective of whether $|s|= |s'|$. By Lemma~\ref{lemma:fromfixedtovariable},
it suffices to XOR the hash value with $k'' \star |M| \bmod p$ where $k''$ is a random 64-bit integer and $|M|$ is the string length as a 64-bit integer, and where $p=2^{64}+27$. The XOR universality follows for strings having different lengths by Lemma~\ref{lemma:simpledeltauniversal} and the equivalence between XOR-universality and $\Delta$-universality in binary finite fields.
As a practical matter, since the final step involves the same modular reduction
twice in the expression
$(\mathrm{CLNH}(s)\bmod p) \oplus ((k'' \star |M|) \bmod p)$, we can simplify it to
$(\mathrm{CLNH}(s) \oplus (k'' \star |M|)) \bmod p$, thus avoiding an unnecessary modular reduction.
Our analysis is summarized by following lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\textsc{CLHASH} is $2.004/2^{64}$-almost XOR universal over strings of up to $2^{64}$~bytes.
Moreover, it is XOR universal over strings of no more than \SI{1}{kB}.
\end{lemma}
The bound of the collision probability of \textsc{CLHASH} for long strings ($2.004/2^{64}$) is 4~times lower than the corresponding \textsc{VHASH} collision probability ($1/2^{61}$).
For short strings (\SI{1}{kB} or less), \textsc{CLHASH} has a bound that is 8~times lower.
See Table~\ref{table:comparison} for a comparison.
\textsc{CLHASH} is given by Algorithm~\ref{alg:clhash}.
\begin{table}
\caption{\label{table:comparison} Comparison between the two 64-bit hash families \textsc{VHASH} and \textsc{CLHASH}}\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|cc}\toprule
& universality & input length \\\midrule
\textsc{VHASH} & $\frac{1}{2^{61}}$-almost $\Delta$-universal & 1--$2^{59}$~bytes \\[3ex
\multirow{2}{*}{\textsc{CLHASH}}
& XOR universal & 1--1024~bytes \\[1.5ex]
& $\frac{2.004}{2^{64}}$-almost XOR universal & 1025--$2^{64}$~bytes \\ \\[1.5ex] \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{\textsc{CLHASH} algorithm: all operations are carry-less, as per \S~\ref{sec:binaryfinitefields}. The $\gg$ operator indicates a left shift: $\mathcal{O} \gg 33$ is the value $\mathcal{O}$ divided by $2^{33}$.
}\label{alg:clhash}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]\small
\REQUIRE 128 randomly picked 64-bit integers $k_1, k_2, \ldots, k_{128}$ defining a
128-bit CLNH hash function (see Equation~\ref{eqn:clnh}) over inputs of length 128
\REQUIRE $k$, a randomly picked 126-bit integer
\REQUIRE $k'$, a randomly picked 128-bit integer
\REQUIRE $k''$, a randomly picked 64-bit integer
\STATE \textbf{input}: string $M$ made of $|M|$~bytes
\IF {$|M|\leq 1024$}
\STATE $\mathcal{O}\leftarrow \mathrm{CLNH}(M) \oplus (k'' \star |M|) \bmod (2^{64}+27) $
\RETURN $\mathcal{O} $
\ELSE
\STATE Let $n$ be the number of 128-word blocks ($\lceil |M| / 1024 \rceil$).
\STATE Let $M_i$ be the substring of $M$ from index $128i$ to $128 i+127$ inclusively, padding with zeros if needed. \label{line:thirteen}
\STATE Hash each $M_i$ using the CLNH function, labelling the result 128-bit results $a_i$ for $i=1,\ldots,n$.
That is, $a_i \leftarrow \mathrm{CLNH}(M_i)$.
\STATE Hash the resulting $a_i$ with a polynomial hash function and store the value in a 128-bit hash value $\mathcal{O}$: $\mathcal{O}\leftarrow a_1 \star k^{n-1}\oplus \cdots \oplus a_n \bmod_{\mathrm{lazy}} (2^{127}+2+1) $ (see Equation~\ref{eq:lazymod}).
\STATE Hash the 128-bit value $\mathcal{O}$, treating it as two 64-bit words ($\mathcal{O}_1, \mathcal{O}_2$), down to a 64-bit CLNH hash value (with the addition of a term accounting for the length $|M|$ in bytes)
\begin{align*}z\leftarrow ((\mathcal{O}_1\oplus k'_1) \star (\mathcal{O}_2 \oplus k'_2 ) \oplus (k'' \star |M|) \bmod{ (2^{64}+27)}.\end{align*}
Values $k'_1$ and $k'_2$ are the two 64-bit words contained in $k'$.
\RETURN the 64-bit hash value $z $
\ENDIF
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Random Bits}
One might wonder whether using \SI{1}{kB} of random bits
is necessary.
For strings of no more than \SI{1}{kB}, \textsc{CLHASH} is XOR universal. Stinson showed
that in such cases, we need the number of random bits to match the input length~\cite{stinson1996connections}.
That is, we need at least \SI{1}{kB} to achieve XOR universality over strings having \SI{1}{kB}.
Hence, \textsc{CLHASH} makes nearly optimal use of the random bits.
\section{Statistical Validation}
\label{sec:statvalid}
Classically, hash functions have been deterministic: fixed maps $h$ from $U$ to $V$, where $|U| \gg |V|$ and
thus collisions are inevitable.
Hash functions might be assessed according to whether their
outputs are distributed evenly, i.e., whether $|h^{-1}(x)| \approx |h^{-1}(y)|$ for two
distinct $x,y \in V$.
However, in practice, the actual input is likely to
consist of clusters of nearly identical keys~\cite{knuth:v3}: for instance, symbol table
entries such as \texttt{temp1}, \texttt{temp2}, \texttt{temp3} are to be expected,
or a collection of measured data values is likely to contain clusters of similar
numeric values. Appending an extra character to the end of an input string, or
flipping a bit in an input number, should (usually) result in a different hash value.
A collection of desirable properties can be defined, and then hash functions rated on their
performance on data that is meant to represent realistic cases.
One common use of randomized hashing is to avoid
DoS (denial-of-service)
attacks when an
adversary controls the series of keys submitted to a hash table. In this setting,
prior to the use of a hash table, a random selection of hash function is made from
the family. The (deterministic) function is then used, at least until the number
of collisions is observed to be too high. A high number of collisions presumably indicates the hash table
needs to be resized, although it could indicate that an undesirable member of the
family had been chosen. Those contemplating switching from deterministic hash
tables to randomized hash tables would like to know that typical performance would
not degrade much. Yet, as carefully tuned deterministic functions can sometimes outperform
random assignments for typical inputs~\cite{knuth:v3}, some degradation might need
to be tolerated. Thus, it is worth checking a few randomly chosen members of
our \textsc{CLHASH} families against statistical tests.
\subsection{SMHasher}
The SMHasher program~\cite{smhasher} includes a variety of quality tests on
a number of minimally randomized hashing algorithms, for which we have weak or
no known theoretical guarantees. It runs several statistical tests, such as the following.
\begin{itemize}
\item Given a randomly generated input, changing a few bits at random should not generate a collision.
\item Among all inputs containing only two non-zero bytes (and having a fixed length in $[4,20]$), collisions should be unlikely (called the \emph{TwoBytes} test).
\item Changing a single bit in the input should change half the bits of the hash value, on average~\cite{estebanez2006evolving} (sometimes called the \emph{avalanche effect}).
\end{itemize}
Some of these tests are demanding: e.g., CityHash~\cite{cityhash} fails the \emph{TwoBytes} test.
We added both \textsc{VHASH} and \textsc{CLHASH} to SMHasher and
used the
Mersenne Twister (i.e., MT19937) to generate the random bits~\cite{matsumoto1998mtd}.
We find that \textsc{VHASH} passes all tests. However,
\textsc{CLHASH} fails one of them: the avalanche test.
We can illustrate the failure.
Consider that for short fixed-length strings (8~bytes or less), \textsc{CLHASH} is effectively equivalent to a hash function of the form $h(x) = a
\star x \bmod p$, where $p$ is irreducible. Such hash functions form an XOR universal family. They also satisfy the identity $h(x \oplus y) \oplus h(x) = h(y)$. It follows that no matter what value $x$ takes, modifying the same $i^{\mathrm{th}}$~bit modifies the resulting hash value in a consistent manner (according to $h(2^{i+1})$). We can still expect that changing a bit in the input changes half the bits of the hash value on average. However, SMHasher checks that $h(x \oplus 2^{i+1})$ differs from $h(x)$ in any given bit about half the time over many randomly chosen inputs $x$. Since $h(x \oplus 2^{i+1})\oplus h(x)$ is independent from $x$ for short inputs with \textsc{CLHASH}, any given bit is either always flipped (for all $x$) or never. Hence, \textsc{CLHASH} fails the SMHasher test.
Thankfully, we can slightly modify CLHASH so that all tests pass if we so desire.
It suffices to apply an additional \emph{bit mixing} function taken from MurmurHash~\cite{smhasher} to the result of \textsc{CLHASH}. The function consists of two multiplications and three shifts over 64-bit integers:
\begin{align*}
x & \leftarrow x \oplus (x \gg 33),\\
x & \leftarrow x \times 18397679294719823053,\\
x & \leftarrow x \oplus (x \gg 33),\\
x & \leftarrow x \times 14181476777654086739,\\
x & \leftarrow x \oplus (x \gg 33).
\end{align*}
Each step is a bijection: e.g., multiplication
by an odd integer is always invertible. A bijection does not affect collision bounds.
\section{Speed Experiments}
We implemented a performance benchmark in C and compiled our software using GNU GCC~4.8 with the \texttt{-O2} flag.
The benchmark program ran on a Linux server with an Intel i7-4770 processor running at \SI{3.4}{GHz}.
This CPU has \SI{32}{kB} of L1 cache, \SI{256}{kB} of L2 cache per core,
and \SI{8}{MB} of L3 cache shared by all cores.
The machine has \SI{32}{GB} of RAM (DDR3-1600 with double-channel). We disabled Turbo Boost and set the processor
to run only
at its highest clock speed, effectively disabling the processor's power management.
All timings are done using the time-stamp coun\-ter (\texttt{rdtsc})~instruction~\cite{intelbenchmark}.
Although all our software\footnote{Our
benchmark software
is made
freely available
under a liberal open-source license (\url{https://github.com/lemire/StronglyUniversalStringHashing}),
and it includes the
modified SMHasher as well as all the necessary software to reproduce our results.}
is single-threaded, we disabled hyper-threading as well.
Our experiments compare implementations of \textsc{CLHASH}, \textsc{VHASH}, SipHash~\cite{siphash2012}, GHASH~\cite{gueron2010efficient} and Google's CityHash.
\begin{itemize}
\item
We implemented \textsc{CLHASH} using Intel intrinsics.
As described in \S~\ref{sec:clhash}, we use various \emph{single instruction,
multiple data} (SIMD) instructions (e.g., SSE2, SSE3 and SSSE3) in addition to the CLMUL instruction set.
The random bits are stored consecutively in memory, aligned with a cache line (64~bytes).
\item
For \textsc{VHASH}, we used the authors' 64-bit implementation~\cite{vhashimpl}, which is optimized with inline assembly. It stores the random bits
in a C \texttt{struct}, and we do not include the overhead of constructing this \texttt{struct} in the timings. The authors assume that the input length is divisible by 16~bytes, or padded with zeros to the nearest 16-byte boundary. In some instances, we would need to copy part of the input to a new location prior to hashing the content to satisfy the requirement. Instead, we decided to optimistically hash the data in-place without copy. Thus, we slightly overestimate the speed of the \textsc{VHASH} implementation --- especially on shorter strings.
\item We used the reference C implementation of SipHash~\cite{siphash}. SipHash is a fast family of 64-bit pseudorandom hash functions adopted, among others, by the Python language.
\item CityHash is commonly used in applications where high speed is desirable~\cite{Lim:2014:MHA:2616448.2616488,Fan:2014:CFP:2674005.2674994}.
We wrote a simple C port of Google's CityHash (version~1.1.1)~\cite{cityhash}.
Specifically, we benchmarked the \texttt{CityHash64WithSeed} function.
\item Using Gueron and Kounavis'~\cite{gueron2010efficient}
code, we implemented a fast version of \textsc{GHASH} accelerated with the CLMUL instruction set. \textsc{GHASH} is a polynomial hash function over $GF(2^{128})$ using the irreducible polynomial $x^{128}+ x^7+x^2+x+1$: $h(x_1,x_2, \ldots, x_n)= a^n x_1 + a^{n-1} x_2+\ldots + a x_n$ for some 128-bit key $a$. To accelerate computations, Gueron and Kounavis replace the traditional Horner's rule with an extended version that processes input words four at a time: starting with $r=0$ and precomputed powers $a^2, a^3, a^4$, compute $r\leftarrow a^4 (r+ x_i) + a^3 x_{i+1} + a^2 x_{i+2} + a x_{i+3} $ for $i=1, 4, \ldots, 4 \lfloor m/4 \rfloor -3$. We complete the computation with the usual Horner's rule when the number of input words is not divisible by four. In contrast with other hash functions, \textsc{GHASH} generates 128-bit hash values.
\end{itemize}
\textsc{VHASH}, \textsc{CLHASH} and \textsc{GHASH} require random bits. The time spent by the random-number generator is excluded from the timings.
\subsection{Results}
We find that the hashing speed is not sensitive to the content of the inputs --- thus we generated the inputs using a random-number generator.
For any given input length, we repeatly hash the strings so that, in total, 40~million input words have been processed.
As a first test, we hashed \SI{64}{B}~and \SI{4}{kB}~inputs (see Table~\ref{table:results3}) and we report the number of cycles spent to hash one byte: for \SI{4}{kB}~inputs, we got 0.26 for \textsc{VHASH},\footnote{For comparison, Dai and Krovetz
reported that VHASH
used 0.6~cycles per byte on
an Intel Core 2 processor (Merom)~\cite{vhashimpl}.}
0.16 for \textsc{CLHASH}, 0.23 for \textsc{CityHash} and 0.93 for \textsc{GHASH}. That is, \textsc{CLHASH} is over \SI{60}{\percent} faster than \textsc{VHASH} and almost \SI{45}{\percent} faster than CityHash.
Moreover,
SipHash is an order of magnitude slower. Considering that it produces 128-bit hash values, the PCMUL-accelerated \textsc{GHASH} offers good performance: it uses less than one cycle per input byte for long inputs.
Of course, the relative speeds depend on the length of the input. In Fig.~\ref{fig:comp}, we vary the input length from 8~bytes to \SI{8}{kB}. We see that the results for input lengths of \SI{4}{kB} are representative. Mostly, we have that \textsc{CLHASH} is \SI{60}{\percent} faster than \textsc{VHASH} and \SI{40}{\percent} faster than CityHash. However, CityHash and \textsc{CLHASH} have similar performance for small inputs (32~bytes or less) whereas \textsc{VHASH} fares poorly over these same small inputs. We find that SipHash is not competitive in these tests.
\begin{table}
\caption{\label{table:results3}A comparison of estimated CPU cycles per byte on a Haswell Intel processor using \SI{4}{kB}~inputs. All schemes generate 64-bit hash values, except that GHASH generates 128-bit hash values.
}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccc}\hline
scheme & \SI{64}{B} input & \SI{4}{kB} input \\ \hline
\textsc{VHASH} & 1.0 & 0.26 \\
\textsc{CLHASH} & \textbf{ 0.45} & \textbf{0.16} \\
CityHash & 0.48 & 0.23
\\
SipHash & 3.1 & 2.1
\\
GHASH & 2.3 & 0.93
\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{figure*}\centering
\subfloat[Cycles per input byte]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{results.pdf}
}
\subfloat[Ratios of cycles per input byte]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{results-ratio.pdf}
}
\caption{\label{fig:comp}Performance comparison for various input lengths. For large inputs, \textsc{CLHASH} is faster, followed in order of decreasing speed by CityHash, \textsc{VHASH}, \textsc{GHASH} and SipHash.
}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Analysis}
From an algorithmic point of view, \textsc{VHASH} and \textsc{CLHASH} are similar. Moreover, \textsc{VHASH} uses a conventional multiplication operation that has lower latency and higher throughput than \textsc{CLHASH}.
And the \textsc{VHASH} implementation relies on hand-tuned assembly code.
Yet \textsc{CLHASH} is \SI{60}{\percent} faster.
For long strings, the bulk of the \textsc{VHASH} computation is spent computing the NH function.
When computing NH,
each pair of input words (or 16~bytes) uses the following instructions: one \texttt{mulq}, three \texttt{adds} and one \texttt{adc}.
Both \texttt{mulq} and \texttt{adc} generate two micro-operations (\microop{}s{}) each, so without counting register loading operations, we need at least $3+2\times 2 =7$~\microop{}s{} to process two words~\cite{fog2014instruction}.
Yet Haswell processors, like other recent Intel processors,
are apparently limited to a sustained execution of no more than
\SI{4}{\microop{}s{}} per cycle.
Thus we need at least $7/4$~cycles for every 16~bytes. That is, \textsc{VHASH} needs at least 0.11~cycles per byte.
Because \textsc{CLHASH} runs at 0.16~cycles per byte on long strings (see Table~\ref{table:results3}),
we have that no implementation of \textsc{VHASH} could surpass our implementation of \textsc{CLHASH} by more than
\SI{35}{\percent}.
Simply put, \textsc{VHASH} requires too many \microop{}s{}.
\textsc{CLHASH} is not similarly limited.
For each pair of input 64-bit words, CLNH uses two 128-bit XOR instructions (\texttt{pxor}) and one \texttt{pclmulqdq} instruction. Each \texttt{pxor} uses one (fused) $\mu$op{} whereas the \texttt{pclmulqdq} instruction uses two
\microop{}s{} for a total of
\SI{4}{\microop{}s{}}, versus the \SI{7}{\microop{}s{}}
absolutely needed by \textsc{VHASH}.
Thus, the number of \microop{}s{} dispatched per cycle is less likely to be a bottleneck for \textsc{CLHASH}. However, the \texttt{pclmulqdq} instruction has a throughput of only two~cycles per instruction.
Thus, we can only process one pair of 64-bit words every two cycles, for a speed of $2/16=0.125$~cycles per byte. The measured speed (0.16~cycles per byte) is about \SI{35}{\percent} higher than this lower bound according to Table~\ref{table:results3}. This suggests that our implementation of \textsc{CLHASH} is nearly optimal --- at least for long strings.
We verified our analysis with the IACA code analyser~\cite{intelIACA}. It reports that \textsc{VHASH} is indeed limited by the number of \microop{}s{} that can be dispatched per cycle, unlike \textsc{CLHASH}.
\section{Related Work}
The work that lead to the design of the \texttt{pclmulqdq} instruction by Gueron and Kounavis~\cite{gueron2010efficient} introduced efficient algorithms using this instruction, e.g., an algorithm for 128-bit modular reduction in Galois Counter Mode. Since then,
the \texttt{pclmulqdq} instruction has been used to speed up
cryptographic applications.
Su and Fan find that the Karatsuba formula becomes especially efficient for software implementations of multiplication in binary finite fields due to the \texttt{pclmulqdq} instruction~\cite{su2012impact}. Bos et al.~\cite{bos2011efficient} used the CLMUL instruction set for 256-bit hash functions on the Westmere microarchitecture.
Elliptic curve cryptography benefits from the \texttt{pclmulqdq} instruction~\cite{oliveirafast,Oliveira2014,Taverne2011}.
Bluhm and Gueron pointed out
that the benefits are increased on the Haswell microarchitecture due to the higher throughput and lower latency of the instruction~\cite{bluhm2013fast}.
In previous work, we used the \texttt{pclmulqdq} instruction for fast 32-bit random hashing on the Sandy Bridge and Bulldozer architectures~\cite{Lemire10072013}. However, our results were disappointing, due in part to the low throughput of the instruction on these older microarchitectures.
\section{Conclusion}
The \texttt{pclmulqdq} instruction on recent Intel processors
enables a fast and almost universal 64-bit hashing family
(\textsc{CL\-HASH}). In terms of raw speed, the hash functions
from this family can surpass some of the fastest 64-bit hash functions on x64 processors
(\textsc{VHASH} and CityHash). Moreover, \textsc{CLHASH} offers
superior bounds on the collision probability.
\textsc{CLHASH} makes optimal use of the random bits, in the sense that it
offers XOR universality for short strings (less than \SI{1}{kB}).
We believe that \textsc{CLHASH} might be suitable for many common purposes.
The \textsc{VHASH} family has been proposed for cryptographic
applications, and specifically message authentication (VMAC): similar applications are possible for \textsc{CLHASH}. Future work should investigate these applications.
Other microprocessor architectures also support fast carry-less multiplication, sometimes referring to it as \emph{polynomial multiplication} (e.g., ARM~\cite{arm8} and Power~\cite{power2013}). Future work might review the performance of \textsc{CLHASH} on these architectures.
It might also consider the acceleration of alternative hash
families such as those based on Toeplitz matrices~\cite{stinson1996connections}.
\begin{acknowledgements}
This work is supported by the National Research Council of Canada, under grant 26143.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{spmpsci}
|
\section{Introduction}
Chimera states represent an intriguing phenomenon in a dynamical network of coupled elements, which spontaneously separates into two coexisting domains with dramatically different behavior \cite{ZAK14}. They occur, surprisingly, in networks of identical units and symmetric coupling schemes \cite{KUR02a,ABR04}. In spite of the fact that these symmetry-breaking states have been the subject of many investigations, e.g., \cite{SET08,LAI09,MOT10,MAR10,OLM10,BOR10,SHE10,WOL11,OME11,LAI11,OME13,HIZ13}, there still remain many issues to be addressed. A recent review on chimera states \cite{PAN15} discusses a number of significant open questions concerning, for instance, the necessary conditions for their existence or generalizations of chimera states. A generalization to amplitude dynamics and to steady state coherence-incoherence patterns has been provided in \cite{ZAK14}. In particular, in \cite{ZAK14} it has been shown that chimeras of steady states appear due to a special symmetry-breaking
coupling which originates
from oscillation death investigations \cite{BAR85,TSA06,
ULL07,KUZ04}. Oscillation death, i.e., the stabilization of inhomogeneous steady states in coupled oscillator networks, appears when a homogeneous steady state splits into at least two distinct symmetry-breaking branches - upper and lower \cite{ZAK13a}. In comparison with amplitude death, which is another type of oscillation suppression, i.e., the stabilization of an unstable homogeneous steady state, oscillation death is much less investigated \cite{KOS13}.
Initially found for phase oscillators \cite{KUR02a}, chimera states can be treated as long chaotic transients towards the in-phase synchronized regime. In this context the network size plays an essential role. In particular, it has been shown theoretically \cite{WOL11} and confirmed experimentally \cite{ROS14a} that the chimera lifetime grows exponentially with the system size. Therefore, chimera states are stable for infinitely large networks and transient for finite-size ensembles. Recently, in \cite{ASH14} the question of what is the smallest possible number of oscillators allowing for chimera states has been addressed. Another important problem, also considered as a necessary condition for the existence of chimera states, is the choice of initial conditions. Random initial conditions do not always guarantee chimera behavior. This is due to the fact that classical chimera states typically coexist with the completely synchronized regime. The coexistence of two stable solutions is a
signature of bistability
which is typically associated with hysteresis. The basin of attraction for chimera states can be relatively small in comparison with that of the synchronized state. For that reason chimera states remained for a long time undetected. Indeed, the first experimental studies \cite{HAG12,TIN12,MAR13,LAR13,SCH14a,WIC13,WIC14} on chimera states were provided only twelve years after their theoretical discovery. Consequently, it is reasonable to use specially prepared initial conditions to ensure chimera patterns. However, it is worth noting that a chimera state is not just a temporary trace of initial conditions which disappears in time, but a persisting pattern with a long lifetime.
In the present work we investigate the connection between two symmetry-breaking effects: chimera states and oscillation death. We show that the interplay of nonlocal coupling topology and symmetry-breaking coupling leads to a number of novel partially coherent inhomogeneous spatial patterns, for instance amplitude chimeras and chimera death. Additionally, we analyze the transition scenarios between these two patterns. Moreover, the transient amplitude chimeras and the transition mechanism from amplitude chimera to a synchronized regime is investigated. Further, the newly found amplitude chimeras are analyzed with respect to initial conditions and transients. In particular, we aim to understand the mechanism of transition from amplitude chimera to in-phase synchronization. Finally, we address the question of how the lifetime of amplitude chimeras depends on initial conditions and what are the optimal initial distributions.
\section{Model}
We analyze the paradigmatic model of Stuart-Landau oscillators \cite{KUR02a,ATA03,FIE09,CHO09,KYR13,SCH13b,POS13a}:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:model}
\dot{z}=f(z) \equiv (\lambda+i\omega - \left|z\right|^2)z,
\end{equation}
where $z = r e^{i \phi}=x+iy \in \mathbbm{C}$, $\lambda, \omega \in \mathbbm{R}$. For $\lambda>0$, the uncoupled system exhibits self-sustained limit cycle oscillations with radius $r_0=\sqrt{\lambda}$ and frequency $\omega$. Therefore, the Stuart-Landau system represents a generic model for nonlinear oscillators close to a Hopf bifurcation. We investigate a ring of $N$ nonlocally
coupled Stuart-Landau oscillators \cite{ZAK14}:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:network}
\dot{z}_j = f(z_j) + \frac {\sigma}{2P} \sum_{k=j-P}^{j+P} ( \mathrm{Re} z_k- \mathrm{Re} z_j),
\end{equation}
where $j=1,2,...,N$.
The coupling parameters, which are identical for all links, are the
coupling strength $\sigma \in \mathbbm{R}$ and the coupling range $P/N$, where $P$ corresponds to the number of nearest neighbors in each direction on a ring. Here we consider coupling only in the real parts, since this breaks the rotational $S^1$ symmetry of the system which is a necessary condition for the existence of nontrivial steady states $z_j \neq 0$ and thus for oscillation death \cite{ZAK13a}. With respect to applications this means that the oscillators are coupled only through a single real variable $x$.
If compared with slow-fast systems such as, for example, the FitzHugh-Nagumo oscillator, which demonstrates two separated time scales,
the Stuart-Landau oscillator is a generic model for sinusoidal oscillations which have only one characteristic time scale defined by the frequency $\omega$.
\section{Amplitude chimeras and chimera death states}
While tuning the coupling range $P$ for a fixed value of the coupling strength $\sigma$ we uncover a variety of dynamical regimes in equation (2) which are shown as space-time plots, color-coded by the variable $y$, and snapshots in Fig. \ref{fig:1}. In particular, we find chimera behavior with respect to amplitude dynamics, i.e., amplitude chimeras \cite{ZAK14}, where one part of the network is oscillating with spatially coherent amplitude, while the other displays oscillations with spatially incoherent amplitudes (Fig. \ref{fig:1}a,f). It is important to note that within the incoherent domain of the amplitude chimera the center of mass of each oscillator $z_{c.m.}=\int_0^T z_j(t) dt/T$, where $T=2\pi/\omega$ is the oscillation period, is shifted away from the origin, while the elements from the coherent subgroup oscillate around the origin. To illustrate this fact we calculate the distance between the center of mass of each oscillator and the origin $r_{c.m.}$ (Fig. \ref{fig:2_new}
a). Surprisingly, the
shape
of this profile is very similar to that of the mean phase velocity profile for the classical phase chimeras. However, for amplitude chimeras the mean phase velocity profile $\bar{\omega}_j$ is flat (Fig. \ref{fig:2_new}b). This fact discloses the crucial feature of amplitude chimera: averaged phase velocities remain the same for every element of the network, since the phases are correlated even within the incoherent domain. In more detail,
Fig. \ref{fig:2_new}c shows the phase portraits of all oscillators in the complex $z$ plane clearly demonstrating the limit cycles with different amplitudes and centers of mass. The nodes from the coherent part oscillating with larger amplitudes around the origin perform fast motions in the complex $z=x+iy$ phase plane, while the elements of the incoherent domain with smaller amplitudes are slowed down. Therefore, the angular frequencies of all the nodes on average remain the same. Consequently, we observe pure amplitude chimera - chimera behavior exclusively with respect to amplitude dynamics rather than the phase, in contrast to amplitude-mediated chimeras, for which both phase and amplitude are in a chimera state \cite{SCH14a,SET13}.
The increase of the coupling range $P/N$ induces a transition from amplitude chimeras to an in-phase synchronized state (Fig. \ref{fig:1}b,g). By increasing the coupling range even further we detect a novel pattern which provides bridging between chimera states and oscillation death. Therefore, we call it {\it chimera death} \cite{ZAK14} (Fig. \ref{fig:1}c-e,h-j). In this regime the oscillations die out in a peculiar way. The population of identical oscillators breaks up into two domains: (i) spatially coherent oscillation
death, where the neighboring elements of the network are correlated forming a regular inhomogeneous steady state, and (ii) spatially incoherent oscillation death, where the sequence of populated branches of the inhomogeneous steady state of neighboring nodes is completely random. It is important to note that the term ``coherent/incoherent'' refers to the coherence/incoherence in space,
i.e., spatial correlation, which should be distinguished from temporal coherence which refers to correlations in time of
the dynamics. Because of symmetry reasons, for a node on the upper branch $y^{*1} \approx +1$ of the inhomogeneous steady state in the left half of the system, there always exists a mirror state shifted by phase $\pi$ (anti-phase) in the complex plane, i.e., located on the lower branch $y^{*2} \approx -1$, in the right half of the system.
Interestingly, the increase of the coupling range for fixed coupling strength also induces structural changes of the chimera death pattern: the coherent spatial domain may consist of one or several clusters where the nodes are on the same branch of the inhomogeneous steady state. With increasing coupling range the number of clusters in the coherent spatial domain is decreased, see the scenario in Fig. \ref{fig:1}, from (c,h) (5 clusters) via (d,i) (3 clusters) to (e,j) (1 cluster). The illustration of the chimera death pattern with the maximum number of clusters in the coherent part is provided by Fig. \ref{fig:3_new}a-c. The phase portrait typical for chimera death is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:3_new}c, it consists of two fixed points shifted by a phase $\pi$, corresponding to the two branches $y^{*1}$, $y^{*1}$ of the inhomogeneous steady state. It should be noted that these two fixed points are very close to the centers of mass of those oscillations in Fig. \ref{fig:2_new}c with the smallest amplitude, i.e.,
in the center of the incoherent domain of the amplitude chimera.
To provide an overall view on the network behavior for the wide range of coupling parameters we plot the map of regimes in the plane of coupling range and coupling strength. The oscillatory behavior of the network is represented by amplitude chimeras (blue region in Fig. \ref{fig:2}), which are observed for small coupling range, and by in-phase synchronized oscillations (light green region in Fig. \ref{fig:2}). The steady state solutions occur for larger values of coupling parameters and are manifested by chimera death (red regions in Fig. \ref{fig:2} with different hatching). The region of chimera death is divided into several regimes depending on the number of coherent clusters. Chimera death may consist of two coherent domains, which are formed by one cluster on the upper and one on the lower branch of the steady state (dark and light red stripes in Fig. \ref{fig:2}). Moreover, the coherent regions may split into three clusters each (dark red and yellow stripes in Fig. \ref{fig:2
}) or more (dark red in
Fig. \ref{fig:5}). The typical space-time patterns and snapshots in panels (c,d,e) and (h,i,j) of Fig \ref{fig:1} provide illustrations of the different multi-cluster chimera death states, and the corresponding coupling parameters are indicated in the phase diagram (Fig \ref{fig:2}) by empty diamonds. It is important to note that the chimera death regime is characterized by high multistability. Therefore, chimera death patterns with different number of clusters in the coherent part coexist. The map of regimes strongly depends on initial conditions, in particular, the borders between chimera death patterns with different number of clusters.
However, the boundary separating the oscillatory regime from the steady state regimes (with multiple cluster numbers) appears to be less sensitive to initial conditions and remains almost the same for different realizations of initial conditions.
The existence of two distinct transition scenarios from the oscillatory to the steady state regime becomes evident from Fig. \ref{fig:2}.
For a small value of coupling strength $\sigma=10$ the amplitude chimera gives way to the chimera death state after passing through in-phase synchronized oscillations when the coupling range is increased (diamonds in Fig. \ref{fig:2}). In contrast, for a large value of the coupling strength, for example, $\sigma=26$ a slight increase of the coupling range from $P/N=0.04$ to $P/N=0.05$ destroys amplitude chimeras and directly leads to chimera death.
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{fig1.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Space-time plots (left panel) and snapshots for the variable $y_j(t)$ (right panel) in a network of Stuart-Landau oscillators for coupling strength $\sigma=10$ and varying nearest neighbors number $P$. (a),(f) $P=4$: amplitude chimera; (b),(g) $P=10$: in-phase synchronized oscillations; (c),(h) $P=15$: multi-cluster ($>3$) chimera death; (d),(i) $P=25$: $3$-cluster chimera death; (e),(j) $P=45$: $1$-cluster chimera death. Other parameters: $N=100$, $\lambda=1$, $\omega=2$.}
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{fig2.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Amplitude chimera: (a) snapshot at $t=1000$ for $r_{c.m.}$ (the distance between the center of mass for every oscillator and the origin); (b) mean phase velocity profile; (e) phase portraits of all oscillators in the complex $z=x+iy$ plane. Parameters: $N=100$, $P=4$, $\sigma=14$, $\lambda=1$, $\omega=2$.}
\label{fig:2_new}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{fig3.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Multi-cluster ($>3$) chimera death: (a) space-time plot for the variable $y_j$; (b) snapshot for the variable $y_j$; (c) phase portrait of all oscillators in the complex $z=x+iy$ plane. Parameters: $N=100$, $P=5$, $\sigma=26$, $\lambda=1$, $\omega=2$.}
\label{fig:3_new}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig4.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Map of dynamical regimes for $N=100$, $\lambda=1$, $\omega=2$ in the plane of coupling range $P/N$ and coupling strength $\sigma$ for specially prepared initial conditions, showing $1$-cluster chimera death ($1$-CD); $3$-cluster chimera death ($3$-CD); multi-cluster ($>3$) chimera death ($N$-CD); amplitude chimera (AC);
in-phase synchronized oscillations (SYNC). Diamonds mark the parameter values chosen in Fig. \ref{fig:1}. Other parameters: $N=100$, $\lambda=1$, $\omega=2$. The detailed explanation of initial conditions is given in Section 5.}
\label{fig:2}
\end{figure}
\section{Transient behavior of amplitude chimeras}
An important feature of classical chimera states is their transient character and strong dependence on initial conditions. Our numerical analysis shows that amplitude chimeras although manifesting a long lifetime (up to $10^4$ dimensionless time units) for the optimal choice of initial conditions, can rapidly transform into in-phase synchronized regime for completely random initial conditions.
To gain more insight into the transient behavior of amplitude chimeras we trace the system's evolution in time having fixed all other parameters. Figure \ref{fig:3}a-d shows corresponding snapshots for different time values. As initial condition here we take chimera death ($t=0$). The pattern at an early stage ($t=4$) shown in Fig. \ref{fig:3}d is reminiscent of the initial conditions, while the regime of amplitude chimeras (Fig. \ref{fig:3}c) is reached later ($t=65$). However, after approximately $125$ time steps it starts deforming (Fig. \ref{fig:3}b) until it turns into an in-phase synchronized pattern (Fig. \ref{fig:3}a). This is also visible in the
space-time plot (Fig. \ref{fig:3}e).
To disclose the transition mechanism from amplitude chimera to the in-phase synchronized regime we analyze phase portraits in the amplitude chimera state (Fig. \ref{fig:4}a) and during the transition (Fig. \ref{fig:4}b) for three selected nodes of the network: one from the coherent part ($j=50$) and the other two from the incoherent domain ($j=99,102$). The time ranges covered in Fig. \ref{fig:4}a and b, respectively, are indicated by two green vertical lines in the space-time plot of Fig. \ref{fig:3}e. In the regime of amplitude chimera the node from the coherent part ($j=50$) oscillates with large amplitude around the origin, while the two nodes in the incoherent domain ($j=99,102$) oscillate with much smaller amplitudes around their own centers of mass shifted from the origin in two opposite directions (Fig. \ref{fig:4}a). During the transition the amplitudes of the incoherent oscillations grow till they reach the value of the coherent oscillations. At the same time the centers of
mass for nodes from
the incoherent domain move towards the origin (Fig. \ref{fig:4}b). Therefore, during the transition the phase trajectories for the nodes $j=99,102$ have spiral shapes (Fig. \ref{fig:4}b) .
An important observation is that the transition mechanism described above depends on the initial conditions. For example, asymmetric initial conditions may lead to another scenario which involves an asymmetric state. In this case nodes from the incoherent part join one by one their neighboring synchronized state.
\section{The role of initial conditions}
The first initial condition we choose originates from the oscillation death problem and is typically used for the inhomogeneous steady state \cite{ZAK13a}. Specifically, the system is divided into two equal domains: one is located on the upper branch and the other is on the lower branch. In our particular example of $N=200$ nodes this implies that one half of the network ($j=1,...,100$) is on the upper branch $y^{*1} \approx +1$ while the other half is on the lower branch $y^{*2} \approx -1$ (Fig. \ref{fig:5}a). In this case the lifetime of amplitude chimeras is $t<200$ and decreases significantly when some small random shift from the branches is applied for every node.
Another type of initial condition we have tested is the modification of the previously discussed set by adding two incoherent regions, where the nodes are distributed randomly (Fig. \ref{fig:5}b). This leads to dramatically short lifetime ($t<30$) of the amplitude chimera, which rapidly transforms into an in-phase synchronized state or a traveling wave.
Next we allow randomness in initial conditions for all nodes of the network, however, observing certain symmetries. In particular, in Fig. \ref{fig:5}c the positions for $1/4$ of the nodes $j=1,...,50$ are chosen randomly around the upper branch, then these values are mirrored to the nodes $j=51,...,100$ by setting $z_j=z_{1-j+N/2}$. Finally, the positions of the other half of the nodes $j=101,...,200$ are obtained by applying a phase shift of $\pi$ which we call ``anti-phase partner'' condition: $z_j=-z_{j+N/2}$ with $j$ $mod$ $N$. The initial condition scheme shown in Fig. \ref{fig:5}d is constructed in a similar way as in Fig. \ref{fig:5}c. The only difference is that the values for the first $j=1,...,50$ nodes are chosen randomly around both branches of the inhomogeneous steady state (and not only around the upper branch like in Fig. \ref{fig:5}c). This amendment does not have any impact on the lifetime of amplitude chimeras, which is on the other hand strongly affected by the p
resence of symmetries in
the initial conditions. Our simulations suggest that amplitude chimeras tend to have very short lifetime if in the incoherent domain the initial positions of nodes near the upper branch are uncorrelated with those close to the lower branch. An increase of the amplitude chimera lifetime can be achieved by introducing symmetries in the initial distribution (``anti-phase partner'' condition). Therefore, optimal results with $t>3000$ are obtained for random initial conditions with symmetries (Fig. \ref{fig:5}c,d). In conclusion, our numerical analysis shows that for random distributions without symmetries amplitude chimeras appear to be short transients towards in-phase synchronized regime, while symmetric conditions significantly increase their lifetime up to $t>10^4$. Moreover, random initial distributions may also lead to asymmetric spatio-temporal patterns.
To provide a comprehensive view on the impact of initial conditions we compare the map of regimes calculated for a specially prepared initial set (Fig. \ref{fig:2}) and for random initial conditions (Fig. \ref{fig:6}). For the diagram shown in Fig. \ref{fig:2}
we use as initial condition an amplitude chimera profile at a fixed time (similar to Fig. \ref{fig:3}c), which is obtained in the following way: For a fixed set of parameters in the amplitude chimera regime, the system is divided into two equal domains; half of the nodes are located on the upper branch and the other half is on the lower branch of the inhomogeneous steady state (similar to Fig. \ref{fig:5}a); this initial condition then evolves into an amplitude chimera state which is used as initial condition for all other parameter values $(\sigma, P/N)$.
The random initial distribution (similar to Fig. \ref{fig:5}d) leads to a significantly different phase diagram (Fig. \ref{fig:6}) in comparison with the specially prepared initial conditions (Fig. \ref{fig:2}). The domain of the amplitude chimera is decreased for strong coupling if compared with Fig. \ref{fig:2}. Moreover, the regime of chimera death obtained from carefully chosen initial conditions (Fig. \ref{fig:2}) is replaced by the regime of incoherent oscillation death (inset in Fig. \ref{fig:6}) which results from random initial conditions. It should be noted that the map of regimes shown in Fig. \ref{fig:6} is obtained for one single realization of random initial distribution and no averaging of initial conditions has been provided. Therefore, it is not statistically representative that chimera death is not observed in Fig. \ref{fig:6}. This is merely due to the fact that the probability to achieve chimera patterns starting from one random realization of the initial conditio
n is very low. However,
the occurrence of chimeras for random initial conditions, in general, is not excluded.
\section{Conclusions}
In conclusion, we have provided a connection between two symmetry-breaking effects - chimera states and oscillation death. In particular, we uncover new spatio-temporal patterns, i.e., amplitude chimeras and chimera death. Amplitude chimeras represent a generalization of chimera behavior to amplitude dynamics, and chimera death generalizes chimeras to steady states. It is shown that different transition scenarios from amplitude chimeras to chimera death are possible.
Chimera death patterns with different numbers of clusters in the coherent part exhibit a high degree of multistability, which is related to a variety of hysteretic scenarios. Moreover, the transient dynamics of amplitude chimera is investigated disclosing the transition mechanism from amplitude chimera to the in-phase synchronized regime. Additionally, we find optimal initial conditions for amplitude chimeras showing that random distributions with particular symmetries essentially enlarge their lifetime.
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{fig5.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Transient amplitude chimera for $N=200$, $\lambda=1$, $\omega=2$, $P=5$ and $\sigma=20$. Snapshots for the variable $y_j$ (left panel): (a) $t=160$: in-phase synchronized oscillations; (b) $t=140$: deformed amplitude chimera at the transition point; (c) $t=65$: amplitude chimera; (d) $t=4$: trace of initial condition. The right panel shows the space-time plot for the variable $y_j(t)$. Blue diamonds mark the time values chosen for the snapshots in the left panel. The green lines mark the time ranges chosen for the phase portraits in Fig. \ref{fig:4}.}
\label{fig:3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{fig6.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Phase portraits of three selected nodes of the network in the complex $z=x+iy$ plane for (a) amplitude chimera state and (b) during the transition to in-phase synchronization. Red color marks the trajectory of node $j=50$ (from the coherent part). Dark and light blue colors show trajectories of nodes from the incoherent domain $j=99$ and $j=102$ correspondingly. Time ranges as marked in green in Fig. \ref{fig:3}. Parameters: $N=200$, $\lambda=1$, $\omega=2$, $P=5$, $\sigma=20$.}
\label{fig:4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{fig7.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Initial conditions for amplitude chimeras used for $N=200$, $\lambda=1$, $\omega=2$, $P=4$ and $\sigma=20$: (a) coherent distribution: one half of the nodes on the upper and one half on the lower branch of the inhomogeneous steady state (amplitude chimera lifetime $t=130$); (b) combination of coherent and incoherent domains with no symmetries in the randomly defined incoherent part (amplitude chimera lifetime $t=25$); (c),(d) random initial conditions with symmetries (optimal amplitude chimera lifetime $t>3000$).}
\label{fig:5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig8.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Map of dynamical regimes for $N=100$, $\lambda=1$, $\omega=2$ in the plane of coupling range $P/N$ and coupling strength $\sigma$ for random initial conditions as in Fig. \ref{fig:5}(d): amplitude chimera (AC); in-phase synchronized oscillations (SYNC); incoherent oscillation death (Incoherent OD). The inset shows a space-time plot for the variable $y_j(t)$ for the coupling strength $\sigma=30$ and coupling range $P/N=0.5$.}
\label{fig:6}
\end{figure}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work was supported by DFG in the framework of SFB 910.
\clearpage
\section*{References}
|
\section{Introduction}
This note builds on our previous paper \cite{KMR} which described a new spectral triple $(\mathcal A, \mathcal H,\mathcal D)$ for the $C^*$-algebra of continuous functions on the space of $p$-adic integers $\mathbb Z_p$. The construction of this spectral triple utilized a coarse-grained approximation of the space $\mathbb Z_p$ and was partially motivated by recent work \cite{BP} on spectral triples for more general Cantor sets. Our considerations closely resembled standard examples of geometric spectral triples that use the usual differentiation for the definition of the operator $\mathcal D$.
The geometric coarse-grained approximation of $\mathbb Z_p$, which we called the $p$-adic tree, is a weighted rooted tree $\{V,E\}$ associated to $\mathbb Z_p$ via Michon's correspondence \cite{BP}. The set of vertices $V$ of the $p$-adic tree consist of balls in $\mathbb Z_p$, with $\mathbb Z_p$ itself being the root of the tree. There is an edge between two vertices $v$ and $v'$ if $v' \subset v$ and $v'$ has the biggest diameter smaller than the diameter of $v$.
Now consider the Hilbert space $H$ consisting of weighted $\ell^2$ functions living on the vertices of the $p$-adic tree:
\begin{equation}\label{Hilbdef}
H= \{f: V \rightarrow \mathbb C : \sum_{v \in V}|f(v)|^2 w(v)< \infty\}.
\end{equation}
Here the discrete-valued weight function $w: V \rightarrow \mathbb R_{\geq 0}$ is defined by: $w(v) = $ the volume of the ball $v$ with respect to the additive Haar measure $d_px$. For the space of $p$-adic integers $\mathbb Z_p$, the volume of a ball is equal to its diameter. It is useful to view $H$ as the subspace of $L^2(\mathbb Z_p,d_px)$ consisting of locally constant functions on $\mathbb Z_p$.
Then we introduced an unbounded operator $D$ on $H$ defined on its maximal domain $\{f\in H : Df\in H\}$ by
\begin{equation}\label{Ddef}
Df(v)=\frac 1{\omega(v)}\left(f(v)-\frac 1{(\textrm{deg } v-1)} \sum_{\substack {v'\in V \\ v'\sqsubset\ v}}f(v')\right),
\end{equation}
where deg $v$ is the degree of the vertex $v$ and $v' \sqsubset v$ means that there is an edge between $v$ and $v'$. One can think of $D$ as a natural discrete derivative for (complex valued) functions on $\mathbb Z_p$.
This forward tree derivative was then used to construct the Dirac type operator $\mathcal D$, necessary for the spectral triple.
It was verified in \cite{KMR} that the operator $D$ is invertible with compact inverse, implying that $D^*D$ has compact resolvent. Consequently, the spectrum of $D^*D$ is discrete with only possible accumulation point at infinity.
In this paper our main interest is to find the spectrum of the operator $D^*D$. By re-parametrizing the vertices of the $p$-adic tree using the set of parameters $V \cong \mathcal G_p \times \mathbb Z_{\geq 0}$, where $\mathcal G_p=\mathbb Q_p / \mathbb Z_p$ is the Pr\"ufer $p$-group, we can decompose $H$ into invariant subspaces: $H=\bigoplus_{g\in \mathcal G_p} H_g$, where $H_g\cong \ell^2(\mathbb Z_{\geq 0})$. This allows the decomposition of the operators $D$ and $D^*$ into a direct sum of much simpler operators
$D=\bigoplus_{g\in \mathcal G_p} D_g$, and $D^*=\bigoplus_{g\in \mathcal G_p} D_g^*$,
where $D_g$ is the restriction of $D$ to $H_g$. Identifying the Pr\"ufer group with the set of numbers $\{ g=\frac r{p^m} :\; 0 \leq r < p^m, p\nmid r \}$, the operators $D_g, D_g^*$ for $g=\frac r{p^m}$ can be written as $D_g=p^m D_0$ and $D_g^*=p^m D_0^*$ where $D_0$ is the operator on $\ell^2(\mathbb Z_{\geq 0})$ given by $
D_0 f_n= p^n (f_n-f_{n+1})$.
Consequently, $D^*D=\bigoplus_{g \in \mathcal G_p} p^{2m} D_0^*D_0$ and the problem of finding the spectrum of $D^*D$ is reduced to finding the spectrum of $D_0^*D_0$.
It will be verified in this paper that the eigenvalues of $D_0^* D_0 $ are the roots of the $q$-Bessel function $_1\phi_1\left(\substack {0\\q};q,\lambda \right)$ with $q=p^{-2}$. In \cite{ABC} the authors give analytic bounds for these roots and discuss their asymptotic behavior. Therefore, we have a good understanding of the spectrum of $D^*D$. In particular, using the results of \cite{ABC}, we were able to obtain several results on analytic structure and analytic continuation of the zeta function of $D^*D$.
Part of the motivation for studying the spectrum of $D^*D$ is that it may have some relevance for developing the structure of $p$-adic quantum mechanics. The operator $D^*D$, a natural analog of the laplacian, can be taken as an alternative starting point for the theory of $p$-adic Schr$\ddot{ \textrm{o}}$dinger operators, see \cite{VVZ}.
The content of this paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we give a brief introduction to $p$-adic harmonic analysis and then describe the $p$-adic tree associated to the ring $\mathbb Z_p$. In the next section we analyze the forward derivative $D$ on the $p$-adic tree and its adjoint $D^*$ in $H$. We also describe the re-parametrization of the $p$-adic tree that leads to a decomposition of the operator $D^* D$ into a direct sum of simpler operators $D_g^* D_g $. Section 4 discusses the calculation of the spectrum of $D_0^* D_0 $ along with an ``elliptic regularity" theorem that shows that the corresponding eigenfunctions are of a special form. In the last section we discuss some spectral properties of the operator $D^* D$ and the analytic continuation of the zeta function associated to it.
\bigskip
\section{Definitions and Notation}
\subsection{Fourier Analysis in $\mathbb Z_p$}
We start this section by briefly recalling some of the basic results and notation we introduced in \cite{KMR} regarding harmonic analysis in the space $\mathbb Z_p$. For further reference and more details on this subject we refer to \cite{HR},\cite{KMR} and \cite{VVZ}.
\smallskip
The characters on $\mathbb Q_p$, the set of all $p$-adic numbers, are given by maps $\chi_a: \mathbb Q_p \rightarrow \mathbb C$ defined by $\chi_a(x)=e^{2\pi i \{ax\}}$ where $a \in \mathbb Q_p$, and $\{ax\}$ in the exponent is the fractional part of the p-adic number $ax$. Two characters $\chi_a(x)$ and $\chi_b(x)$ are equal on ${\mathbb Z_p}$ if and only if $a-b\in \mathbb Z_p$. Consequently we see that the dual groups of $\mathbb Q_p$ and $\mathbb Z_p$ (denoted $\widehat {\mathbb Q_p}$, $\widehat {\mathbb Z_p}$ ) are $\widehat {\mathbb Q_p}=\mathbb Q_p$ , $\widehat {\mathbb Z_p}= \mathbb Q_p / \mathbb Z_p$. The dual group of $\mathbb Z_p$, called the Pr\"ufer group $\mathcal G_p$, can also be identified with a group of roots of unity given by
\begin{equation}\label{Prufdef}
\widehat {\mathbb Z_p} \cong \{e^{2 \pi i \frac {k}{p^n}} : n \in \mathbb Z_{\geq 0}, p \nmid k \in \mathbb Z\}.
\end{equation}
We let $\mathcal E(\mathbb Z_p)$ be the space of locally constant functions (test functions), i.e. the set of functions $\phi: \mathbb Z_p \rightarrow \mathbb C$ such that for every $x \in \mathbb Z_p$ there is a neighborhood $U_x$ of $x$ on which $\phi$ is constant. The space of linear functionals on $\mathcal E(\mathbb Z_p)$ (distributions on $\mathbb Z_p$) equipped with the weak$^*$-topology is denoted by $\mathcal E^*(\mathbb Z_p)$.
If $d_px$ denotes the Haar measure on $(\mathbb Z_p, +)$ normalized so that $\int_{\mathbb Z_p}d_px=1$, then we define the Fourier transform of a test function $\phi \in \mathcal E(\mathbb Z_p)$ as the function $\widehat \phi$ on $\widehat {\mathbb Z_p}$ given by
$$ \widehat \phi([a])=\int_{\mathbb Z_p} \phi(x) \overline{\chi_a(x)}d_px.$$
For a locally constant function, only a finite number of Fourier coefficients will be nonzero. Thus, the Fourier transform gives an isomorphism between $\mathcal E(\mathbb Z_p)$ and $\mathcal E(\widehat{ \mathbb Z_p})$, where the latter in our case is the space of all those functions on $\widehat{ \mathbb Z_p}$ that are zero almost everywhere. The inverse Fourier transform is given by
$$\phi(x)= \sum_{[a]\in \widehat {\mathbb Z_p}} \widehat \phi([a]) \chi_a(x).$$
For a distribution $T \in \mathcal E^*(\mathbb Z_p)$ the Fourier transform is the function $\widehat T$ on $\widehat {\mathbb Z_p}$ defined by $\widehat T([a])= T(\overline{\chi_a(x)})$. Once again, the distributional Fourier transform gives an isomorphism between $\mathcal E^*(\mathbb Z_p)$ and $\mathcal E^*(\widehat {\mathbb Z_p})$. The inverse Fourier transform of a distribution is given by $$T(\chi_a(x))= \sum_{[a]\in \widehat {\mathbb Z_p}} \widehat T([a]) \chi_a(x).$$
\bigskip
\subsection{The $p$-adic tree}
We recall the construction of the weighted rooted tree $\{V,E\}$ associated to the Cantor metric space $(\mathbb Z_p, \rho_p)$, the space of $p$-adic integers equipped with the usual $p$-adic metric $\rho_p$, via Michon's correspondence \cite{BP}, \cite{KMR}. The symbols $V$ and $E$ above are used to denote the set of vertices and the edges of the tree, and we call this tree the $p$-adic tree.
\smallskip
The vertices of the $p$-adic tree are the balls in $\mathbb Z_p$. Since $\mathbb Z_p$ is a totally disconnected space, the range of $\rho_p$ is countable and consists of numbers of the form $p^{-n}$, $n \in \mathbb Z$ and zero. Therefore, if we let $V_n$ be the set of balls of diameter $p^{-n}$ then the set of vertices $V$ has the natural decomposition $V= \bigcup_{n=0}^{\infty} V_n$. The set of edges $E$ has the decomposition $E= \bigcup_{n=0}^{\infty} E_n$ where an edge $e=(v,v')$ between two vertices $v, v'$ belongs to $E_n$ if $v \in V_n$, $v' \in V_{n+1}$ and $v' \subset v$.
The compactness of the space $\mathbb Z_p$ implies that the number of balls of diameter $p^{-n}$ (hence the number of vertices) for fixed $n$, and the degree of each vertex are finite. Now we observe the following fact:
\begin{prop}
Every ball of radius $p^{-n}$ contains a unique integer $k$ such that $0 \leq k < p^n$.
\end{prop}
A proof of this proposition can be found in \cite{KMR}. From this observation we see that there is a one-to-one correspondence between the set of integers $0 \leq k < p^n$ and the set $V_n$ of balls of diameter $p^{-n}$. Therefore, the set of vertices has the natural parametrization:
\begin{equation}\label{para}
V\cong S:=\{(n,k) : n=0,1,2,\ldots, \;0 \leq k < p^n\}.
\end{equation}
Two vertices $(n,k)$ and $(n+1,k')$ are connected by an edge if and only if $k'-k$ is divisible by $p^n$. Thus, a given vertex $(n,k)$ will be connected (via edges) to exactly $p$ vertices in $V_{n+1}$. Also, we introduce a weight function $w: V \rightarrow \mathbb R^+$ by $w(v)=$ volume $(v)$ with respect to the Haar measure $d_px$. If $v\in V_n$ then $w(v)=p^{-n}$.
\bigskip
\section{The Operator $D$}
\subsection{A Forward Derivative on the $p$-adic tree }
Due to the decomposition $V= \bigcup_{n=0}^{\infty} V_n$ of the set of vertices, any complex valued function $f$ on $V$ can be written as a sequence $\{f_n\}$ of complex valued functions on $V_n$. Let $\mathcal E^*(V)$ denote the space of all complex valued functions living on the vertices of the $p$-adic tree. By the discussion in the previous section we can identify each $V_n\cong \mathbb Z_p / p^n \mathbb Z_p \cong \mathbb Z / p^n \mathbb Z$ with the finite additive group $\mathbb Z / p^n \mathbb Z$. Consequently, we can introduce the Fourier transform of a function $f \in \mathcal E^*(V)$ to be the discrete Fourier transform on each $V_n$ given by
\begin{equation*}
\widehat f_n(l)= \frac 1{p^n} \sum_{k=0}^{p^n-1}f_n(k)e^{-2 \pi i \frac{kl}{p^n}}, \;\; 0 \leq l < p^n.
\end{equation*}
Because the characters of $\mathbb Z / p^n \mathbb Z$ satisfy the orthogonality condition:
\begin{equation}\label{orthocon}
\sum_{0\leq s<p^j}e^\frac{-2\pi iks}{p^j}=\begin{cases}
0 & \textrm{ if }\ p^j\nmid k \\
p^j & \textrm{ if }\ p^j\mid k,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
we obtain the following Fourier inversion formula:
\begin{equation}\label{FIof_f}
f_n(k)=\sum_{0\leq l<p^n}\widehat f_n(l)e^{\frac{2\pi ikl}{p^n}}.
\end{equation}
We also remark that the $p$-adic tree can be thought to be self dual, $\widehat V\cong V$, due to the fact that each $\mathbb Z / p^n \mathbb Z$ (hence $V_n$) is self dual. Thus, the Fourier transform on the $p$-adic tree is an isomorphism between the space $\mathcal E^*(V)$ of functions on the vertices of the $p$-adic tree and the space $\mathcal E^*(\widehat V)$ of functions on the vertices of the dual tree. Additionally, via the Parseval's identity, the Fourier transform gives an isomorphism between the Hilbert space $H= \ell^2(V,w)$, of \eqref{Hilbdef}, and
$\widehat H:= \ell^2(\widehat V)$, where the latter Hilbert space has no weight in the inner product.
Notice that the decomposition $V= \bigcup_{n=0}^{\infty} V_n$ induces a Hilbert space decomposition $H= \bigcup_{n=0}^{\infty}\ell^2(V_n, p^{-n})$. Using the parametrization \eqref{para} introduced in the previous section, we can write the action of the operator $D$ of the formula \eqref{Ddef} on the components $f_n$ of $f$ as:
\begin{equation*}
(Df)_n(k)=p^n \left(f_n(k)-\frac 1p \sum_{0 \leq j < p} f_{n+1}(k+jp^n)\right).
\end{equation*}
We note here that the choice of the domain for $D$, as well as all other unbounded operators below, is the maximal domain, i.e $\{f\in H : Df\in H\}$.
Using the Fourier transform of $f_n$ and orthogonality of the characters \eqref{orthocon} we write the following equivalent formula for $D$:
\begin{equation*}
Df_n(k)=p^n \sum_{0 \leq l < p} \left(\widehat f_n(l)- \widehat f_{n+1}(pl)\right) e^{\frac{2 \pi i kl}{p^n}}.
\end{equation*}
Hence, in Fourier transform, the operator $D$ becomes $\widehat D$ given by:
\begin{equation}\label{Dhat}
\widehat D \widehat f_n(l)= p^n (\widehat f_n(l)- \widehat f_{n+1}(pl)),
\end{equation}
which is an unbounded operator on $\widehat H$.
Notice that $D$ and $\widehat D$ are unitarily equivalent, but it is easier to work with the latter.
The adjoint $D^*$ of $D$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{D*}
D^*g_n(k)=p^n\left[g_n(k)-\frac 1p g_{n-1}(k\mod p^{n-1})\right],
\end{equation}
assuming $g_{-1}(0)=0$.
Later we will need the following formula for the adjoint $\widehat {D^*}$ of $\widehat D$:
\begin{equation}\label{Dhat*}
\widehat {D^*} \widehat g_n(l)=\begin{cases}
p^n \widehat g_n(l)& \textrm{ if }\ p\nmid l \\
p^n\left(\widehat g_n(l)- \frac 1p \widehat g_{n-1}\left(\frac lp\right)\right) & \textrm{ otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
It was verified in \cite{KMR} that $D$ and $D^*$ are invertible with compact inverses.
\smallskip
\subsection{Invariant Subspaces of $H$}
The key observation that allows us to find the spectrum of $D^*D$ is that we can decompose the Hilbert space $H$ into invariant subspaces by means of a different parametrization of the $p$-adic tree.
\smallskip
The original parametrization \eqref{para} of the set of vertices of $p$-adic tree was done by using the set
\begin{equation*}
S:=\{(n,k) : n=0,1,2,\ldots, 0 \leq k < p^n\}.
\end{equation*}
Given a pair $(n,k)$ in $S$ notice that we can write $k=rp^l$ with $p\nmid r$ and $l\in \{0,1, \ldots n-1\}$, by factoring out the highest power of $p$ that divides $k$. Such a representation of $k$ will be uniquely determined by $r$ and $l$. If we associate $n$ with $\frac{k}{p^n}=\frac r{p^{n-l}}= \frac r{p^m}$ where $m=n-l$, which is a unique representation of $n$ in terms of $r$ and $m$, then we have the correspondence $(n,k) \mapsto \left(\frac r{p^m},l\right)$.
Conversely, given a pair $\left(\frac r{p^m},l\right)$ where $0 \leq r < p^m$, $p \nmid r$ and $l \in \{0,1,2, \ldots\}$ we can make the unique association $\left(\frac r{p^m},l\right) \mapsto (m+l, rp^l)$.
Thus, if
\begin{equation*}
S':= \left\{\left(\frac r{p^m},l\right) : 0 \leq r < p^m,\ p\nmid r,\ l=0,1,2,\ldots \right\}
\end{equation*}
then we have the one-to-one correspondence between the sets $S$ and $S'$ given by $(n,k) \leftrightarrow \left(\frac r{p^m}, l\right)$.
In fact, the set of numbers $\left\{ g=\frac r{p^m} :\; 0 \leq r < p^m, p\nmid r \right\}$ is isomorphic to the Pr\"ufer group $\mathcal G_p$ defined in (\ref{Prufdef}). Therefore, $V\cong \widehat V \cong \mathcal G_p \times \mathbb Z_{\geq 0}$. Consequently we obtain the following new decomposition of the Hilbert space $\widehat H$:
\begin{equation*}
\widehat H= \ell^2(S)\cong \ell^2(S')=\bigoplus_{\frac r{p^m}\in \mathcal G_p} \ell^2(\mathbb Z_{\geq 0})=: \bigoplus_{g\in \mathcal G_p} \widehat H_g
\end{equation*}
where $\widehat H_g=\ell^2(\mathbb Z_{\geq 0})$.
\smallskip
We will now look at the operators $\widehat D$ and $\widehat {D^*}$ in the new coordinates. Using formula \eqref{Dhat} we compute:
\begin{equation*}
\widehat D \widehat f \left(\frac r{p^m},l\right)= p^{m+l} \left(\widehat f\left(\frac r{p^m},l\right)-\widehat f\left(\frac r{p^m},l+1\right)\right).
\end{equation*}
Equation \eqref{Dhat*} yields:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\widehat {D^*}\widehat f\left(\frac r{p^m},l\right )&=\begin{cases}
p^{m+l} \widehat f\left(\frac r{p^m},0\right) & \textrm{ if } l=0 \\
p^{m+l} \left(\widehat f\left(\frac r{p^m},l\right)-\frac 1p \widehat f \left(\frac r{p^m}, l-1\right)\right) & \textrm{ otherwise }.
\end{cases}\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
If we assume that $\widehat f \left(\frac r{p^m}, -1\right)=0$ for any $r,m$ then we can rewrite the formula for $\widehat {D^*}$ as:
\begin{equation}\label{NDhat*}
\widehat {D^*}\widehat f\left(\frac r{p^m},l\right )=p^{m+l} \left(\widehat f\left(\frac r{p^m},l\right)-\frac 1p \widehat f \left(\frac r{p^m}, l-1\right)\right).
\end{equation}
Notice that, in the new coordinates, the operators $\widehat D$ and $\widehat{D^*}$ affect only the second coordinate $l$ and consequently each $H_g$ is an invariant subspace. Thus, by letting $\widehat D_g:= \widehat D \vert_{H_g}$ and $\widehat {D_g^*}:= \widehat {D^*} \vert_{H_g}$ of $\widehat {D_g}$, we have the following decompositions of the operators $\widehat D$ and $\widehat {D^*}$:
\begin{equation}\label{Dg}
\widehat D=\bigoplus_{g\in \mathcal G_p} \widehat {D_g} \textrm{\,\, and \,\,} \widehat {D^*}=\bigoplus_{g\in \mathcal G_p} \widehat {D_g^*}.
\end{equation}
\smallskip
Let $\widehat {D_0}$ be the operator on $\ell^2(\mathbb Z_{\geq 0})$ given by $\widehat {D_0}f(l)=p^l\left(f(l)-f(l+1)\right)$. It will be more convenient to switch to subscript notation and write:
\begin{equation}\label{D_0def}
(\widehat {D_0}f)_n=p^n \left(f_n-f_{n+1}\right).
\end{equation}
The adjoint of $\widehat {D_0}$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{D_0*def}
(\widehat {D_0^*g})_n=p^n \left(g_n-\frac 1p g_{n-1}\right).
\end{equation}
From formula \eqref{NDhat*} we see that if $g=\frac r{p^m}$ then
\begin{equation*}
\widehat {D_g}=p^m \widehat {D_0} \textrm{ \,\,and \,\,} \widehat {D_g^*}= p^m \widehat {D_0^*}.
\end{equation*}
Consequently, $\widehat {D^*}\widehat D$ has the decomposition;
\begin{equation}\label{decomD*D}
\widehat {D^*}\widehat D=\bigoplus_{g\in \mathcal G_p} \widehat {D_g^*}\widehat {D_g}=\bigoplus_{g\in \mathcal G_p} p^{2m} (\widehat {D_0^*}\widehat {D_0}).
\end{equation}
Thus, the key step in finding the spectrum of $D^*D$ is to compute the spectrum of the operator $ D_0^* D_0$ on $\ell^2(\mathbb Z_{\geq 0})$. We devote the next section to a description of this spectrum.
\bigskip
\maketitle
\section{Spectrum of $D_0^*D_0$}
The fact that $D^{-1}$ is compact implies that the operators $D^*D$ and $ D_0^* D_0$ have compact resolvent. Consequently, the spectrum of the unbounded operator $ D_0^* D_0$ consists of eigenvalues diverging to infinity.
Using formulas \eqref{D_0def} and \eqref{D_0*def} we obtain the following system of equations for $\widehat {D_0^*}\widehat {D_0}$.
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
(\widehat {D_0^*}\widehat {D_0}f)_0&=f_0-f_1\\
(\widehat {D_0^*} \widehat {D_0}f)_n&=p^n \left((\widehat {D_0}f)_n-\frac 1p (\widehat {D_0}f)_{n-1}\right)\\
&=p^{2n-2}[-p^2f_{n+1}+(1+p^2)f_n-f_{n-1}] \textrm{\, for any } n\geq 1.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
We remark at this point that we could equivalently study the spectrum of $\widehat {D_0} \widehat {D_0^*}$; however the equations for the latter operator are not any simpler than the formulas for $\widehat {D_0^*}\widehat {D_0}$. Obviously, with the absence of kernels, the eigenvalue equations for both operators yield the same eigenvalues.
\smallskip
The problem is now to solve the following eigenvalue equations for $\widehat {D_0^*}\widehat {D_0}$:
\begin{equation}\label{EVE}
\begin{aligned}
p^{2n-2}[-p^2f_{n+1}+(1+p^2)f_n-f_{n-1}]&=\lambda f_n;\textrm{ for } n\geq 1\\
f_0-f_1&=\lambda f_0,\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
with $f_n \in \ell^2(\mathbb Z_{\geq 0})$.
The key step in solving the system of equations \eqref{EVE} is the following result which asserts that all eigenvectors of $\widehat {D_0^*}\widehat {D_0}$ take the special exponential sum form $f_n=\sum_{k=0}^\infty c(k)p^{-nk}$ with rapidly decaying coeffients $c(k)$. This result is a form of elliptic regularity of the operator $\widehat {D_0^*}\widehat {D_0}$.
\begin{theo}\label{EVForm}
Let $\{f_{n}(\lambda)\}$ be an eigenvector of $\widehat {D_0^*}\widehat {D_0}$ with eigenvalue $\lambda$. Then the following statements are true.
\begin{enumerate}
\item The sequence $\{f_n(\lambda)\}_{n=0}^{\infty}$ belongs to $\ell^1(\mathbb Z_{\geq 0})$.
\item The eigenvector $f_n(\lambda)$ can be uniquely expressed in the form
\begin{equation}\label{expform}
f_{n}(\lambda)=\sum_{k=1}^{\infty} c(2k)p^{-2nk},
\end{equation}
where the coefficients $c(2k)$ decay exponentially in $k$.
\item The coefficients $c(2k)$ satisfy the equations
\begin{equation*}c(2)=\left(\frac{\lambda}{1-p^{-2}}\right)\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} f_k,
\end{equation*}
and, for $ k\geq 2$,
\begin{equation}\label{coeff}
c(2k)=\left(\frac{-\lambda}{1-p^{-2}}\right)^{k-1}\frac{c(2)p^{k(k-1)}(p^2-1)^{k-2}}{(p^4-1)^2(p^6-1)^2\ldots(p^{2k-2}-1)^2 (p^{2k}-1)}.
\end{equation}
\item If the remainder $r_n(2N)$ is defined by the formula:
\begin{equation*}
f_n(\lambda)=c(2)p^{-2n}+c(4)p^{-4n}+c(6)p^{-6n}+ \ldots + c(2N-2)p^{-(2N-2)n}+ r_n(2N),
\end{equation*}
then $\{r_n(2N)\}_{n=0}^{\infty}\rightarrow 0$ as $N \rightarrow \infty$ in the $\ell^1$ norm.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theo}
\smallskip
\begin{proof}
The main idea of the proof is to rewrite the equations \eqref{EVE} in an integral equation form and then use it iteratively to produce the solution. To this end we regroup the terms in the first equation of system \eqref{EVE} above to obtain:
\begin{equation*}
\left(f_n-f_{n-1}\right)-p^2 \left(f_{n+1}-f_n\right)=\lambda p^{2-2n} f_n.
\end{equation*}
Using the notation $\Delta f_n:=f_{n+1}-f_n$, we can then rewrite the system of equations \eqref{EVE} as follows.
\begin{equation}\label{EVE1}
\begin{aligned}
\Delta f_n&=p^{-2}\left(\Delta f_{n-1}-\lambda p^{2-2n}f_n \right)\, \textrm{ for } n \geq 1\\
\Delta f_0&=f_1-f_0=-\lambda f_0.\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Iteratively, with the help of equations \eqref{EVE1}, we obtain the following formula for $\Delta f_n$:
\begin{equation}\label{Deltafn}
\Delta f_n=-p^{-2n}\lambda (f_0+f_1+\ldots +f_n), \, n \geq 0.
\end{equation}
Equation \eqref{Deltafn} is a one-step linear difference equation, so it has one-parameter family of solutions. However, since we are looking for the solution in the Hilbert space we need to choose one that vanishes at infinity. This leads to the following formula for $f_n$:
\begin{equation*}
f_n=\sum_{l=n}^{\infty} \lambda p^{-2l}\sum_{k=0}^l f_k.
\end{equation*}
Interchanging the summation indices of the above formula we obtain:
\begin{equation}\label{E2fn}
\begin{aligned}
f_n&=\sum_{k=0}^{n} \sum_{l=n}^{\infty}\lambda p^{-2l} f_k+\sum_{k=n+1}^{\infty} \sum_{l=k}^{\infty}\lambda p^{-2l} f_k\\
&=\frac{\lambda}{(1-p^{-2})}\left[p^{-2n}\sum_{k=0}^n f_k+\sum_{k=n+1}^{\infty}p^{-2k} f_k\right].
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Thus we can estimate:
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}|f_n| \leq \frac{\lambda}{(1-p^{-2})}\left[\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}p^{-2n}\sum_{k=0}^n |f_k|+\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\sum_{k=n+1}^{\infty}p^{-2k} |f_k|\right].
\end{equation*}
By interchanging the summation indices in the first sum above and evaluating the sum over $n$ we obtain:
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}p^{-2n}\sum_{k=0}^n |f_k| = \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} |f_k| \left(\frac{p^{-2k}}{1-p^{-2}}\right).
\end{equation*}
Using Cauchy-Schwartz inequality and the fact that $f \in \ell^2(\mathbb N)$ we conclude that this sum is bounded:
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}|f_k|\left(\frac{p^{-2k}}{1-p^{-2}}\right)\leq \left(\frac{1}{1-p^{-2}}\right)\sqrt{\frac{1}{1-p^{-4}}}\,\|f\|_2 < \infty.
\end{equation*}
Notice that for the second sum we have:
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\sum_{k=n+1}^{\infty}p^{-2k} |f_k|=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}p^{-2n}\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}p^{-2l}|f_{n+l}|.
\end{equation*}
Once again using Cauchy-Schwartz inequality we see that the second sum is finite:
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}p^{-2n}\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}p^{-2l}|f_{n+l}| \leq \sqrt{\frac{p^{-4}}{1-p^{-4}}}\left(\frac1{1-p^{-2}}\right)\|f\|_2< \infty .
\end{equation*}
This verifies that $\{f_n\}\in \ell^1(\mathbb N)$.
\bigskip
To prove the second part of Theorem \ref{EVForm}, we observe that equation \eqref{E2fn} gives;
\begin{equation*}
f_n=\frac{\lambda p^{-2n}}{(1-p^{-2})}\left[\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} f_k-\sum_{k=n+1}^{\infty} f_k+\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}p^{-2l} f_{n+l}\right].
\end{equation*}
Rearranging the terms on the right hand side of the equation to isolate the coefficient of $p^{-2n}$ we get:
\begin{equation}\label{E3fn}
f_n=\left(\frac{\lambda}{1-p^{-2}}\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} f_k\right)p^{-2n}-\lambda p^{-2n} \sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{1-p^{-2l}}{1-p^{-2}}\right)f_{n+l},
\end{equation}
from which we extract the coefficient
\begin{equation*}
c(2):=\left(\frac{\lambda}{1-p^{-2}}\right)\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} f_k.
\end{equation*}
Notice that $c(2)$ is well defined due to part (1).
Recursively applying this formula for $f_n$ on the right hand side of equation \eqref{E3fn} we obtain:
\begin{equation*}
f_n=c(2)p^{-2n}-\lambda p^{-2n}\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{1-p^{-2l}}{1-p^{-2}}\right)\left(c(2)p^{-2n-2l}-\lambda p^{-2n-2l} \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{1-p^{-2k}}{1-p^{-2}}\right) f_{n+l+k}\right).
\end{equation*}
Once again we rearrange the terms to extract the coefficient $c(4)$ of $p^{-4n}$.
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
f_n=c(2)p^{-2n}&+\left(-\lambda c(2)\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{p^{-2l}-p^{-4l}}{1-p^{-2}}\right)\right)p^{-4n} \\
&+ \frac{\lambda^2}{p^{4n}}\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{p^{-2l}-p^{-4l}}{1-p^{-2}}\right)\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{1-p^{-2k}}{1-p^{-2}}\right) f_{n+l+k}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
This gives:
\begin{equation*}
c(4)=\frac{-\lambda c(2)}{(1-p^{-2})}\cdot\frac{p^2}{(p^4-1)}\ .
\end{equation*}
By repeatedly applying this process we can obtain an expansion of $f_n$ in powers of $p^{-2n}$, provided the remainder $r_n(2N)$ goes to zero as $N\to\infty$. We prove a stronger $\ell^1$ estimate on $r_n(2N)$ below, implying the pointwise convergence needed for the existence of the expansion of $f_n$.
\smallskip
Using induction we readily establish that the coefficients $c(2k)$ of this expansion are in general given by the formula:
\begin{equation}\label{Fcoeff}
c(2k)=\left(\frac{-\lambda}{1-p^{-2}}\right)^{k-1}\frac{c(2)p^{k(k-1)}(p^2-1)^{k-2}}{(p^4-1)^2(p^6-1)^2\ldots(p^{2k-2}-1)^2 (p^{2k}-1)}\ .
\end{equation}
\smallskip
Next we estimate the growth of the coefficients $c(2k)$. Simplifying the formula for $c(2k)$ we obtain:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
c(2k)&=\frac{c(2)\lambda^{k-1}}{p^{(k-2)(k-1)}(1-\frac1{p^{2}})(1-\frac 1{p^{4}})^2(1-\frac1{p^{6}})^2\ldots (1-\frac1{p^{2k-2}})^2(1-\frac1{p^{2k}})}\\
&= \frac{\lambda^k (1-\frac1{p^{2k}}) \sum_{m=0}^{\infty}f_m }{p^{(k-2)(k-1)}(1-\frac1{p^{2}})^2(1-\frac 1{p^{4}})^2(1-\frac1{p^{6}})^2\ldots (1-\frac1{p^{2k-2}})^2(1-\frac1{p^{2k}})^2}\ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
Since $\prod_{i=1}^k (1-p^{-2i})^2 \geq \prod_{i=1}^{\infty} (1-p^{-2i})^2$ and the infinite product is a finite nonzero number, we obtain the following estimate for the coefficients $c(2k)$:
\begin{equation*}
|c(2k)|\leq \frac{|\lambda|^{k}\|f\|_1}{p^{(k-2)(k-1)}\prod_{i=1}^{\infty} (1-p^{-2i})^2}\ ,
\end{equation*}
which shows that they decay exponentially. This establishes both the second and the third part of the theorem.
\smallskip
Finally we estimate the remainder term $r_n(2N)$. Using induction it is easily established that the remainder $r_n(2N)$ satisfies the following summation formula:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
r_n(2N)=&\frac{(-\lambda)^N}{p^{2nN}}\sum_{l_1=1}^{\infty}\sum_{l_2=1}^{\infty} \ldots \sum_{l_N=1}^{\infty}\frac{({p^{-(2N-2)l_1}}-p^{-2Nl_1})}{1-p^{-2}}\frac{(p^{-(2N-4)l_2}-p^{-(2N-2)l_2})}{1-p^{-2}}\\
&\ldots\frac{(1-p^{-2l_N})}{1-p^{-2}}
f_{n+l_1+l_2+\ldots+l_N}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
Estimating the $\ell^1$ norm we see that:
\begin{equation}\label{error}
\begin{aligned}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|r_n(2N)|\leq &\sum_{l_1=1}^{\infty}\sum_{l_2=1}^{\infty} \ldots \sum_{l_N=1}^{\infty}\frac{|\lambda|^N}{p^{2nN}(1-p^{-2})^N}({p^{-(2N-2)l_1}}-p^{-2Nl_1})(p^{-(2N-4)l_2}-p^{-(2N-2)l_2})\\
&\ldots (1-p^{-2l_N})|f_{n+l_1+l_2+\ldots+l_N}|.\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Notice that the term $\sum_{l_N=1}^{\infty}(1-p^{-2l_N})|f_{n+l_1+l_2+\ldots+l_N}|$ can be estimated as follows:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\sum_{l_N=1}^{\infty}(1-p^{-2l_N})|f_{n+l_1+l_2+\ldots+l_N}|&\leq \sup_{l_N \geq 1}(1-p^{-2l_N})\sum_{l_N=1}^{\infty}|f_{n+l_1+l_2+\ldots+l_N}|\\
&\leq \|f\|_1
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
where the last line can be justified by changing the summation index in the previous line appropriately. Moreover, we can explicitly calculate each sum that appears in formula
\eqref{error}. For example:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}p^{-2Nn}&=\frac{p^{-2N}}{1-p^{-2N}},\\
\sum_{l_1=1}^{\infty}({p^{-(2N-2)l_1}}-p^{-2Nl_1})&=\frac{(1-p^{-2})p^{-(2N-2)}}{(1-p^{-(2N-2)})(1-p^{-2N})},\\
\sum_{l_2=1}^{\infty}(p^{-(2N-4)l_2}-p^{-(2N-2)l_2})&=\frac{(1-p^{-2})p^{-(2N-4)}}{(1-p^{-(2N-4)})(1-p^{-(2N-2)})},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
and so on. Substituting all these values into the formula \eqref{error} we get the following estimate:
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|r_n(2N)|\leq \frac{|\lambda|^N}{(1-p^{-2})^N}\cdot \frac{p^{-2N}}{1-p^{-2N}} \cdot \frac{(1-p^{-2})p^{-(2N-2)}}{(1-p^{-(2N-2)})(1-p^{-2N})}\ldots \frac{(1-p^{-2})p^{-2}}{(1-p^{-4})(1-p^{-2})}\ .
\end{equation*}
Simplifying this expression we obtain:
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|r_n(2N)|\leq \frac{|\lambda|^N}{p^{N(N+1)}\prod_{k=1}^N (1-p^{-2k})^2} \leq \frac{|\lambda|^N}{p^{N(N+1)}\prod_{k=1}^{\infty} (1-p^{-2k})^2}.
\end{equation*}
Since $\prod_{k=1}^N (1-p^{-2k})^2 < \infty$ we see that $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|r_n(2N)| \rightarrow 0$ as $N \rightarrow \infty$.
\smallskip
Finally we will prove uniqueness of the expansion of $f_n(\lambda)$. Consider the analytic function $f(z)= \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}c(2k)z^k$. From the above estimate of the coefficients $c(2k)$ we see that the radius of convergence $R$ of the power series for $f$ is given by:
\begin{equation*}
\frac 1R= \limsup_{k \rightarrow \infty} \sqrt[k]{|c(2k)|} \leq |\lambda| \;\limsup_{k \rightarrow \infty}\sqrt[k]{\frac{\|f\|_1}{\prod_{i=1}^{\infty} (1-p^{-2i})^2}} \cdot \frac1{p^{k-3+2/k}}.
\end{equation*}
Therefore, $R=\infty$ and the function $f(z)$ is entire. Therefore, in particular:
\begin{equation*}
f(p^{-2n})=\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}c(2k)p^{-2nk}=f_n(\lambda),
\end{equation*}
and so the coefficients $c(2k)$ are uniquely determined by $f_n(\lambda)$, because an analytic function is completely determined by its values on a convergent sequence of points, \cite{AL}.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
\begin{rem} The collection of $\ell^2$ functions with a power series representation of the form \eqref{expform} is fairly restrictive which is clear from the fact that $\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} p^{2n}f(n)= c(2)$.
It can be easily shown that the set of $\ell^2$ functions with this power series representation is dense in the space of all $\ell^2$ functions.
\end{rem}
The difficult part already completed, we can now state our main theorem.
\begin{theo}
The spectrum of the operator $\widehat {D_0^*} \widehat {D_0}$ consists of simple eigenvalues $\{\lambda_n\}$ which are the roots of the $q$-hypergeometric function $\lambda\mapsto\ _1\phi_1\left(\substack {0\\q};q,\lambda \right)$, with $q=\frac1{p^2}$.
\end{theo}
\begin{proof}
Substituting $f_n=\sum_{k=1}^\infty c(2k)p^{-2nk}$ and formula \eqref{Fcoeff} into the initial condition of system \eqref{EVE} and dividing throughout by $c(2)$ we obtain the following:
\begin{equation}\label{NEVE}
\frac{1}{p^2}+\lambda -1+ \sum_{k=2}^\infty \frac{\left(p^{-2k}+\lambda -1\right) \lambda^{k-1}p^{2k-2}} {\prod_{j=2}^k(1-p^{2j})\left(1-\cfrac1{p^{2j-2}}\right)} =0.
\end{equation}
The infinite sum on the left hand side of the above equation, call it $S_1$, can be simplified by first breaking it up into two terms, extracting some terms and then recombining as follows:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
S_1&=\sum_{k=2}^\infty \frac{\left(p^{-2k} -1\right) \lambda^{k-1}p^{2k-2}} {\prod_{j=2}^k(1-p^{2j})\left(1-\cfrac1{p^{2j-2}}\right)} + \sum_{k=3}^\infty \frac{\lambda^{k-1}p^{2k-4}}{\prod_{j=2}^{k-1}(1-p^{2j})\left(1-\cfrac1{p^{2j-2}}\right)}\\
&=\frac{\left(\frac1{p^4}-1\right)\lambda p^2}{\left(1-p^4\right)\left(1-\frac1{p^2}\right)}+ \sum_{k=3}^\infty \frac{p^{2k-4}\lambda^{k-1}\left[p^2(p^{-2k}-1)+(1-p^{2k})\left(1-\frac1{p^{2k-2}}\right)\right]}{\prod_{j=2}^{k}(1-p^{2j})\left(1-\cfrac1{p^{2j-2}}\right)}\ .\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
Using the substitution $q=\frac1{p^2}$ equation \eqref{NEVE} can be written as
\begin{equation*}
(q-1)+ \frac{\lambda}{(1-q)}+ \sum_{k=3}^\infty \frac{q^{2-k}\lambda^{k-1}}{\prod_{j=2}^{k-1}(1-q^{-j})\prod_{j=2}^{k}\left(1-q^{j-1}\right)}=0.
\end{equation*}
Notice that at $k=2$ the expression
\begin{equation*}
\frac{q^{2-k}\lambda^{k-1}}{\prod_{j=2}^{k-1}(1-q^{-j})\prod_{j=2}^{k}\left(1-q^{j-1}\right)}
\end{equation*} yields the value $\frac{\lambda}{(1-q)}$. Thus the above equation is in fact equal to:
\begin{equation*}
(q-1)+ \sum_{k=2}^\infty \frac{q^{2-k}\lambda^{k-1}}{\prod_{j=2}^{k-1}(1-q^{-j})\prod_{j=2}^{k}\left(1-q^{j-1}\right)}=0.
\end{equation*}
Now we rearrange the terms in the infinite sum in order to compare it with the hypergeometric function $_1\phi_1\left(\substack {0\\q};q,\lambda \right)$.
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
(q-1)+ \sum_{k=2}^\infty \frac{q^{2-k}\lambda^{k-1}}{\prod_{j=2}^{k-1}(1-q^{-j})\prod_{j=2}^{k}\left(1-q^{j-1}\right)}&=(q-1)+ \sum_{k=2}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{k}\lambda^{k-1}(1-q)q^{\frac{(k-2)(k-1)}{2}}}{\prod_{j=1}^{k-1}(1-q^{j})^2}\\
&=(q-1)- \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{k}\lambda^{k}(1-q)q^{\frac{k(k-1)}{2}}}{\prod_{j=1}^{k}(1-q^{j})^2}\\
&=1+ \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{k}\lambda^{k}q^{\frac{k(k-1)}{2}}}{\prod_{j=1}^{k}(1-q^{j})^2}\ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
By using the notation
\begin{equation*}
(a;q)_n=(1-a)(1-aq)\ldots(1-aq^{n-1})
\end{equation*}
and the above computation, we can rewrite the eigenvalue equation as
\begin{equation*}
1+ \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{k}\lambda^{k}q^{\frac{k(k-1)}{2}}}{(q;q)_k^2}=0.
\end{equation*}
The function $_1\phi_1$ of four variables $a_0, b_1,q,z$ is defined as
\begin{equation*}
_1\phi_1\left(
\begin{array}{c@{}c@{}c}
\begin{array}{c}
a_0\\
b_1\\
\end{array} ;&\ q^2 ,&\ z\\
\end{array}\right)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{(a_0;q^2)_n}{(q^2;q^2)_n(b_1;q^2)_n}(-1)^nq^{2\binom{n}{2}}z^n.
\end{equation*}
Thus, if $\lambda$ is an eigenvalue, we get:
\begin{equation*}
_1\phi_1\left(\substack {0\\q};q,\lambda \right)=1+ \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{k}\lambda^{k}q^{\frac{k(k-1)}{2}}}{(q;q)_k^2}=0,
\end{equation*}
showing that the eigenvalues of the operator $\widehat {D_0^*}\widehat {D_0}$ are the roots of the above $q$ - hypergeometric function.
Conversely, the above calculation shows that given a root $\lambda$ of $\lambda\mapsto\ _1\phi_1\left(\substack {0\\q};q,\lambda \right)$ the formula \eqref{expform} with arbitrary $c(2)$ and
other coefficients $c(2k)$ given by \eqref{coeff} gives, up to a constant, the unique eigenvector of $\widehat {D_0^*}\widehat {D_0}$ corresponding to eigenvalue $\lambda$. By the analysis in \cite{KMR} the whole spectrum of $\widehat {D_0^*}\widehat {D_0}$ consists of such eigenvalues.
\end{proof}
\smallskip
\maketitle
\section{Spectral properties}
\subsection{Spectrum of $D^*D$}
Computation of the spectrum of $D^*D$ is based on decomposition \eqref{decomD*D} and the analysis of the spectrum of $\widehat {D_0^*}\widehat {D_0}$ in the previous section.
\smallskip
\begin{theo}
Let $\{\lambda_n\}$ be the eigenvalues of the operator $\widehat {D_0^*}\widehat {D_0}$ and let $\widehat D_g^*\widehat D_g$ be as in formula \eqref{Dg}. Then,
\begin{enumerate}
\item The spectrum of $\widehat {D_g^* }\widehat {D_g}$ consists of simple eigenvalues $\{p^{2m}\lambda_n\}$ i.e., $\sigma (\widehat {D_g^* }\widehat {D_g})= \bigcup_n \{p^{2m} \lambda_n\}$.
\item $\sigma ( D^* D)= \sigma (\widehat {D^*} \widehat D)= \bigcup_{m,n} \{p^{2m} \lambda_n\}$. Moreover, each eigenvalue of $\widehat {D^*} \widehat D$ occurs with multiplicity $p^m(1-\frac 1p)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theo}
\begin{proof}
The above results follow directly from the decomposition \eqref{decomD*D}. Since the number of different values of $r$ less than $p^m$ that are relatively prime to $p$ is equal to $p^m-p^{m-1}$, each eigenvalue of $\widehat D^*\widehat D$ in $H$ has multiplicity $p^m(1-\frac 1p)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
The operator $(D^*D)^{-1}$ is a $s$-th Schatten class opeartor for all $s \geq 1$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
From the decomposition \eqref{decomD*D} we see that:
\begin{equation*}
(D^*D)^{-s}= \bigoplus_{\frac r{p^m}\in \mathcal G_p}p^{-2ms}\,(D_0^*D_0)^{-s},
\end{equation*}
from which we compute the following trace:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
{{\operatorname{Tr}}} (D^*D)^{-s}&=\sum_{\frac r{p^m}\in \mathcal G_p}p^{-2ms}\, {{\operatorname{Tr}}} (D_0^*D_0)^{-s}\\
&=\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}\sum_{\substack {0 \leq r < p^m \\ p \nmid r}}p^{-2ms}\, {{\operatorname{Tr}}} (D_0^*D_0)^{-s}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
Since the number of nonnegative $r$'s less than $p^m$ and relatively prime to $p$ is equal to the Euler number of $p^m$, we can compute the sum over $m$ provided that $s > \frac 12$:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}\label{traceD*D}
{{\operatorname{Tr}}} (D^*D)^{-s}&=\sum_{m=0}^{\infty} (p^m-p^{m-1})p^{-2ms}\, {{\operatorname{Tr}}} (D_0^*D_0)^{-s}\\
&=(1-\frac 1p)\left(\frac1{1-p^{1-2s}}\right) \,{{\operatorname{Tr}}} (D_0^*D_0)^{-s}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
From \cite{ABC} we have that $\lambda_n \leq p^n$, so we can estimate the trace ${{\operatorname{Tr}}} (D_0^*D_0)^{-s}=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(\lambda_n)^{-s}$ as follows, provided $s>0$:
\begin{equation*}
{{\operatorname{Tr}}} (D_0^*D_0)^{-s}=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(\lambda_n)^{-s} \leq \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} p^{-ns}=\frac 1{1-p^{-s}}.
\end{equation*}
Summing up this information we see that,
\begin{equation*}
{{\operatorname{Tr}}} (D^*D)^{-s}\leq \left(1-\frac 1p \right)\left(\frac1{1-p^{1-2s}}\right)\left( \frac 1{1-p^{-s}}\right)
\end{equation*}
whenever $s> \frac 12$. Thus for any $s \geq 1$ the $s$-th Schatten norm of $(D^*D)^{-1}$ is finite.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
\bigskip
\subsection{Analytic continuation of the zeta functions}
Using formula \eqref{traceD*D} we can express the zeta function associated with the operator $D^*D$, denoted $\zeta_D(s)$, in terms of $\zeta_{D_0}(s)$, the zeta function associated with the operator $D_0^*D_0$:
\begin{equation}\label{zeta}
\zeta_D(s)=(1-\frac 1p)\left(\frac1{1-p^{1-2s}}\right) \zeta_{D_0}(s).
\end{equation}
We now consider the analytic continuation of $\zeta_{D_0}(s)$.
\begin{theo}
$\zeta_{D_0}(s)$ is holomorphic for $\Re s >0$ and can be analytically continued to a meromorphic function for $\Re s > -2$.
\end{theo}
\begin{proof}
To show that $\zeta_{D_0}(s)$ is holomorphic in the region $\Re s >0$ we estimate:
\begin{equation*}
|\zeta_{D_0}(s)|\leq \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left|\frac 1{\lambda_n^{\Re s + i \, \Im s}}\right|= \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac 1{\lambda_n^{\Re s}}\ ,
\end{equation*}
since $\lambda_n^{-i\, \Im s}$ is unimodular. From \cite{ABC} we know that the eigenvalues $\lambda_n$ of $D_0^*D_0$ satisfy the following upper and lower bounds:
\begin{equation}\label{ulbounds}
p^n \left(1-\frac{p^{-2n}}{1-p^{-2n}}\right) < \lambda_n < p^n.
\end{equation}
Thus we get:
\begin{equation*}
|\zeta_{D_0}(s)| \leq \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac 1{\left(p^n \left(1-\frac{p^{-2n}}{1-p^{-2n}}\right)\right)^{\Re s}}.
\end{equation*}
We have an elementary inequality:
\begin{equation*}
\frac{p^{-2n}}{1-p^{-2n}}= 1- \frac 1{p^{2n}-1} \geq \frac{p^2-2}{p^2-1},
\end{equation*}
which holds since the left-hand side is an increasing function of $n$, while the right-hand side is its value at $n=1$. Therefore, we get:
\begin{equation*}
|\zeta_{D_0}(s)| \leq \left(\frac{p^2-1}{p^2-2}\right)^{\Re s} \,\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac 1{p^{n\Re s}},
\end{equation*}
which is convergent for $\Re s >0$. Consequently, $\zeta_{D_0}(s)$ is holomorphic in $\Re s >0$.
\smallskip
We now show that $\zeta_{D_0}(s)$ can be analytically continued to $\Re s > -2$. Since $\lambda_n$ behaves like $p^n$, the analytic continuation of $\zeta_{D_0}(s)$ will be achieved by a perturbative argument from the meromorphic function obtained from the zeta function by replacing $\lambda_n$ with $p^n$. First we write:
\begin{equation*}
p^{-ns}- \lambda_n^{-s}=e^{-sn\ln p}-e^{-s \ln(\lambda_n)}=\int_{-\ln(\lambda_n)}^{-n\ln p}\frac d{dt}e^{ts} dt=s\int_{-\ln(\lambda_n)}^{-n\ln p}e^{ts} dt.
\end{equation*}
Thus, we obtain:
\begin{equation*}
|p^{-ns}- \lambda_n^{-s}|\leq |s|\int_{-\ln(\lambda_n)}^{-n\ln p}|e^{ts}| dt=|s|\int_{-\ln(\lambda_n)}^{-n\ln p}e^{t \Re s} dt.
\end{equation*}
In this integral we can estimate the integrand by its maximum on the interval of integration $[-\ln(\lambda_n),-n\ln p]$ to arrive at the following estimate:
\begin{equation*}
|p^{-ns}- \lambda_n^{-s}|\leq \begin{cases}
|s|(n \ln p - \ln(\lambda_n))e^{-n \ln p \Re s} & \textrm{ if } \Re s \leq 0 \\
|s|(n \ln p - \ln(\lambda_n))e^{- \ln(\lambda_n) \Re s} & \textrm{ if } \Re s> 0. \\
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Inequality \eqref{ulbounds} implies that:
\begin{equation*}
\ln\left(\frac {p^n}{\lambda_n}\right)< -\ln \left(1-\frac{p^{-2n}}{1-p^{-2n}}\right)= \frac{p^{-2n}}{1-p^{-2n}} \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac 1{k+1} \left(\frac{1}{p^{2n}-1}\right)^k.
\end{equation*}
Since $1-p^{-2n}> \frac 12$ for $n\geq 1$, we can estimate the above as:
\begin{equation*}
\ln\left(\frac {p^n}{\lambda_n}\right)< 2p^{-2n}\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac 1{k+1} \left(\frac{1}{p^2-1}\right)^k= -2p^{-2n}\ln \left(1- \frac 1{p^2-1}\right).
\end{equation*}
Consequently, if $\Re s \leq 0$, we have:
\begin{equation*}
|p^{-ns}- \lambda_n^{-s}|\leq -2 |s|\ln \left(1- \frac 1{p^2-1}\right)p^{-2n}p^{-n \Re s}.
\end{equation*}
This lets us estimate the difference of the series as follows:
\begin{equation*}
\left|\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (p^{-ns}- \lambda_n^{-s})\right| \leq -2 \ln \left(1- \frac 1{p^2-1}\right)|s| \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}p^{-n(2+ \Re s)}.
\end{equation*}
The series $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}p^{-n(2+ \Re s)}$ is convergent for $\Re s > -2$ hence, by the Weierstrass $M$ test, the series $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (p^{-ns}- \lambda_n^{-s})$ converges uniformly for $\Re s > -2$ and hence it is analytic for $\Re s > -2$.
Moreover, since
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}p^{-ns}= \frac {p^{-s}}{1-p^{-s}}
\end{equation*}
is meromorphic in the complex plane with poles at $s= \frac {2 \pi i k}{\ln p}$, $k \in \mathbb Z$, we obtain that the zeta function
$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\lambda_n^{-s}$ for meromorphic for $\Re s > -2$ with the above mentioned poles.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
$\zeta_D(s)$ is meromorphic for $\Re s > -2$ with poles at $s=\frac{2 \pi ik}{\ln p}$, and $s=\frac 12\left(1-\frac{2 \pi ik}{\ln p}\right)$, where $k\in \mathbb Z$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The proof of this corollary follows from the theorem above and equation \eqref{zeta}.
\end{proof}
\section{Appendix}
In this section we record some basic properties and identities satisfied by the $q$ - hypergeometric function $_1 \phi_1$ we encountered in section 4. More on $q$ - hypergeometric functions can be found in \cite{GR}. We start with the general definition of these type of functions:
\begin{equation*}
_{r+1}\phi_s\left(
\begin{array}{c@{}c@{}c}
\begin{array}{c}
a_0,a_1,\ldots,a_r\\
b_1,b_2,\ldots,b_s\\
\end{array} ;&\ q ,&\ z\\
\end{array}\right)%
=\sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{(a_0;q)_n(a_1;q)_n\ldots (a_r;q)_n}{(q;q)_n(b_1;q)_n\ldots (b_s;q)_n}\left((-1)^nq^{\binom{n}{2}}\right)^{s-r}z^n
\end{equation*}
where $b_j \neq q^{-n}$ for any $j,n$.
Here we used the notation $(a;q)_n=(1-a)(1-aq)\ldots(1-aq^{n-1})$. We remark that $(a;q)_{\infty}=\prod_{j=0}^{\infty}(1-aq^j)$. When $s>r$ the above series converges for all $z$ while it converges for $|z|<1$ when $s=r$.
We are interested in the special case where $r=0, s=1$ and $a=0, b=q$, which leads to the formula:
\begin{equation*}
_1\phi_1\left(
\begin{array}{c@{}c@{}c}
\begin{array}{c}
0\\
q\\
\end{array} ;&\ q ,&\ z\\
\end{array}\right)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{1}{(q;q)_n(q;q)_n}(-1)^nq^{\binom{n}{2}}z^n.
\end{equation*}
The function $_1 \phi_1$ satisfies the Cauchy's sum:
\begin{equation*}
_1\phi_1\left(
\begin{array}{c@{}c@{}c}
\begin{array}{c}
a\\
b\\
\end{array} ;&\ q ,&\ b/a\\
\end{array}\right)=\frac{(b/a;q)_{\infty}}{(b;q)_{\infty}}.
\end{equation*}
In \cite{ABC} the authors investigated the roots of the third Jackson $q$-Bessel function:
\begin{equation*}
J_{\nu}^{(3)}(z;q):= z^{\nu} \frac{(q^{\nu +1};q)_{\infty}}{(q;q)_{\infty}}\; {_1\phi_1}\left(
\begin{array}{c@{}c@{}c}
\begin{array}{c}
0\\
q^{\nu+1}\\
\end{array} ;&\ q ,&\ qz^2\\
\end{array}\right),
\end{equation*}
where $0 < q <1$ and $z$ is a complex parameter. It is known that this function has infinitely many zeros, each of multiplicity one, all of them real. When $\nu=0$ we that the third Jackson $q$-Bessel function equals the function $_1 \phi_1$ which we used in this paper.
We record the following transformation property of $_1 \phi_1$:
\begin{equation*}
_1\phi_1\left(
\begin{array}{c@{}c@{}c}
\begin{array}{c}
0\\
b\\
\end{array} ;&\ q ,&\ z\\
\end{array}\right)=\frac{(z;q)_{\infty}}{(b;q)_{\infty}}\ {_1\phi_1}\left(
\begin{array}{c@{}c@{}c}
\begin{array}{c}
0\\
z\\
\end{array} ;&\ q ,&\ b\\
\end{array}\right).
\end{equation*}
Starting with this transformation the authors in \cite{ABC} deduce that if $q< (1-q)^2$ then the positive roots $\omega_k(q)$, $k=1,2,3, \ldots$, of $J_0^{(3)}(z;q)$, arranged in the increasing order satisfy the following:
\begin{equation*}
q^{-k/2+ \alpha_k(q)}< \omega_k(q)< q^{-k/2},
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
\alpha_k(q)=\frac{\log \left(1- \frac{q^k}{1-q^k}\right)}{\log q}.
\end{equation*}
In particular, this gives the asymptotic behavior $\omega_k \sim q^{-k/2}$ as $k \rightarrow \infty$.
Additionally, those results give an upper and lower bound \eqref{ulbounds} for the roots of the specific $_1 \phi_1$ function needed in this paper.
|
\section{Introduction}
For about 30 years, Be stars have been favorite targets of optical
interferometers \citep{thom,gcasNature}, and they are important objects to study the role of rotation in the link between a star and its close environment. Be stars are rapidly rotating, main-sequence B-stars that eject gas into circumstellar disks \citep{Rivinius2013}. The ``e'' suffix in their spectral classification refers to the presence of Balmer emission lines that form in their outflowing disks. Such emission appears in B-stars with equatorial velocities above approximately $75\%$ of the critical rate, and
processes related to nonradial pulsation and/or small-scale magnetic fields
probably aid mass loss into the disk \citep{Rivinius2013}. In some circumstances, these processes may produce high-energy X-rays. The Be star \object{$\gamma$~Cassiopeiae}, for example, exhibits thermal X-ray emission.
In a recent series of two papers on \object{$\gamma$~Cas}, \citet{smith} and \citet{stee} have reviewed the most remarkable features of this star:
X-ray activity, magnetic field, critical rotation, Keplerian rotation, disk
elongation, and binarity. These papers have also shown once more that a
multiwavelength and multitechnique approach is key to making progress in
understanding the physics of these complex systems.
The origin of the rapid spin of Be stars is unknown. Most Be stars appear to be somewhat evolved objects \citep{McSwain2005,Zorec2005}, so that their fast spin represents processes that occur well into their main-sequence lives. One possibility is that B-stars spin up as they conclude core H-burning due to the redistribution of internal angular momentum \citep{Ekstrom2008,Granada2013,Granada2014}. A second possibility is that Be stars were spun up by mass and angular momentum transfer in a binary \citep{Pols1991,deMink2013}. In this case, the companion would lose most of its envelope and would appear as a hot, stripped-down He-star remnant. The Be binary star \object{$\varphi$ Persei} represents the first detection of a Be star with a hot, faint companion \citep{Poeckert1981,Thaller1995,Gies1998}, and it is one of three such systems known at present \citep{Peters2013}. Clearly it is important to study such Be binaries to determine the physical properties of the stars at the conclusion of their transformative interaction.
This paper is an analysis of the results obtained on \object{$\varphi$ Persei} thanks to a combined visible and infrared interferometric campaign with the instruments VEGA \citep{vega} and MIRC \citep{mirc} on the CHARA Array \citep{chara} and is complemented with a new analysis of a collection of radial velocity measurements. In Sect.~\ref{phiper} we summarize the known facts on \object{$\varphi$ Persei} relevant to this study, and we compile radial velocity measurements in Sect.~\ref{sec:rv}. The journal of interferometric observations is presented in Sect.~\ref{data}, and MIRC data are presented in Sect.~\ref{sec:MIRC} along with a global astrometric and radial velocity analysis. The VEGA data and analysis are presented in Sect.~\ref{sec:Vega}. The scientific implications of our results are presented and discussed in Sect.~\ref{discussion}, and we conclude in Sect.~\ref{conclusion}.
\section{Main characteristics of \object{$\varphi$ Persei}}
\label{phiper}
The source \object{$\varphi$ Persei} (HD10516, HIP8068) is a bright star ($m_V=4.09$) in the northern sky that is classified as B1.5~V:e-shell \citep{Slettebak1982}. The {\it Hipparcos} parallax \citep{leeuw2007b} is $\pi=4.54\pm0.2$ millisecond of arc (mas), which gives a distance $d=220\pm10$~pc. Using the interstellar Ca II distance scale, \citet{Megier2009} estimate a distance of $d=195\pm32$~pc.
\citet{Campbell1895} published a list of 32 stars presenting both bright and dark hydrogen lines and addressed the question of explaining these interesting and varying features. \object{$\varphi$ Persei} appears in this list, and about 120 years later, we are still considering it as a puzzle. Until 1960, most of the papers published on \object{$\varphi$ Persei} after this discovery were dedicated to samples of stars and statistical studies. More detailed work followed this period, and \citet{Slettebak1966} (confirmed later on by \citealt{Abt2002}) published a measurement of the projected rotational velocity of $V \sin i=410-450$ km~s$^{-1}$, which is estimated to be around $85\%$ of the equatorial breakup velocity.
\citet{Poeckert1981} presented the first evidence of a companion in \object{$\varphi$ Persei} and identified it as a helium star. Based on the velocity curves, he estimated masses of $M_p=21$~$M_{\odot}$~and $M_s=3.4$~$M_{\odot}$. The primary is the Be star, whereas the secondary is the hot companion with an effective temperature estimated to be around 50000K in order to ionize helium. The photospheric spectrum of the hot companion was first detected in spectra from the {\it International Ultraviolet Explorer} satellite by \citet{Thaller1995}, who showed that the spectrum appears similar to that of the sdO6 subdwarf star HD~49798. \citet{Bozic1995} presented a comprehensive review of the available photometric and radial velocity data, and they proposed an orbital solution with a period $P=126.6731$ days, an epoch of Be star superior conjunction $T_{sc}={\rm HJD}2435046.73$ (HJD = heliocentric Julian Date), and revised masses: $M_p$ between 16 and 22~$M_{\odot}$~and $M_s$ between 1.7 and 2.2~$M_{\odot}$. They classified the primary star as B0.5e. The companion was finally confirmed by \citet{Gies1998} thanks to high-resolution UV spectroscopy with the {\it Hubble Space Telescope}. The subdwarf-to-Be flux ratio is $0.165\pm0.006$ (resp.\ $0.154\pm0.009$) for the 1374\AA~region (resp.\ 1647\AA). Moreover, they derived a double-lined solution for the radial velocity curve that yields masses of $M_p=9.3\pm0.3$~$M_{\odot}$~and $M_s=1.14\pm0.04$~$M_{\odot}$. The lower mass estimates with respect to the results from \citet{Bozic1995} are explained by a much smaller secondary semiamplitude in the RV measurements, which leads to a smaller projected semimajor axis and thus lower masses. The subdwarf effective temperature is $T_{\rm eff}=53000\pm3000K$ and the surface gravity is $\log g=4.2\pm0.1$.
Through the study of the helium lines, \citet{Stefl2000} argued for an origin of the emission in the outer parts of the disk surrounding the primary star. Their observations agree with a scenario where the outer parts of an axisymmetric disk are illuminated by the radiation of the secondary. They also favor inhomogeneities in the global density pattern of the inner regions as evidenced by the emission line asymmetry. The model of the Fe~II $5317$\AA~ and He~I $6678$\AA~ and $5876$\AA~ emission lines of \object{$\varphi$ Persei} proposed by \citet{Hummel2001} yields the size and shape of the excitation region in the circumprimary disk. The Fe~II emission originates within 12 stellar radii in an axisymmetric disk around the primary, whereas the He~I emission is best fit by a disk sector with a radius of 15 stellar radii and opening angle of $\simeq120^{\circ}$ facing the secondary \citep{Hummel2003}. They also confirmed that the complex structure of the emission line profiles is due to an external illumination.
Polarimetric studies of \object{$\varphi$ Persei} were made in the late 1990s through the work of \citet{Clarke1998} and \citet{Ghosh1999}. A wavelength dependence of the polarimetric fluctuations was detected and associated with events deep inside the binary system, the amount of scattered radiation being primarily controlled by the opacity of the primary star's disk. \citet{Ghosh1999} measured an intrinsic polarization of \object{$\varphi$ Persei} equal to $1.57\pm0.11\%$ (resp. $1.36\pm0.10\%$, $1.19\pm0.09\%$ and $0.98\pm0.08\%$) in the B (resp., V, R and I) band. The position angle (measured east from the north celestial pole) of the scattering disk normal axis is $PA=27\pm2^{\circ}$.
Optical interferometric observations of \object{$\varphi$ Persei} (see Table~\ref{tab:interfero}) were first reported in 1997 with the MarkIII interferometer \citep{Quirrenbach1997}. Using a wide spectral band of $54$\AA~ centered on H$\alpha$, they fitted their data with a model of a Gaussian disk plus a stellar uniform disk of $0.39$~mas contributing $23\%$ of the flux in the spectral band. Using the NPOI interferometer with an H$\alpha$ filter of width $39$\AA$\pm3$\AA~, \citet{Tycner2006} used the same model as \citet{Quirrenbach1997} and obtained similar results. The authors also derived an inclination angle $i\geq74^{\circ}$. Finally, \citet{Gies2007}, using the CHARA Array in the $K'$-band, fitted a model with a Gaussian elliptical disk plus a central source and a secondary object accounting for $6\%$ of the flux ($\Delta K'=2.9$ mag). The flux contribution from the central source is estimated as $53.8\pm1.5\%$.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{Interferometric estimates of disk parameters. References are (1) \citet{Quirrenbach1997}, (2) \citet{Tycner2006}, (3) \citet{Gies2007}, (4) \citet{Touhami2013}, (5) this paper. Columns 1 and 2 list the ratio of the minor to major axis $r$ and its uncertainty, Columns 3 and 4 list the disk position angle along the major axis $PA$ and its uncertainty, and Cols. 5 and 6 list the angular FWHM of the disk major axis $\theta_{\rm maj}$ and its uncertainty.}
\label{tab:interfero}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{4pt}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccc}
\hline
$r$ & $\delta r$ & $PA$ & $\delta PA$ & $\theta_{\rm maj}$ & $\delta \theta_{\rm maj}$ & Band & Ref.\\
\hline
0.46 & 0.04 & -62 & 5 & 2.67 & 0.20 & H$\alpha$ & (1)\\
0.27 & 0.01 & -61 & 1 & 2.89 & 0.09 & H$\alpha$ & (2)\\
0.00 & 0.22 & -44 & 3 & 2.30 & 0.08 & $K'$ & (3)\\
0.10 & .... & -44 & 4 & 2.44 & 0.22 & $K'$ & (4)\\
0.15 & 0.09 & -64 & 3 & 1.44 & 0.41 & $H$ & (5)\\
0.37 & 0.03 & -76 & 1 & 0.48 & 0.05 & $R$ & (5)\\
0.34 & 0.03 & -69 & 2 & 0.82 & 0.10 & H$\alpha$ & (5)\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The main features of the system may be summarized as follows: The system is a known spectroscopic binary with a period of almost 127 days. The primary object is a Be star with a very high rotational velocity ($450$ km~s$^{-1}$) that presumably presents a very elongated photosphere seen almost equator-on. As evidenced by the first interferometric measurement and in accordance to its shell classification, it is expected that the inclination angle is at almost $90^\circ$. The companion is a hot subdwarf star. We can estimate from the UV flux a contribution of $8\%$ or less in the $V$ - and $H$-band continuum. The main goals of our study are to attempt a direct detection of the companion in the optical to determine its physical and orbital properties and to continue the study of the disk geometry and kinematics.
\section{Spectroscopic orbital determination from radial velocity measurements}
\label{sec:rv}
A combined analysis of the astrometric and radial velocity orbits
provides the key step to determining the stellar masses and distance.
However, a comprehensive spectroscopic orbit was last determined by
\citet{Bozic1995}, so it is worthwhile to reassess the
spectroscopic orbital elements based on observations that are
more contemporaneous with the interferometric observations.
Here we present new radial velocity measurements for
the Be primary and for the elusive sdO secondary.
\citet{Bozic1995} showed that the wings of the H$\alpha$
emission line that are formed in the inner disk close to the Be star
display radial velocity variations of the Be star. Thus, we
collected the available H$\alpha$ spectroscopy from the
Be Star Spectra Database\footnote{http://basebe.obspm.fr/basebe/}
\citep{Neiner2011} and from the work of \citet{Grundstrom2007}.
These were supplemented by several spectra we obtained with the
KPNO Coude Feed telescope and one spectrum published by
\citet{Tomasella2010}. All of these are high S/N spectra with a
resolving power generally better than $R=\lambda/ \triangle\lambda=5000$.
The reduced heliocentric Julian dates (RJD) of observation and origins of
these 79 spectra are listed in Table~\ref{tab:rv}. The H$\alpha$ emission strength changed by a factor of two during these observations (with local maximum strength in 2005 and local minimum strength in 2011), and there were changes visible in the shape of the line core. However, the shapes of the emission wings remained more or less constant throughout this period, and this suggests that fast-moving gas close to the base of the disk at the photosphere was present throughout. Consequently, measurements of the Doppler shifts from the wing bisector should provide a reasonable estimate of the motion of the gas closest to the Be star itself. \citet{Bozic1995} came to a similar conclusion and found no evidence of systematic deviations in the resulting velocities (which might be present, for example, if high-speed gas streams contributed to the emission flux).
\begin{longtab}
\begin{longtable}{lccl}
\caption{\label{tab:rv}Radial velocity measurements}\\
\hline
Component & RJD & Vr (km~s$^{-1}$) & Source and Observer\\
\hline
Be Primary & 50023.5987 & -9.8 $\pm$ 1.5 & HST Gies et al. (1998)\\
Be Primary & 50084.5151 & 8.7 $\pm$ 1.5 & HST Gies et al. (1998)\\
Be Primary & 50276.5235 & -12.8 $\pm$ 1.5 & HST Gies et al. (1998)\\
Be Primary & 50327.3240 & 4.1 $\pm$ 1.5 & HST Gies et al. (1998)\\
Be Primary & 50371.3607 & -0.2 $\pm$ 1.5 & HST Gies et al. (1998)\\
Be Primary & 50371.4089 & -0.2 $\pm$ 1.5 & HST Gies et al. (1998)\\
Be Primary & 50709.6087 & 1.9 $\pm$ 1.0 & BeSS Neiner\\
Be Primary & 50709.6193 & 2.0 $\pm$ 1.0 & BeSS Neiner\\
Be Primary & 51056.9586 & -22.0 $\pm$ 1.1 & KPNO Gies\\
Be Primary & 51221.3465 & -0.2 $\pm$ 0.8 & INAF Tomasella et al. (2010)\\
Be Primary & 51419.9373 & -11.1 $\pm$ 3.8 & KPNO Gies\\
Be Primary & 51419.9390 & -11.3 $\pm$ 3.5 & KPNO Gies\\
Be Primary & 51420.9717 & -11.6 $\pm$ 5.0 & KPNO Gies\\
Be Primary & 51421.9875 & -14.5 $\pm$ 2.6 & KPNO Gies\\
Be Primary & 51421.9905 & -13.1 $\pm$ 2.7 & KPNO Gies\\
Be Primary & 51430.9768 & -14.7 $\pm$ 4.0 & KPNO Gies\\
Be Primary & 51430.9805 & -14.8 $\pm$ 4.2 & KPNO Gies\\
Be Primary & 52237.3904 & -5.2 $\pm$ 0.7 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 52241.3562 & -10.1 $\pm$ 0.7 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 52253.3768 & -4.9 $\pm$ 0.7 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 52263.2743 & -2.3 $\pm$ 0.4 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 52284.3159 & -18.4 $\pm$ 0.7 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 52293.3072 & -18.0 $\pm$ 0.6 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 52303.2874 & -29.4 $\pm$ 0.6 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 52521.4100 & 10.7 $\pm$ 0.9 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 52854.5309 & 13.4 $\pm$ 1.0 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 52855.5299 & 10.3 $\pm$ 1.5 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 53290.8068 & -0.7 $\pm$ 1.2 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 53290.8076 & -0.6 $\pm$ 1.4 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 53290.8087 & -0.0 $\pm$ 1.6 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 53291.7942 & -0.8 $\pm$ 1.1 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 53291.7951 & -0.3 $\pm$ 1.3 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 53292.8129 & -1.6 $\pm$ 1.0 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 53292.8140 & -2.1 $\pm$ 1.1 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 53294.7812 & -0.1 $\pm$ 2.2 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 53294.7851 & -0.1 $\pm$ 1.7 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 54019.8264 & 10.2 $\pm$ 1.2 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 54020.8271 & 8.1 $\pm$ 0.9 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 54021.8123 & 6.6 $\pm$ 1.2 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 54022.7978 & 8.3 $\pm$ 1.4 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 54023.8106 & 7.0 $\pm$ 0.9 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 54331.5338 & -24.6 $\pm$ 2.1 & BeSS Desnoux\\
Be Primary & 54358.5030 & -18.2 $\pm$ 0.9 & BeSS Thizy\\
Be Primary & 54393.5289 & 5.6 $\pm$ 1.2 & BeSS Thizy\\
Be Primary & 54513.3741 & 12.7 $\pm$ 2.4 & BeSS Guarro\\
Be Primary & 54672.6520 & 3.2 $\pm$ 1.0 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 54761.7315 & -0.6 $\pm$ 3.2 & KPNO Grundstrom\\
Be Primary & 54793.4824 & 8.3 $\pm$ 1.1 & BeSS Guarro\\
Be Primary & 54866.2563 & -27.1 $\pm$ 2.1 & BeSS Guarro\\
Be Primary & 55059.5401 & -8.5 $\pm$ 3.5 & BeSS Desnoux\\
Be Primary & 55060.5620 & -3.6 $\pm$ 1.2 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 55067.5022 & -9.5 $\pm$ 1.4 & BeSS Thizy\\
Be Primary & 55072.3554 & 11.0 $\pm$ 4.3 & BeSS Terry\\
Be Primary & 55109.4944 & -12.6 $\pm$ 2.8 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 55117.3864 & -10.7 $\pm$ 10.7 & BeSS Garrel\\
Be Primary & 55119.3849 & -15.7 $\pm$ 11.4 & BeSS Garrel\\
Be Primary & 55203.3741 & -17.7 $\pm$ 17.1 & BeSS Garrel\\
Be Primary & 55398.4875 & 11.1 $\pm$ 1.3 & BeSS Terry\\
Be Primary & 55417.5052 & 8.0 $\pm$ 2.5 & BeSS Desnoux\\
Be Primary & 55455.4248 & -16.4 $\pm$ 1.2 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 55534.2922 & -1.9 $\pm$ 1.6 & BeSS Guarro\\
Be Primary & 55559.4242 & -0.3 $\pm$ 2.0 & BeSS Garrel\\
Be Primary & 55774.5908 & 3.2 $\pm$ 2.2 & BeSS Ubaud\\
Be Primary & 55777.5094 & -2.6 $\pm$ 0.8 & BeSS Dubreuil\\
Be Primary & 55785.5531 & 2.5 $\pm$ 0.7 & BeSS Terry\\
Be Primary & 55828.3888 & -17.2 $\pm$ 0.6 & BeSS Terry\\
Be Primary & 55831.5150 & -20.7 $\pm$ 1.3 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 55857.4198 & -31.3 $\pm$ 0.6 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 55879.6551 & -9.6 $\pm$ 0.6 & BeSS Graham\\
Be Primary & 55907.6115 & 8.0 $\pm$ 0.6 & BeSS Graham\\
Be Primary & 55956.3393 & -12.3 $\pm$ 2.1 & BeSS Garrel\\
Be Primary & 56143.6007 & 5.8 $\pm$ 1.3 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 56150.4413 & 7.5 $\pm$ 2.8 & BeSS Terry\\
Be Primary & 56163.4058 & 17.4 $\pm$ 2.6 & BeSS Garrel\\
Be Primary & 56167.4575 & 18.1 $\pm$ 1.8 & BeSS Terry\\
Be Primary & 56204.5901 & 0.8 $\pm$ 2.2 & BeSS Favaro\\
Be Primary & 56206.4024 & -0.4 $\pm$ 0.7 & BeSS Buil\\
Be Primary & 56260.5174 & -4.8 $\pm$ 0.5 & BeSS Graham\\
Be Primary & 56267.3228 & 2.2 $\pm$ 1.2 & BeSS Garrel\\
Be Primary & 56270.4680 & 4.7 $\pm$ 2.0 & BeSS Guarro\\
Be Primary & 56291.3623 & 20.6 $\pm$ 0.5 & BeSS Ubaud\\
Be Primary & 56301.3892 & 19.6 $\pm$ 3.4 & BeSS Guarro\\
Be Primary & 56490.5331 & -4.6 $\pm$ 1.3 & BeSS Ubaud\\
Be Primary & 56628.5588 & 4.6 $\pm$ 1.6 & BeSS Graham\\
Be Primary & 56665.6322 & 28.1 $\pm$ 1.0 & BeSS Sawicki\\
sdO Secondary & 43763.4936 & -114.3 $\pm$ 3.5 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 43837.9529 & 62.5 $\pm$ 3.6 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 43839.8268 & 48.4 $\pm$ 2.6 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 43844.0271 & 35.0 $\pm$ 3.2 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 44151.5341 & -66.7 $\pm$ 4.3 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 44167.3172 & -8.6 $\pm$ 3.8 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 44174.0036 & 7.6 $\pm$ 3.8 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 44328.2958 & 81.8 $\pm$ 4.5 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 44332.4182 & 86.0 $\pm$ 4.0 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 44485.0176 & -13.3 $\pm$ 2.7 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 44486.1504 & -16.9 $\pm$ 2.7 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 44511.1058 & -96.3 $\pm$ 2.6 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 44661.1698 & -82.7 $\pm$ 2.6 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 44824.9353 & 66.5 $\pm$ 2.6 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 45237.9853 & 28.6 $\pm$ 3.2 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 45238.0244 & 26.5 $\pm$ 4.4 & IUE \\
sdO Secondary & 50023.5987 & 78.2 $\pm$ 1.1 & HST Gies et al. (1998)\\
sdO Secondary & 50084.5151 & -77.6 $\pm$ 1.1 & HST Gies et al. (1998)\\
sdO Secondary & 50276.5235 & 75.5 $\pm$ 1.1 & HST Gies et al. (1998)\\
sdO Secondary & 50327.3240 & -54.1 $\pm$ 1.1 & HST Gies et al. (1998)\\
sdO Secondary & 50371.3607 & -24.2 $\pm$ 1.1 & HST Gies et al. (1998)\\
sdO Secondary & 50371.4089 & -23.0 $\pm$ 1.1 & HST Gies et al. (1998)\\
\hline
\end{longtable}
\end{longtab}
We measured the H$\alpha$ wing velocity by determining the emission line
bisector position using the method described by \citet{Shafter1986}.
The radial velocity is found by cross-correlating the observed profile
with a pair of oppositely signed Gaussian functions offset to positions
of $\pm 250$ km~s$^{-1}$ from line center and then measuring the
zero-crossing position of the resulting cross-correlation function.
The uncertainties in the resulting measurements were estimated using
the semi-empirical expression from \citet{Grundstrom2007}, but we
caution that these estimates do not account for long-term changes
in the emission profile that also influence the wing measurements.
In most cases we were able to also measure accurate positions of the
nearby atmospheric telluric lines, and we used these to make small
corrections to the wavelength calibration in the topocentric frame.
The resulting radial velocity measurements appear in Col. 3 of Table~\ref{tab:rv}.
For convenience, we also include a set of six
radial velocities measured by \citet{Gies1998} for the Be star
photospheric lines in far-ultraviolet spectra obtained with the
{\it Hubble Space Telescope}.
We made a single-lined spectroscopic orbital determination from these radial
velocities alone using the program SBCM described by \citet{Morbey1974}.
We began making circular fits with the period derived by \citet{Bozic1995},
$P=126.6731\pm0.0071$~d, and we derived an orbital semiamplitude of
$K_a = 11.4 \pm 1.0$ km~s$^{-1}$. This agrees within the uncertainties
with the value reported by \citet{Gies1998}, $K_a = 10.0 \pm 0.8$ km~s$^{-1}$.
The measurement of radial velocities for the sdO companion is much more
difficult. There are several features in the optical spectrum that display
the antiphase Doppler shifts expected for the companion, but these are
usually associated with gas near the companion star. These include weak
He~II $4686$\AA~ emission that may form in a disk close to the companion
\citep{Poeckert1981}, He~I $4026$\AA~, $4471$\AA~ ``shell'' lines
formed farther away \citep{Poeckert1981}, and the He~I $6678$\AA~
emission line that probably originates in the outer disk of the Be star
facing the hot subdwarf \citep{Stefl2000,Hummel2001}. There are only six
{\it HST} measurements of the photospheric lines of the companion itself that were made in the far-ultraviolet spectrum by \citet{Gies1998}, and we include these in Table~\ref{tab:rv}. There are also 16 high-resolution FUV spectra of \object{$\varphi$ Persei} available in the archive of the {\it International Ultraviolet Explorer Satellite} \citep{Thaller1995}, and we successfully detected the spectral signature of the companion in each of these using the cross-correlation methods described by \citet{Peters2013}.
We measured radial velocities for the companion using the same model template
spectrum adopted in the work of \citet{Gies1998}, and our derived radial
velocities appear at the bottom of Table~\ref{tab:rv}. The uncertainties
associated with these velocities are probably larger than reported in the table. Indeed, since they are too faint, the interstellar lines in the spectrum of \object{$\varphi$ Persei} cannot be used to correct for zero-point shifts of the star position with respect to the slit in the large-aperture observations \citep{Peters2013}.
We made a single-lined spectroscopic orbital solution for the secondary again using the orbital period from \citet{Bozic1995}, and we obtained a semiamplitude of $K_b = 83.6 \pm 2.1$ km~s$^{-1}$ that agrees within errors with the determination from the {\it HST} spectra of $K_b = 81.2 \pm 0.6$ km~s$^{-1}$ \citep{Gies1998}. Elliptical fits provided no improvement
in the residuals. Thus, the {\it IUE} measurements tend to confirm the results from the {\it HST} spectra. On the other hand, because the measurement errors are larger for the {\it IUE} velocities, it is not clear whether or not
including them improves our estimate of the semiamplitude $K_b$.
In the following section, we restrict our considerations to the
{\it HST} velocities of the companion. Note that the FUV derived estimate of the
secondary semiamplitude is somewhat lower than that found from optical studies
($K_b = 105 \pm 7$ km~s$^{-1}$ from He~II $4686$\AA~, \citealt{Poeckert1981};
$K_b \approx 90$ km~s$^{-1}$ from He~I $4026$\AA~, $4471$\AA~, \citealt{Poeckert1981}; $K_b = 101 \pm 6$ km~s$^{-1}$ from He~I $6678$\AA~, \citealt{Bozic1995})
presumably because the latter are influenced by gas motions and a location of
origin that differ from that of the hot companion. The He~I $6678$\AA~ emission, for example, probably originates in the outer disk facing the companion at a position closer to the Be star and thus with a higher Keplerian orbital speed than that of the companion.
\section{Interferometric observations and data analysis principles}
\label{data}
Interferometric observations were carried out on the CHARA Array \citep{chara}, located at Mount Wilson Observatory. It consists of six 1~m telescopes sending their beams, after compression, through vacuum pipes to the recombining lab, through the fixed and movable delay lines with the correction of longitudinal dispersion, and the beams are re-arranged before feeding the instruments. For the purpose of this work we have used the MIRC instrument \citep{mirc2004,mirc} operated in the $H$ band using all six CHARA telescopes \citep{mirc2012} and the VEGA spectrograph used in the 4-T mode \citep{vega2}. The spectral configurations used with the different instruments are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:spectro}. The different configurations we used during these observations are presented in Table~\ref{tab:obs}. The corresponding $(u,v)$ coverage, generated with the \texttt{Aspro2} service\footnote{Available at http://www.jmmc.fr/aspro}, is presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:planuv}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\center
\includegraphics[width=6cm,height=6cm]{fig1a.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=6cm,height=6cm]{fig1b.pdf}
\caption{Top: $(u,v)$ plane coverage for MIRC. Bottom: $(u,v)$ plane coverage for VEGA. The two figures use the same spatial frequency scale. }
\label{fig:planuv}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{Spectral configurations used with VEGA and MIRC for the \object{$\varphi$ Persei} observations. Column 2 gives the spectral band, Col. 3 the spectral width of one channel, and Col. 4 the number of channels.}
\label{tab:spectro}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{4pt}
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\hline
& $\lambda$~nm & $\Delta\lambda$~nm & Channels\\
\hline
VEGA & [483;498] & 15 & 1\\
& [636;651] & 15 & 1\\
& [648;663] & 15 & 1\\
& [663;678] & 15 & 1\\
\hline
VEGA & [646;666] & 0.1 & 200\\
\hline
MIRC & [1501;1712] & 35 & 6\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
For the VEGA observations, VEGA and MIRC were used simultaneously, MIRC with six telescopes in $H$ band and VEGA with two different four-telescope configurations. MIRC was used as a 6-T group delay sensor, and corrections were sent directly to the main delay lines. An initial cophasing of the two instruments was made using a reference target thanks to the fine adjustments of the MIRC feeding optics and corresponding corrections on the main delay lines. The observing sequence was then 1) MIRC finds and stabilizes the fringes, 2) MIRC and VEGA start recording data, 3) at the end of the VEGA sequence, MIRC does its shutter and photometry sequence.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{\object{$\varphi$ Persei} observations with VEGA and MIRC on the CHARA Array. Column~1 gives the UT date, Column~2 the reduced heliocentric Julian date RJD, Col.~3 the orbital phase of the companion according to our newly determined ephemeris, Col.~4 the telescope configuration, and Col.~5 the UT time of observation. } \label{tab:obs}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{4pt}
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\hline
Date & RJD & Phase & Telescopes & UT\\
\hline
VEGA\\
\hline
2011Sep28 & 55832.86 & 0.81 & S2E2W1W2 & 08:40\\
2011Oct18 & 55852.77 & 0.97 & S1S2W1W2 & 06:26\\
2011Oct18 & 55852.85 & 0.97 & S1S2W1W2 & 08:31\\
2011Oct18 & 55852.96 & 0.97 & E1E2W1W2 & 10:58\\
2011Oct19 & 55853.72 & 0.98 & S1S2W1W2 & 05:16\\
2011Oct19 & 55853.78 & 0.98 & S1S2W1W2 & 06:39\\
2011Oct19 & 55853.88 & 0.98 & E1E2W1W2 & 09:02\\
2011Oct19 & 55853.93 & 0.98 & E1E2W1W2 & 10:21\\
\hline
MIRC\\
\hline
2011Sep03 & 55807.91 & 0.62 & S1S2E1E2W1W2 & 09:50 \\
2011Sep28 & 55832.86 & 0.81 & S1S2E1E2W1W2 & 08:38\\
2011Oct18 & 55852.87 & 0.97 & S1S2E1E2W1W2 & 08:52 \\
2011Oct19 & 55853.76 & 0.98 & S1S2E1E2W1W2 & 06:14 \\
2012Aug18 & 56158.02 & 0.38 & S1S2E1E2W1W2 & 12:29\\
2012Sep15 & 56185.81 & 0.60 & S1S2E1E2W1W2 & 07:26\\
2012Oct31 & 56231.77 & 0.96 & S1S2E1E2W1W2 & 06:29 \\
2012Nov06 & 56237.61 & 0.01 & S1S2E1E2W1W2 & 02:38\\
2013Oct08 & 56573.86 & 0.66 & S1S2E1E2W1W2 & 08:38 \\
2013Oct21 & 56586.76 & 0.76 & S1S2E1E2W1W2 & 06:14\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Two different calibrators were used for the VEGA observations: \object{HD3360} and \object{HD25642}. They were identified using the \texttt{SearchCal} service\footnote{Available at http://www.jmmc.fr/searchcal} \citep{SearchcalBright,SearchcalFaint} and the CDS Astronomical Databases SIMBAD and VIZIER\footnote{Available at http://cdsweb.u-strasbg.fr/}. We used the \texttt{SearchCal} spectrophotometric uniform disk angular diameter determinations in the $R$ and $H$ bands, which led to $\theta_{UD-R}=0.284\pm0.020$~mas and $\theta_{UD-H}=0.287\pm0.020$~mas for \object{HD3360} and to $\theta_{UD-R}=0.439\pm0.031$~mas and $\theta_{UD-H}=0.447\pm0.031$~mas for \object{HD25642}. In addition to these calibrators, MIRC calibration employed the additional calibrators \object{7 And} ($0.65\pm0.03$~mas), \object{$\theta$~Cas} ($0.57\pm0.04$~mas), and \object{HD~33167} ($0.50\pm0.04$~mas).
The data processing followed the standard MIRC \citep{monnier2007,monnier2012} and VEGA \citep{vega,vega2} procedures. Based upon our understanding of the current VEGA limitations \citep{vegaspie2012}, we decided to reject all closure phase measurements with VEGA and to set a conservative lower limit to the absolute uncertainty of the squared visibility measurements at the level of 0.05.
\section{Near-IR image reconstruction and companion detection}
\label{sec:MIRC}
\subsection{MIRC results}
\label{sec:MIRC_results}
\begin{figure*}[!th]
\center
\includegraphics[width=16cm]{fig2.pdf}\\
\caption{(left) Here we show the two-dimension visibility function for \object{$\varphi$ Persei} from MIRC. We combined all our epochs together and averaged with a 30m smoothing window, maintaining each wavelength channel. (right) This shows the same averaged data as a function of radial spatial frequency unit. In addition, we have included model visibilities for position angles along the major and minor axes of the average disk model (see Table~\ref{tab:MIRCmodel}).}
\label{fig:mircplot}
\end{figure*}
For the purposes of this paper, we wished to extract two major findings from the MIRC data. First, we sought to directly
detect the companion for the first time to determine the visual orbit of the \object{$\varphi$ Persei} binary system. Secondly, we aimed to take advantage of the dense and complete $(u,v)$-coverage from MIRC to create an image using aperture synthesis and to constrain the inclination angle of the disk.
\begin{figure}[h]
\center
\includegraphics[height=9cm,angle=90]{fig3.pdf}\\
\caption{Image reconstruction made with MIRC data in the $H$
band. Here we have separately modeled the contributions from the Be star and the companion, and this image represents the emission from the {\em \textup{disk alone}}, contributing about $\sim$29\% of the total $H$-band flux. We have marked the location of the companion at the ten epochs reported here with error ellipses and show the best-fit circular orbit (see text). The colored band shows the results from 100 bootstrap fits to illustrate the errors on our orbital solution. East is left and north is up.}
\label{fig:diskMIRC}
\end{figure}
First, to extract the companion location, we fitted a binary model to each of the ten best observing epochs with six-telescope MIRC data. The model for each epoch has 11 parameters: fraction of $H$-band light from the primary, uniform disk diameter for the primary, fraction of light from the companion, uniform disk diameter for the companion, separation and position angle of the companion compared to the primary, Gaussian model for disk emission with three parameters describing the symmetric component (FWHM of the major axis, FWHM of the minor axis, position angle on the sky of the major axis), and two parameters to describe any asymmetric disk emission \citep[skew angle and skew fraction; see description in][]{monnier2006,che2012}.
In our case, the uniform disk diameter (UDD) of the primary was fixed at 0.3 mas and the UDD of the companion was fixed as 0.056 mas, on the basis of spectrophotometric estimations. We might expect the skewness to change from epoch to epoch \citep[as was found for \object{$\delta$~Sco} by][]{che2012}. This is indeed confirmed by our results at each epoch, but unfortunately, no conclusion could be drawn. Based on our fitting, we report the median and one-sigma range of the $H$-band disk parameters in Table~\ref{tab:MIRCmodel}, while the locations of the companion for all epochs are collected in Table~\ref{tab:companionMIRC}. The typical reduced $\chi^2$ achieved during fitting was $\sim$1.9. A synthetic view of the MIRC data is presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:mircplot}.
We used the MACIM imaging algorithm \citep{macim2006} along with the dark energy regularizer to carry out image reconstruction by combining all the MIRC data together. Since the primary star contains $\sim$70\% of the total flux, it is important to remove this component explicitly as part of the image reconstruction, as explained in detail in \citet{che2012}. We accounted for the moving secondary based on an orbital model, although this has only a small effect since the companion only contributes $\sim1.5\%$ of the total light in the system. Figure~\ref{fig:diskMIRC} shows our image reconstruction of the disk alone, along with the locations of the secondary star for each epoch. The dynamic range appears to be noticeably smaller than most MIRC imaging (background noise is about ten times below peak emission), but this is because the central star has been removed from this image through modeling. If we were to add back the central star, we would find a dynamic range of $\sim$100 in this image. The reduced $\chi^2$ for this image is $\sim$2.0, only slightly worse than found using disk modeling for each individual epoch. We expect some time variation between epochs, and so it is not too surprising that the $\chi^2$ is not as low as typically found when imaging with MIRC.
We briefly mention some known limitations of our method and point out future work. First, the disk model is quite simplistic. As discussed elsewhere \citep[e.g., ][]{Kraus2012, che2012}, the gas disk is expected to have a hole in the center where the star is, and we also expect significant obscuration of the central star at this high-inclination angle. Furthermore, the imaging suggests a Gaussian disk profile, which is probably not a realistic model. The asymmetric component of the disk emission changes the photo center of the primary object, thus adding errors to our estimate of the secondary separation vector. Indeed, it seems the companion location of 2012Nov06 is physically impossible, and our estimate might have been affected by changing asymmetries in the inner disk that were not accurately modeled by our method.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{Basic parameters of the $H$-band disk model from MIRC observations. The component fluxes are indicated by $f_a$, $f_d$, and $f_b$
for the Be star, disk, and companion, respectively.}
\label{tab:MIRCmodel}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{4pt}
\begin{tabular}{c|c}
\hline
Model Parameter & Value \\
\hline
$f_a$ & 0.70$\pm$0.06 \\
$f_d$ & 0.29$\pm$0.06 \\
$f_b$ & 0.015$\pm$0.003 \\
FWHM$_{\rm major}$(mas) & 1.44$\pm$0.41 \\
FWHM$_{\rm minor}$ (mas) & 0.22$\pm$0.12 \\
PA of major axis (deg) & -64$\pm$3 \\
Disk inclination (deg) & 82$\pm$4 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{Position of the companion as a function of the RJD as detected in the various MIRC datasets. Separation is given in mas and position angle in degrees. Columns~5--7 give the uncertainty ellipse.} \label{tab:companionMIRC}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{4pt}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
\hline
RJD & Phase & Separation & $PA$ & $\sigma_{major}$ & $\sigma_{minor}$ & $PA(\sigma)$\\
\hline
55807.91 & 0.62 & 4.50 & 126.7 & 0.07 & 0.06 & 84\\
55832.86 & 0.81 & 2.56 & 268.2 & 0.09 & 0.06 & 18\\
55852.87 & 0.97 & 5.75 & 293.1 & 0.11 & 0.10 & 12\\
55853.76 & 0.98 & 5.83 & 293.5 & 0.14 & 0.10 & 298\\
56158.02 & 0.38 & 4.34 & 104.0 & 0.10 & 0.09 & 330\\
56185.81 & 0.60 & 4.90 & 124.8 & 0.14 & 0.10 & 318\\
56231.77 & 0.96 & 5.73 & 292.3 & 0.10 & 0.10 & 291\\
56237.61 & 0.01 & 6.08 & 306.6 & 0.18 & 0.12 & 292\\
56573.86 & 0.66 & 3.39 & 134.4 & 0.26 & 0.17 & 340\\
56586.76 & 0.76 & 1.27 & 226.6 & 0.28 & 0.10 & 309\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Orbital solution for the companion}
\begin{figure}[h]
\center
\includegraphics[height=9cm,angle=90]{fig4.pdf}\\
\caption{Radial velocity measurements of the primary star along with predicted orbit from the joint MIRC$+$RV fit (see Table~\ref{tab:orbit}). Open symbols represent H$\alpha$ wing bisector measurements, while filled symbols represent {\it HST} measurements from \citet{Gies1998}. $1-\sigma$ error bars have been fixed to $\pm 8.6$ km~s$^{-1}$ as explained in the text. The width of the solid line illustrates the errors on our orbital solution estimated from 100 bootstrap fits. The RV is negative at zero phase because we have chosen an astrometric orbital ephemeris of the secondary relative to the primary, which is opposite in sign to the radial velocity convention, where the velocity of the primary star is measured relative to the center-of-mass.}
\label{fig:vr}
\end{figure}
Based on the radial velocity measurements presented in Sect.~\ref{sec:rv} and
on the companion positions determined in Sect.~\ref{sec:MIRC_results},
we performed a joint astrometric and radial velocity solution of the orbit.
We adopted the period from \citet{Bozic1995}, $P=126.6731\pm0.0071$~d,
in the first combined fit. By combining the epochs of the ascending node of the companion (equal to the velocity maximum for the secondary and the velocity minimum for the Be star primary) from \citet{Bozic1995}, \citet{Gies1998} (119 orbital cycles later), and our new solution (166 orbital cycles later), we then derived improved estimates for the period and epoch. The revised period $P=126.6982\pm0.0035$~d is $3\sigma$ larger than that found by \citet{Bozic1995}, but we use this revised period
and epoch ($T_{\rm RV~min}=RJD~56110.00\pm0.12$) to reference the orbital
phase in the rest of this paper.
We fixed the period to $P=126.6982$ and assumed a circular orbit for our final solution. To assess the errors in the orbital parameters, we carried out a bootstrap analysis, for which we resampled the astrometric and RV data to create 100 synthetic data sets. Initially, we found the reduced $\chi^2$ for the RV data to be 69, clearly revealing systematic errors not accounted for in the original RV error analysis. In response to this, we treated all data with uniform error bars scaled to achieve a reduced $\chi^2$ of unity. The corresponding errors become thus $\pm 8.6$ km~s$^{-1}$ (resp.\ $\pm 1.35$ km~s$^{-1}$ and $\pm 3$ km~s$^{-1}$) for the H$\alpha$ set (resp.\ the primary and secondary {\it HST} data set from \citealt{Gies1998}). As mentioned earlier, we also chose to remove the epoch of 2012 Nov 06 from our astrometric fit because it has a much larger discrepancy with the orbital prediction than any other observation, and it must be an outlier due to unmodeled disk substructure or a calibration problem (we have included it in Fig.~\ref{fig:diskMIRC} for reference).
The result of our best-fit model along with 100 bootstraps is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:diskMIRC}, the RV curve is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:vr}. The results on the orbital parameters, masses, and distance appear in Table~\ref{tab:orbit} and are discussed in Sect.~\ref{discussion}.
\begin{table}[t]
\label{tab:orbitalparameter}
\centering
\caption{Orbital elements of the \object{$\varphi$ Persei} binary system determined using interferometric and radial velocity measurements together, assuming a circular orbit. Note our orbital convention for the ephemeris here is referencing the location of the secondary relative to the primary (thus the primary star attains its most negative radial velocity at epoch $T_{\rm RV~min}$).} \label{tab:orbit}
\begin{tabular}{lr}
\hline
Parameter & Value \\ \hline\hline
$T_{\rm RV~min}$ (RJD) & 56110.03$\pm$0.08 \\
$P$ (d) & 126.6982 (fixed) \\
$a$ (mas) & 5.89$\pm$0.02 \\
$e$ & 0 (fixed) \\
$i$ ($^\circ$) & 77.6$\pm$0.3 \\
$\omega$($^\circ$) & 0 (fixed) \\
$\Omega$($^\circ$) & -64.3$\pm$0.3 \\
$\gamma$ (km\,s$^{-1}$) & -2.2$\pm$0.5 \\
$K_a$ (km\,s$^{-1}$) & 10.2$\pm$1.0 \\
$K_b$ (km\,s$^{-1}$) & 81.5$\pm$0.7 \\
\hline
$M_{a+b}$ ($M_\odot$) & 10.8$\pm$0.5 \\
$M_{a}$ ($M_\odot$) & 9.6$\pm$0.3 \\
$M_{b}$ ($M_\odot$) & 1.2$\pm$0.2 \\
\hline
$d (pc)$ & 186$\pm$3\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Visible data and disk properties}
\label{sec:Vega}
\subsection{Visible broadband data and model fitting}
Using the VEGA wide spectral band measurements, we first performed a model fitting using the software LITpro\footnote{LITpro software available at http://www.jmmc.fr/litpro} \citep{litpro}. We first used the three bands containing continuum and then, separately, the band containing the H$\alpha$ line as defined in Table~\ref{tab:spectro}.\\
In a first approach, we just used a simple uniform disk model. We found a diameter in the continuum of $0.343\pm0.006$~mas and in the line of $0.423\pm0.012$ with a reduced $\chi^2$ of 9.3 and 14.4, respectively (Table~\ref{tab:litpro}, first section). The larger equivalent diameter in the line indicates the presence of an extended structure, corresponding to the line emission associated with the disk. The residuals clearly indicate that the size of the object varies with position angle, and thus we used a second model with the addition of an elongated Gaussian disk. The results are presented in Table~\ref{tab:litpro} (second section). We tried to detect the companion in the VEGA data but, despite the very good $(u,v)$ coverage, the data quality at low visibility level does not permit this direct detection. We therefore decided to adopt the position of the companion found by MIRC, but consider its flux as a free parameter. To avoid the complication introduced by the change in the companion's position, we only used the data of 2011 October 18 and 19 (RJD=55852 and 55853) for this analysis.
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\caption{\object{$\varphi$ Persei} model-fitting results for the continuum and the band containing H$\alpha$. The different models are 1) UD=equivalent uniform disk, 2) GD=elongated Gaussian disk, 3) UD+GD=central uniform disk of flux F1 + elongated Gaussian disk of flux F2, and 4) UD+GD+C=same as 3) + a companion of flux F3.}
\label{tab:litpro}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2pt}
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
& Continuum & H$\alpha$\\
\hline
\hline
UD & &\\
$\chi^2$& 9.3$\pm$0.1 & 14.4$\pm$0.1\\
$\theta$ & 0.343$\pm$0.006 & 0.423$\pm$0.012\\
\hline
GD & &\\
$\chi^2$ & 5.4$\pm$0.1 & 7.2$\pm$0.1 \\
$\theta_{min}$ & 0.141$\pm$0.006 & 0.182$\pm$0.010 \\
$elong$ & 2.34$\pm$0.14 & 2.32$\pm$0.18 \\
$PA$ & -78$\pm$1 & -72$\pm$2 \\
\hline
UD+GD & &\\
$\chi^2$ & 4.9$\pm$0.1&4.7$\pm$0.1\\
F1 & 0.47$\pm$0.13&0.45$\pm$0.08\\
$\theta$ & 0.1$\pm$0.1&0.1$\pm$0.1\\
F2 & 0.53$\pm$0.13&0.55$\pm$0.08\\
$\theta_{min}$ & 0.19$\pm$0.02&0.29$\pm$0.02\\
$elong$ & 2.64$\pm$0.49&2.89$\pm$0.29\\
$PA$ & -76$\pm$1&-69$\pm$2\\
\hline
UD+GD+C & &\\
$\chi^2$ & 4.3$\pm$0.1&4.2$\pm$0.1\\
F1 & 0.44$\pm$0.06&0.43$\pm$0.07\\
$\theta$ & 0.1$\pm$0.1&0.1$\pm$0.1\\
F2 & 0.53$\pm$0.06&0.54$\pm$0.09\\
$\theta_{min}$ & 0.18$\pm$0.01&0.28$\pm$0.02\\
$elong$ & 2.67$\pm$0.21&2.92$\pm$0.30\\
$PA$ & -76$\pm$1&-69$\pm$2\\
F3 & 0.033$\pm$0.006&0.029$\pm$0.008\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The results clearly show the significant departure from a spherical object, both in the continuum and in the band containing H$\alpha$. As evidenced by the evolution of the reduced $\chi^2$, an improvement is found with a model consisting of a uniform disk + an elongated Gaussian disk (Table~\ref{tab:litpro}, third section), and the results are even better if we consider the companion (Table~\ref{tab:litpro}, fourth section). The difference in size and orientation of the elongated object between the continuum and H$\alpha$ is the signature of the difference between the disk emitting in the H$\alpha$ line and the continuum, and the elongated object
potentially consists of a rotationally distorted photosphere plus the contribution from the disk. In fact, a large portion of the stellar photosphere is obscured by the disk, but this fraction is not the same in the continuum and in the H$\alpha$ band. We also note that the position angle value found in the emission line region, where the disk is dominating the flux, is closer to the position angle found in the $H$ band ($PA=-64^\circ \pm 3^\circ$) and is compatible within 2~$\sigma$ despite the difference of wavelength.
\subsection{Spectrally resolved H$\alpha$ data and model fitting}
\label{sec:VegaDiff}
Differential visibilities are estimated through the standard VEGA procedure \citep{vega}. For the purpose of the \object{$\varphi$ Persei} work, we have established the absolute orientation of the differential phases in any of the CHARA+VEGA configurations \citep{vegaspie2012}. Some examples of differential measurements are presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:VisVEGA}, bottom part. The photon-counting detectors of VEGA suffer from a local saturation effect in presence of bright spectral lines that attenuates the line intensity. This nonlinearity in the photometric response of the detector does not generate bias in the derived complex visibilities as explained by \citet{Delaa2011}.
To model the spectrally resolved visibility and differential phase in the H$\alpha$ emission line, we used the simple kinematic model developed for fast model-fitting of a geometrically and optically thin equatorial disk in rotation described in detail by \citet{Delaa2011} and \citet{Meilland2012}.
The model parameters can be classified into four categories:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The stellar disk parameters: stellar polar radius ($R_\star$), stellar flattening (f), distance ($d$), inclination angle ($i$), and major-axis position angle ($PA$).
\item The kinematic parameters: rotational velocity ($V_{\rm rot}$) at the disk inner radius (i.e., photosphere) and the rotation power-law index ($\beta$).
\item The disk continuum parameters: disk FWHM in the continuum ($a_{\rm c}$) and disk continuum flux normalized by the total continuum flux ($F_{\rm c}$).
\item The disk emission line parameters: disk FWHM in the line ($a_{\rm l}$) and line equivalent width (EW).
\end{enumerate}
\begin{table}[!tbh]
\caption{Values of the VEGA best-fit kinematic model parameters.
\label{model_params}}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline
~~Parameter~~ & ~~Value~~ &~~Remarks~~\\
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{3}{c}{\textbf{Global geometric parameters}}\\
$R_\star$ & 7$\pm$2 R$_\odot$ & \\
$f$ & 1.4$\pm$0.3 & \\
$d$ & 186 pc & this work\\
$i$ & 78$^\circ$$\pm$10$^\circ$ \\
$PA$ & -68$^\circ$$\pm$ 5$^\circ$ \\
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{c}{\textbf{Global kinematic parameters}}\\
$V_\mathrm{rot}$ & 450 $\pm$50 \,km\,s$^{-1}$ &\\
$\beta$ & 0.5 $\pm$0.1 & Keplerian rotation\\
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{c}{\textbf{Continuum disk geometry }}\\
$a_\mathrm{c}$ & 3.4$\pm$1.7 D$_\star$ & = 1.2$\pm$0.6 mas\\
$F_\mathrm{c}$ & 0.14$\pm$0.2 &\\
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{c}{\textbf{H$\alpha$ disk geometry }}\\
$a_\mathrm{H\alpha}$ & 5.9$\pm$1.7 D$_\star$ &= 2.1$\pm$0.6 mas\\
$EW_\mathrm{H\alpha}$ & 19.0$\pm$4.0 $\AA$ &\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The model produces a data cube consisting of narrow spectral band images through the H$\alpha$ line at the instrumental spectral resolution. Visibilities and differential phases for our baseline configurations are then extracted from the data cube and are
compared to the observation using the standard $\chi^2$ method.
Except for the distance, the ten parameters are free and can vary within a range of realistic values. The parameter values for the best-fit model are presented in Table~\ref{model_params}. The reduced $\chi^2$ for this model is 4.0. Interestingly, with this more representative model of the system geometry, the position angle and inclination of the disk is fully compatible with the one found with the MIRC imaging.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig5a.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig5b.pdf}
\caption{Top: 0.65$\mu$m continuum visibility for the best-fit model is plotted as a function of the spatial frequency, whereas the blue zone represents the extent of the model visibility for the various orientations of the baseline. Bottom: examples of differential visibilities and phases (in red + error bar in yellow) for the best-fit model (in blue) for various baselines between 32 and 278m.}
\label{fig:VisVEGA}
\end{figure}
The 0.65$\mu$m continuum-squared visibilities for the best-fit model are plotted as a function of the spatial frequency in Fig~\ref{fig:VisVEGA}, top part. Some examples of differential visibilities and phases for the best-fit model for various baselines between 32 and 278m are plotted in Fig~\ref{fig:VisVEGA}, bottom part. As already explained in \citet{Delaa2011}, phase variations for baselines overresolving the object (i.e., 60m in the major-axis orientation and 200m in the minor-axis one in the case of \object{$\varphi$ Persei}) are only poorly fitted. The jumps seen for some baselines might be either due to inhomogeneity in the disk or to VEGA data reduction biases at very low visibility. We also note that some of the very short baselines show an increase of visibility instead of a drop in the H$\alpha$ line, which corresponds to a smaller object in the line. This effect might be due to the high opacity of the disk seen edge-on and can only be modeled using a radiative transfer code.
\subsection{Spectrally resolved image reconstruction around H$\alpha$}
\label{sec:vegaImage}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=18cm,angle=-90,origin=br]{fig6-1.pdf}\\
\vspace{6 mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\includegraphics[width=5cm]{fig6-2a.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=5cm]{fig6-2b.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=5cm]{fig6-2c.pdf}\\
& \includegraphics[height=6cm]{fig6-3a.pdf}&
\includegraphics[height=6cm]{fig6-3b.pdf}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Top row: sequence of intensity maps (6.4x6.4mas) as a function of wavelength with north up and east left as imaged by VEGA (upper sequence), as computed from the kinematic model in Sect.~\ref{sec:VegaDiff} (middle sequence), and as imaged through a simulated observation of the above model (lower sequence). Middle row: at the left, we present the continuum image convolved to the diffraction limit of VEGA (0.2\,mas) together with contours at 50, 5, 0.5 and 0.05\% of the peak intensity to show the disk contour. The middle and right panels show the selected zones to extract the spectra presented below together with an unconvolved continuum image of the system.
Bottom row: extracted spectra for the different spatial components: 1) Bottom middle: extracted fluxes (top: total flux, pink absorption feature: ``star'' zone, blue emission feature: ``disk'' zone, and dashed spectrum: all other contributions), 2) bottom right: decomposition of the ``disk'' zone: the top spectrum is the total flux. The blue and red lines correspond to the blue- and redshifted emission features, while the central zeroshifted emission feature comes from all other parts of the ``disk'' zone.}
\label{fig:VegaImages}
\end{figure*}
We used the MiRA software \citep{Thiebaut2010} combined with an improved self-calibration method \citep{Millour2011} to reconstruct wavelength-dependent images of \object{$\varphi$ Persei} in the visible wavelength range. The data set contains the broadband $V^2$ defined in Table~\ref{tab:spectro} and the wavelength-dependent differential visibilities and phases, but no closure phases, as previously said. Therefore, the self-calibration method had to be modified. The different steps of our method, and the additions made in this work, are presented in Appendix~\ref{sec:reconstruction}. The so-called \emph{SELF-CAL} software and its documentation are available online\footnote{Available at http://self-cal.oca.eu}.
The image reconstruction leads to an $(x,y,\lambda)$ image cube
that covers a field of view of $6.4$\,mas with 64x64 pixels, a
wavelength range between 646\,nm and 666\,nm with a spectral
resolution of $\approx1640$. This translates into $\approx10$ spectral
channels in the H$\alpha$ emission line.
The images in Fig.~\ref{fig:VegaImages} exhibit little variation of morphology throughout the continuum. They display three prominent features:
\begin{itemize}
\item an elongated central source (the ``star'') that can be
contained in an ellipse with $\approx0.6 \times 0.4$\,mas major and minor axes, and $\approx20^\circ$ position angle for the minor axis,
\item an extended flattened source (the ``disk'') whose extension is
weakly constrained. We can set an upper limit to its size to an ellipse $\approx3.9 \times 1.8$\,mas, and $\approx20^\circ$ position angle of the minor axis,
\item a significant amount of unconstrained flux
($\approx15\%$ of the continuum flux, throughout all wavelengths),
which could be linked to the companion star or to
image-reconstruction artifacts.
\end{itemize}
The images in the emission line are very different from those in the continuum, showing emission that sweeps across the ``disk'' feature. In the upper part of Fig.~\ref{fig:VegaImages}, we compare the spectral images and the maps deduced from the model presented in the previous section. We also provide a set of reconstructed images from simulated data based on the kinematic model.
To extract information from these images from milli-arcsecond
integral-field spectroscopy, we multiplied the
images by the system spectrum (as MiRA provides total-flux-normalized
images) and selected different zones with binary masks to
extract their spectra. The result of this process is shown in the bottom part of Fig.~\ref{fig:VegaImages}.
The ``star'' zone exhibits an absorption spectrum, characteristic of a
stellar spectrum. The ``disk'' zone bears most of the emission of the
system, while the unconstrained flux has a flat spectrum.
The results of the VEGA imaging and model fitting are discussed in general in Sect.~\ref{discussion}.
\section{Discussion}
\label{discussion}
\subsection{Fundamental stellar parameters}
We first consider the dimensions of the binary system.
The astrometric measurements from MIRC (Table~\ref{tab:companionMIRC})
were combined with the radial velocity measurements for the two
components (Table~\ref{tab:rv}) in a joint solution for the binary
orbital elements and distance that is summarized in Table~7. Our derived values of the stellar masses,
$M_a = 9.6 \pm 0.3 M_\odot$ and $M_b = 1.2 \pm 0.2 M_\odot$, agree well with those determined previously by \citet{Gies1998}.
Our distance estimate $d=186 \pm 3$~pc is about $4.2\sigma$ closer than
the estimate from the revised {\it Hipparcos} distance
or $1.1\sigma$ closer than the original {\it Hipparcos} distance.
We note, however, that \object{$\varphi$ Persei} is flagged as ''unsolved variable''
in the {\it Hipparcos} catalog; we could then expect an underestimated
error for the parallax in the revised {\it Hipparcos} catalog.
A knowledge of the distance to \object{$\varphi$ Persei} has consequences
for the size of the Be star. We can estimate the
stellar radius from the predicted angular size and distance.
We first consider the angular size from a comparison from a
of the observed and predicted photospheric fluxes,
a task that is best accomplished in the ultraviolet part of the spectrum
where the circumstellar disk flux is negligible. \citet{Touhami2013} fit the observed UV spectrum of \object{$\varphi$ Persei} using a Kurucz flux model for the adopted temperature (from \citet{Fremat2005}) of the Be star and a standard extinction law (ignoring the small flux contribution of the hot companion), and
they derived a limb-darkened, angular diameter for the Be star
of $0.235 \pm 0.008$ mas. This is similar to the minor-axis diameter
derived from the VEGA broadband observations ($0.18 \pm 0.01$ mas, Table~\ref{tab:litpro}). Then, for an adopted distance of 186 pc, the stellar radius is estimated to be $R_a / R_\odot = 4.7 \pm 0.4$. This is somewhat lower but consistent within error bars to that given in Table~\ref{model_params} and prorated for the adopted lower distance ($R_a / R_\odot = 5.9 \pm 1.7$). The difference may be partially due to the neglect of UV flux scattered away from the line of sight by electron scattering in the inner disk so that the stellar UV flux (and hence angular size) is somewhat higher than estimated from the observed UV spectrum. Furthermore, the estimate of stellar diameter from the VEGA measurements may be influenced by the assumed flux distribution in the disk.
The mass and radius of the Be star match the mass -- radius relationship
for main-sequence stars derived from eclipsing binaries \citep{Torres2010}. Furthermore, the effective temperature $T_{\rm eff} = 29.3$~kK \citep{Gies1998} and luminosity $\log L_a/L_\odot = 4.16 \pm 0.10$ (for $R_a / R_\odot = 4.7$) are consistent with those of eclipsing binary stars of similar mass \citep{Torres2010}. The Be star's rotation rate, however, is exceptional. Adopting the estimate of projected rotational velocity from \citet{Fremat2005}, $V\sin i = 462 \pm 33$ km~s$^{-1}$, we derive a ratio of
equatorial velocity to orbital velocity at the equator \citep{Rivinius2013} of
$(V\sin i / \sin i) / V_{\rm crit} = 0.93 \pm 0.08$ for the
mass and radius given above and an inclination from Table~\ref{tab:MIRCmodel}
(assuming coalignment of the spin and orbital vectors; see below).
Note that we have tacitly assumed that the radius derived from the
UV flux and the distance corresponds to the star's polar radius,
whereas it may represent some value between the polar and (larger)
equatorial radius. For example, if our radius estimate corresponds to
the equatorial radius in a near critical rotation star, then
$R_{\pm polar} = R_a / 1.5$ and $(V\sin i / \sin i) / V_{\rm
crit} = 0.76 \pm 0.08$.
On the other hand, the measured projected velocity may underestimate
the actual value of $V\sin i$ because of gravity darkening
\citep{Townsend2004}. Despite these uncertainties, the clear conclusion is that the Be star is rotating very rapidly. The companion's rotational velocity is low, $v_{\rm rot} \sin i < 10$ km~s$^{-1}$ \citep{Gies1998}.
\citet{Gies1998} derived a radius ratio of $R_b / R_a = 0.20$ from the
observed flux ratio in the ultraviolet spectrum. Adopting the Be star
radius given above, the radius and luminosity of the hot companion
are $R_b / R_\odot = 0.94 \pm 0.09$ and $\log L_b /L_\odot = 3.80 \pm 0.13$
(for $T_{\rm eff} = 53 \pm 3$~kK; \citet{Gies1998}). Thus, although the
Be star is five times larger than the sdO companion, it is only twice as
luminous. In the Rayleigh-Jeans tail of the spectrum in the near-IR, we would expect that the surface flux varies with effective temperature, so the flux ratio would be $F_b / F_a \approx (T_b / Ta)(R_b / R_a)^2$. Based upon the temperature and radius ratios estimated by \citet{Gies1998}, the predicted optical/IR flux ratio is $8\%$. This value is similar to the observed flux ratio in the optical ($F3/F1 = 7.5 \pm 1.7 \%$; Table~\ref{tab:litpro}), but higher than found in the $H$ band ($f_2/f_1 = 2.1 \pm 0.5\%$; Table~\ref{tab:MIRCmodel}). We speculate that the discrepancy is due to obscuration of the sdO companion by circumstellar gas that becomes more significant at longer wavelength (see below).
\subsection{Birthplace and age}
We next consider the possible birthplace and age of \object{$\varphi$ Persei}.
Our derived distance is consistent with that of the nearby \object{$\alpha$~Per} cluster (Melotte 20; Per OB3) at 177 pc \citep{Zeeuw1999}, and
\object{$\varphi$ Persei} is located at a similar angular separation ($15.9^\circ$)
from the cluster center as some of the $\alpha$~Per ``halo stars''
identified by \citet{Zeeuw1999}. Furthermore, the proper motion of \object{$\varphi$ Persei} ($\mu_\alpha \cos \delta = 24.6$ mas~yr$^{-1}$,
$\mu_\delta = -14.0$ mas~yr$^{-1}$; \citealt{leeuw2007b}) is
similar to that of the $\alpha$~Per cluster ($\mu_\alpha \cos \delta = 22.7$ mas~yr$^{-1}$, $\mu_\delta = -26.5$ mas~yr$^{-1}$; \citealt{Lodieu2012}).
Likewise, the systemic radial velocity of \object{$\varphi$ Persei} ($-2.2$ km~s$^{-1}$; Table~7) is similar to the mean value for the $\alpha$~Per cluster ($-1.0$ km~s$^{-1}$; \citealt{Zeeuw1999}). Thus, the distance, position, and kinematical properties of \object{$\varphi$ Persei} suggest that it may be an outlying member of the $\alpha$~Per cluster. If so, then the age of \object{$\varphi$ Persei} is the cluster age, $\approx 52$~Myr \citep{Kharchenko2005,Makarov2006, Lyubimkov2010}. This is much older than the main-sequence lifetime of $\approx 25$~Myr for a $10 M_\odot$ mass star like the Be primary \citep{Brott2011},
which suggests that the Be star attained its high mass relatively recently.
The age of the $\alpha$~Per cluster is consistent with the binary
evolutionary scenario for \object{$\varphi$ Persei}. The \object{$\varphi$ Persei} binary probably
began its life as a pair of $6 M_\odot + 5 M_\odot$ stars with a shorter
orbital period in the range of 7~d \citep{Vanbeveren1998b} to
14~d \citep{Vanbeveren1998}. As the initially more massive star
completed core-hydrogen burning, it expanded and began mass and
angular momentum transfer to the companion. The binary separation
increased following mass ratio reversal, reaching its current state
of wide separation between the stripped-down remnant of the mass donor
(the hot subdwarf star) and the rapidly rotating mass gainer (the Be star).
If we assume that the mass transfer was approximately conservative
(i.e., negligible mass lost from the system), then the progenitor
of the hot subdwarf had a mass at least as high as half the current
total mass of the system ($5.4~M_\odot$; Tab.~7).
Indeed, given the current advanced evolutionary state of the donor as a hot subdwarf star, it must have had an original mass in excess of that for any H-burning star still in the $\alpha$~Per cluster. The most massive star
in the $\alpha$~Per cluster (aside from \object{$\varphi$ Persei}) is $\alpha$~Per itself, with a mass estimated in the range of $6.7 M_\odot$ \citep{Makarov2006} to $7.3 M_\odot$ \citep{Lyubimkov2010}. Thus, the original mass of the donor star was probably $M_{b~{\rm orig}}\approx 7 M_\odot$, so that the mass gainer (Be star) accreted most of the difference $M_{b~{\rm orig}} - M_b \approx 6 M_\odot$
during mass transfer. This wholesale transformation of the mass gainer
led to its current high mass and fast spin, and the Be disk
found today represents the Be star's means to shed its excess
angular momentum. We now know of two other Be plus sdO binaries,
\object{FY~CMa} and \object{59~Cygni}, that share many of the properties of \object{$\varphi$ Persei}
\citep{Peters2013}, and it is probable that other hot companions
of Be stars await discovery \citep{Koubsky2012,Koubsky2014}.
\subsection{Properties of the Be-star disk}
We next consider the properties of the Be star disk.
Interferometric observations have now resolved the disk in
the continuum at several wavelengths. The angular size
derived depends in part on the adopted model for the
flux distribution in the sky, but we list in Table~\ref{tab:interfero}
the results for an assumed uniform disk star and
Gaussian elliptical disk. The Gaussian FWHM along the
disk major axis $\theta_{\rm maj}$ appears to increase with
wavelength from $R$ through $H$ and $K'$ bands as expected
because of the increase in hydrogen free-free opacity with wavelength
that causes the optical depth unity radius to appear larger
when moving into the near-infrared \citep{Touhami2011}.
The H$\alpha$ diameter measured from the VEGA observations
is somewhat smaller than that derived from earlier H$\alpha$ measurements
and is comparable to or lower than the contemporaneous near-IR continuum estimates.
This is surprising given that the H$\alpha$ sizes are generally larger
than the near-IR continuum sizes in most Be stars \citep{Touhami2013}. We note, however, that the H$\alpha$ emission equivalent
width at the time of the VEGA observations ($W_\lambda=-25$\AA)
was much weaker than at some times in the past ($W_\lambda=-46$\AA~ in 2001), and if the disk size scales with the emission strength
\citep{Grundstrom2006}, then the disk dimensions may have
been larger at earlier epochs. It is possible that gravitational
interactions with the companion limit the physical boundary of the
gaseous disk, as occurs in many Be X-ray binaries
\citep{Negueruela2001}.
The interferometric observations indicate that the spin angular momentum axis of the disk is coaligned with the orbital angular momentum axis.
The position angle of the long axis of the projected disk ($PA$ in Tables~\ref{tab:interfero}, \ref{tab:MIRCmodel}, \ref{tab:litpro}, and \ref{model_params}) agrees with the longitude of the ascending node in the astrometric orbital solution ($\Omega$ in Table~7). The position angle of the disk normal ($PA + 90^\circ$) agrees with the intrinsic polarization angle, as expected by \citet{Quirrenbach1997}. Furthermore, the disk inclination derived from the ratio of projected minor to major axis ($i= 75^\circ \pm 9^\circ$ from $r= \cos i$ in Tables~\ref{tab:interfero} and \ref{model_params}) is consistent within errors with the astrometric orbital inclination ($i=77\fdg6 \pm 0\fdg3$ in Table~7). Finally, the sense of the disk rotation (moving away in the northwestern part; Fig.~\ref{fig:VegaImages}) is the same as the sense of orbital motion (Fig.~\ref{fig:diskMIRC}). Thus, we find that
the disk and orbital angular momentum vectors are coaligned, verifying the
prediction from the binary interaction model that the spin-up of the Be star
was caused by mass and angular momentum transfer from the donor companion.
Note that in general we expect that the inclination derived from
the projected shape of the disk will be smaller than actual because of disk flaring that increases the apparent size of the minor axis \citep{Grundstrom2006}, so the small difference we find between inclination estimates from the disk and orbit is probably consistent with some disk flaring. The increase in disk thickness with radius (flaring) means that there will be a range in inclination below $90^\circ$ where the disk may occult our view of the Be star photosphere, and this may explain the presence of narrow ``shell'' lines that are observed in the spectra of some Be stars \citep{Rivinius2013}. \object{$\varphi$ Persei} has a well-observed shell line spectrum, so our inclination estimate would appear to indicate that the disk half-opening angle may amount to as much as $90^\circ - i = 12^\circ$ in this case. Curiously, \citet{Hanuschik1996} used a statistical study of the numbers of Be-shell and normal Be stars to arrive at a similar half-opening angle of $13^\circ$. The agreement may be coincidental, and detailed models of disk line formation show that shell line spectra may form over a wider range below $i=90^\circ$ \citep{Silaj2014}.
Next, we offer a few comments about the surface brightness distribution of
the Be disk. Similar to other investigators, we have used Gaussian elliptical models
for surface brightness because they generally provide good fits of the
interferometric visibility. However, models of the spatial appearance of disk flux often predict more complicated distributions (Fig.~\ref{fig:VegaImages}), and in particular, in models where the circumstellar gas becomes optically thick, the surface brightness distribution appears more or less constant in the parts of the disk close to the photosphere \citep{Gies2007}. Thus, for example, the relatively small minor axis fit to the MIRC observations (Table~\ref{tab:MIRCmodel}) may be partially due to the non-Gaussian appearance of the foreshortened disk brightness distribution (Fig.~\ref{fig:diskMIRC}). It is probably unrealistic to assume that the disk is azimuthally symmetric, because many Be stars including \object{$\varphi$ Persei} display long-lived asymmetries in their emission line profiles that probably form in one-armed spiral structures \citep{Rivinius2013}. The H$\alpha$ profile observed over the time span of the CHARA observations displayed a stronger red than blue peak (see Fig.~8 of \citet{Silaj2010}), which indicates that some asymmetry in the H$\alpha$ disk surface brightness did exist at this time. We note that there is a hint in the H$\alpha$ image reconstructions shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:VegaImages} that the northwestern (redshifted) extension of the disk is slightly brighter than the southeastern extension (blueshifted). The VEGA observations were obtained near orbital phase 0.0 when the companion appears near its northwestern, maximum elongation, and the part of the disk facing the companion may be brighter \citep{Hummel2001}. Thus, the H$\alpha$ interferometry offers tentative evidence for the presence of the surface brightness asymmetries expected from disk density structures and heated zones.
Finally we note that reverse mass transfer from the Be disk to the hot
subdwarf may occur. The fact that the observed circumstellar disk radius appears smaller than the semimajor axis (Fig.~\ref{fig:diskMIRC}) does not necessarily imply that disk gas never reaches the vicinity of the companion. The interferometric observations record the spatial distribution of the brightest parts of the disk emission, and it is possible that lower density and fainter disk gas does extend to the orbit of the companion as it slowly moves outward from the Be star. Indeed, \citet{Hummel2003} argued that the He~I $6678$\AA~ emission extends to the outer edge of the disk at $R_{\rm Roche} / a = 0.56$. We would expect that some of this gas will be captured by the gravitational pull of the companion to form an accretion disk around the subdwarf star. The double-peaked appearance of the He~II $4686$\AA~ emission that forms near the companion may be evidence of such an accretion
disk \citep{Poeckert1981}. It is possible that gas around the
companion may obscure our view of the hot subdwarf star itself,
and the attenuation would increase with wavelength if free-free
processes dominate the continuum opacity. This may explain
why the companion appears fainter than expected in the near-IR.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{conclusion}
Thanks to advanced visible and infrared interferometric instrumentation at the CHARA Array, we have been able to obtain the first high angular resolution images of the Be binary \object{$\varphi$ Persei}, including the first spectrally resolved images in the visible (made with VEGA in four-telescope mode). These images show the highly inclined circumstellar disk surrounding the Be star, and the helium star remnant of the mass donor star is detected for the first time through MIRC observations of its orbital motion.
The relative angular orbital motion of the hot companion was combined with new orbital radial velocity measurements of both components to derive a full, three-dimensional orbit of the binary system. We obtain masses of $9.6 \pm 0.3 M_\odot$ and $1.2 \pm 0.2 M_\odot$ for the Be star primary and subdwarf secondary, respectively. The distance derived from the joint astrometric and spectroscopic solution is $186 \pm 3$~pc. We note that \object{$\varphi$ Persei} shares the same distance, kinematical, and evolutionary properties as members of the $\alpha$~Per star cluster, and if this association is confirmed, then the cluster age will place significant constraints on the initial masses and evolutionary mass transfer processes that transformed the \object{$\varphi$ Persei}
binary system. The Be star (mass gainer) has a mass, radius, and
effective temperature that are typical of an early B-type main-sequence
star, but it is rotating very rapidly ($93 \pm 8 \%$ of the critical rate) as
a consequence of angular momentum gained during past mass transfer. The sdO secondary star (remnant of the mass donor) is fainter in the near-IR than predicted from the FUV flux ratio \citep{Gies1998}, due perhaps to obscuration by circumstellar gas in its vicinity.
The circumstellar gas disk of the Be star primary was resolved in the optical
and near-IR $H$-band, and we estimated the disk flux contributions
in each of the H$\alpha$ emission lines and the optical and near-IR continua. The apparent ellipticity and position angle of the disk in the sky is similar in each band. The size of the disk in the continuum flux is larger at longer wavelength, presumably due to the increasing free-free optical depth of the disk at longer wavelength. The disk appears largest in the spectrally resolved H$\alpha$ observations (Fig.~\ref{fig:VegaImages}), but the visible flux appears to be confined well within the Roche lobe of the Be star. We find that the angular momentum vector of the disk is aligned with and shows the same sense of rotation as the binary orbital angular momentum vector. This agreement confirms the evolutionary prediction that the Be star was spun up by mass transfer in the binary and that this excess angular momentum is now being shed into the Be star disk.
The appearance of the Be disk is presented in the first nonparametric images
reconstructed from the MIRC $H$-band observations (Fig.~\ref{fig:diskMIRC}) and from the spectrally dispersed VEGA observations of H$\alpha$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:VegaImages}). These images reveal the brighter, inner
parts of the disk, and there is some evidence in the spectrally
dispersed H$\alpha$ maps from VEGA of an asymmetry in the azimuthal
light distribution of the circumstellar disk. The northwestern
part of the disk that is moving away from us appears slightly
brighter than the southeastern part that is approaching (Fig.~\ref{fig:VegaImages}),
consistent with the relatively stronger red peak of the H$\alpha$
profile observed at this time. Such asymmetries probably originate
in long-lived disk structures (perhaps a one-armed spiral instability),
and long-baseline interferometric observations now appear to offer
the means of exploring the time evolution of these disk processes.
\begin{acknowledgements}
The CHARA Array is operated with support from the National Science Foundation through grant AST-0908253, the W. M. Keck Foundation, the NASA Exoplanet Science Institute, and from Georgia State University. VEGA is a collaboration between CHARA and OCA-Lagrange/UJF-IPAG/UCBL-CRAL that has been supported by the French programs PNPS and ASHRA, by INSU and by the R\'{e}gion PACA. We acknowledge the use of the electronic database from the CDS, Strasbourg and electronic bibliography maintained by the NASA/ADS system. Part of this material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.~AST-1009080 (DRG) and grants NSF-AST0707927 and NSF-AST1108963 (JDM). We finally warmly thank Dietrich Baade, our referee, for his accurate review.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Statement of the main result}
Dain has proven the inequality $m \geq |J|$ for complete, maximal, asymptotically flat axisymmetric vacuum initial data to the 3+1 dimensional Einstein equation. Here $m$ is the ADM mass associated with the data and $J$ is the conserved angular momenta associated with the $U(1)$ isometry \cite{dain2006proof,Dain:2005vt ,dain2008proof}. A thorough account of this program with references to further generalizations can be found in the review \cite{dain2012geometric}. A natural problem is to investigate whether these results can be generalized to higher dimensions. The area-angular momenta inequalities (see \cite{dain2012geometric} for a survey) have been shown to admit such a generalization in all dimensions $D$ for black holes with $U(1)^{D-3}$ rotational isometries \cite{hollands2012horizon}. Here we will focus on extending mass-angular momenta inequalities in $D=5$, as this is the only other possibility that admits asymptotically flat spacetimes with these isometries.
In previous work \cite{alaee2014mass} we have constructed a mass functional $\mathcal{M}$ valid for a broad class of maximal, asymptotically flat, $U(1)^2$-invariant, $(t-\phi^i)$-symmetric, vacuum initial data. The mass functional evaluates to the ADM mass for this class and is a lower bound for the mass of general biaxisymmetric data. We also showed that the critical points of this mass functional amongst this class of data are precisely the $\mathbb{R} \times U(1)^2$-invariant vacuum solutions of the five-dimensional Einstein equation.
Our result concerns the subset of stationary, biaxisymmetric data that represent maximal slices of extreme black holes. The uniqueness results of Figueras and Lucietti \cite{figueras2010uniqueness} imply that, for fixed angular momenta $J_1,J_2$ and interval structure, there is \emph{at most} one asymptotically flat extreme black hole. We will consider the case where an extreme solution exists. Then for a fixed structure we can write the mass of the extreme black hole as $m_{ext}= f(J_1,J_2)$ for some function $f$ which depends on the interval structure. We have shown (under suitable conditions) that for small variations with fixed angular momenta about the extreme black hole initial data, the mass $m_{ext}$ is a minimum; that is
\begin{equation}
m \geq f(J_1,J_2)
\end{equation}
Note that $m$ could be the mass of a dynamic black hole. This is shown by demonstrating that the extreme black holes are local minima of the mass functional. Of course, \emph{within} the two explicitly known families of stationary black holes, the extreme Myers-Perry \cite{Myers1986} and extreme doubly-spinning black ring \cite{pomeransky2006black} for fixed angular momenta, the extreme member of the family has the minimum mass, as is the case for Kerr. However, for more general interval structure, there is no reason to expect this to occur, or indeed that a non-extreme family of solutions with a given interval structure contains an extreme limit.
We will consider maximal initial data sets for the Einstein vacuum equations that consist of a triple $(\Sigma,h_{ab},K_{ab})$ where $\Sigma$ is complete, simply connected Riemannian manifold with two asymptotic ends, $h_{ab}$ is a Riemannian metric , and $K_{ab}$ is a trace-free symmetric tensor field which satisfies the vacuum constraints
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:constraints}
R_h= K^{ab}K_{ab}\qquad
\bm{\nabla}^bK_{ab}= 0
\end{eqnarray}
where $R_h$ and $\bm{\nabla}$ are the scalar curvature and Levi-Civita connection with respect to $h_{ab}$. Let $m_i$ be Killing vectors generating the $U(1)^2$ symmetry of the data. We have $\mathcal{L}_{m_i} h_{ab} = \mathcal{L}_{m_i} K_{ab} = 0$. We consider the class of metrics of the form
\begin{equation}\label{htphi}
h_{ab}=e^{2v}\tilde{h}_{ab}\qquad \tilde{h}_{ab}=e^{2U}\left(\text{d}\rho^2+\text{d} z^2\right)+\lambda'_{ij}\text{d}\phi^i\text{d}\phi^j
\end{equation}
where $U = U(\rho,z)$ is a smooth function, $\lambda'=[\lambda'_{ij}]$ is a positive definite $2\times 2$ symmetric metric with $\det\lambda'=\rho^2$ and $\phi^i$ are coordinates with periodicity $2\pi$ adapted to the Killing vectors $m_i$. Note that we assume that the action of the $U(1)^2$ isometry is orthogonally transitive. We expect that this assumption can be removed~\cite{dain2008proof}. (Of course, if the data arises from a \emph{stationary} spacetime, this assumption can be removed).
In the following we will \emph{not} assume the data is $t-\phi^i$ symmetric. Rather, we restrict attention to metrics of the form \eqref{htphi} but we allow for general axisymmetric extrinsic curvature. As has been proved in \cite{alaee2014mass}, one can always decompose $K_{ab}$ as
\begin{equation} \label{decomposition}
K_{ab} = \mathcal{K}_{ab} + H_{ab}
\end{equation} where $\mathcal{K}_{ab}$ is the $t-\phi^i$-symmetric part of the extrinsic curvature. Recall that $(t-\phi^i)$-symmetry implies that under the diffeomorphism $\phi^i \to -\phi^i$, we have $h_{ab} \to h_{ab}, \mathcal{K}_{ab} \to -\mathcal{K}_{ab}$ \cite{alaee2014mass}.
We now briefly review the construction of the mass functional which is defined for $t-\phi^i$ symmetric data $(\Sigma,h,\mathcal{K})$. Since $\mathcal{K}_{ab}$ is automatically traceless, using the divergence-less condition and the property $\Sigma$ is simply connected \cite{alaee2014small}, we can express $\tilde{K}_{ab}=e^{2v}\mathcal{K}_{ab}$ in a compact form. Define two scalar potentials $Y^i$ and one-forms
\begin{equation}
S^i = \frac{1}{2 \det \lambda'} i_{m_1} i_{m_2} \star \text{d} Y^i
\end{equation} Note $\text{d} \star S^i = 0$. Then an \emph{arbitrary} divergenceless $t-\phi^i$-symmetric extrinsic curvature can be expressed as \cite{alaee2014small}
\begin{equation}\label{exttphi}
\tilde{K}_{ab}=\frac{2}{\det\lambda'}\Bigg[\left(\lambda'_{22} S^1{}_{(a}m_1{}_{b)}-\lambda'_{12}S^2{}_{(a}m_1{}_{b)}\right)+\left(\lambda'_{11} S^2{}_{(a}m_2{}_{b)}-\lambda'_{12}S^1{}_{(a}m_2{}_{b)}\right)\Bigg].
\end{equation} Hence for $(t-\phi^i)$ symmetric initial data, the extrinsic curvature is completely characterized by the scalar potentials $Y^i$ as well as the metric functions $\lambda'_{ij}$. One can show \cite{alaee2014small} that these potentials are simply the pull-backs of the spacetime twist potentials defined in the usual way, i.e. $\text{d} Y^i = \star_5(m_1 \wedge m_2 \wedge \text{d} m_i)$. Moreover, these potentials are related to the angular momenta of the data by
\begin{equation}
J_i=\frac{\pi}{4}\left[Y^i(\rho=0,z)-Y^i(\rho=0,-z)\right]
\end{equation}
In terms of the conformal data $(\tilde{h}_{ab},\tilde{K}_{ab},v)$ the constraint equations reduce to the Lichnerowiscz equation for $v$:
\begin{gather}
\Delta_{\tilde{h}}\Phi-\frac{1}{6} R_{\tilde h}\Phi +\frac{1}{6}\tilde{K}_{ab}\tilde{K}^{ab}\Phi^{-5}=0.\label{eq:Lich}
\end{gather} where $\Phi = e^{2v}$.
\begin{remark}\cite{alaee2014mass} Let $(\Sigma,h,\mathcal{K})$ be an asymptotically flat, $(t-\phi^i)$-symmetric, vacuum initial data set. Such data can be completely characterized by $\Sigma$, its $U(1)^2$ action, and a triple $u = (v,\lambda',Y)$ where $v$ is a scalar, $\lambda'$ is a positive definite symmetric matrix with determinant $\rho^2$, and $Y=(Y^1,Y^2)^t$ is a column vector (the function $U$ is found by solving a Poisson equation arising from \eqref{eq:Lich}). We will denote such data simply by $(\Sigma,u)$. \label{tphiremark}
\end{remark}
Let $\rho$, $z$, $\phi$ be cylindrical coordinates in Euclidean $\mathbb{R}^3$ with metric $\delta_3=\text{d}\rho^2+\text{d} z^2+\rho^2\text{d}\phi^2$. Note all functions only depend on $\rho$ and $z$. Then by \cite{alaee2014mass} we have the following mass functional defined for $(\Sigma,u)$
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{M}(u)=\frac{1}{8}\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\left(-\frac{\det\nabla\lambda'}{2\rho^2}+e^{-6v}\frac{\nabla Y^t\lambda'^{-1}\nabla Y}{2\rho^2}+6\left(\nabla v\right)^2\right)\, \, \text{d}\Sigma-\frac{\pi}{4}\sum_{\text{rods}}\int_{I_i}\log V_i\,\text{d} z
\end{eqnarray}
where $\text{d}\Sigma=\rho\,\text{d}\rho\text{d} z\text{d}\phi$ and $\nabla$ are respectively the volume element and connection with respect to $\delta_3$, and $V_i$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
V_i(z)=\lim_{\rho\to 0}\frac{2\sqrt{\rho^2+z^2}\lambda'_{ij}w^iw^j}{\rho^2},\qquad z\in I_i=(a_i,a_{i+1}),\quad w^i\in\mathbb{Z}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda'_{ij}w^j = O(\rho^2)$ as $\rho \to 0$ with $w=w^i\frac{\partial}{\partial\phi_i}$ is the Killing vector vanishing on the rod $I_i$ Note that $\phi$ is an auxiliary coordinate with period $2\pi$ and the functional can be defined over the orbit space $\mathcal{B}\cong\Sigma/U(1)^2$ \cite{alaee2014mass}. $\mathcal{B}$ is a two-dimensional manifold with boundary and corners \cite{hollands2008uniqueness} and the boundary and asymptotic conditions on the various functions which parametrize the data are given in Section II of \cite{alaee2014mass}. We record them here for convenience.
To understand the decay in the asymptotic regions, we define new coordinates
\begin{equation}
x \equiv \frac{z}{\sqrt{\rho^2 + z^2}}\; , \qquad r \equiv \left[2\sqrt{\rho^2+z^2}\right]^{1/2}
\end{equation} where $x \in [-1,1]$ and $r \in (0,\infty)$. Observe that $\delta_3 = r^2(\text{d} r^2 +\tfrac{r^2}{4}[ (1-x^2)^{-1} \text{d} x^2 + (1-x^2)\text{d} \phi^2])$. Note the boundary $\rho=0$ corresponds to $x= \pm 1$ and $r \to 0$ corresponds to an asymptotic end which can be either asymptotically flat or cylindrical whereas $r \to \infty$ corresponds to the asymptotically flat end where the ADM mass is defined. We require:
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item as $r\to\infty$
\begin{gather}
v=o_{1}(r^{-1}),\quad\lambda'_{ij}-\sigma_{ij}=\frac{f_{il}\sigma_{lj}}{r^2}+\sigma_{ij}o_1(r^{-2}),\label{Asympvf}\\
V=\frac{\bar{V}(x)}{r^2}+o_1(r^{-2}),\quad \int_{-1}^1\bar{V}(x)\,\text{d} x=0.\label{AsympV}
\end{gather}
where $\sigma_{ij}=\frac{r^2}{2}\text{diag}\left(1+x,1-x\right)$ and $f_{ij}$ is a diagonal matrix with $\text{Tr}(f_{ij})=0$. This implies that the geometry approaches the flat metric on $\mathbb{R}^4$ at large $r$.
\item As $r\to 0$ for an asymptotically flat end we have
\begin{gather}
v=-2\log (r)+o_{1}(1),\quad\lambda'_{ij}-\sigma_{ij}=f_{il}\sigma_{lj}r^2+\sigma_{ij}o_1(r^{2}),\\
V=\bar{V}(x)r^2+o_1(r^{2}),\quad \int_{-1}^1\bar{V}(x)\,\text{d} x=0.\label{End1}
\end{gather}
\item As $r\to 0$ for an asymptotically cylindrical end with topology $\mathbb{R}^+\times N$ where $N\cong S^3,S^1\times S^2, L(p,q)$ we have
\begin{gather}
v=-\log (r)+o_{1}(r^{1}),\quad\lambda'_{ij}-\bar{\sigma}_{ij}=o_1(r^{2}),\quad
V=O_1(1)\label{End2}
\end{gather}
where $h^c=e^{2V} \frac{ \text{d} x^2}{4(1-x^2)}+\bar{\sigma}_{ij}\text{d}\phi^i\text{d}\phi^j$ is the metric on $N$.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{remark} \label{remark1} The mass functional is defined for $t-\phi^i$ symmetric data $(\Sigma,u)$ and it equals the ADM mass. The ADM mass of \emph{general} initial data $(\Sigma,h,K)$ satisfies \cite{alaee2014mass}
\begin{equation}
m \geq \mathcal{M}(u)
\end{equation} where $u = (v,\lambda',Y)$ is constructed from the corresponding $\mathcal{K}_{ab}$ associated to $K_{ab}$ by the decomposition \eqref{decomposition}. The equality is achieved if and only if the original initial data set is $t-\phi^i$ symmetric.
\end{remark}
From now on we restrict attention to the mass functional, as it is a lower bound for the mass of our original initial data. We set $\varphi=(\bar{v},\bar{\lambda}', \bar{Y})$ where $\bar{\lambda'}$ is a symmetric $2 \times 2$ matrix such that $\det\bar{\lambda'}=0$. As will be explained in following sections, $\varphi$ will represent a perturbation about some fixed initial data $u_0$ defined in Definition \ref{Def1} . This should consist of five free degrees of freedom, and the apparent restriction $\det\bar{\lambda'} =0$ is simply a gauge choice. Let $\Omega$ be a (unbounded) domain and we introduce the following weighted spaces of $C^1$ functions with norm
\begin{equation}
\norm{f}_{C^1_{\beta}(\Omega)}=\sup_{x\in \Omega}\{\sigma^{-\beta}\abs{f}+\sigma^{-\beta+1}\abs{\nabla f}\}
\end{equation} is finite
with $\beta<-1$ and $\sigma=\sqrt{r^2+1}$ and for a column vector and a matrix we define respectively
\begin{equation}
\abs{\bar{Y}} \equiv \left(\bar{Y}^t \lambda'^{-1}_0 \bar{Y}\right)^{1/2}\;, \quad
\abs{\bar{\lambda}'} \equiv \left(\text{Tr}\left[\bar{\lambda}'^t\bar{\lambda}'\right]\right)^{1/2}
\end{equation}
Let $\rho_0> 0$ be a constant and $K_{\rho_0}$ be the cylinder $\rho\leq \rho_0$ in $\mathbb{R}^3$. We define the domain $\Omega_{\rho_0}=\mathbb{R}^3 \backslash K_{\rho_0}$. The perturbation $\bar{Y}$ and $\bar{\lambda}$ are assumed to vanish in $K_{\rho_0}$. This is consistent with the physical requirement that the
perturbations keep fixed the angular momenta $J_i$ and fixed orbit space. The Banach space $B$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
\norm{\varphi}_{B}=\norm{\bar{v}}_{C^1_{\beta}(\mathbb{R}^3)}+\norm{\bar{\lambda}'}_{C^1_{\beta}(\Omega_{\rho_0})}+\norm{\bar{Y}}_{C^1_{\beta}(\Omega_{\rho_0})}
\end{equation}
Now we define the class of extreme data. Note that we will denote non-negative constants which depend on parameters of data such as mass and angular momenta by $C$, $C_i$, and $C'$.
\begin{Def}\label{Def1}
The set of \emph{extreme class} $E$ is the collection of data arising from extreme, asymptotically flat, $\mathbb{R}\times U(1)^2$ invariant black holes which consist of triples $u_0 = (v_0,\lambda'_0,Y_0)$ where $v_0$ is a scalar, $\lambda'_0=[\lambda_{ij}]$ is a positive definite $2\times 2$ symmetric matrix, and $Y_0$ is a column vector with the following bounds for $\rho\leq r^2$
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\frac{\nabla Y_0^t\lambda^{-1}_0\nabla Y_0}{X_0}\leq Cr^{-4}$ and $e^{-2v_0}\frac{\nabla Y_0^t\lambda^{-1}_0\nabla Y_0}{X_0}\leq Cr^{-2}$ in $\mathbb{R}^3$
where $\lambda_0=e^{2v_0}\lambda'_0$
\item $C_1\rho I_{2\times 2}\leq\lambda_{0}\leq C_2 \rho I_{2\times 2}$ and $C_3\rho^{-1}I_{2\times 2}\leq\lambda^{-1}_{0}\leq C_4\rho^{-1}I_{2\times 2}$ in $\Omega_{\rho_0}$
\item $\rho^2\leq X_0$ in $\mathbb{R}^3$ where $X_0=\det\lambda_0$ and $X_0^2\leq C' \rho^4$ in $\Omega_{\rho_0}$ where $\lim_{\rho_0\to 0}C'=\infty$
\item $\abs{\nabla v_0}^2\leq C r^{-4}$, $\abs{\nabla\ln X_0}^2\leq C\rho^{-2}$ in $\mathbb{R}^3$ and $\abs{\nabla\lambda_0\lambda^{-1}_0}^2\leq C\rho^{-2}$ in $\Omega_{\rho_0}$
\end{enumerate}
\end{Def}
The choice of these bounds are consistent with the two known extreme black holes initial data, extreme Myers-Perry and extreme doubly spinning black ring. These inequalities are difficult to prove directly because the expressions in terms of the $(\rho,z)$ coordinates are unwieldy. However, we have checked numerically that these bounds hold for a wide range of parameters for these two cases. It is possible that there exists an extreme data which has slightly different bounds (i.e. this would correspond to another extreme black hole with different orbit space). In that case we expect the arguments used in the proof of theorem \ref{main theorem} can be extended to take into account these different estimates.
Note that by what has been proved in \cite{alaee2014mass}, $\mathcal{M}$ evaluated on the extreme class is non-negative and given by
\begin{equation}\label{massextreme}
\mathcal{M}_{\text{cp}}=\frac{3}{8}\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}e^{-6v_0}\frac{\abs{\nabla Y_0}^2 }{2\rho^2}\, \,\text{d} \Sigma
\end{equation}
where $\abs{\nabla Y_0}^2=\nabla Y_0^t\lambda'^{-1}_{0}\nabla Y_0$. Now denote an extreme data of this class by $u_0 = (v_0,\lambda'_0,Y_0)\in E$. Then we have the following result
\begin{thm}\label{main theorem} $\phantom{Next line}$
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item Let $\varphi=(\bar{v},\bar{\lambda}', \bar{Y}) \in B$ where $B$ is the Banach space defined above and $u_0=({v}_0,{\lambda}_0',{Y_0})\in E$ is extreme data with fixed $\mathcal{B}$. Then the functional $\mathcal{M}:B\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ has a strict local
minimum at $u_0$. That is, there exists $\epsilon>0$ such that
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}(u_0+\varphi)>\mathcal{M}(u_0)
\end{equation}
for all $\varphi\in B$ with $\norm{\varphi}_{B}<\epsilon$ and $\varphi\neq 0$.
\item Let $(\Sigma,h_{ab},K_{ab})$ be an asymptotically flat, maximal, $U(1)^2$-invariant, vacuum initial data with mass $m$ and angular momenta $J_1$ and $J_2$ and fixed orbit space $\mathcal{B}$ such that the data satisfies the boundary conditions given by \eqref{Asympvf}-\eqref{End2}. Let $u = (v,\lambda',Y)$ describe the associated $t-\phi^i$ symmetric data as in Remark \ref{remark1} and write $u = u_0 + \varphi$ where $u_0$ is extreme data with the same $J_1,J_2$ and orbit space $\mathcal{B}$. If $\varphi$ is sufficiently small (as in (a)) then
\begin{equation}
m\geq f(J_1,J_2) = \mathcal{M}(u_0)
\end{equation} for some $f$ which depends on the orbit space $\mathcal{B}$. Moreover, $m=f(J_1,J_2)$ for data $(\Sigma,h,K)$ in a neighbourhood if and only if the data are extreme data.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\noindent For the sake of illustration we mention two special cases of the theorem.
\begin{enumerate}
\item In dimension 5, a possible horizon topology is $H\cong S^3$. Consider fixed angular momenta $J_1$ and $J_2$ and fixed orbit space $\tilde{\mathcal{B}}$ consisting of a finite timelike interval (the event horizon) and two semi-infinite spacelike intervals extending to asymptotic infinity (representing rotation axes). Then the orbit space of the slice will be $\mathcal{B} \cong \tilde{\mathcal{B}}\backslash \{\text{horizon interval}\}$ which corresponds to slice topology $\Sigma\cong\mathbb{R}\times S^3$ \cite{alaee2014notes,alaee2014mass}. By the uniqueness theorem \cite{figueras2010uniqueness} extreme Myers-Perry solution is the unique solution with this orbit space and fixed angular momenta. Thus there exists $f(x,y)=3\left[\frac{\pi}{32}(\abs{x}+\abs{y})^2\right]^{1/3}$ such that mass of extreme Myers-Perry is equal to $f(J_1,J_2)$. Then by theorem \ref{main theorem} mass of any asymptotically flat, maximal, biaxisymmetric data sufficiently close (in the sense made precise above) with the same interval structure and angular momenta is greater than $f(J_1,J_2)$.
\item Now consider the horizon topology $H\cong S^2\times S^1$. Consider fixed angular momenta $J_1$ and $J_2$ and fixed orbit space $\tilde{\mathcal{B}}$ consisting a finite timelike interval, a finite spatial interval, and two semi-infinite intervals extending to asymptotic infinity. Then the orbit space of the slice will be $\mathcal{B} \cong \tilde{\mathcal{B}}\backslash \{\text{horizon interval}\}$ which corresponds to slice topology $\Sigma\cong S^2\times B^2\#\mathbb{R}^4$ \cite{alaee2014notes,alaee2014mass}. By the uniqueness theorem \cite{figueras2010uniqueness} the extreme doubly spinning black ring is the unique solution with orbit space $\tilde{\mathcal{B}}$ and fixed angular momenta. Thus there exist $f(x,y)=3\left[\frac{\pi}{4}\abs{x}(\abs{y}-\abs{x})\right]^{1/3}$\footnote{In \cite{alaee2014mass} there is a typo in equation (2). The correct expression is $M^3=\frac{27\pi}{4}J_1(J_2-J_1)$} such that mass of extreme doubly spinning black rings is equal to $f(J_1,J_2)$. Then by theorem \ref{main theorem} the mass of any asymptotically flat, maximal, biaxisymmetric data with the same orbit structure and fixed angular momenta is greater than $f(J_1,J_2)$.
\end{enumerate}
Theorem \ref{main theorem} is a local inequality which should be satisfied for a wide class of (possibly dynamical) black holes with a fixed interval structure with a geometry sufficiently near an extreme black hole. One may expect to prove a global result showing that this inequality holds all data with fixed $J_1,J_2$ and $\mathcal{B}$. Such a global inequality has been proved in the electrovacuum in 3+1 dimensions \cite{chrusciel2009mass,dain2008proof}. A major obstacle to extending this result to the present case is showing positivity of $\mathcal{M}$ for arbitrary interval structures consistent with asymptotic flatness. However, for a class of interval structures (including Myers-Perry black hole initial data) one can show $\mathcal{M} \geq 0$ \cite{alaee2014mass}. We are currently investigating whether a global inequality can be demonstrated in this particular setting. In this context, it is worth noting that $\mathbb{R} \times U(1)^2$-invariant vacuum spacetimes can be cast as harmonic maps from the orbit space to $SL(3,\mathbb{R}) / SO(3)$ \cite{hollands2008uniqueness}. The target space metric is easily checked to be Einstein with negative curvature (it is not conformally flat). This can be contrasted with the four-dimensional case where the $\mathbb{R} \times U(1)$-invariant vacuum solutions are harmonic maps to $SL(2,\mathbb{R})/SO(2) \cong \mathbb{H}^2$ equipped with its standard Einstein metric.
Another open problem is to generalize this theorem to include multiple asymptotic ends, corresponding to multiple black holes \cite{chrusciel2008mass}.
The proof of theorem \ref{main theorem} is given in Section \ref{proof}. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{critical} we find critical points of $\mathcal{M}$ and we prove uniform continuity of a one parameter family of functionals obtained from $\mathcal{M}$ and denoted by $\mathcal{E}_{\varphi}(t)$. In Section \ref{Carter} we will use a Carter-type identity (a linearized version of Mazur's identity) to derive an identity for five dimensional spacetimes and we use this identity to prove positivity of the second variation of $\mathcal{E}_{\varphi}(t)$ at $t=0$. Finally, we prove a coercive condition for the second variation $\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(0)$. This is sufficient to demonstrate that $u_0$ is a strict minimum for $\mathcal{M}$.
\section{Critical points of the mass functional $\mathcal{M}$}\label{critical}
In this section we will study the properties of second variation of mass functional $\mathcal{M}$. Let $\varphi\in B$ and consider the real-value function
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{E}_{\varphi}(t)\equiv \mathcal{M}(u_0+t\varphi)
\end{equation}
and we assume
\begin{equation}
(v,\lambda',Y)\equiv(v(t),\lambda'(t),Y(t))=(v_0+t\bar{v},\lambda'_0+t\bar{\lambda}',Y_0+t\bar{Y})\label{relation1}
\end{equation}
where $\det\lambda'=\rho^2$. This choice for determinant of $\lambda'$ requires that $\det\bar{\lambda}=0$. Moreover we have
\begin{equation}
\lambda\equiv \lambda (t)=e^{2v}\lambda'(t)\qquad X\equiv X(t)=e^{4v}\rho^2\label{relation2}
\end{equation}
and $X_0=X(0)$. Then the first variation is
{\small\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{E}'_{\varphi}(t)&=&\frac{1}{8}\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\Bigg[12\nabla v.\nabla\bar{v}+\frac{e^{-6v}}{2\rho^4}\Bigg[\nabla Y^t\text{adj}(\bar{\lambda'})\nabla Y+2\nabla Y^t\text{adj}(\lambda')\nabla\bar{Y}-6\bar{v}\nabla Y^t\text{adj}(\lambda')\nabla Y\Bigg]\nonumber\\
&-&\frac{1}{2\rho^2}\text{Tr}\left(\text{adj}(\nabla\bar{\lambda'})\nabla\lambda'\right)\Bigg]\,d\Sigma
\end{eqnarray}}
The critical points of this variation ($\mathcal{E}'_\phi(0) =0$) in \cite{alaee2014mass} are given by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{EL1}
G_X&\equiv&4\Delta_3v+\frac{\nabla Y^t{\lambda}^{-1}\nabla{Y}}{X} = 0\\ \label{EL2}
G&\equiv&\nabla\cdot\left(\frac{\nabla\lambda'}{\rho^2}\right)+\frac{e^{2v}}{X^2}\nabla Y\nabla Y^t = 0\\ \label{EL3}
G_Y&\equiv&\nabla\cdot\left(\frac{\lambda^{-1}\nabla Y}{X}\right) = 0
\end{eqnarray}
On the other hand, the vacuum field equations for a $\mathbb{R} \times U(1)^2$-invariant spacetime are \cite{figueras2010uniqueness}
\begin{gather}\label{fieldeqns}
\begin{aligned}
G_{\lambda}&\equiv \nabla\cdot \left(\lambda^{-1}\nabla\lambda\right)+\frac{\lambda^{-1}}{X}\nabla Y\cdot\nabla Y^t = 0\\
G_{Y}&=\nabla\cdot \left(\frac{\lambda^{-1}}{X}\nabla Y\right) = 0
\end{aligned}
\end{gather}
where $G_X=\text{Tr}\left(G_{\lambda}\right)$. It is straightforward to show these field equations \eqref{fieldeqns} are equivalent to critical points (\ref{EL1})-(\ref{EL3}) of $\mathcal{E}_{\varphi}$. This shows the critical points of the mass functional are the same as the stationary, biaxisymmetric vacuum solutions \cite{alaee2014mass} (written in spacetime Weyl coordinates with orbit space $\tilde{\mathcal{B}}$). However, for non-extreme black holes, this chart only covers the exterior region of the black hole spacetime and the manifold has an interior boundary. In particular in these coordinates the mass functional is singular on the inner boundary. One can always find quasi-isotropic coordinates on the initial data slice $\Sigma$ to complete the manifold and compute the mass, but then the resulting geometry is \emph{not} a critical point of $\mathcal{M}$. But for extreme black holes, the usual spacetime Weyl coordinates and quasi-isotropic coordinates coincide, and the mass functional is well defined on these critical points. This point is discussed in more detail\footnote{We thank S Dain for clarifying this point.} in \cite{dain2006variational} and {\cite{alaee2014mass}}.
A calculation yields the second variation
{\small\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(t)&=&\frac{1}{8}\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\Bigg(12\left(\nabla\bar{v}\right)^2-\frac{\det\nabla\bar{\lambda'}}{\rho^2}+\frac{e^{-6 v}}{\rho^4}\Bigg[2\nabla Y^t\text{adj}(\bar{\lambda'})\nabla{\bar{Y}}+\nabla \bar{Y}^t\text{adj}(\lambda')\nabla{\bar{Y}}\nonumber\\
&-&6\bar{v}\nabla Y^t\text{adj}(\bar{\lambda'})\nabla Y-12\bar{v}\nabla Y^t\text{adj}(\lambda')\nabla\bar{Y}+18\bar{v}^2\nabla Y^t\text{adj}(\lambda')\nabla Y\Bigg]
\Bigg)\,d\Sigma
\end{eqnarray}}
Note that the integrand of the functional $\mathcal{M}$ is singular at $\rho=0$. However, we have defined the Banach space $B$ only for functions $\bar{Y}$ and $\bar{\lambda}'$ with support in $\Omega_{\rho_0}$. Therefore, the domain of integration of the terms in which $\nabla \bar{Y}$ and $\nabla\bar{\lambda'}$ appear are in fact $\Omega_{\rho_0}$ and hence the integrand is regular for those terms.
We now introduce axillary Hilbert spaces $\mathcal{H}_i$, which is defined in terms of the weighted Sobolev spaces
\begin{eqnarray}
\norm{\bar{v}}^2_{\mathcal{H}_1}&=&\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\abs{\nabla\bar{v}}^2 r^{-2}\text{d}\Sigma+\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\abs{\bar{v}}^2r^{-4}\text{d}\Sigma\\
\norm{\bar{\lambda}'}^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}&=&\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\abs{\nabla\bar{\lambda}'}^2\rho^{-2}\text{d}\Sigma+\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\abs{\bar{\lambda}'}^2\rho^{-4}\text{d}\Sigma\\
\norm{\bar{Y}}^2_{\mathcal{H}_3}&=&\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\abs{\nabla\bar{Y}}^2\rho^{-2}\text{d}\Sigma+\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\abs{\bar{Y}}^2\rho^{-4}\text{d}\Sigma
\end{eqnarray}
and its corresponding inner products. The following auxiliary Hilbert space for $\phi$ with norm defined by
\begin{equation}
\norm{\varphi}_{\mathcal{H}}^{2}=\norm{\bar{v}}^2_{\mathcal{H}_1}+\norm{\bar{\lambda}}^2_{\mathcal{H}_2}+\norm{\bar{Y}}^2_{\mathcal{H}_3},
\end{equation}
with its corresponding inner product. We have $B\subset \mathcal{H}$ and the following P\'oincare inequalities
\begin{lemma}\label{Poincare}
Let $\varphi\in\mathcal{H}$ and $\delta\neq 0$ is a real number . Then
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item $\abs{\delta}^{-2}\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\abs{\nabla\bar{v}}^2r^{-2\delta-1}\text{d}\Sigma\geq
\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\abs{\bar{v}}^2r^{-2\delta-3}\text{d}\Sigma$
\item $\abs{\delta}^{-2}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\abs{\nabla\bar{\lambda}'}^2\rho^{-2\delta}\text{d}\Sigma\geq
\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\abs{\bar{\lambda}'}^2\rho^{-2\delta-2}\text{d}\Sigma$
\item $2\abs{\delta}^{-2}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\nabla\bar{Y}^t\nabla\bar{Y}\rho^{-3\delta}\text{d}\Sigma\geq
3\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\bar{Y}^t\bar{Y}\rho^{-3\delta-2}\text{d}\Sigma$
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item The proof of this part is similar to Theorem 1.3 of \cite{bartnik1986mass}.
\item The proof of part (b) is as following. We know for any symmetric matrices $\bar{\lambda}$ we have
\begin{equation}
\abs{\bar{\lambda}'}^2=\bar{\lambda}'^2_{11}+\bar{\lambda}'^2_{22}+2\bar{\lambda}'^2_{12}
\end{equation}
Let $\Delta_3$ be Laplace operator respect to $\delta_3$ on $\mathbb{R}^3$.
\begin{equation}
\Delta_3(\ln \rho)=0
\end{equation}
Then for each one of these functions, $\bar{\lambda}'_{ij}$ and by integrating over $\Omega_{\rho_0}$ and integrating by parts,
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\nabla\left(\rho^{-2\delta}\bar{\lambda}'^2_{ij}\right)\nabla\left(\ln\rho\right)\text{d}\Sigma=0
\end{equation}
Now if we expand the derivatives in the integrand and use H\"older inequality we have
\begin{equation}
\abs{\delta}^{-2}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\abs{\nabla\bar{\lambda'}_{ij}}^2\rho^{-2\delta}\text{d}\Sigma\geq
\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\abs{\bar{\lambda}'_{ij}}^2\rho^{-2\delta-2}\text{d}\Sigma
\end{equation}
Then we have the following inequality
\begin{equation}
\abs{\delta}^{-2}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\abs{\nabla\bar{\lambda}'}^2\rho^{-2\delta}\text{d}\Sigma\geq
\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\abs{\bar{\lambda}'}^2\rho^{-2\delta-2}\text{d}\Sigma
\end{equation}
\item Proof is similar to part (b).
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{uniformlemma} Let $\varphi\in B$ and $0<t<1$, then
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item The function $\mathcal{E}_{\varphi}(t)$ is $C^2$ in the $t$ variable.
\item For every $\epsilon>0$ there exist $\eta(\epsilon)$ such that for
$\norm{\varphi}_{B}< \eta(\epsilon)$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{uc}
\abs{\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(t)-\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(0)}\leq\epsilon\norm{\varphi}^2_{\mathcal{H}}
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item
To show $\mathcal{E}_{\varphi}(t)$ is $C^2$ it is enough to to show the third derivatives exists for all $t$. First we have
{\small\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{E}'''_{\varphi}(t)&=&\frac{1}{8}\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\frac{e^{-6 v}}{\rho^4}\Bigg(3\nabla\bar{Y}^t\text{adj}(\bar{\lambda'})\nabla{{Y}}
-42\bar{v}\nabla\bar{Y}^t\text{adj}(\bar{\lambda'})\nabla{\bar{Y}}
-12\bar{v}\nabla\bar{Y}^t\text{adj}(\lambda')\nabla{\bar{Y}}\nonumber\\
&+&108\bar{v}^2\nabla{Y}^t\text{adj}(\bar{\lambda'})\nabla{ Y}
+144\bar{v}^2\nabla{Y}^t\text{adj}(\lambda')\nabla{\bar{Y}}
-216\bar{v}^3\nabla{Y}^t\text{adj}(\lambda')\nabla{ Y}
\Bigg)\,\text{d}\Sigma\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}}
Note $\nabla\bar{Y}^i$ and $\bar{\lambda}'$ have compact support in $\Omega_{\rho_0}$. Therefore, by parts 1 and 2 of Definition \ref{Def1} and relation $\text{adj}\bar{\lambda}'=-\frac{1}{\rho^2}\text{adj}{\lambda}'_0\bar{\lambda}'\text{adj}\lambda'_0$ and $\det\bar{\lambda}'=0$ it is straightforward but tedious to show that all terms are bounded by the norm $B$. The only term with different domain is
\begin{equation}
-\frac{216\bar{v}^3}{X_0}\nabla{Y}_0^t\lambda^{-1}_0\nabla{Y}_0
\end{equation}
which is bounded on $\mathbb{R}^3$ by part 1 of Definition \ref{Def1}. Then $\mathcal{E}_{\varphi}(t)$ is $C^2$.
\item First by integrand of $\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(t)$ we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(t)-\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(0)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\left(A_1|_{0}^t+...+A_6|_{0}^t\right)\,\text{d}\Sigma
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
A_1&=&18\frac{e^{-6v}\bar{v}^2}{\rho^4}\nabla Y_0^t\text{adj}\lambda'_0\nabla Y_0\qquad A_2=\frac{e^{-6v}}{\rho^4}(18\bar{v}^2t-6\bar{v})\nabla {Y}^t_0\text{adj}\bar{\lambda}'\nabla Y_0\nonumber\\
A_3&=&\frac{e^{-6v}}{\rho^4}(36\bar{v}^2t-12\bar{v})\nabla \bar{Y}^t\text{adj}{\lambda}'_0\nabla Y_0\qquad
A_4=\frac{e^{-6v}}{\rho^4}(18\bar{v}^2t^2-12\bar{v}t+1)\nabla \bar{Y}^t\text{adj}\lambda'_0\nabla\bar{Y}\nonumber\\
A_5&=&\frac{e^{-6v}}{\rho^4}(36\bar{v}^2t^2-24\bar{v}t^2+2)\nabla \bar{Y}^t\text{adj}\bar{\lambda}'\nabla{Y}_0\qquad
A_6=\frac{e^{-6v}}{\rho^4}(18\bar{v}^2t^3-18\bar{v}t^2+3t)\nabla \bar{Y}^t\text{adj}\bar{\lambda}'\nabla\bar{Y}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
All of these terms satisfy \eqref{uc} by similar steps as in \cite{dain2006proof}. We will explicitly give the proof for $A_1,A_2,A_3$ as the arguments are similar but tedious. First we have
\begin{gather}\label{barv}
\abs{\bar{v}}\leq \sigma^{\beta}\norm{\bar{v}}_{C^1_{\beta}(\mathbb{R}^3)}\leq \norm{\bar{v}}_{C^1_{\beta}(\mathbb{R}^3)}\leq \norm{\varphi}_{B}\leq \eta
\end{gather}
By part (1) of Definition \ref{Def1} we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}A_1|_{0}^t\text{d}\Sigma_0&=&\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}18\bar{v}^2\frac{\nabla Y_0^t\lambda_0^{-1}\nabla Y_0}{X_0}\left[e^{-6 t\bar{v}}-1\right]\text{d}\Sigma\nonumber\\
&\leq&18 C\left[e^{6\eta}-1\right]\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\bar{v}^2r^{-4}\text{d}\Sigma \nonumber\\
&\leq& 18 C\left[e^{6\eta}-1\right]\norm{\bar{v}}^2_{\mathcal{H}_1}
\leq 18 C\left[e^{6\eta}-1\right]\norm{\varphi}^2_{\mathcal{H}}
\end{eqnarray}
Now First we write $A_2=B_1+B_2$ where
\begin{gather}
B_1=\frac{e^{-6v}}{\rho^4}18\bar{v}^2t\nabla {Y}^t_0\text{adj}\bar{\lambda}'\nabla Y_0\qquad B_2=-6\frac{e^{-6v_0}}{\rho^4}\bar{v}\nabla {Y}^t_0\text{adj}\bar{\lambda}'\nabla Y_0\left[e^{-6 t\bar{v}}-1\right]
\end{gather}
We will prove it for $B_1$ and $B_2$ is similar. We have
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}B_1\text{d}\Sigma &=&-\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\frac{e^{-6v}}{\rho^6}18\bar{v}^2t\nabla {Y}^t_0\text{adj}\lambda'_0\bar{\lambda}'\text{adj}\lambda'_0\nabla Y_0\text{d}\Sigma\nonumber\\
&\leq&18e^{6\eta}\eta\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\frac{e^{-6v_0}}{\rho^4}\abs{\bar{\lambda}'}\bar{v}\nabla {Y}^t_0(\text{adj}{\lambda}'_0)^2\nabla Y_0\text{d}\Sigma\nonumber\\
&\leq&18C\eta e^{6\eta}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\abs{\bar{\lambda}'}\bar{v}\rho^{-1}r^{-2}\text{d}\Sigma \nonumber\\
&\leq&18C\eta e^{6\eta}\norm{\bar{v}}_{\mathcal{H}_1}\norm{\bar{\lambda'}}_{\mathcal{H}_2}\leq 18C\eta e^{6\eta}\norm{\varphi}^2_{\mathcal{H}}
\end{eqnarray}
We used the identity $\text{adj}\bar{\lambda}'=-\frac{1}{\rho^2}\text{adj}{\lambda}'_0\bar{\lambda}'\text{adj}\lambda'_0$ in the first line. The first inequality arise from \eqref{barv} and the matrix inequality $u^t A u \leq \abs{A} u^t u$ for any $2 \times 2$ matrix $A$. The second inequality is a consequence of parts (1) and (2) of Definition \ref{Def1}. Finally, the third inequality follows from H\"older's inequality.
The term $A_3$ can be expressed as $A_3=B_3+B_4$ where
\begin{gather}
B_3=36\frac{e^{-6v}}{\rho^4}\bar{v}^2t\nabla \bar{Y}^t\text{adj}{\lambda}'_0\nabla Y_0\qquad B_4=-12\frac{e^{-6v_0}}{\rho^4}\bar{v}\nabla \bar{Y}^t\text{adj}{\lambda}'_0\nabla Y_0\left[e^{-6 t\bar{v}}-1\right]
\end{gather}
Then the bound of $B_3$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}B_3\text{d}\Sigma
&\leq&36\eta e^{6\eta}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\frac{1}{X_0}\bar{v}\nabla \bar{Y}^t\lambda'^{-1}_0\nabla Y_0\text{d}\Sigma \nonumber\\
&\leq&36\eta e^{6\eta}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\frac{\bar{v}}{X_0}\left(\nabla \bar{Y}^t\lambda'^{-1}_0\nabla \bar{Y}\right)^{1/2} \left(\nabla Y_0^t \lambda_0^{-1} \nabla Y_0 \right)^{1/2}\text{d}\Sigma \nonumber \\
&\leq&36C\eta e^{6\eta}\left(\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\rho^{-2}\nabla \bar{Y}^t\lambda'^{-1}_0\nabla \bar{Y}\text{d}\Sigma \right)^{1/2}\left(\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\bar{v}^2r^{-4}\text{d}\Sigma \right)^{1/2}\nonumber\\
&\leq&36C\eta e^{6\eta}\norm{\bar{v}}_{\mathcal{H}_1}\norm{\bar{Y}}_{\mathcal{H}_3}
\leq 36C\eta e^{6\eta}\norm{\varphi}^2_{\mathcal{H}}
\end{eqnarray} The first inequality uses \eqref{barv}. We know $\lambda_0^{-1}$ is a positive definite symmetric matrix. Thus it has a square root matrix $\lambda_0^{-1/2}$, that is $\lambda_0^{-1}=\left(\lambda_0^{-1/2}\right)^2$. Then the integrand in the first line is equal to $X_0^{-1} \bar{v} u^t w$ where $u^t = \nabla \bar{Y}^t \lambda_0^{-1/2}$ and $w = \lambda_0^{-1/2}\nabla Y_0$. Since $u^t w \leq (u^t u)^{1/2} (w^t w)^{1/2}$ we have the second inequality. The third inequality follows from H\"older's inequality and parts (1) and (2) of Definition 1. The fourth inequality is by the definition of norm.
$B_4$ is exactly similar to $B_3$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\section{Local minima of $\mathcal{E}_\varphi(t)$ }\label{Carter}
In this section we first derive a five-dimensional version of Carter's identity and show its relation with the second variation $\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(t)$. Assume we are in a five dimensional vacuum spacetime with isometry group $\mathbb{R}\times U(1)^2$. The field equations can be expressed simply as the conservation of a current (see \cite{figueras2010uniqueness} for details).
\begin{equation}\label{EOM}
\nabla\cdot J=\nabla\cdot\left(\rho\,\Phi^{-1}\nabla\Phi\right)=0
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation} \Phi \equiv
\Phi(X,Y,\lambda)=\begin{pmatrix}
\frac{1}{X} & -\frac{Y^t}{X} \\
-\frac{Y}{X} & \lambda+\frac{YY^t}{X}
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
and $\det\Phi=1$, $\lambda$ is a positive definite $2\times 2$ symmetric matrix with $\det\lambda=X$ and $Y$ is a column vector. One can derive the Mazur identity (for a detailed discussion see \cite{carter1985bunting}) for two matrices $\Phi_{[1]}$ and $\Phi_{[2]}$ (not necessarily solutions) with corresponding currents $J_{[1]}, J_{[2]}$
\begin{equation} \label{Mazur}
\Delta \Psi-\text{Tr}\left(\Phi_{[2]}\left(\nabla\cdot\mathring{J} \right)\Phi_{[1]}^{-1}\right)=\frac{1}{\rho^2}\text{Tr}\left(\mathring{J}^t\Phi_{[2]}\mathring{J}\Phi_{[1]}^{-1}\right)
\end{equation}
where $\Delta$ is Laplace operator with respect to flat metric $\delta_3$ and
\begin{eqnarray}
\Psi&=&\text{Tr}\left(\Phi_{[2]}\Phi_{[1]}^{-1}-I\right)\qquad \mathring{J}=J_{[2]}-J_{[1]}
\end{eqnarray} Note that this identity holds quite generally for any field theory which can be derived from a positive definite action with Lagrangian of the form $L \sim \,{\rm Tr} (\Phi^{-1} \text{d} \Phi)^2$. The linearized version of this identity in four dimensions was originally found by Carter \cite{carter1971axisymmetric} and plays an important role in geometric inequalities in 3+1 dimensional spacetime\cite{dain2006proof,dain2008proof,dain2011area,dain2011areacharge}. We will now derive a generalization of this identity for five dimensions. Assume we have $\Phi_{[1]}(X,Y,\lambda)$ and $\Phi_{[2]}(X_2,Y_2,\lambda_2)$ related by
\begin{gather}\label{fieldeqns}
\begin{aligned}X_2&=X+s\dot{X}\qquad &&Y_2 =Y+s \dot{Y} \qquad \lambda_2=\lambda+s\dot{\lambda} \\
G_{\lambda_2}&=G_{\lambda}+s \dot{G}_{\lambda},\qquad &&G_{X_2}=G_X+s \dot{G}_X
\end{aligned}
\end{gather}
The overdot $\dot{}$ represents the linear order of expansion or first variation with respect to $s$ (when taking variations of the products of several terms, we use the notation $\delta$ instead of dot for convenience of notation). Then \eqref{Mazur} implies, to lowest order in $s$, that
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\Delta\left(\frac{\dot{Y}^t\lambda^{-1}\dot{Y}}{X}+\frac{\dot{X}^2}{X^2}\right)\nonumber\\
&+&\frac{\dot{Y}^t\lambda^{-1}\dot{Y}}{X}G_X-\frac{\dot{X}}{X}\dot{G}_X-2\frac{\dot{X}}{X}G_Y^t\dot{Y}-2\dot{Y}^t\lambda^{-1}\dot{\lambda}G_Y+\frac{\dot{Y}^t\lambda^{-1}G^t_{\lambda}\dot{Y}}{X}-\text{Tr}\left(\lambda^{-1}\dot{\lambda}\dot{G}^t_{\lambda}\right)-2\dot{G}_Y^t\dot{Y}\nonumber\\
&=&\left(\nabla\left(\frac{\dot{X}}{X}\right)+\frac{\dot{Y}^t\lambda^{-1}\nabla Y}{X}\right)^2+X\left(\dot{U}_2^t\lambda\dot{U}_2+\nabla U_1^t\lambda\nabla U_1\right)+\text{Tr}\bigg[\left(\nabla\left(\dot{\lambda}\lambda^{-1}\right)+\frac{\nabla Y\dot{Y}^t\lambda^{-1}}{X}\right)^2\bigg]\nonumber\\
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}
U_1\equiv\frac{\lambda^{-1}\dot{Y}}{X}\qquad U_2\equiv\frac{\lambda^{-1}\nabla{Y}}{X}
\end{equation} This is the five-dimensional extension of Carter's identity which appeared in \cite{carter1971axisymmetric} .
Now if we consider our parametrization of data with relations \eqref{relation1} and \eqref{relation2} we have
\begin{equation}
\dot{X}=4\bar{v}X,\qquad \dot{\lambda}=\bar{\lambda}=2\bar{v}\lambda+\lambda\lambda'^{-1}\bar{\lambda}',\qquad \dot{Y}=\bar{Y}
\end{equation}
Thus
\begin{equation}
\lambda^{-1}\dot{\lambda}=2\bar{v}I+\lambda'^{-1}\bar{\lambda}'\label{lambdaandprime}
\end{equation}
since $\text{Tr}\left(\lambda'^{-1}\bar{\lambda}'\right)= \delta \det \lambda' / \det \lambda' = 0$ we have $\text{Tr}\left(\lambda^{-1}\bar{\lambda}\right)=4\bar{v}$. Then the following identity holds for arbitrary $v$, $\bar{v}$,$Y$, $\bar{Y}$,$\lambda$,$\bar{\lambda}$ will be
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Carteridentity}
&&\Delta\left(\frac{\bar{Y}^t\lambda^{-1}\bar{Y}}{X}+16\bar{v}^2\right)\nonumber\\
&+&\frac{\bar{Y}^t\lambda^{-1}\bar{Y}}{X}G_X-4\bar{v}\dot{G}_X-8\bar{v}G_Y^t\bar{Y}-2\bar{Y}^t\lambda^{-1}\bar{\lambda}G_Y+\frac{\bar{Y}^t\lambda^{-1}G^t_{\lambda}\bar{Y}}{X}-\text{Tr}\left(\lambda^{-1}\bar{\lambda}\dot{G}^t_{\lambda}\right)-2\dot{G}_Y^t\bar{Y}\nonumber\\
&=&F(t)
\end{eqnarray}
where $G_X$, $G_Y$, and $G_{\lambda}$ defined in \eqref{fieldeqns} and
\begin{eqnarray}
F(t)&=&\left(4\nabla\bar{v}+\frac{\bar{Y}^t\lambda^{-1}\nabla Y}{X}\right)^2+X\left(\dot{U}_2^t\lambda\dot{U}_2+\nabla U_1^t\lambda\nabla U_1\right)+\text{Tr}\bigg[\left(\nabla\left(\bar{\lambda}\lambda^{-1}\right)+\frac{\nabla Y\bar{Y}^t\lambda^{-1}}{X}\right)^2\bigg]\nonumber\\
\dot{G}_X&=&4\Delta_3\bar{v}+\frac{e^{-6v}}{\rho^4}\left\{2\nabla{\bar{Y}}^t\text{adj}\lambda'\nabla Y+\nabla{{Y}}^t\text{adj}\bar{\lambda'}\nabla Y-6\bar{v}\nabla{{Y}}^t\text{adj}\lambda'\nabla Y\right\}\nonumber\\
\dot{G}_{\lambda}&=&2\Delta_3\bar{v} I+\nabla\cdot\delta\left(\lambda ^{'-1}\nabla\lambda'\right)+\frac{e^{-6v}}{\rho^4}\left\{2\text{adj}\lambda'\nabla Y\cdot\nabla \bar{Y}^t+\text{adj}\bar{\lambda}'\nabla Y\cdot\nabla {Y}^t-6\bar{v}\text{adj}\lambda'\nabla Y\cdot\nabla{Y}^t\right\}\nonumber\\
\dot{G}_{Y}&=&\nabla\cdot \left(\frac{e^{-6v}}{\rho^4}\left\{\text{adj}\lambda'\nabla\bar{Y}+\text{adj}\bar{\lambda}'\nabla{Y}-6\bar{v}\text{adj}\lambda'\nabla{Y}\right\}\right)
\end{eqnarray} The identity \eqref{Carteridentity} can be verified directly.
Assume $\varphi\in B$ then after a tedious calculation involving repeated integration by parts we have the remarkable relation
\begin{equation}\label{secondvariation}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\left(-4\bar{v}\dot{G}_X-\text{Tr}\left(\lambda^{-1}\bar{\lambda}\dot{G}_{\lambda}\right)-2\dot{G}_Y^t\bar{Y}\right)\text{d}\Sigma=16\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(t)
\end{equation}
Thus if $t=0$, the field equations $G_X(0)=G_{\lambda}(0)=G_Y(0)=0$ hold and we have from \eqref{Carteridentity} (the integral over the divergence term vanishes by our boundary conditions)
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(0)=\frac{1}{16}\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}F(0)\text{d}\Sigma\geq 0
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
F(0)&=&\left(4\nabla\bar{v}+\frac{\bar{Y}^t\lambda^{-1}_0\nabla Y_0}{X_0}\right)^2+X_0\left(\dot{U}_2^t\lambda\dot{U}_2+\nabla U_1^t\lambda\nabla U_1\right)+\text{Tr}\bigg[\left(\nabla\left(\bar{\lambda}\lambda^{-1}_0\right)+\frac{\nabla Y_0\bar{Y}^t\lambda^{-1}_0}{X_0}\right)^2\bigg]\nonumber\\
&\geq& X_0\nabla U_1^t\lambda_0\nabla U_1\label{F1}
\end{eqnarray}
Now if $\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(0)=0$, then $F(0)=0$. Therefore, by inequality \eqref{F1} we have $\nabla U_1=0$. Also, since $\varphi\in B$, we have $\bar{Y}=0$. Therefore, by $F=0$ and $\bar{Y}=0$ we have $\bar{v}=0$ and $\bar{\lambda}=0$. This is, however, not sufficient to prove that the extreme data $u_0$ is a \emph{strict} local minimum. For this one needs a stronger positivity result on $\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(0)$ (see for example, Theorem 40.B of \cite{zeidler1989nonlinear}) which we now demonstrate.
Firstly, we prove a coercive condition required for $u_0$ to be a local minimum. We note the identity (this arises in the proof of \eqref{secondvariation})
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}2\rho^{-2}\text{Tr}\left(\lambda'^{-1}\nabla \lambda'\text{adj}\bar{\lambda'}\nabla \bar{\lambda'}\right)\,\text{d}\Sigma=-\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\left(\text{Tr}\left[\bar{\lambda}'\nabla\left(\lambda'^{-1}\right)\right]\right)^2\,\text{d}\Sigma\label{Crazyidentity}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{lemma}\label{coercive}
There exist $\mu>0$ such that for all $\varphi\in B$ we have
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(0)\geq\mu\norm{\varphi}^2_{\mathcal{H}}\label{Coercivein}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\varphi\in B$. Note that $\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(0)$ defines a bilinear form
\begin{equation}
a(\varphi,\varphi)\equiv\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(0)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}F(0)\text{d}\Sigma
\end{equation}
as function of $\varphi$. The inequality \eqref{Coercivein} is equivalent to the following variational problem
\begin{equation}
\mu=\inf_{\varphi\in B,\norm{\varphi}^2_{\mathcal{H}}=1}a(\varphi,\varphi)
\end{equation}
Since $a(\varphi,\varphi)$ is positive definite, we have $\mu\geq 0$. Now we prove $\mu > 0$. Assume $\mu=0$, then there exists a sequence $\{\varphi_n\}$ such that
\begin{equation}
\norm{\varphi_n}^2_{\mathcal{H}}=1\qquad \text{for all $n$}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\lim_{n\to\infty}a(\varphi_n,\varphi_n)=0
\end{equation}
Then we have
\begin{eqnarray}
0&=&\lim_{n\to\infty}a(\varphi_n,\varphi_n)=\lim_{n\to\infty}\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}F(0)\text{d}\Sigma\nonumber\\
&\geq&\lim_{n\to\infty} \int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}X_0\nabla U_1^t\lambda_0\nabla U_1\text{d}\Sigma
\geq C_1\lim_{n\to\infty}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\rho^3 \nabla U_1^t\nabla U_1\text{d}\Sigma\nonumber\\
& \geq& \frac{3C_1}{2}\lim_{n\to\infty}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\rho U_1^t U_1\text{d}\Sigma
\geq\frac{3C_1C_3}{2C'}\lim_{n\to\infty}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\rho^{-4}\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\bar{Y}_n\text{d}\Sigma
\end{eqnarray}
In first inequality we used \eqref{F1}. The second follows from part 2 and 3 of Definition \ref{Def1} . Third inequality follows from Lemma \ref{Poincare}-(c). Fourth inequality follows from part 3 of Definition \ref{Def1}. Therefore,
\begin{equation}
\lim_{n\to\infty}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\rho^{-4}\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\bar{Y}_n\text{d}\Sigma=0\label{firstY}
\end{equation}
Next we establish some inequalities. First rewrite $F(0)$ in the form
\begin{eqnarray}
F(0)&=&\left(4\nabla\bar{v}_n+\frac{\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\nabla Y_0}{X_0}\right)^2+2A_1^t\lambda_0 A_1+2A_2^t\lambda_0 A_2+\text{Tr}\bigg[\left(\nabla\left(\bar{\lambda}_n\lambda^{-1}_0\right)+\frac{\nabla Y_0\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0}{X_0}\right)^2\bigg]\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}
A_1 = \frac{\sqrt{X_0}}{2} \left[B_I + B_{II} + B_{III}\right], \qquad A_2 = \frac{\sqrt{X_0}}{2} \left[B_{II} - B_I\right]
\end{equation} and
\begin{eqnarray}
B_I &=& {\frac{\lambda^{-1}_0\nabla\lambda_0\lambda^{-1}_0\bar{Y}_n}{X}+\frac{\nabla{X}_0}{X^2_0}\lambda^{-1}_0\bar{Y}_n}, \qquad B_{II} = \frac{\lambda^{-1}_0\bar{\lambda}_n\lambda^{-1}_0\nabla{Y}_0}{X_0}+\frac{\bar{X}}{X^2_0}\lambda^{-1}_0\nabla Y_0 \nonumber \\ B_{III} &=& 2\frac{\lambda^{-1}_0\nabla\bar{Y}}{X_0} \; .
\end{eqnarray}
Then we have the following inequality
\begin{equation}
a(\varphi_n,\varphi_n)+\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}2B_I^t\lambda_0B_I\,\text{d}\Sigma\geq\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\frac{1}{4}B_{III}^t\lambda_0B_{III}
\,\text{d}\Sigma\label{ineq1}
\end{equation}
where $B_I$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
B_I=\frac{\lambda^{-1}_0}{\sqrt{X_0}}\left(\nabla\lambda_0\lambda^{-1}_0+\frac{\nabla{X_0}}{X_0}I_{2\times 2}\right)\bar{Y}_n=\frac{\lambda^{-1}_0}{\sqrt{X_0}}M\bar{Y}_n \;.
\end{equation}
By part 4 of Definition \ref{Def1} we have
\begin{equation}
\abs{M}^2\leq 2\abs{\nabla\lambda_0\lambda^{-1}_0}^2+2\abs{\nabla\ln X_0}^2\leq C\rho^{-2}
\end{equation}
and we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}2B_I^t\lambda_0B_I\,\text{d}\Sigma&\leq&\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\frac{2}{X_0}\abs{M}^2\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\bar{Y}_n\,\text{d}\Sigma\leq 2C\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\rho^{-4}\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\bar{Y}_n\,\text{d}\Sigma\label{ineq2}
\end{eqnarray}
Then by inequities \eqref{ineq1} and \eqref{ineq2} we have
\begin{equation}
a(\varphi_n,\varphi_n)+4\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\rho^{-4}\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\bar{Y}_n\,\text{d}\Sigma\geq \frac{1}{4}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\rho^{-2}\nabla\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\nabla\bar{Y}_n\,\text{d}\Sigma
\,\text{d}\Sigma
\end{equation}
Now we take the limit of above equation and use the equation \eqref{firstY} to find
\begin{equation}
\lim_{n\to\infty}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\rho^{-2}\nabla\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\nabla\bar{Y}_n\text{d}\Sigma=0
\end{equation}
Thus
\begin{equation}\label{Ynvanish}
\lim_{n\to\infty}\norm{\bar{Y}_n}_{\mathcal{H}_3}=0
\end{equation}
Now we look at the first term in $F(0)$. Then
\begin{equation}
a(\varphi_n,\varphi_n)+\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\left(\frac{\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\nabla Y_0}{X_0}\right)^2\,\text{d}\Sigma\geq 8\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\left(\nabla\bar{v}_n\right)^2\,\text{d}\Sigma \label{ineq4}
\end{equation}
Since $\lambda_0$ is a positive definite symmetric metric it has unique square root $\lambda^{1/2}_0$. Now if we set $u=\lambda_0^{-1/2}\bar{Y}$ and $w=\lambda_0^{-1/2}\nabla Y_0$ we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\left(\frac{\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\nabla Y_0}{X_0}\right)^2\,\text{d}\Sigma &\leq&\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\left(\frac{\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\bar{Y}_n}{X_0}\right)\left(\frac{\nabla{Y}^t_0\lambda^{-1}_0\nabla{Y}_0}{X_0}\right)\,\text{d}\Sigma \nonumber\\
&\leq&C\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\rho^{-2}\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\bar{Y}_nr^{-4}\,\text{d}\Sigma\nonumber\\
&\leq&C\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\rho^{-4}\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\bar{Y}_n\,\text{d}\Sigma \label{ineq3}
\end{eqnarray}
The first inequality follows from the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality $u^tw\leq (u^tu)^{1/2}(w^tw)^{1/2}$. Second inequality is by part 1 and 3 of Definition \ref{Def1}. The third inequality is by the fact $\rho\leq r^2$. Then by inequality \eqref{ineq3} and \eqref{ineq4} we have
\begin{equation}
a(\varphi_n,\varphi_n)+C\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\rho^{-4}\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\bar{Y}_n\,\text{d}\Sigma \geq 8\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\left(\nabla\bar{v}_n\right)^2\,\text{d}\Sigma \geq 8\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\left(\nabla\bar{v}_n\right)^2 r^{-2}\,\text{d}\Sigma\label{ineq5}
\end{equation} the last inequality is by Theorem 1.2-(i) of \cite{bartnik1986mass}.
Now if we take the limit of inequality \eqref{ineq5} and by the fact the right hand side is zero by \eqref{firstY}, we have
\begin{equation}
\lim_{n\to \infty}\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\left(\nabla\bar{v}_n\right)^2 r^{-2}\,\text{d}\Sigma=0\label{vinfty}
\end{equation}
Thus by Lemma \ref{Poincare}-(a) we have
\begin{equation}\label{vnvanish}
\lim_{n\to \infty}\norm{\bar{v}_n}_{\mathcal{H}_1}=0
\end{equation}
Now we consider the last term of $F(0)$. We have the following inequality
\begin{equation}
a(\varphi_n,\varphi_n)+\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\text{Tr}\bigg[\left(\frac{\nabla Y_0\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0}{X_0}\right)^2\bigg]\,\text{d}\Sigma \geq \frac{1}{2}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\text{Tr}\bigg[\left(\nabla\left(\bar{\lambda}_n\lambda^{-1}_0\right)\right)^2\bigg]\,\text{d}\Sigma \label{ineq8}
\end{equation}
The integrand of the second term on the left hand side has vanishing determinant since $\det\left(\nabla Y_0\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\right)=\frac{\det\left(\nabla Y_0\bar{Y}^t_n\right)}{\rho^2}=0$. Thus by the matrix identity $\text{Tr}(A^2)=\left(\text{Tr}A\right)^2-2\det A$ and inequality \eqref{ineq3} we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\text{Tr}\bigg[\left(\frac{\nabla Y_0\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0}{X_0}\right)^2\bigg]\,\text{d}\Sigma &\leq&C\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\rho^{-4}\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\bar{Y}_n\,\text{d}\Sigma \label{ineq7}
\end{eqnarray}
By relation \eqref{lambdaandprime}
the right hand side expands
\begin{eqnarray}
\text{Tr}\bigg[\left(\nabla\left(\bar{\lambda}_n\lambda^{-1}_0\right)\right)^2\bigg]
&=&2\left[\nabla\bar{v}_n\right]^2+\text{Tr}\left[\left(\nabla\bar{\lambda}'_n\lambda'^{-1}_0\right)^2\right]+\text{Tr}\left[\left(\bar{\lambda}'_n\nabla\left(\lambda'^{-1}_0\right)\right)^2\right]\nonumber\\&+&2\text{Tr}\left[\nabla\bar{\lambda}'_n\left(\frac{\text{adj}\bar{\lambda}'_n}{\rho^2}\right)\nabla\lambda'_0\lambda'^{-1}_0\right]
\end{eqnarray}
By integration we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\text{Tr}\bigg[\left(\nabla\left(\bar{\lambda}_n\lambda^{-1}_0\right)\right)^2\bigg]\,\text{d}\Sigma&=&\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}2\left[\nabla\bar{v}_n\right]^2\,\text{d}\Sigma+\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\text{Tr}\left[\left(\nabla\bar{\lambda}'_n\lambda'^{-1}_0\right)^2\right]\,\text{d}\Sigma \nonumber\\
&\geq&\int_{\mathbb{R}^3}2\left[\nabla\bar{v}_n\right]^2\,\text{d}\Sigma+C_1^2\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\abs{\nabla\bar{\lambda}'_n}^2\rho^{-2}\,\text{d}\Sigma\qquad\label{ineq6}
\end{eqnarray}
The equality is by identity \eqref{Crazyidentity}. The inequality is by part 2 of Definition \ref{Def1}. Then by substitution of inequalities \eqref{ineq6} and \eqref{ineq7} in \eqref{ineq8} we have
\begin{eqnarray}
a(\varphi_n,\varphi_n)+C\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\rho^{-4}\bar{Y}^t_n\lambda^{-1}_0\bar{Y}_n\,\text{d}\Sigma \geq \int_{\mathbb{R}^3}\left[\nabla\bar{v}_n\right]^2\,\text{d}\Sigma+\frac{C_1^2}{2}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\abs{\nabla\bar{\lambda}'_n}^2\rho^{-2}\,\text{d}\Sigma
\end{eqnarray}
Now if we take the limit from both side of this inequality and use equation \eqref{vinfty} we have
\begin{equation}
\lim_{n\to\infty}\int_{\Omega_{\rho_0}}\abs{\nabla\bar{\lambda}'_n}^2\rho^{-2}\,\text{d}\Sigma=0
\end{equation}
Thus by Lemma \ref{Poincare}-(b) we have
\begin{equation}\label{lambdavan}
\lim_{n\to\infty}\norm{\bar{\lambda}'_n}_{\mathcal{H}_2}=0
\end{equation}
Thus \eqref{Ynvanish}, \eqref{vnvanish} and \eqref{lambdavan} contradict the fact that $\norm{\varphi_n}_{\mathcal{H}}=1$. Hence $\mu>0$.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{main theorem}}\label{proof}
\begin{proof} The proof is straightforward and similar to the proof of theorem 1 of \cite{dain2006proof} and Chapter 40-B of \cite{zeidler1989nonlinear}.
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item We have proved in Lemma \ref{uniformlemma} that $\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(t)$ is $C^2$ with respect to $t$. Also by Taylor's theorem we have
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}(u_0+\varphi)-\mathcal{M}(u_0)=\mathcal{E}_{\varphi}(1)-\mathcal{E}_{\varphi}(0)=\frac{\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(t)}{2}\quad 0<t<1
\end{equation}
To prove this is positive we will show $\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(t)\geq 0$ and $\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(t)=0$ implies $\varphi=0$.
By Lemma \ref{uniformlemma}-(b) $\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(t)$ is uniformly continuous, that is for every $\epsilon>0$ there exist $\eta(\epsilon)$ such that the following inequality holds
\begin{equation}
\abs{\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(t)-\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(0)}\leq \epsilon \norm{\varphi}^2_{\mathcal{H}}
\end{equation}
for every $\norm{\varphi}_{\mathcal{H}}<\eta(\epsilon)$. From this inequality we have
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(0)-\epsilon \norm{\varphi}^2_{\mathcal{H}}\leq \mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(t)
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{coercive} we have
\begin{equation}
(\mu-\epsilon) \norm{\varphi}^2_{\mathcal{H}}\leq \mathcal{E}''_{\varphi}(t)
\end{equation}
Choosing $\eta(\epsilon)$ such that $0 < \epsilon<\mu$ the desired result follows.
\item Let $u= u_0 + \varphi$ be the associated $t-\phi^i$ symmetric part of the initial data set $(\Sigma,h,K)$ as in the statement of Theorem \ref{main theorem}. It was proved that the ADM mass of this data satisfies \cite{alaee2014mass}
\begin{equation}\label{ADMineq}
m\geq\mathcal{M}(u) = \mathcal{M}(u_0 + \varphi)
\end{equation}
Then by part (a) we have
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}(u_0+\varphi)> \mathcal{M}(u_0)
\end{equation}
for nonzero $\varphi$. Since $u_0$ is an extreme data, there exists a function $f$ such that $\mathcal{M}(u_0)=f(J_1,J_2)$. Thus
\begin{equation}
m \geq f(J_1,J_2)
\end{equation}
Clearly, by definition if the initial data is extreme, then $m=f(J_1,J_2)$ . Conversely, suppose the mass $m$ of given initial data $(\Sigma,h,K)$ satisfies $m=f(J_1,J_2)=\mathcal{M}(u_0)$. Hence $\varphi =0$ and $u= u_0$ and from \eqref{ADMineq} and Remark \ref{remark1} the initial data is extreme. Thus $m=f(J_1,J_2)$ if and only if the data belongs to the extreme class.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
We would like to thank S. Dain for comments on the use of the Carter identity in his article \cite{dain2006proof} and also for clarifying the relationship between spacetime Weyl and quasi-isotropic coordinates for non-extreme data. HKK also thanks James Lucietti for discussions concerning the uniqueness theorem for extreme black holes \cite{figueras2010uniqueness}. We also would like to thank the referees for suggesting a number of improvements. AA is partially supported by a graduate scholarship from Memorial University. HKK is supported by an NSERC Discovery Grant.
|
\section{Introduction}
Computer vision techniques can provide fast, accurate, automated, and noninvasive measurements of phenotypic properties of plants. Measurements of properties such as volume, leaf length, and leaf angle can be used to evaluate the effect on plants of variation in environmental conditions or genetic properties \cite{FuncStruc}. Obtaining these measurements from image data can be difficult. Plants typically have properties such as uniform colour, specular surfaces, and thin regions which present challenges for typical reconstruction techniques.
Existing methods have focused largely on the problem of recovering the shape of the plant independent its structure. Structure, here, is intended to encompass the various parts of a plant and the relationships between them, as opposed to purely geometric shape information contained in a representation of the whole plant such as a 3D volume or point cloud. The structure may be represented in terms of anatomical aspects of the plant, but may equally be described in terms of more basic elements. Importantly, structure allows the application of prior knowledge about the grammar of particular types of plants.
There are two primary advantages of considering structure rather than shape. The first is that structure is much more closely related to plant anatomy, and therefore a much better indication of phenotype. The second advantage is that the structural properties of a plant provide a strong indication of the likelihood of a particular shape, which is a valuable cue when trying to select from among multiple feasible shapes. For plants with potentially complex structures, such as wheat, there may be many possible plant shape hypotheses which are supported by an image set, whereas prior knowledge of plant anatomy may indicate that only one structure is feasible. This means that structure recovery is possible when shape estimation alone would be ambiguous, or equivalently, that fewer cameras are required to estimate structure than shape. A related advantage is that even if more than one shape is supported by the image set, these shapes often have closely related structures, so although the images are ambiguous (in terms of shape) they may still support an estimate of structure, and thus a phenotypic interpretation.
Structure, for the purposes of the method we propose here, includes information about the identity, length, and curvature of each leaf in the plant, and the relationships between leaves. In this method each leaf is represented by a 3D curve tracing the central axis of the leaf from its tip to the base of the plant. The combination of multiple leaf models gives a model of a complete plant. This estimate of structure implies a particular 3D shape of the plant, which may be used to estimate which pixels belong to each plant element. Estimating structure thus enables the length of leaf 4 on day 10 to be measured, for example, and post-processing would allow an estimate of the width or the length of senescence.
The method we describe is capable of estimating the structure of a plant made up of thin elements from a small set of images taken from widely-spaced viewpoints. Because the properties of these plants make reconstruction difficult using standard feature matching techniques, we reconstruct the plants using only their silhouettes. We employ a generate-and-test method, generating possible plant structures which are evaluated against the images. The generation process makes use of a database of leaf models, providing prior information on plausible leaf curves, which we use to restrict the generated models to plausible plant structures. The space of possible generated models is therefore significantly smaller than if we were to generate models by naively sampling 3D curves, allowing for a more efficient reconstruction process. Likely leaf tip locations are also detected, and used to further constrain the space of possible models. Figure~\ref{fig:recon1} shows a 3D plant model estimated with this method projected into the original image set.
\section{Related Work}
A range of techniques currently exist for automated extraction of phenotypic properties from image or depth data. Highly detailed and accurate point-cloud reconstructions can be obtained with the use of technology such as laser scanners \cite{SurfaceBased} or structured light \cite{GrowingPlants,Chlorophyll}. However, this technology can be prohibitively expensive or infeasible to incorporate into existing systems, may not provide sufficient resolution for recovering thin structures, and can be difficult to apply when plant size varies greatly. Reconstruction from images can provide a lower cost and a more practical solution. Methods based on identifying plant pixels can be used to estimate volume without recovering 3D structure \cite{HighThrough1,ShootBiomass}. Image based approaches for recovering 3D reconstructions employ techniques such as dynamic programming \cite{StereoVis} and simulated annealing \cite{SimAnneal} to overcome the difficulty of identifying corresponding points between frames. Reconstruction based on matching line features can provide robustness to appearance variation in different views \cite{LinFeat,CornRecon,CurveBased}. Complex plant structures with overlapping leaves mean a large number of views of the plant are usually required for a complete reconstruction. Techniques for obtaining a dense set of views of a plant include the use of mirrors \cite{HighThrough} or cameras mounted on robotic arms \cite{ToFData}. Mechanisms for turning the plants \cite{HighThrough1} can be used to generate a range of views, but can cause leaf movement which leads to additional difficulties for reconstruction. For methods which recover a point cloud or volumetric description of a plant, additional processing such as applying skeletonisation operations to a point cloud is required to recover a structural description \cite{LaserScan}. Interactive methods avoid some of the difficulty of fully automated techniques \cite{PlantModelling,MorphTraits} but significantly increase the time and manual effort required for reconstruction.
\section{Method}
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.18\columnwidth]{figures/results/head_0.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.18\columnwidth]{figures/results/head_1.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.18\columnwidth]{figures/results/head_2.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.18\columnwidth]{figures/results/head_3.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.18\columnwidth]{figures/results/head_4.jpg}
}
\caption{A reconstructed plant model projected into the original images, and another view of the 3D model}
\label{fig:recon1}
\end{figure}
We aim to recover an estimate of the length, curvature, and identity of each leaf of a grass plant, in this case wheat, from a set of images.
The image set may be small (the results in this paper were obtained from four images), and captured with widely-spaced cameras. Widely-spaced views, and the thin components and relatively uniform colour of these plants, make accurate reconstruction infeasible using standard feature matching techniques. Such techniques would also not provide data on the structure of the plant in occluded regions.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\columnwidth]{figures/vishull/orig.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.25\columnwidth]{figures/vishull/vishull4.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.25\columnwidth]{figures/vishull/vishull2.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.25\columnwidth]{figures/vishull/vishull3.jpg}
}
\caption{A visual hull reconstruction illustrating the spurious shapes beyond the true plant reconstruction which are inherent to the visual hull.}
\label{fig:vishull}
\end{figure}
Given that attempting to match the appearance of individual points on leaves is infeasible, we instead analyse the silhouette of the plant in each view. Using standard silhouette-based reconstruction methods \cite{VisHull} could leave the 3D structure ambiguous when only a small number of views is available. Figure \ref{fig:vishull} shows three views of the visual hull generated from the four silhouettes for the plant on the left. Due to self occlusion and the limited set of views, this visual hull reconstruction includes leaf-like regions which do not correspond to actual leaves of the plant.
Instead of directly recovering the 3D shape of the plant from the silhouettes, we use a generate-and-test method to recover the 3D structure, generating plausible 3D plant models and evaluating them against the image set. A process of using prior knowledge to generate plausible structures which are evaluated against the data is employed for tree and plant reconstruction by methods such as \cite{AnalBySyn,Unfoliaged,StatTrees}.
This method allows us to use prior information about the plants being reconstructed to aid in determining the structure in regions where that structure would be ambiguous given only the image data. We make use of a database of manually modelled leaves. The reconstruction process generates 3D plant models by finding leaf models in the database which closely match the current image set, then refining these individual leaf models, and selecting an optimal combination of leaf models to model the complete plant.
\subsection{Input Data}
The input to our process is a set of images of a plant. The method is suitable for use with any number and placement of cameras, provided two views are available for each leaf. For results in this paper, we used four images captured by cameras covering $360^{\circ}$ around the plant. These images were captured with a set of consumer-grade DSLR cameras. The method requires calibrated cameras with known scale. We also require the approximate location of the centre of the pot, and a vector giving the vertical orientation of the pot. To obtain the necessary calibration information with minimal manual intervention, we make use of a calibration object providing features on multiple planes in each view. A 3D model giving the approximate structure of the pot and pot holder is also used to estimate occlusion. We require that the leaves are static while images are being captured, and that the leaves do not move between images being captured.
The structure recovery process estimates a silhouette of the plant for each frame.
Depending on the background of the scene, a colour histogram thresholding method (as applied, for example, in \cite{HighThrough1}) may be sufficient. Due to the variation in colour and texture of the plants and background in the image sets we are using, a pixel classifier using a Support Vector Machine trained on manually labelled images was applied for the mask generation.
\subsection{Calibration}
Camera calibration is achieved using a calibration object that displays known patterns to a variety of viewpoints. Rather than using independent planes as proposed in \cite{sturmcalib} and \cite{zhangcalib}, a single rigid object is favourable here as it does not require that fixed cameras view planes in common. Such an object can also be placed within an automated greenhouse system so that calibration can be periodically performed or verified. The shape of the object is recorded in a file such as may be sent to one of the many acrylic laser cutting services so it can be rapidly constructed anywhere in the world.
QR codes are used as calibration patterns as they are rich in features and can be uniquely identified. The patterns are printed onto durable adhesive labels for robustness against humidity and temperature. The adhesive labels are placed onto the object manually, resulting in some ambiguity in their true locations. Rather than rely on a large number of manual measurements, adhesive label placements are described by calibration object parameters which are estimated as part of the calibration process.
Initial camera poses and intrinsic parameters are estimated assuming ideal (known) placements of calibration patterns. Subsequently, both camera parameters and calibration object parameters are refined so as to minimise the sum of squared reprojection distances and error terms based on prior estimates of the calibration object parameters. Figure~\ref{fig:calib} shows the calibration object.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering\leavevmode
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.35\linewidth}\centering\leavevmode
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{figures/calibration/calibration.jpg}
\caption{The calibration object}
\label{fig:calib}
\end{minipage}\hspace*{0.03\linewidth}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.6\linewidth}\centering\leavevmode
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{figures/manual/manual_1_small.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{figures/manual/manual_2_small.jpg}
\caption{A plant model manually constructed from two views}
\label{fig:manual}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Database Building}
The goal of the method is to generate a plausible plant model given the silhouette in each view. To generate candidate models representing plausible plant structures, we use a database of pre-defined leaf models. These models are manually constructed using an interactive tool. Plants are modelled by specifying a series of 3D point locations tracing the axis of each leaf. To specify a point location, the user first selects a point on a leaf in one view of the plant, then selects the corresponding point in a second view. The selected point in the second view is constrained to lie on the corresponding epipolar line. The database currently contains models for 480 leaves, modelled from 230 plants. Each leaf is modelled with an average of $8$ points. Figure~\ref{fig:manual} shows two views of a manually modelled plant. To increase the density of the database, additional leaf models are generated by transforming modelled leaves to stretch their shape in multiple directions within a small distance range. This generates $100$ models for each modelled leaf.
\subsection{Skeleton Extraction}
A set of 2D skeletons extracted from the silhouette for each view are used as estimates of the projection of the set of 3D leaf axes. An example of such skeletons being used for plant reconstruction is given in the reconstruction method of \cite{OrthoImages}, where matching between skeleton points in orthographic images is used to recover 3D leaf paths. To generate the skeletons, we use the thinning algorithm of \cite{Thinning}. An example of a skeleton extracted from a silhouette is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:skel}.
\begin{figure}[t]\leavevmode\centering
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.52\linewidth}\leavevmode\centering
\subfigure[Input]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\columnwidth]{figures/endpts/endpts_0.jpg}}
\subfigure[Classified]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\columnwidth]{figures/endpts/endpts_1.jpg}}
\subfigure[Skeleton]{\includegraphics[width=0.31\columnwidth]{figures/endpts/endpts_2.jpg}}
\caption{Extracting a skeleton for a frame}\label{fig:skel}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.47\linewidth}\leavevmode\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.475\linewidth]{figures/endpts/tips_0.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.475\columnwidth]{figures/endpts/tips_1.jpg}
\caption{2 views of the 3D tip and base points}
\label{fig:tips}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Leaf Tip Detection}
To limit the number of candidate models which need to be evaluated to find a model which corresponds to the current image set, information extracted from the 2D skeletons is used to guide the generation process. To identify possible tip points, we first construct a graph from each skeleton image. As some plant regions in the silhouettes may be disconnected due to sections of the plant which are too thin to be detected, edges are added between nearby points to connect these isolated regions in the graph.
From the graphs, we extract a set of possible 3D leaf tip points and a base point. We significantly reduce the space of possible models by considering only candidate leaf models with ends corresponding to these tip and base points. For each graph, we first detect a set of 2D points possibly corresponding to leaf tips by measuring the distance to the graph centre for each node and finding local maxima for this distance. These 2D points are matched between images to give possible 3D leaf tip locations. Matches for a point are found by locating points close to the corresponding epipolar line in a second view. 3D tip points are then determined by triangulation. Matches in further views are located by finding points close to the projection of the 3D points. The final position for each point is determined as the 3D point minimizing the sum of squared distances to the corresponding 2D points in all views. We select the 3D point closest to the input pot centre position as the base point. The selected base point and set of possible tip points for a plant are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:tips}.
The boundary of the extracted silhouette may not be smooth due to misclassified background pixels. This results in extreme points in the graph which do not correspond to leaf tips, and 3D tip points being generated corresponding to points part way along the leaves. While such points could be removed using morphological filtering operations, doing so also eliminates important structural information.
Instead, we use the set of graphs to detect 3D tip points which are likely to be part way along the path to a true leaf tip. We find the shortest path in the graph from each 3D tip point to the base point in each view where that point is visible, and remove any point for which these paths do not include at least $150$ pixels not included in the paths to a tip point farther from the base. Points with 2D projections which are not close to the silhouettes are also rejected.
\subsection{Leaf Generation}\label{sec:leafgen}
For each possible tip point, we build a set of candidate leaf models. Leaves from the database of manually modelled plants are linearly transformed to fit the tip and base points for each leaf to the selected tip point and base point positions. The transformed leaves are then evaluated against the images. The leaf models which best match the images are determined by measuring the distance in each image between sampled points on the models and the nearest point on the 2D skeleton for that image.
The tip point, base point, and the orientation vector determined in the calibration process are used to define a linear transform mapping the base and tip of each leaf chosen from the database to the corresponding points in the current scene. This transform can then be used to map all points of the leaf into the scene. To efficiently evaluate distances from model points to skeleton points, a distance transform is applied to the 2D skeleton in each view, assigning each pixel in the image the distance to the nearest skeleton point. As leaves can hang over the edge of the pot, where they cannot be seen by some cameras, we also make use of a 3D model giving the approximate structure of the pot and pot holder. This allows occlusion to be estimated and incorporated into the reconstruction. After evaluating the full set of transformed leaf models against the images, parameters for the best models are refined to improve their fit to the image set, as we do not expect the database to contain an exact match for each leaf.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfigure[with penalty]{\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{figures/fit_initial.jpg}}
\subfigure[without penalty]{\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{figures/fit_no_penalty.jpg}}
\caption{The effect of the curvature penalty}\label{fig:curvepenalty}
\end{figure}
To refine the leaf while preserving its shape, we model each leaf
using cubic B-splines $b_\mat{C}(t)\rightarrow\Re^3$, $t\in(0,1)$
parameterised by a set of control points $\vec{C}$. The control
points are optimised with respect to ${\cal S}=\{ \mat{S}^v\}_{\forall
v}$, where $\mat{S}^v=[ \vec{s}_1^v, \hdots, \vec{s}_n^v]$ is the
set of skeleton points in view $v$, by minimising
\begin{equation}
d(\mathcal{S}, \mat{C})=\sum_v
\int_0^1 \frac{r_v(b_{\mat{C}}(t))
}{
\sum_v o_v(b_{\mat{C}}(t))
}\;\mathit{dt}+\int_0^1 c_{\mat{C}}(t) dt
\label{eqn:leafoptlm}\end{equation}
where the residual
\begin{equation}
r_v(\vec{x})=o_v(\vec{x})\left(\min_j\|\vec{s}_j^v-\mat{A}_v\vec{x}\|_2\right)\label{eqn:distresid}
\end{equation}
measures the distance between the projection of a point on the leaf
against the closest skeleton point in view $v$. Here, $\mat{A}_v$ is
the projection matrix for view $v$ and $o_v(\vec{x})$ is a delta
function that is $0$ if $\vec{x}$ is occluded in view $v$ and $1$ otherwise. Residuals are inversely weighted by the number of views where a point is visible, to avoid biasing the optimisation towards a better fit for points which are visible in more views. To prevent significant changes in the leaf shape, the term
\begin{equation}
c_{\mat{C}}(t)=\alpha(\kappa_{\mat{C}}(t)-\kappa_{\mat{C}_0}(t))^2
\end{equation}
is added to the residuals to penalise changes in curvature with respect
to the control points $\mat{C}_0$ of the original curve. The term
\begin{equation}
\kappa_{\mat{C}}(t)=
\frac{\| b_{\mat{C}}'(t)\times b_{\mat{C}}''(t) \|}
{\| b_{\mat{C}}'(t) \|^{3}}
\end{equation}
measures curvature of the B-spline $b_{\mat{C}}$ evaluated at $t$.
The effect of the curve penalty on the reconstruction is illustrated
in Figure \ref{fig:curvepenalty}. In both cases the optimisation
began from the curve illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:curvepenalty}(a).
Without the penalty, the different parts of the hypothesised curve
latch onto different, disjoint leaves in the image (Figure
\ref{fig:curvepenalty}(b)).
The curvature of a leaf may not be continuous, particularly where the
leaf meets the stem. We therefore find any points in the 3D path of the original leaf model where a sharp change of angle ($>45^\circ$) occurs, and model the path as a set of one or more
connected splines, with discontinuous curvature at these points. The
number of control points for each segment is determined from the
segment length.
To fit a leaf to the image set, the position of the 3D control points
are refined by applying Levenberg-Marquardt optimisation to a set of
points sampled along the leaf. In practice, we define $n$ points that
are separated by approximately $7.5\mathrm{mm}$ along the original
curve and define the distance residual in \ref{eqn:distresid} by the
distance transform over the skeletonised observation. The change in
the shape of a leaf during refinement is illustrated in
Figure~\ref{fig:leaf2}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\leavevmode\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.2435\textwidth]{figures/opt3.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.2435\textwidth]{figures/opt4.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.2435\textwidth]{figures/opt5.jpg}
\caption{Refining parameters for a leaf model}
\label{fig:leaf2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\leavevmode\centering
\subfigure[Initial set]{\includegraphics[width=0.37\textwidth]{figures/opt1.jpg}}
\subfigure[Optimised set]{\includegraphics[width=0.37\textwidth]{figures/opt2.jpg}}
\caption{Initial and optimised set of leaf candidates}
\label{fig:leaf3}
\end{figure}
The distance measure is used to rank the full set of leaf models generated from the database. The best $200$ leaf models are then selected and refined. Figure~\ref{fig:leaf3} shows a set of initial candidate models obtained for a point, and the same set of models after refinement.
\subsection{Structure Estimation}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{figures/leafsetmetric.pdf}
\vspace*{1.25mm}
\caption{The interior, exterior and overlapping areas of the set metric}
\label{fig:leafsetmetric}
\end{figure}
The above process generates a set of possible leaf models which may be combined into a full plant model. In generating the complete plant model, multiple candidates for each tip are tested, because overlapping leaves may result in several plausible paths from a tip to the base. For each tip point, we select $5$ candidate leaves using the distance measure evaluated for the refined leaf. As multiple leaf models may converge to the same shape in refinement, additional leaf models are not selected if there is only minimal deviation from an already selected model.
On the basis of the leaf hypothesis set, and the anatomy-based prior which describes the ways in which such leaves may be combined, it is possible to construct a set of full-plant hypotheses. This process may be seen as a data-driven means of exploiting a generative model in a situation where sampling from a full generative model directly would be too computationally expensive. The generative model for a plant such as wheat is relatively simple, but nonetheless far too complex to be sampled from directly.
\newcommand{{\cal R}}{{\cal R}}
Each hypothesised structure is evaluated against the number of
skeleton pixels covered by the model, the number of pixels outside the
plant which are covered, and the number of leaves used. Let
${\cal I}_v$ be the set of skeleton pixels in view $v$. The set of
\emph{`interior'} pixels which are supported by the set of leaves
$\cal L$ is given by
\begin{equation}
i_v({\cal L})=\{ \vec{i} \;|\; (\vec{i}\in{\cal I}_v) \wedge (a_v(\vec{i}, {\cal L})>0) \}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
a_v(\vec{i}, {\cal L})=\sum_{\mat{L}\in{\cal L}} m_v(\vec{i}, \mat{L})
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
m_v(\vec{i}, {\mat L})=\left\{\begin{array}{cl}
1 & \textrm{if\;} \min_{t} \| \vec{i}-\mat{A}_vb_{\mat{L}}(t) \| < \tau \\
0 & \textrm{otherwise.}
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
counts the number of leaves which project to the pixel
$\vec{i}\in{\cal I}_v$ within a tolerance $\tau=10$ pixels. This
threshold helps to account for divergence between the skeleton
extracted for each frame and the projection of the true axis of each
leaf. The set of \emph{`exterior'} pixels
\begin{equation}
e_v({\cal L})=\{ \vec{j} \;|\; (\vec{j}\in{\cal R}) \wedge (\min_{\vec{i}\in{\cal I}_v} \|\vec{i}-\vec{j}\| > \tau) \}
\end{equation}
are in the image ${\cal R}$ generated by rendering ${\cal L}$ with
projection matrix $\mat{A}_v$ but are not within the threshold distance of any skeleton pixels.
The quality of the leaf set is
\begin{equation}
q({\cal L})=\sum_{v\in{\cal V}} \left(|i_v({\cal L})|-\beta|e_v({\cal L})|-\gamma o_v({\cal L})\right)\label{eqn:leafsetmetric}
\end{equation}
where $\beta$ controls the penalty for covering exterior pixels and $\gamma$ with
\begin{equation}
o_v({\cal L})=\sum_{\vec{i}\in i_v({\cal L})} (a_v(\vec{i}, {\cal L})-1)
\end{equation}
penalises solutions where multiple leaves overlap the same set of
pixels. Consequently, \eqref{eqn:leafsetmetric} favours models that
closely match the skeletons in each view while using the smallest
number of leaves. Figure \ref{fig:leafsetmetric} illustrates the
segmentation of the observed image into interior, exterior and
overlapping pixels given a hypothesised leaf set ${\cal L}$.
A set of leaves ${\cal L}$ is chosen from a larger set of candidate
leaves by a random, greedy search. Let ${\cal
C}^l=\{\mat{C}_1^l, \hdots, \mat{C}_n^l\}$ be the set of $n$
candidate control point sets for leaf tip $l$. A leaf model $\mat{C}'$ is
randomly chosen and removed from the set ${\cal P}=\{ {\cal
C}^l\}_{\forall l}$. If $q({\cal L}\cup\{\mat{C}'\})>q({\cal L})$,
then $\mat{C}'$ is added to the initially empty set of hypothesised
leaves ${\cal L}$ and ${\cal C}^l\rightarrow\varnothing$ where
${\cal C}^l$ is the set of candidate leaves that contained
$\mat{C}'$. The process of sampling leaves from ${\cal P}$ and adding
them to the model set continues until ${\cal P}$ is empty.
\section{Results}
This method has been tested on a set of plants with up to $8$ leaves each, with manual measurements taken for the first $4$ leaves of each plant. Figure~\ref{fig:res2} shows the original images from two cameras, and the reconstructed plant model projected into those images, for $6$ plants. These results show the structure of the plant being accurately recovered despite overlap between multiple leaves. These results were generated with $50000$ runs of the model generation process, and with weights set to $\alpha=2 \times 10^{-7}$, $\beta=1.4$ and $\gamma=0.3$. Result images for more plants are included in Online Resource 1.
In most cases, the reconstruction process determined the correct number of leaves and generated a model close to the true shape of the plant. Figure~\ref{fig:partial} shows some cases where a leaf was not reconstructed, or was only partially reconstructed. In Figure~\ref{fig:partial}(a), a leaf was not reconstructed due to the leaf tip and most of the length of the leaf being occluded in all views by the leaf labelled in red. In Figure~\ref{fig:partial}(b), only part of the shape of the leaf labelled in yellow was recovered, as a close match for the leaf was not found in the database. This limitation would be improved with a more comprehensive model database. A leaf model was not fitted to the full extent of the leaf labelled in green in Figure~\ref{fig:partial}(c), due to the pixels of a dead leaf tip being classified as background during silhouette generation.
For this set of plants, we have compared leaf length measurements automatically extracted from the models with manual measurements of the first $4$ leaves of each plant. Manual measurements were taken from the leaf tip to the point at which the leaf meets the stem. To measure this distance from the reconstructed leaf models, we estimate this point by finding the point at which overlapping leaf models diverge. Table~\ref{tab:meas} shows automatically and manually measured leaf lengths in millimetres and relative percentage error for the set of plants seen in Figure~\ref{fig:res2}. For tests on a set of $40$ plants, the average difference between the manual measurements and our estimated leaf lengths was $19.06mm$. The average relative error was $8.64\%$.
This testing has highlighted an unforeseen ambiguity in the (stem-side) end point of such leaf measurements which leads to differences between the manually measured quantity and that estimated from the recovered structure. It also indicates a need to conduct repeated manual measurements so as to estimate the error in that process. Despite these limitations, the results show that the method is capable of automatically recovering meaningful plant structure estimates from image sets.
Figure~\ref{fig:res_mat} shows results of applying this method to more mature plants with a greater density of leaves. In these cases, the structure of the majority of leaves was still recovered. However, some leaves with tips in regions where structure is dense were not identified, and the accuracy of the curves for the reconstructed leaves was also lower in these regions. Improving reconstruction accuracy for more mature plants will be a focus of further development of this method.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centerline{
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.22\columnwidth]{figures/results/partial_0.jpg}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.22\columnwidth]{figures/results/partial_1.jpg}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.22\columnwidth]{figures/results/partial_2.jpg}}
}
\caption{Partially reconstructed leaves}
\label{fig:partial}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_0_0_smaller.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_0_0_smaller.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_0_1_smaller.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_0_1_smaller.jpg}
}
\vspace{1mm}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_1_0.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_1_0.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_1_1.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_1_1.jpg}
}
\vspace{1mm}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_2_0.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_2_0.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_2_1.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_2_1.jpg}
}
\vspace{1mm}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_3_0.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_3_0.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_3_1.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_3_1.jpg}
}
\vspace{1mm}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_4_0.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_4_0.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_4_1.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_4_1.jpg}
}
\vspace{1mm}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_5_0.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_5_0.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_5_1.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_5_1.jpg}
}
\caption{Original images and reconstruction results}
\label{fig:res2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_mat_0_0_smaller.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_mat_0_0_smaller.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_mat_0_1_smaller.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_mat_0_1_smaller.jpg}
}
\vspace{1mm}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_mat_1_0_smaller.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_mat_1_0_smaller.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_mat_1_1_smaller.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_mat_1_1_smaller.jpg}
}
\vspace{1mm}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_mat_2_0_smaller.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_mat_2_0_smaller.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/orig_mat_2_1_smaller.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=0.17\columnwidth]{figures/results/res_mat_2_1_smaller.jpg}
}
\caption{Reconstruction results for more mature plants}
\label{fig:res_mat}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[th]
\caption{Measurement results for the first $4$ leaves}
\begin{center}\setlength{\tabcolsep}{5pt}
\begin{tabular}{l|cccc|cccc}
\hline
&\multicolumn{4}{c|}{\bfseries{Plant 1}} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\bfseries{Plant 2}} \\
Manual (mm) & 150.64 & 220.68 & 299.53 & 245.26 & 138.74 & 243.89 & 332 & 351 \\
Estimated (mm) & 147.0 & 216.79 & 299.89 & 241.99 & 145.99 & 214.75 & 292.73 & 337.99 \\
Relative (\%) & 2.42 & 1.77 & 1.55 & 0.92 & 5.23 & 11.95 & 11.83 & 3.71\\
\hline
\hline
&\multicolumn{4}{c|}{\bfseries{Plant 3}} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\bfseries{Plant 4}} \\
Manual (mm) & 144.97 & 263.75 & 378 & 224.13 & 115.73 & 203.23 & 279.82 & 320.0 \\
Estimated (mm)& 145.91 & 259.87 & 376.73 & 242.94 & 137.0 & 200.99 & 279.0 & 287.92 \\
Relative (\%) & 0.65 & 1.47 & 0.34 & 8.39 & 17.51 & 1.1 & 0.29 & 10.02 \\
\hline
\hline
&\multicolumn{4}{c|}{\bfseries{Plant 5}} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\bfseries{Plant 6}} \\
Manual (mm) & 101.4 & 185.82 & 259.16 & 299.87 & 119.22 & 211.86 & 273.85 & 304.55 \\
Estimated (mm) & 117.0 & 162.0 & 255.81 & 251.98 & 130.99 & 184.51 & 272.54 & 265.98 \\
Relative (\%) & 15.38 & 12.82 & 1.29 & 15.97 & 9.87 & 12.91 & 0.48 & 12.66 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\label{tab:meas}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusions and Future Work}
We have presented a method suitable for recovering the structure of thin plants from a small set of images captured by widely spaced cameras. There are a range of potential future developments for this method. Although the present method operates only on RGB images, it would be straightforward to incorporate depth map information into the fitting process, allowing for reconstruction using depth camera or laser data from a limited range of views.
The method could potentially be applied to single images, using the variation in plausible reconstructions of the image to determine the range of possible values for various plant properties. The method could also provide a means of estimating further physical properties of leaves from measured properties of leaves represented in the database. The structure estimates can be used for leaf angle and length measurements, and we plan to use these paths as a basis for also measuring leaf width and senescence.
We plan to use the estimated structures of plants over time to track plant growth, with a database of models of developing plants used to determine plausible matches between the estimated leaves at different time steps. The method will also be refined to improve the reconstruction accuracy for more mature plants, where the structure of individual leaves is more difficult to distinguish using only skeletons extracted from silhouettes.
\clearpage
\bibliographystyle{splncs03}
|
\section{ introduction}
Conventional phases and their transitions in condensed-matter systems can be understood by Landau symmetry breaking~\cite{arodz2003patterns}.
However, new phases have emerged over the past few decades such as integer quantum hall~\cite{QHE80, Laughlin81} and fractional quantum hall~\cite{FQHE1982} effects have evaded the usual Landau-Ginzburg-Wilson paradigm.
More recently, microscopic spin models exhibiting topological orders were also constructed, such as the toric code, quantum double models and string-nets~\cite{Dennis2002, Kitaev2003, string_wen03, string_wen05}.
These new quantum phases are called topological phases and they cannot be characterized by a local order parameter.
Instead, they are found to possess the so-called topological order~\cite{Wen1989, Wen1990} characterized by properties such as the ground-state degeneracy, nontrivial quasiparticle statistics~\cite{Wen_TO1990, Wen_TO1993,Kitaev20062, Bais_2012, Zhang2012}, and more recently nonzero topological entanglement entropy~\cite{Kitaev_2006, Levin_2006}.
Recent progress on the general scheme of classifying these topological orders is also vitalized by using the notation of entanglement~\cite{Pollmann_2010,Pollmann_2011,Xie_TPS_2010, Xie_LU_2010, Haldane_2008}.
Specifically, intrinsic topological orders have patterns of long-range entanglement that cannot be achieved via local unitary transformation from a trivial product state.
The local unitary transformations can only remove short-range entanglement, i.e., quantum correlations between neighboring sites.
Due to its robustness against the local operations, the long-range entanglement gives rise to topological order of the nontrivial ground state.
Long-range entanglement is manifested in the so-called topological entanglement entropy~\cite{Kitaev_2006, Levin_2006,TEE_0701,TEE_0702, TEE_08, TEE_11,TEE_12,Vidal2013, TEE_PEPS_cirac11} and other related entanglement quantities~ \cite{negativity201301, negativity201302,orus14, Multipartite_2014}.
However, in general, it is still numerically challenging to access large system sizes to extrapolate accurately the topological entanglement to determine whether a topological phase exists.
Even if one manages to obtain nonzero topological entanglement entropy, there are possibly different topological phases that possess the same value of the entanglement.
Quasiparticle statistics, related to the generally non-abelian geometric phases, represented by the modular $S$ and $T$~\cite{Wen_STmatrix} matrices, provide a more refined characterization of a topological order. $S$ and $T$ are representations of $90^\circ$-rotation and the Dehn twist, respectively, on a two-dimensional torus.
These topological quantities do not depend on the microscopic details of the Hamiltonian, and can be used as order parameters, albeit non-local.
It turns out that one can, given a complete basis states in the degenerate ground space, exploit entanglement, with respect to a bipartite cut, to deduce the set of minimally entangled states (MESs). These states form a special complete set of bases~\cite{Grover_11,Zhang2012, Zhu13,Vidal2013,Tu_2013,He14_dmrg} in the ground space, and from them the modular matrices $S$ and $T$ can actually be deduced.
Methods such as Quantum Monte Carlo and the exact diagonalization have been used in such computations~\cite{Zhu13, Siddhardh14, MES_GM2014}.
The recent development of matrix product states (MPS)~\cite{ mps_1995,mps_2003,mps_2004} and the 2D tensor product states (TPS)~\cite{ peps_2004, Murg2007,Vidal2007, Vidal2008,Levin_TRG2007,Xiang_08}, which are the generalization of the density-matrix renormalization group (DMRG) method~\cite{dmrg1992, dmrg1993} has given rise to alternative approaches to obtain ground states and thus MESs.
These tensor-network or tensor-product states also were constructed as variational wavefunctions for optimizing Hamiltonians~\cite{trg08-Wen,Xiang_08, Vidal2007, Vidal2008, Murg2007, Vidal2009}, but they have also been shown to exactly represent a large class of topological states,
including both non-chiral~\cite{Verstraete_04, Verstraete_06,Oliver_09, Gu_09} and chiral~\cite{Read_2013,Wahl_2013} topological order.
The DMRG itself has also been used to obtain the MES systematically~\cite{Vidal2013,Zaletal14,He14_dmrg}.
In particular, via techniques introduced in Refs.~\cite{Vidal2013, Zhu13, Zaletal14, Siddhardh14, He_Wen_2014}, the MESs corresponding to different quasiparticle excitations can be obtained and the modular matrices can be determined from MESs.
We shall follow the approach proposed by He, Moradi and Wen~\cite{He_Wen_2014}, who showed that the gauge-symmetry structure of TPS can give us information about topological order.
In particular, applying the gauge-symmetry preserved tensor renormalization group (GSPTRG) to $\mathbb{Z}_2$ topological orders under deformation of the wavefunction via a string tension, He et al. obtained the modular matrices as a topological order parameter to characterize the topological phases and their phase transition from the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ topologically ordered phase to a trivial phase (that is adiabatically connected to a product state).
Here, we employ the same approach and apply it to $\mathbb{Z}_N$ topological models under deformations and characterize the topological phase with the modular matrices and locate the phase transitions to topologically trivial phases.
For one particular type of deformation, we can map the wavefunction norm square to the partition function of the classical $N$-state Potts model and obtain the analytic critical string tensions.
The numerical results via GSPTRG agree very well with those via the mapping.
The unexpected result we obtain is that under different deformations, the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ topologically ordered phase can also be driven to a critical phase, in addition to the trivial product-state phase.
The phase diagrams of the $Z_3$ topological phase under different deformations considered in this paper are summarized in Fig.~\ref{phase_diagram}.
The paper is organized as follows.
In Sec.~\ref{review} we review the notion of topological order and gauge symmetry preserved tensor renormalization group which can be used to identify intrinsic topological orders;
In Sec.~\ref {results} we discuss how the deformation can be applied to the $\mathbb{Z}_N$ topologically ordered model via the tensor product states and how to use GSPTRG to compute the modular matrices for characterizing the topological order.
There, we also show a useful mapping form the $\mathbb{Z}_N$ model under a string tension to the two-dimensional classical $N$-state Potts model, from which the critical point between the topologically ordered phase and a trivial phase can be obtained analytically and compared with numerics.
In Sec.~\ref {critical}, we evaluate the modular matrices and correlation function for the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ model and discuss the critical phases.
We conclude in Sec.~\ref{conclusion}.
\section{Modular matrices and gauge symmetry preserved tensor renormalization group} \label{review}
\subsection {Modular matrices}
One of the exotic features of the topological order is the nontrivial quasiparticle statistics, which can be obtained by modular transformations on degenerate ground states on the torus, giving rise to the modular $S$ and $T$ matrices.
This approach of characterizing topological orders has become quite fruitful recently~\cite{Zhang2012, Vidal2013, Michael_2013,He_Wen_2014}.
The modular matrices, or $S$ and $T$ matrices, are generated respectively by the $90^{\circ}$ rotation and the Dehn twist on a set of degenerate ground states on the torus.
The elements of $S$ matrix express the mutual statistics of the quasiparticles, whereas
the $T$ matrix express the twisting a quasiparticle wavefunction along an axes by $360^{\circ}$.
Specifically, to obtain the modular matrices, we need to first determine all the degenerate ground states $\{ | \psi _a \rangle \}_{a=1}^{N}$ of the system.
The $S$ and $T$ matrices are defined as follows~\cite{ Wen1989,Wen1990,Levin_2006}:
\begin{align}
& \langle \psi_a | \hat{S} | \psi_b \rangle = e^{-\alpha_S V+\mathfrak{o} (1/V)} S_{ab} \notag \\
& \langle \psi_a | \hat{T} | \psi_b \rangle= e^{-\alpha_T V+\mathfrak{o} (1/V)} T_{ab},
\end{align}
where $\hat{S} $ and $\hat{T} $ are the transformations of the $90^{\circ}$ rotation and the Dehn twist respectively on a torus with lattice size $V$, $\alpha_S$ and $\alpha_T$ are non-universal constants, and $S_{ab} $ and $T_{ab} $ are elements of the modular matrices.
The information of quasiparticles statistics and their fusion rule are encoded in the $S$ and $T$ matrices~\cite{Verlinde_1987, Liu_2013,Wen_STmatrix,Moradi2014}.
In particular, from the gauge structure of tensor product states at the fixed point (TPS)~\cite{Xie_TPS_2010,Swingle2010,Schuch2010,Oliver2014}, the degenerate ground states can be obtained by inserting the gauge transformation to TPS, i.e., operating on the bond or virtual degrees of freedom by the appropriate gauge transformation.
The degenerate ground states can be labeled as $|\psi(g,h)\rangle$ with gauge transformations $( g,h) $ applied on the internal indices along two directions.
Next, we describe the real-space renormalization group approach and how the modular matrices can be obtained.
\subsection { Gauge symmetry preserved tensor renormalization group (GSPTRG) }
An symmetry preserved tensor renormalization group procedure exist for quantum states based on the tensor product representation
\begin{align}
|\psi\rangle=\sum_{s_1,s_2,... s_m...}\text{tTr}(A^{s_1}A^{s_2}...A^{s_m}...)|s_1 s_2... s_m...\rangle,
\label{TPS}
\end{align}
where $A^s_{\alpha,\beta,\gamma,...}$ is a local tensor with physical index $s$ and internal indices $\alpha\beta\gamma$ etc. $\text{tTr}$ denotes tensor contraction of all the connected inner indices according to the underlying lattice structure.
The norm of TPS is given by
\begin{align}
\langle \psi | \psi \rangle =\text{tTr} (\mathbb{T}^1 \mathbb{T}^2 \mathbb{T}^3... \mathbb{T}^m... ),
\label {ST_TPS}
\end{align}
where the local {\it double tensor\/} $\mathbb{T}^i$ can be formed by merging two layers tensors $A$ and $A^*$ with the physical indices contracted,
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{T}\equiv \sum _s (A^s_{\alpha,\beta, \gamma,\delta... }) \times (A^s_{\alpha',\beta', \gamma',\delta'... }) ^*
\end{equation}
However, it is generally computionally hard to calculate exactly the tensor trace (tTr) or the contraction of the whole tensor network in two and higher dimensions
This imposes the hurdles of an exponentially hard calculation.
Several approximation schemes have been proposed as solutions in this context, such as iPEPS~\cite{Vidal2009} algorithm, the corner transfer matrix method (CTMRG)~\cite{CTMRG1997}, and tensor renormalization approach~\cite{Levin_TRG2007}, all of which tackle this problem essentially by scaling the computational complexity down to the polynomial level for calculating the tensor trace.
We express tensor renormalization group (TRG) approach which is akin to the real space renormalization in the way that at each step, the RG is structured by merging sites (by contracting respective tensors) and truncating the bond dimension according to the relevance of the eigenvalues in the Schmidt decomposition of the old tensors.
Actually, by doing several steps of TRG, the double tensor will flow to a fixed point. The information of the ground states can be extracted from the fixed point tensor.
A many body wave function and Hamiltonian may be invariant under certain transformations that correspond to symmetries.
The symmetry group divides the Hilbert space of system into symmetry sectors that can be labeled by the quantum number or conserved particle number.
Symmetries can be used to improve the numerical methods, such as used in the exact diagonalization method and density matrix renormalization group~\cite{ed_symmetry, dmrg_symmetry}, as well as matrix product states and tensor product states~\cite{U1TPS_singh10,SPQSRG_huang13,He_Wen_2014}.
The TRG method has itself emerged as an alternative approach for dealing with quantum spin systems.
However, the local decomposition usually breaks the symmetry sectors if the symmetry is not strictly enforced. Then, it would flow to the wrong fixed point.
In this section, we will express the gauge symmetry preserved tensor renormalization group (GSPTRG) procedure proposed by He, Moradi and Wen~\cite{He_Wen_2014} for TPS and demonstrate its effectiveness in identifying the topological order from the fixed point tensors.
GSPTRG differs from TRG only when we decompose the tensor.
The matrix would has blocks corresponding to the symmetry sectors.
Once we keep the block structure, the symmetry will be preserved.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\center{\epsfig{figure=SPTRG.pdf,angle=0,width=8.5cm}}
\caption[] {Schematic procedure of the GSPTRG} \label{SPTRG}
\end{figure}
In Ref.~\cite{He_Wen_2014}, the authors showed how to preserve the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ gauge symmetry to determine the phase diagram of $\mathbb{Z}_2$ and double-semion model with string tension.
The $\mathbb{Z}_2$ topological model can be realized in toric code model.
The ground state of toric code model is an equal weight superposition of all closed string loops and it can be represented by tensor product state with virtual dimension $\chi=2$.
When putting the Hamiltonian on the torus, it has four-fold degeneracy ground states which can be obtained by inserting the string operators, such as Pauli matrix $Z$, to the virtual bond degrees of freedom of one particular ground-state wavefunction.
Below we shall consider the case of $\mathbb{Z}_N$ topologically ordered phases for which the Hamiltonian is the generalized toric code model~\cite{Zn_2012,He_Wen_2014}, so the $\mathbb{Z}_N$ topological order has $\mathbb{Z}_N$ gauge symmetry.
To implement GSPTRG, first we form a double tensor $\mathbb{T}$ on each site $ \mathbb{T} = \sum _s (A^s_{\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta }) \times (A^s_{\alpha', \beta',\gamma',\delta' }) ^* $ as shown in Fig.~\ref{SPTRG} (1).
The double tensor $\mathbb{T}$ will has $\mathbb{Z}_N \times \mathbb{Z}_N$ gauge symmetry.
Due to such a gauge symmetry, the elements of double tensor are non-zero only when ${\alpha +\beta +\gamma +\delta =0}$ (mod $N$) and ${\alpha' +\beta' +\gamma' +\delta' =0}$ (mod $N$).
We then view the tensor $\mathbb{T}$ as a matrix $M_{\alpha \beta \alpha' \beta', \gamma \delta\gamma' \delta' } = \mathbb{T}_{\alpha\alpha', \beta \beta', \gamma\gamma', \delta \delta'} $.
The first step of the coarse graining is to decompose a rank-four tensor $M$ (e.g., the double tensor $\mathbb{T}$) into two rank-three tensors.
We do it in two different ways on black and white tensors (see Fig.~\ref{SPTRG} (3)).
Due to a such gauge symmetry, the tensor
\begin{align}
M_{\alpha \beta \alpha' \beta', \gamma \delta\gamma' \delta' } = \bigoplus _{p,q=1} ^{N} m_{p,q},
\end{align}
would be block diagonalized by the quantum number. For example, the each block $m_{p,q}$ obey the rule
\begin{align}
&{\alpha+\beta =p} \quad \text{mod} \quad N \notag \\
&{\gamma+\delta =N-p } \quad \text{ mod} \quad N \notag \\
&{ \alpha'+\beta' =q } \quad \text{ mod} \quad N \notag \\
&{\gamma'+\delta' =N-q } \quad \text{mod}\quad N,
\end{align}
where $p,q=0,1,2,3,...,N-1$ as shown in Fig.~\ref{Block_form} (b). Then, singular-value decomposition (SVD) is performed in each block.
As mentioned above, the tensor contraction is an exponentially hard calculation.
Here, a cutoff $\chi_c$ might be necessary on the dimension of double tensor to keep the computation efficient.
When making the truncation, we need to preserve the symmetry structure of the tensor by keeping the blocks together.
Such symmetry considerations apply similarly to all symmetry groups.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\center{\epsfig{figure=block_form.pdf,angle=0,width=8.5cm}}
\caption[] {(a) The double tensor structure. (b) The $M$ is block diagonalized by the quantum number. } \label{Block_form}
\end{figure}
After the decomposition, the lattice structure is changed.
The second step is to form a new rank-four tensor denoted by $\mathbb{T}'$ as shown in Fig.~\ref{SPTRG} (5).
To do this, we combine the resultant four tensors that meet at s square to form a new tensor as shown in Fig.~\ref{SPTRG} (4).
After doing several steps GSPTRG, the double tensor will gradually flow to a fixed point tensor that preserves the gauge symmetry.
The modular matrices can be evaluated and monitored during the process of the RG steps by performing three steps.
(i) Inserting the gauge transformations $g,h,g',h'$ into the internal indices $\alpha, \beta, \alpha', \beta',$ respectively of the fixed point double tensor as shown in Fig.~\ref {Block_form} (a) to determine $ \big \langle \psi(g',h') | \psi(g,h) \big \rangle$.
(ii) Performing the rotation and the Dehn twist operators on the ground state wave function.
The operators performing on the physical indices can be achieved or replaced by appropriate gauge operations to internal indices,
\begin{align}
& \big\langle \psi(g',h') | \hat{T} | \psi(g,h) \big\rangle = \big\langle \psi(g',h') | \psi(g,gh) \big\rangle \notag \\
& \big\langle \psi(g',h') | \hat{S} | \psi(g,h) \big\rangle = \big\langle \psi(g',h') | \psi(h,g^{-1}) \big\rangle \notag.
\end{align}
(iii) Finally, tracing all internal indices of the fixed point tensor.
For the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ topological phase in Ref. \cite{He_Wen_2014}, the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ gauge symmetry is generated by $\sigma ^z$ acting on each internal indices. (We note that for different forms of ground-state wavefunctions, the gauge operator might be $\sigma^x$.)
The same rule holds in the $\mathbb{Z}_N$ topological phase that generalizes from this case.
The gauge symmetry can be generated by the $N \times N $ operator $Z$ at which all elements are zero except diagonal term $Z_{k,k} = \exp { \frac{2\pi i (k-1)}{N}}; k =1,2,3,...N$.
Instead of viewing the gauge operators $g,h$ applied to internal indices, we can also understand the degenerate ground state $ | \psi(g,h) \big \rangle$ in terms of closed string operators $\hat{g},\hat{h}$ defined in the physical dimension.
The $ \hat{S} $ and $\hat{T}$ transformation can be written in the basis of the degenerate ground states $ | \psi(\hat{g},\hat{h}) \big \rangle$ generated by appropriate closed string operators $\hat{g},\hat{h}$ on the torus along the vertical and horizontal directions, respectively.
The string operators for the particular $\mathbb{Z}_N$ phase (i.e. $\mathbb{Z}_N$ toric code) can be chosen as $\mathcal{Z}^q \equiv (Z )^q \otimes (Z^{\dagger})^ q \otimes (Z )^q \otimes (Z^{\dagger})^ q \dots $, $q=0,1,2,...,N-1$ and $ \mathcal{Z}^0 = \mathcal{I}$.
The $ | \psi( \mathcal{I}, \mathcal{I}) \big \rangle \equiv | \psi \rangle $ is our reference ground state represented by the tensor product state in Eq. \ref{ZN_TPS}.
Our goal is to obtain the modular $S$ and $T$ matrices.
We can obtain the $N^2 \times N^2$ $S$-matrix generated by $90^\circ$-rotation and it is given as
$S_{a,b} = \big\langle \psi( \mathcal{Z}^{a_1},\mathcal{Z}^{a_2}) \big\rangle | \hat{S} | \psi(\mathcal{Z}^{b_1},\mathcal{Z}^{b_2}) \big\rangle
= \big\langle \psi(\mathcal{Z}^{a_1},\mathcal{Z}^{a_2} \big\rangle | \psi(\mathcal{Z}^{b_2},\mathcal{Z}^{-b_1}) \big\rangle $; where
$a_1,a_2,b_1,b_2 = {0,1,2,...N-1} $. Both matrix indices $a$ and $b$ range from $1$ to $N^2$ where $a = a_1\, N+a_2+1$ and $b = b_1\, N+b_2+1$.
Similarly, to apply the Dehn twist to all degeneracy ground states we also can get the $N^2 \times N^2$ $T$-matrix:
$T_{a,b} = \big\langle \psi( \mathcal{Z}^{a_1},\mathcal{Z}^{a_2}) | \hat{T} | \psi(\mathcal{Z}^{b_1},\mathcal{Z}^{b_2}) \big\rangle
= \big\langle \psi(\mathcal{Z}^{a_1},\mathcal{Z}^{a_2} | \psi(\mathcal{Z}^{b_1},\mathcal{Z}^{b_1+b_2}) \big\rangle $.
For example, the 4-by-4 $T$-matrix for the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ toric code is given as follows:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
\label{Tmatrix}
T = \left(
\begin{array}{ccccc}
\big\langle \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{I}) | \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{I}) \big\rangle &\big \langle \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{I}) | \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{Z}) \big\rangle
&\big\langle \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{I}) | \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{Z}) \big\rangle &\big\langle \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{I}) | \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{I}) \big\rangle \\
\big\langle \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{Z}) | \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{I}) \big\rangle & \big\langle \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{Z}) | \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{Z}) \big\rangle
&\big \langle \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{Z}) | \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{Z}) \big\rangle&\big\langle \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{Z}) | \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{I}) \big\rangle\\
\big\langle \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{I}) | \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{I}) \big\rangle& \big\langle \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{I}) | \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{Z}) \big\rangle
&\big\langle \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{I}) | \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{Z}) \big\rangle&\big \langle \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{I}) | \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{I}) \big\rangle \\
\big\langle \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{Z}) | \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{I}) \big\rangle &\big\langle \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{Z}) | \psi(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{Z}) \big\rangle
& \big\langle \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{Z}) | \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{Z}) \big\rangle & \big\langle \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{Z}) | \psi(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{I}) \big\rangle \\
\end{array} \right).
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
\section{ The results} \label {results}
\subsection{ The quantum $\mathbb{Z}_N$ phase}
Let us begin by describing the construction of $\mathbb{Z}_N$ wavefunctions.
Their Hamiltonian is generalized from toric code model \cite{Zn_2012,He_Wen_2014}.
The tensor product state (TPS) on the square lattice motivated by the $\mathbb{Z}_N$ topologically ordered phase is characterized by the rank-4 tensor, $P_{\alpha, \beta, \gamma,\delta}$ with four internal indices running over $0,1,2,...N-1$ on vertex and the rank-3 tensor $G^{s}_{\alpha,\beta}$ with one physical index $s$ running over the $N$ possible spin states ${0,1,....(N-1)}$ on the link as shown in Fig.~\ref{TO} (a).
The wave function is then given by
\begin{align}
|\psi \rangle= \sum_{\{s^i\}}\text{ tTr}( \otimes_v P \otimes_l G^{s_i}) \mid s_1,s_2,....\rangle,
\label{ZN_TPS}
\end{align}
where $v$ labels vertices and $l$ links. Specifically,
\begin{align}
P_{\alpha, \beta,\gamma,\delta} = \left\{
\begin{array}{l l}
1, & \quad \text{if $\alpha+\beta+ \gamma+\delta=0$ mod N}, \\
0, & \quad \text{otherwise},
\end{array} \right.
\label{TTlabel}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
&G_{ii}^{i}=1, \quad i=0,1,2,3,...,N-1, \notag \\
& \text{others=0}.
\label{GGlabel}
\end{align}
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\center{\epsfig{figure=Z3_phase.pdf,angle=0,width=17cm,height=6cm}}
\caption[]
{The trace of modular matrices (a)$S$, (b) $T$, and the property (c) $X_2/X_1$ as functions of parameter $g$ display a phase transition at critical point $g_c$ of $\mathbb{Z}_3$ model}
\label{Z3_phase}
\end{figure*}
The rank-3 tensor $G$ behaves like a projector which essentially sets the internal index equal to the physical index.
In \cite{robustness_PEPS_cirac11}, they studied the problem of the stability of a tensor network state under physical perturbations to the local tensor.
In view of this we can consider a deformation, $Q=\sum_{i=0} ^{N-1} q_i | i \rangle \langle i |$ and $ 0 \leq q_i \leq 1$ which apply to the physical indices, $|\psi_{(Q)} \rangle \equiv Q \otimes Q \otimes... \otimes Q | \psi \rangle $.
At $q_i= 1, (i=0,1,2,...,N-1)$, this is exactly $\mathbb{Z}_N$ topologically ordered phases.
At $q_0=1, \quad q_i=0, (i=1,2,3,...,N-1)$, the tensor represent a product state of all $0$.
At some critical point in parameters $q_i$, the phase transition will occur.
Here, we first consider $q_0=1$ and $q_i=g^2, (i=1,2,3,...,N-1)$.
The $\mathbb{Z}_N$ phase has a $N^2$-fold ground-state degeneracy on a torus, which corresponds to $N^2$ different types of quasiparticle excitations. Therefore, the corresponding modular matrices will be of size $N^2 \times N^2$.
For simplicity of the calculation we associate every vertex with four matrices as shown in Fig.~\ref{TO} and from the double tensor.
The norm of wave function represented by the double tensor can then be represented as standard tensor product form as Eq.~(\ref{ST_TPS}), where the double tensor $\mathbb{T}^{\alpha', \beta', \gamma', \delta'}_{\alpha, \beta, \gamma, \delta}$ has eight inner indices $ \alpha', \beta', \gamma', \delta',\alpha, \beta, \gamma, \delta = 0,1,...,N-1 $.
From the TPS with deformation, we can find the phase transition point of the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ model as shown in Fig.~\ref{Z3_phase} by using GSPTRG.
The fixed point tensor structure might be complicated but it is always possible to identify them.
We calculate $S$ and $T$ matrices and a basis independent quantity given by the ratio $X_2/X_1$~\cite{Xie_LU_2010}, where
$X_1$ and $X_2$ as shown in Fig. \ref{X2X1} are defined as follows,
\begin{align}
& X_1 = \big( \sum _{s,\alpha, \beta, \alpha', \beta'} A^s_{\alpha, \beta, \alpha, \beta} \times (A^{s}_{\alpha', \beta', \alpha', \beta'} )^* \big) ^2, \notag \\
& X_2 = \sum _{s,s',\alpha, \beta,\gamma,\delta, \alpha', \beta',\gamma',\delta'}
(A^s_{\alpha, \beta, \gamma, \beta} \times A^{s'}_{\gamma, \delta, \alpha, \delta})
\times \notag \\
&\big( (A^s_{\alpha', \beta', \gamma', \beta'})^* \times \big( A^{s'}_{\gamma', \delta', \alpha', \delta'})^* \big).
\end{align}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\center{\epsfig{figure=X2X1.pdf,angle=0,width=7cm}}
\caption[]
{The quantity $X_2/X_1$ obtained by taking the ratio of the contraction value of the double tensor in two different ways. $X_2 / X_1$ is invariant under gauge transformation, such as unitary operators $U$ and $V$. It can be used to distinguish different fixed-point tensors. }
\label{X2X1}
\end{figure}
We find that when $0 \leq g < 0.7776 $, all components of $S$ and $T$ matrices are $1$, and $X_2/X_1=1.0$, and this shows that the ground state is in the trivial phase.
When $0.7776 \leq g < 1.0 $, the tensor belongs to the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ topologically ordered phase, since we obtain nontrivial $S$ and $T$ matrices as follows:
\begin{align}
\label{Z3_Smatrix}
S = \left(
\begin{array}{cccccccccc}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 &0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 &0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 &0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 &0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 &0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 &0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 &0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 &1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 &0 \\
\end{array} \right),
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\label{Z3_Tmatrix}
T = \left(
\begin{array}{cccccccccc}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 &0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 &0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 &0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 &0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 &0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 &0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 &0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 &1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 &0 \\
\end{array} \right),
\end{align}
and $X_2/X_1=0.33333$.
The $S$ and $T$ matrices obtained above give us the modular transformations.
Note that the matrices are not in the canonical form (where, e.g., the $T$ is diagonal), but
there is a procedure to make the $T$-matrix diagonal and at the same time make $S$ in the canonical form~\cite{Liu_2013}.
Then diagonalized $T$-matrix gives the self-statistics of quasiparticles, and $S$ matrix the mutual statistics.
In the GSPTRG algorithm, we preserve the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ gauge symmetry of the tenser.
As performing more steps of RG, the nonlocal order parameters show sharper changes around $g_c=0.7776$ in Fig.~\ref{Z3_phase}, and
the crossings of different RG curves signal the transition point separating the trivial phase and topological phase.
Similar behaviors of the $\mathbb{Z}_4$ and $\mathbb{Z}_5$ model under GSPTRG is also found in Fig.~\ref{ZN_total_S}.
For $\mathbb{Z}_4$ model, when $0.7597 \leq g < 1.0 $, the tensor belongs the $\mathbb{Z}_4$ topologically ordered phase, since we obtain nontrivial $S$ and $T$ matrices as follows:
\begin{align}
S =
\begin{pmatrix}
1&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\
&&&&1&&&&&&&&&&&\\
&&&&&&&&&&&&1&&&\\
&&&&&&&&1&&&&&&&\\
&1&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&1\\
&&&&&&&&&&&1&&&&\\
&&&&&&&1&&&&&&&&\\
&&1&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\
&&&&&&&&&&1&&&&&\\
&&&&&&&&&&&&&1&&\\
&&&&&1&&&&&&&&&&\\
&&&1&&&&&&&&&&&&\\
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&1&\\
&&&&&&&&&1&&&&&&\\
&&&&&&1&&&&&&&&&\\
\end{pmatrix},
\end{align}
\begin{align}
T =
\begin{pmatrix}
1&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\
&1&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\
&&1&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\
&&&1&&&&&&&&&&&&\\
&&&&&&&1&&&&&&&&\\
&&&&&&1&&&&&&&&&\\
&&&&&1&&&&&&&&&&\\
&&&&1&&&&&&&&&&&\\
&&&&&&&&&1&&&&&&\\
&&&&&&&&&&&1&&&&\\
&&&&&&&&1&&&&&&&\\
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\
&&&&&&&&&&&&&1&&\\
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&1\\
&&&&&&&&&&&&1&&&\\
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&1&\\
\end{pmatrix},
\end{align}
and $X_2/X_1=0.25$ as shown in Fig.~\ref{ZN_total_S} (a).
For $\mathbb{Z}_5$ model, when $0.7450 \leq g < 1.0 $, the tensor belongs the $\mathbb{Z}_5$ topologically ordered phase, since we obtain nontrivial $25 \times 25$ $S$ and $T$ matrices and $X_2/X_1=0.2$ as shown in Fig.~\ref{ZN_total_S} (b).
\begin{figure}[ht]
\center{\epsfig{figure=ZN_total_S.pdf,angle=0,width=8.5cm,height=11cm}}
\caption[]{The trace of modular matrices $S$ as functions of parameter $g$ display a phase transition at critical point $g_c$ of (a)$\mathbb{Z}_4$ (b) $\mathbb{Z}_5$ model } \label{ZN_total_S}
\end{figure}
In the following, we shall find the mapping from the norm square of the $\mathbb{Z}_N$ wavefunctions and the $N$-state Potts model.
First, by applying a deformation $Q=\sum_{i=0} ^{N-1} q_i | i \rangle \langle i |$ to tensor $G^{s}_{\alpha,\beta}$, a new tensor $\Lambda $ can be obtained as shown in Fig.~\ref{TO} (b):
\begin{align}
\Lambda_{\alpha,\beta}^{\alpha', \beta'} = \sum_{s,s',s''} Q_{s,s'} G^{s'}_{\alpha \beta} \times Q^*_{s, s''} G^{*s''}_{\alpha,\beta}.
\end{align}
There are two nonzero components in $\Lambda_{\alpha,\alpha'}^{\beta,\beta'}$,
\begin{align}
\Lambda_{0,0}^{0,0} = 1; \quad \Lambda_{i, i}^{i, i} = q_i^2 \quad (i=1,2,...,N-1).
\end{align}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\center{\epsfig{figure=TO_phase.pdf,angle=0,width=8.5cm}}
\caption[]{(a) The tensor product state representation of $\mathbb{Z}_N$ topologically ordered phase, (b) Apply the deformation to form a double tensor $\Lambda$ on the link and the tensor on the vertex, $\tilde{P} = P \otimes P^* $, (c) The double tensor represented by $\Lambda$ and $\tilde{P}$, (d)Decompose tensor $\Lambda= \sqrt{\Lambda} \sqrt{\Lambda} $ and reconstruct the tensor (e) The new double tensor.} \label{TO}
\end{figure}
Second, we form the double tensor $\mathbb{T}$ as shown in Fig.~\ref{TO} (e) from tensors $\tilde{P} = P \otimes P^{*} $ on the vertex and $\Lambda$ on the link as shown in Fig.~\ref{TO} (d),
\begin{align}
\mathbb{T}_{i,j, k,l}^{i', j', k', l'} = & \sum _{ \alpha, \beta, \gamma,\delta, \alpha ', \beta ', \gamma ',\delta '} P_{\alpha, \beta, \gamma, \delta} \times P^*_{\alpha ', \beta ', \gamma ', \delta '} \notag \\
&\sqrt{ \Lambda_{\alpha,i} ^{\alpha', i '}}
\sqrt{ \Lambda_{\beta, j} ^{\beta', j '}}
\sqrt{ \Lambda_{\gamma, k}^{\gamma ', k '}}
\sqrt{ \Lambda_{\delta,l} ^{\delta', l '}},
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\mathbb{T}_{i,j,k,l}^{i,j,k,l} = \prod_{m=0}^{N-1} q_m^{ n_m},
\end{align}
where $n_m$ is the number of virtual indices in state "$m$".
Then the double tensor with nonzero components of $\mathbb{Z}_2$ model for $Q=| 0 \rangle \langle 0 | + g^2 | 1 \rangle \langle 1 | $ are given by
\begin{align}
\label{Z2quantum}
& \mathbb{T}_{0000}^{0000} = 1 \\
& \mathbb{T}_{0011}^{0011} = \mathbb{T}_{0110}^{0110}= \mathbb{T}_{1100}^{1100} \notag \\
& =\mathbb{T}_{1001}^{1001} = \mathbb{T}_{0101}^{0101} = \mathbb{T}_{1010}^{1010} = g^4 \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{1111}^{1111} = g^8 \notag.
\end{align}
The double tensor with nonzero components of $\mathbb{Z}_3$ model for $Q=| 0 \rangle \langle 0 | + g^2 | 1 \rangle \langle 1 | + g^2 | 2 \rangle \langle 2 | $ are given by
\begin{align}
\label{Z3quantum}
& \mathbb{T}_{0000}^{0000} = 1 \\
& \mathbb{T}_{1110}^{1110}= \mathbb{T}_{1101}^{1101}= \mathbb{T}_{1011}^{1011}= \mathbb{T}_{0111}^{0111}= g^6 \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{2220}^{2220}= \mathbb{T}_{2202}^{2202}= \mathbb{T}_{2022}^{2022}= \mathbb{T}_{0222}^{0222} = g^6 \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{0012}^{0012} = \mathbb{T}_{0120}^{0120} = \mathbb{T}_{1200}^{1200} = \mathbb{T}_{2001}^{2001} = \mathbb{T}_{1002}^{1002} = \mathbb{T}_{0021}^{0021} \notag \\
& =\mathbb{T}_{0210}^{0210} = \mathbb{T}_{2100}^{2100} = \mathbb{T}_{0102}^{0102} = \mathbb{T}_{1020}^{1020} = \mathbb{T}_{0201}^{0201} = \mathbb{T}_{2010}^{2010} = g^4 \notag \\
&\mathbb{T}_{1122}^{1122} = \mathbb{T}_{1221}^{1221} = \mathbb{T}_{2211}^{2211} = \mathbb{T}_{2112}^{2112} = \mathbb{T}_{1212}^{1212} = \mathbb{T}_{2121}^{2121} = g^8 \notag .
\end{align}
The $\mathbb{Z}_2$ model above is mathematically equivalent to the two-dimensional classical Ising model where the transition point is known to great accuracy~\cite{Xie_LU_2010}.
The numerical results from Ref.~\cite{He_Wen_2014} show that the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ toric code and double-semion models have the same critical point under the string tension.
This is understood by recognizing that the phases in the double-semion wavefunction of Ref.~\cite{He_Wen_2014} under the string tension cancel in the mapping to the Potts model and its has the same norm square as the one from deforming the toric code. Therefore, they have the same critical point $g_c=0.802243$ from Eq.~(\ref{eqn:gc}) below.
Next we derive the mapping.
\subsection{The classical $N$-state Potts Model}
The Hamiltonian of the $N$-state Potts is given by
\begin{align}
H = \sum _{<i,j>} (-J \delta_{s_i,s_j} ).
\end{align}
with the sum running over the nearest neighbor pairs $<i, j>$ over all lattice sites.
The degree of freedom $s_i,s_j$ on the site is on values in $\{0,1,..., q-1\}$.
The $\delta_{s_i,s_j}$ is the Kronecker delta, which equals one whenever $s_i = s_j$ and zero otherwise.
The model is ferromagnetic when $J>0$ and antiferromagnetic if $J<0$.
A basic question is where the phase transition point is.
Baxter has determined the exact free energy for the square-lattice Potts model and determined the critical point, such as ferromagnetic critical point is $ e^{\beta J}=1+\sqrt{q}$ and antiferromagnetic critical point is $ e^{\beta J}=-1+\sqrt{4-q}$~\cite{Baxter88}.
For example, the three-state Potts model with zero external field is $N=3$ and then the spins are usually taken to be $\{0,1,2\}$.
By tuning the temperature, the phase transition will occur,
for example, for $J > 0$ the transition is first order if $N \geq 5$ and is continuous if $N \leq 4$.
The partition function of $N$-state Potts Model is given by:
\begin{align}
Z = e ^{-\beta H} = \sum \prod _{<i,j>} e ^{\beta J \delta_{s_i,s_j} } = \sum \prod_{<i,j>} \Lambda(i,j).
\end{align}
Here, $\Lambda$ is named the transfer Matrix on the link and can be represented by a $N \times N$ matrix
\begin{align}
\Lambda (i,j)=
\begin{pmatrix}
e^{\beta J} & 1 & 1 & \dots & 1 \\
1 & e^{\beta J} & 1 & \dots & 1 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
1 & 1 & 1 & \dots & e^{\beta J}
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{align}
Applying the Hadamard matrix $H$, we form a diagonal matrix $\Lambda'$ as shown in Fig.~\ref{classical} (a).
\begin{align}
\Lambda' =& H\times \Lambda \times H^{\dagger} \notag\\
= &
\begin{pmatrix}
e^{\beta J}+q-1 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0 \\
0 & e^{\beta J} -1 & 0 & \dots & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \dots & e^{\beta J}-1
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{align}
For example, the Hadamard matrix of three-state Potts model can be given by
\begin{align}
H = \sum_{\alpha,\beta =0 }^2 H_{\alpha \beta} = \frac{1}{\sqrt3} \left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1& \omega & \omega^2 \\
1& \omega^2 & \omega \\
\end{array} \right),
\end{align}
where $\omega = e^{i 2 \pi / 3}$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\center{\epsfig{figure=classical_model.pdf,angle=0,width=8.5cm}}
\caption[] {The tensor representation of partition function, (b) Reconstruct the tensor (c) The new tensor configuration.} \label{classical}
\end{figure}
Then, we define a trivial rank-4 tensor $R_{\alpha \alpha \alpha \alpha}=1$ with index $\alpha$ running over $0,1,2,...,N-1$ on each vertex.
To apply the Hadamard matrix $H$ to the tensor $R$,
\begin{align}
R'_{i,j,k,l}
&= \sum _{ \alpha} R_{\alpha, \alpha, \alpha,\alpha} \times H_{\alpha, i} H^{+}_{\alpha, j} H^{+}_{\alpha, k}H_{\alpha,l} \\
& = \left\{
\begin{array}{l l}
1/q, & \quad \text{if $\alpha+\beta+ \gamma+\delta=0$ mod N}\\
0, & \quad \text{otherwise}.
\end{array} \right.
\end{align}
Combining the tensor $R'$ and $\Lambda '$ forms a new tensor $\mathbb{T}$.
Then the double tensor with nonzero components of classical Ising model without magnetic field are
\begin{align}
\label{Z2classical}
& \mathbb{T}_{0000} = \frac{1}{2} (2\cosh(\beta J))^2 \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{0011} = \mathbb{T}_{0110} = \mathbb{T}_{1100} = \frac{1}{2} (2\cosh(\beta J))(2\sinh(\beta J)) \notag \\
&\mathbb{T}_{1001} =\mathbb{T}_{0101} =\mathbb{T}_{1010} = \frac{1}{2} (2\cosh(\beta J))(2\sinh(\beta J)) \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{1111} = \frac{1}{2} (2\sinh(\beta J))^2.
\end{align}
The nonzero components of the three-state Potts model are given by
\begin{align}
\label{Z3classical}
& \mathbb{T}_{0000} = \frac{1}{3} (\sqrt{e^{\beta J}+2 } )^4 \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{0111} = \mathbb{T}_{1011} = \mathbb{T}_{1101} = \mathbb{T}_{1110}
= \frac{1}{3} (\sqrt{e^{\beta J}+2 } ) (\sqrt{e^{\beta J}-1 } )^3 \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{0222} = \mathbb{T}_{2022} = \mathbb{T}_{2202} = \mathbb{T}_{2220}
= \frac{1}{3} (\sqrt{e^{\beta J}+2 } ) (\sqrt{e^{\beta J}-1 } )^3 \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{0012} = \mathbb{T}_{0120} = \mathbb{T}_{1200} = \mathbb{T}_{2001} = \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{0021} = \mathbb{T}_{0210}= \mathbb{T}_{2100} = \mathbb{T}_{1002} = \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{0102} = \mathbb{T}_{1020} = \mathbb{T}_{0201} = \mathbb{T}_{0201} =
\frac{1}{3} (\sqrt{e^{\beta J}+2 } )^2 (\sqrt{e^{\beta J}-1 } )^2 \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{1122} = \mathbb{T}_{1221} = \mathbb{T}_{2211} = \mathbb{T}_{2112} = \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{1212} = \mathbb{T}_{2121} =
\frac{1}{3} (\sqrt{e^{\beta J}-1 } )^4.
\end{align}
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\center{\epsfig{figure=CP_total.pdf,angle=0,width=17cm,height=6cm}}
\caption[]
{ The trace of $S$ matrix as a function $(g-gc)\times L^{\nu}$ on (a)$\mathbb{Z}_2$ (b)$\mathbb{Z}_3$ (c) $\mathbb{Z}_4$ models. }
\label{CP_total}
\end{figure*}
\subsection {Duality}
The two-dimensional classical ferromagnetic Potts models have phase transitions
located at $e^{(\beta_c J)} =1+ \sqrt{q}$, separateing the ordered (ferromagnetic) and disordered (paramagnetic) phases.
The form of partition function of the $N$-state Potts model represented by the tensor network is equal to the norm square of the $\mathbb{Z}_N$ wave function, with deformation $ Q = | 0 \rangle \langle 0 | + \sum_{i=1}^{N-1}g^2 | i \rangle \langle i |$, represented by the tensor network, such as Eq.~(\ref{Z2quantum}), Eq.~(\ref{Z2classical}) and Eq.~(\ref{Z3quantum}), Eq.~(\ref{Z3classical}).
The double tensor of the norm of $\mathbb{Z}_N$ wave function is just a two copies of the partition function of Potts model.
We then have the relation between the parameter $g$ and the parameter $\beta J$,
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:gc}
g = \left( \frac{ \sqrt{e^{\beta J}-1 } ^2 } {\sqrt{e^{\beta J}+N-1} ^2 } \right) ^{1/8}.
\end{align}
From the relation and the transition point of Potts model, we can then obtain the phase transition point $g_c$ for $\mathbb{Z}_N$ model :
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{l |c | c || c | c }
& Numerics & \scriptsize From mapping & Numerics & \scriptsize Potts model \\
\hline
N & $ g_c $ & $g_c(\beta J)$& $ 1/ \nu$ & $ 1/ \nu$ \\
\hline
\hline
2 & 0.8021 \tiny($\chi_c=24$) & 0.802243 & 1.010 & 1 \\
3 & 0.7776 \tiny($\chi_c=24$) & 0.777817 & 1.201 & 6/5 \\
4 & 0.7597 \tiny($\chi_c=32$) & 0.759835 & 1.501 & 3/2 \\
5 & 0.7450 \tiny($\chi_c=30$) & 0.745582 & & first order
\label {CP_val}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
From this table, the transition points from the GSPTRG are quite close to exact mapping results.
For the classical $N$-state Potts Model, if $N \leq 4$, this model describes a continuous phase transition with scalar order parameter.
The critical exponents of these transition are universal values and characterize the singular properties of physical quantities.
In particular, the correlation function of the classical spin system is,
\begin{align}
D(\vec{r_i} - \vec{r_j}) = \langle S(\vec{r_i} ) S(\vec{r_j} ) \rangle - \langle S(\vec{r_i} ) \rangle \langle S(\vec{r_j} ) \rangle,
\end{align}
where the brackets mean statistical average over all configurations.
The correlation length $\xi$ is defined in terms of correlation function $D(\vec{r_i} -\vec{r_j} ) \sim e^{|\vec{r_i} -\vec{r_j} |/ \xi }$, where $|\vec{r_i} -\vec{r_j}|$ is the distance between two spins.
In the asymptotic limit of large $|\vec{r_i} -\vec{r_j}|$, the correlation function decays to zero exponentially.
On the other hand, the correlation length diverges at the critical point $\xi \sim |T-T_c| ^{-\nu}$, where $\nu$ is an example of a critical exponent.
In the above Table, we list the exponents for the classical Potts Model.
As shown above the $\mathbb{Z}_N$ model with one parameter $g$ can be mapped to the classical $N$-state Potts Model.
We fit critical exponent $\nu$ for the order parameter i.e. $Tr(T), Tr(S),$ or $X_2/X_1$ under the renormalization flow.
Our results as shown in Fig.~\ref{CP_total} are $1/\nu=1.01$ for the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ model, $1/\nu=1.201$ for the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ model and $1/\nu=1.501$ for the $\mathbb{Z}_4$ model.
For the five-state Potts model, the transition is a weak first-order~\cite{Potts_1982}.
Near critical point, the correlation length is very large but finite.
It is difficult to distinguish the critical exponent of the $\mathbb{Z}_5$ model numerically.
It is worth mentioning that since after each step of the renormalization, the number of sites is reduced by half, this is to say that, after performing two steps of renormalization, the distance between two new neighbor sites will be increased twofold.
We can perform a rescaling, and see the data collapse.
In Fig.~\ref{CP_total}, $L$ is length scale defined by the number of RG step $n_{rg}$, $L = 2^{n_{rg}/2}$.
\section {The critical phase} \label{critical}
Here we focus on the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ topologically ordered phase under different forms of deformation.
As mentioned above, the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ topologically ordered phase can be represented by rank-four tensor $P$ (see Eq.~(\ref{TTlabel}) ) and rank-three tenors $G$ (see Eq.~(\ref{GGlabel}) ).
We have already discussed a special projector $Q_a= 1 \times |0 \rangle \langle 0 | + g^2 \times |1 \rangle \langle 1 | +g^2 \times |2 \rangle \langle 2 | $ with $0 \leq g \leq 1$ in earlier parts, and here only briefly review it.
At some critical point in $g$, the state must go through a phase transition.
Moreover, this model is mathematically equivalent to two-dimensional three-state Potts model.
We can obtain $g_c = 0.777817$ from exactly mapping.
By using GSPTRG, we can obtain the transition point to be between $0.7776$ and $0.7777$ and find our results to be with $0.02\% $ accuracy.
We shall discuss the more deformation operator $Q= q_0\times |0 \rangle \langle 0 | + q_1 \times |1 \rangle \langle 1 | + q_2 \times |2 \rangle \langle 2 | $ with $q_0, q_1, q_2 >0$ in detail.
By applying it to the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ toric code wavefunction, we obtain the double tensor
\begin{align}
\mathbb{T}_{i,j,k,l} ^{i,j,k,l} = \left\{
\begin{array}{l l}
q_0^{n_0 } q_1^{n_1 } q_2^{n_2 }, & \quad \text{if $i+j+k+l=0$ mod 3}\\
0, & \quad \text{otherwise},
\end{array} \right.
\end{align}
where $i,j,k,l=0,1,2$ and $n_0$, $n_1$, and $n_2$ means the number of the inner indices in state "$0$", "$1$", and "$2$" respectively.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\center{\epsfig{figure=10g_phase.pdf,angle=0,width=17cm,height=6cm}}
\caption[]
{The trace of modular matrices (a)$S$, (b) $T$, and the property (c) $X_2/X_1$ as functions of parameter $g$ display a phase transition at critical point $g_c$ of $\mathbb{Z}_3$ model with projector $Q_b= 1 \times |0 \rangle \langle 0 | +0 \times | 1 \rangle \langle 1 | +g^2 \times |2 \rangle \langle 2 | $. }
\label{10g_phases_giagram}
\end{figure*}
\subsection {For $ q_0=1; q_1=0; q_2=g^2$ }
We first study the case $ q_0=1; q_1=0; q_2=g^2$, i.e., the wavefunction is constructed from an effective two-dimensional Hilbert space spanned by $|0\rangle$ and $|2\rangle$.
At $g=0$, the tensor represents a product of all states being $0$. Therefore, the phase diagram near $g=0$ is a region of the trivial phase that is adiabatically connected to a product state.
At $g> 0$, the nonzero components are
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{T}_{0222} ^{0222} = g^6, \mathbb{T}_{2022} ^{2022} = g^6; \mathbb{T}_{2202} ^{2202} = g^6 ; \mathbb{T}_{2220} ^{2220} = g^6 \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{0000} ^{0000} = 1.
\end{align}
While $g \gg 1$, the tensor form is mathematically equivalent the quantum dimer model at Rokhsar-Kivelson (RK) point \cite{RK1988,Moessner2001,Summary_QDM} where the degenerate ground state attains exactly zero energy in the form of an equal weight superposition of all possible configurations in a given winding parity sector on square lattice.
This point is a critical phase with algebraically decaying correlation function.
It is noteworthy that the RK point is a critical point separating two gapped phases of the quantum dimer model on the square lattice.
In the large $g$ limit, we can regard string-$2$ as vacuum state and string-$0$ as dimer. Then the tensor form will obey the hard-core constraint where each vertex is connected to one dimer only and has the same weight.
As a result, as $ g$ goes from $0$ to $2$, a phase transition must occur.
Some phases between gapped trivial states and critical phases could exist. Can a topologically ordered phase exist?
Let us examine this middle parameter region in detail.
We use the gauge symmetry preserved tensor renormalization group to flow our wave function to fixed point and obtain the modular matrices by inserting gauge transformation and invariant quantity $X_2/X_1$ easily with sharp quantum phases transition point.
Again, this is a advantage to use GSPTRG to characterize the topologically ordered phase numerically with TPS ansatz.
Our numerical results is given in Fig.~\ref{10g_phases_giagram}.
We see that when $0 \leq g < 0.944$, all components of $9\times 9$ $S$ and $T$ matrices are $1$, and $X_2/X_1 = 1.0$. We can say the ground state in the trivial (product) phase, since at $g=0$ this wave function is product state.
For $0.944 \leq g < 1.238$, the tensor belongs the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ topologically ordered phase, since we obtain nontrivial $S$ and $T$ matrices (same as Eq.~(\ref{Z3_Smatrix}) and (\ref{Z3_Tmatrix})) and $X_2/X_1=0.3333$.
For $ 1.238 \leq g <2.0$, when renormalization step is larger enough, we can obtain the trivial fixed point.
The GSPTRG can distinguish different topologically ordered phases and a topologically ordered phase from topologically trivial phases. But it cannot distinguish different topologically trivial phases. From the equivalence to the RK point for large $g$, the system is probably gapless for $g$ large; from the trivial product state at $g=0$, the system is probably also a trivial product phase for small $g$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\center{\epsfig{figure=Dr_all.pdf,angle=0,width=9cm,height=10cm}}
\caption[] { The correlation function under the deformation $Q_b= 1 \times |0 \rangle \langle 0 | +0 \times | 1 \rangle \langle 1 | +g^2 \times |2 \rangle \langle 2 | $ with (a) $g=1.02$ (b) $g=2.0$. The correlation function under the deformation $Q_c= 1 \times |0 \rangle \langle 0 | + 1 \times | 1 \rangle \langle 1 | +g^2 \times |2 \rangle \langle 2 | $ with (c) $g=1.3$ (d) $g=2.0$. } \label{Dr_all}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\center{\epsfig{figure=11g_phase.pdf,angle=0,width=17cm,height=6cm}}
\caption[]
{The trace of modular matrices (a)$S$, (b) $T$, and the property (c) $X_2/X_1$ as functions of parameter $g$ display a phase transition at critical point $g_c$ of $\mathbb{Z}_3$ model with projector $Q_c= 1 \times |0 \rangle \langle 0 | +1 \times |1 \rangle \langle 1 | +g^2 \times |2 \rangle \langle 2 | $. }
\label{11g_phases_giagram}
\end{figure*}
The GSPTRG can be used to detect the topological order well, but it cannot use to classify the trivial phases.
It must look more carefully in trivial phases.
We need sufficient evidence to show what trivial phase is.
The relevant quantity of our interest is the correlation function which appears useful in characterizing the product state and critical phase.
The connected correlation function is expressed as,
\begin{align}
D(r) = \langle S_0 (\vec{r}_i) S_0 (\vec{r}_i) \rangle - \langle S_0 (\vec{r}_j) \rangle \langle S_0 (\vec{r}_j) \rangle,
\end{align}
where $r= |\vec{r}_i - \vec{r}_j |$ and $S_0 (\vec{r}_i)$ count 1 if $ ''0''$ state is present on the link $\vec{r}_i$ in a given configuration otherwise
$0$.
In the asymptotic limit of large $r$, the correlation function will converge to zero.
When $0 \leq g < 0.944$, we obtain topological entanglement entropy $\gamma =0$.
In the limit $g=0$, this is a product state of all $0$.
There is good evidence to show that as $0 \leq g < 0.944$ the state in this region is the trivial state.
When $ g > 1.238$, based on the observation of tensor representation on $ g \gg 1$ discussed earlier, we would claim that this phase might be a critical phase.
From the GSPTRG results, the values of $tr(S)$, $tr(T)$, and $X_2/X_1$ approach to $9.0$, $9.0$, and $1.0$ respectively.
In the tensor renormalization approach, the above quantities are calculated on the square lattice with size $128 \times 128 $.
For the critical phase, the correlation function is algebraic of the form $D(r) \sim r ^{-b}$ for large $r$ as displayed in Fig.~\ref{Dr_all} (b) obtained using the tensor renormalization group (TRG) and the mean-field approximated second renormalization group (SRG) \cite{SRG}.
However, for TRG, the convergence becomes very slow and unstable in the critical phase~\cite{Huang2014}.
Even though the TRG is not efficient, the results with large critical bond dimension $\chi_c =64$ already show that the correlation function structure is different exponentially decaying as shown in Fig.~\ref{Dr_all} (a).
On the other hand, the mean-field approach of SRG can improve the accuracy of the results as shown in Fig.~\ref{Dr_all} (b) with bond dimension $\chi_c =64$.
When $0.994 \leq g < 1.238$, it is worth noting that the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ phase exists, even if one of physical term $|1 \rangle$ is turned off.
It is an unsettled question.
\subsection {For $ q_0=1; q_1=1; q_2=g^2$ }
Here we consider the deformation parametrized by $ q_0=1, q_1=1, q_2=g^2$ in the projector $Q_c= q_0 \times |0 \rangle \langle 0 | +q_1 \times |1 \rangle \langle 1 | +q_2 \times |2 \rangle \langle 2 | $. The double tensor with nonzero components of are given by
\begin{align}
\label{Z3quantum}
& \mathbb{T}_{0000}^{0000} = 1 \\
& \mathbb{T}_{1110}^{1110}= \mathbb{T}_{1101}^{1101}= \mathbb{T}_{1011}^{1011}= \mathbb{T}_{0111}^{0111}= 1 \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{2220}^{2220}= \mathbb{T}_{2202}^{2202}= \mathbb{T}_{2022}^{2022}= \mathbb{T}_{0222}^{0222} = g^6 \notag \\
& \mathbb{T}_{0012}^{0012} = \mathbb{T}_{0120}^{0120} = \mathbb{T}_{1200}^{1200} = \mathbb{T}_{2001}^{2001} = \mathbb{T}_{1002}^{1002} = \mathbb{T}_{0021}^{0021} \notag \\
& =\mathbb{T}_{0210}^{0210} = \mathbb{T}_{2100}^{2100} = \mathbb{T}_{0102}^{0102} = \mathbb{T}_{1020}^{1020} = \mathbb{T}_{0201}^{0201} = \mathbb{T}_{2010}^{2010} = g^2 \notag \\
&\mathbb{T}_{1122}^{1122} = \mathbb{T}_{1221}^{1221} = \mathbb{T}_{2211}^{2211} = \mathbb{T}_{2112}^{2112} = \mathbb{T}_{1212}^{1212} = \mathbb{T}_{2121}^{2121} = g^4 \notag.
\end{align}
At $g=1$, this is exactly the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ phase and the corresponding state has topological order.
Recall the earlier case, the same may be said, while $g \gg 1$, the tensor form is also mathematically equivalent to the quantum dimer model at Rokhsar-Kivelson (RK) point on the square lattice, the wavefunction at which is the equal weight superposition of all dimer configurations.
At some critical point in $g$, the phase transition will occur.
With the GSPTRG procedure, we flow the initial double tensor for arbitrary $g$ to symmetry preserved fixed point tensor and calculate the modular matrices and the $X_2/X_1$.
The results are shown in Fig.~\ref{11g_phases_giagram}.
As the number of GSPTRG steps increase, the transition from $\mathbb{Z}_3$ phase to a critical phase approaches to a step function at $g_c= 1.76$.
From the correlation function, we also see that it is algebraically decaying as shown in Fig.~\ref{Dr_all} (d).
\subsection {For $ q_0=1; q_1=g^2; q_2=g^2$ }
In the earlier section, we only consider that $g$ goes from $0$ to $1$.
However, in the large $g$ limit, the effective terms of Eg. \ref{Z3quantum} are $\mathbb{T}_{1122}^{1122} = \mathbb{T}_{1221}^{1221} = \mathbb{T}_{2211}^{2211} = \mathbb{T}_{2112}^{2112} = \mathbb{T}_{1212}^{1212} = \mathbb{T}_{2121}^{2121} = g^8$.
We can regard string-$2$ as vacuum state and string-$1$ as dimer state.
It will obey the rule of fully packed loop model where each vertex is connected to two dimers.
Just as the RK point of the quantum dimer model on the square lattice, the wavefunction at the large $g$ limit corresponds to the equal weight superposition of all fully packed loop.
The RK-like point of fully packed loop model is also a critical liquid state with algebraically decaying correlation functions \cite{FPL1997}.
The transition from $\mathbb{Z}_3$ phase to the critical phase occurs at $g_c= 7.3825$ from GSPTRG.
We also calculate the correlation function by using SRG, and see the algebraically decaying beharior as shown in Fig.~\ref{Dr_1gg}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\center{\epsfig{figure=Dr_1gg.pdf,angle=0,width=8cm}}
\caption[]
{The correlation function under the deformation $Q_a= 1 \times |0 \rangle \langle 0 | + g^2 \times | 1 \rangle \langle 1 | +g^2 \times |2 \rangle \langle 2 | $ with $g=20.0. $ } \label{Dr_1gg}
\end{figure}
The GSPTRG can be used to classify the topologically ordered phases with different modular matrices.
The scheme is robust for topological order, because it is a gapped state and has gapped entanglement spectrum or singular value (SV) spectrum.
When performing the RG transformation, as long as the cutoff in the bond dimension $\chi_{c}$ is large the wave function will flow to a fixed point.
However, the scheme cannot be used to distinguish different non-topological (trivial) phases.
As we have observed, gapped and gapless trivial phases under the GSPTRG scheme flow to fixed points that exhibit the same $tr(S)$, $tr(T)$, and $X_2/X_1$.
However, this approach to fixed point is slower for the gapless phases as shown in Fig. \ref{10g_phases_giagram}.
In Fig. \ref{lambda_i}, we plot the spectra of singular values after several steps of GSPTRG transformation.
For $g=0.9$ which is a topological phase, the there-fold degeneracy of SV spectra can be found and the pattern of degeneracy is robust under RG flow.
The single largest SV separated by gap can be found in the gapped trivial phase.
However, due to the finite cutoff $\chi_c$, the RG flow for the gapless phase cannot be followed accurately and indefinitely.
The continuous spectrum of SV eventually breaks into chunks separated by a gap after sufficiently large number of RG step; see Fig. \ref{lambda_i} (b).
Increasing the bond dimension $\chi_{c}$ can slow the breakdown.
An alternative, and perhaps the most elegant approach is proposed by Evenbly and Vidal \cite{TNR_2014}, who proposed a coarse-graining transformation called tenser network renormalization (TNR) that can explicitly recovers the scale invariance and flow the wavefunction to a fixed point for critical points.
However, implementing the TNR scheme is beyond the scope of the present work.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\center{\epsfig{figure=lambda_i.pdf,angle=0,width=9cm}}
\caption[]
{ Spectra of singular values of g=0.7, g=0.9 and g=15.0 for cutoff $\chi_c = 24$ after (a) $6$ and (b) $20$ applications of GSPTRG, under the deformation $Q_a= 1 \times |0 \rangle \langle 0 | + g^2 \times | 1 \rangle \langle 1 | +g^2 \times |2 \rangle \langle 2 | $. The index $i$ is to number the singular values $\lambda_i'$s.}
\label{lambda_i}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Summary of phase diagram}
The results of the section suggest the generic $\mathbb{Z}_3$ model with projector $Q = q_0 \times |0 \rangle \langle 0 | + q_1\times |1 \rangle \langle 1 | +q_2 \times |2 \rangle \langle 2 | $ shown in Fig.~\ref{phase_diagram}.
For projector $Q_a$, by varying parameter $g$, the phase transition from trivial state to topologically ordered phase will occur at $g_{c1}=0.7776$.
The second phase transition from trivial state to critical phase occur at $g_{c2}= 7.3825$.
For projector $Q_b$, by varying parameter $g$, the first phase transition from trivial state to topologically ordered phase will occur at $g_{c1}=0.944$.
The second critical point from topologically ordered phase to critical phase is at $g_{c2}=1.238$.
The interesting thing is that even we turn off one parameter, the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ phase can be found with two body system.
For projector $Q_c$, by varying parameter $g$, the phase transition from topologically ordered phase to critical phase will occur at $g_{c1}= 1.76$.
In general, richer phase diagrams may be obtained by considering more general parameter $q_0$, $q_1$, and $q_2$ or $\mathbb{Z}_N$ model.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\center{\epsfig{figure=phase.pdf,angle=0,width=8cm}}
\caption[]
{ Generic phase diagrams. (a) the deformations $Q_a= 1\times |0 \rangle \langle 0 | + g^2 \times |1 \rangle \langle 1 | +g^2 \times |2 \rangle \langle 2 | $, (b) $Q_b= 1 \times |0 \rangle \langle 0 | +0 \times | 1 \rangle \langle 1 | +g^2 \times |2 \rangle \langle 2 | $, (c) $Q_c= 1 \times|0 \rangle \langle 0 | + 1\times |1 \rangle \langle 1 | +g^2 \times |2 \rangle \langle 2 |. $ } \label{phase_diagram}
\end{figure}
\subsection{For $N>3$ case}
In general, for other $\mathbb{Z}_N$ phases, we always can find the phase transition with deformation $Q= \sum_{i=0} ^{N-1} q_i |i \rangle \langle i | $.
From tensor structure, sometimes we can deduce the possible phase.
For example, we consider the $\mathbb{Z}_4$ phase with deformation $Q= |0 \rangle \langle 0 | + |1 \rangle \langle 1 | + |2 \rangle \langle 2| + g^2\times |3 \rangle \langle 3 |$.
As $ g \gg 1$, the tensor from represent a product state of all $3$.
This is because the $T_{3,3,3,3}$ was allowed.
However, for the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ phase, the $T_{2,2,2,2}$ was not allowed.
Thus, it is impossible to find the product state for $\mathbb{Z}_3$ phase with $Q= |0 \rangle \langle 0 | + |1 \rangle \langle 1 | + g^2 \times |2 \rangle \langle 2 |$.
\section {Concluions} \label{conclusion}
We have employed the gauge symmetry protected tensor renormalization group (GSPTRG) method introduced by He, Moradi and Wen~Ref. \cite{He_Wen_2014} to study $\mathbb{Z}_N$ topological order under deformation.
It is important to know the underlying gauge symmetry operators in order for this method to work.
Due to the removal of irrelevant short-range entanglement, the fixed-point wavefunction contains primarily the long-range entanglements that can be used to identify the topological order.
From the fixed-point form of the tensor representing the ground-state wavefunction, the modular matrices $S$ and $T$ that represent the mutual and self-statistics, respectively, of quasiparticles can be obtained.
These can be used as order parameters to detect phase transitions.
We applied the string tension to deform the $\mathbb{Z}_N$ wavefunction, similar to that in the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ toric code with deformation.
The GSPTRG approach accurately determined the phase transition between the nontrivial topologically ordered phase and the trivial phase, the result of which matches very well with the mapping to $N$-state Potts model.
The RG process is a coarse-graining process and can be associated with the change of a length scale.
From this perspective we were able to collapse the data from modular matrices with suitable scaling near the transitions and determined the critical exponent of the correlation length and the result agrees well with the mapping to the Potts model.
In particular, we also investigated different deformations on the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ model and we found that the topologically ordered phase can be driven to a critical phase. Moreover, there exists a finite region of parameters such that the $\mathbb{Z}_3$ phase is composed of local two-level systems, i.e., qubits.
There has been tremendous progress on both theoretical and experimental advancement of the search of exotic phases with topological order.
A future extension and application of the GSPTRG method would be to first use a gauge symmetry preserved approach to find the ground-state wavefunction of a Hamiltonian (potentially containing topological order) and use the RG to flow the wavefunction to a fixed point and obtain the modular matrices.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors would like to thank Oliver Buerschaper, Lukasz Fidkowski, Artur Garcia-Saez, Rom\'an Or\'us for useful discussions.
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under
Grants No. PHY 1314748 and No. PHY 1333903.
|
\section{Manifolds}\label{se:manifolds}
\subsection{Manifolds} In these notes an $n$-dimensional \emph{manifold} will indicate a second countable Hausdorff topological space $M$ covered by a family of open sets $\{\mathcal{U}_\lambda:\lambda\in\Lambda\}$, together with coordinate maps
\[
\begin{split}
\phi_\lambda:\mathcal{U}_\lambda&\longrightarrow \mathbb{R}^n\\
p&\mapsto \bigl(x_1(p),x_2(p),\ldots,x_n(p)\bigr),
\end{split}
\]
such that $\phi_\lambda$ is a homeomorphism of $\mathcal{U}_\lambda$ into its range, an open set in $\mathbb{R}^n$ satisfying that
\[
\phi_\lambda\circ\phi_\mu^{-1}: \phi_\mu(\mathcal{U}_\lambda\cap\mathcal{U}_\mu)\rightarrow
\phi_\lambda(\mathcal{U}_\lambda\cap\mathcal{U}_\mu)
\]
is a $C^\infty$-map (i.e., all the partial derivatives of any order exist and are continuous). The family of ``charts'' $\{(\mathcal{U}_\lambda,\phi_\lambda):\lambda\in\Lambda\}$ is called an \emph{atlas} of the manifold.
The reader may consult \cite{Conlon}, \cite{Warner} or \cite{GeometryI} for the basic facts in this section.
\begin{examples}
\begin{itemize}
\item The euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^n$ with the trivial atlas $\{(\mathbb{R}^n,\id)\}$. (Or any open subset of $\mathbb{R}^n$.)
\item The unit circle $\mathbb{S}^1=\{(x,y)\in\mathbb{R}^2:x^2+y^2=1\}$ with the atlas consisting of the following four charts:
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{U}_{\textrm{top}}&=\{(x,y)\in\mathbb{S}^1: y>0\}&\quad\phi_{\textrm{top}}:\mathcal{U}_{\textrm{top}}&\rightarrow \mathbb{R},\ (x,y)\mapsto\arccos x,\\
\mathcal{U}_{\textrm{bottom}}&=\{(x,y)\in\mathbb{S}^1: y<0\}&\quad\phi_{\textrm{bottom}}:\mathcal{U}_{\textrm{top}}&\rightarrow \mathbb{R},\ (x,y)\mapsto\arccos x,\\
\mathcal{U}_{\textrm{right}}&=\{(x,y)\in\mathbb{S}^1: x>0\}&\quad\phi_{\textrm{right}}:\mathcal{U}_{\textrm{top}}&\rightarrow \mathbb{R},\ (x,y)\mapsto\arcsin y,\\
\mathcal{U}_{\textrm{left}}&=\{(x,y)\in\mathbb{S}^1: x<0\}&\quad\phi_{\textrm{left}}:\mathcal{U}_{\textrm{top}}&\rightarrow \mathbb{R},\ (x,y)\mapsto\arcsin y.
\end{align*}
Here we assume $\arccos: (-1,1)\rightarrow (0,\pi)$ and $\arcsin:(-1,1)\rightarrow \left(-\frac{\pi}{2},\frac{\pi}{2}\right)$.
Note that, for example, $\mathcal{U}_{\textrm{top}}\cap\mathcal{U}_{\textrm{left}}=\{(x,y)\in\mathbb{S}^1: y>0,x<0\}$ and the change of coordinates is the map:
\[
\begin{split}
\phi_{\textrm{top}}\circ\phi_{\textrm{left}}^{-1}:\left(0,\frac{\pi}{2}\right)&\rightarrow
\left(\frac{\pi}{2},\pi\right)\\
t\quad&\mapsto\ \pi-t,
\end{split}
\]
which is clearly $C^\infty$.
\item The cartesian product $M\times N$ of an $m$-dimensional manifold $M$ and an $n$-dimensional manifold $N$ is naturally an $(m+n)$-dimensional manifold.
\end{itemize}
\end{examples}
A continuous map $\Psi:M\rightarrow N$ between two manifolds $M$ and $N$ of respective dimensions $m$ and $n$ is \emph{smooth} if for any charts $(\mathcal{U}_\lambda,\phi_\lambda)$ and $(\mathcal{V}_\mu,\varphi_\mu)$ of $M$ and $N$ respectively, the map (between open sets in $\mathbb{R}^m$ and $\mathbb{R}^n$):
\[
\varphi_\mu\circ\Psi\circ\phi_\lambda^{-1}:\phi_\lambda\left(\mathcal{U}_\lambda\cap\Psi^{-1}(\mathcal{V}_\mu)\right)\rightarrow \varphi_\mu(\mathcal{V}_\mu)
\]
is of class $C^\infty$.
In particular, we will consider the set $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$ of smooth maps from the manifold $M$ into $\mathbb{R}$. This is a unital, commutative, associative ring with the pointwise addition and multiplication of maps. Actually, it is an algebra over $\mathbb{R}$, as we can multiply maps by constants.
\bigskip
\subsection{Vector fields} A \emph{nonassociative real algebra} is a real vector space $A$ endowed with a bilinear map (multiplication) $m:A\times A\rightarrow A$. We will usually (but not always!) write $xy$ for $m(x,y)$. The notions of homomorphism, subalgebra, ideal, ..., are the natural ones.
Note that the word \emph{nonassociative} simply means `not necessarily associative'.
For example, a \emph{Lie algebra} is a nonassociative algebra $L$ with multiplication $(x,y)\mapsto [x,y]$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item $[x,x]=0$ for any $x\in L$ (the product is \emph{anticommutative}),
\item $[[x,y],z]+[[y,z],x]+[[z,x],y]=0$ for any $x,y,z\in L$ (\emph{Jacobi identity}).
\end{itemize}
Given a nonassociative algebra $A$ and a homomorphism $\varphi:A\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, a \emph{$\varphi$-derivation} is a linear map $d:A\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ such that $d(xy)=d(x)\varphi(y)+\varphi(x)d(y)$ for any $x,y\in A$. The set of $\varphi$-derivations form a vector space.
On the other hand, a \emph{derivation} of $A$ is a linear map $D:A\rightarrow A$ such that $D(xy)=D(x)y+xD(y)$ for any $x,y\in A$.
The set of derivations $\Der(A)$ is a Lie algebra with the usual `bracket': $[D_1,D_2]=D_1\circ D_2-D_2\circ D_1$.
\begin{exercise} Check that indeed, if $D_1$ and $D_2$ are derivations of $A$, so is $[D_1,D_2]$.
\end{exercise}
\medskip
Given a manifold $M$ and a point $p\in M$, the map $\varphi_p:\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ given by evaluation at $p$: $\varphi_p(f):= f(p)$, is a homomorphism. The \emph{tangent space} $T_pM$ at $p$ is the vector space of $\varphi_p$-derivations of $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$\footnote{There are other possible definitions, but this is suitable for our purposes.}. That is, the elements of $T_pM$ (called \emph{tangent vectors} at $p$) are linear maps $v_p:\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, such that
\[
v_p(fg)=v_p(f)g(p)+f(p)v_p(g)
\]
for any $f,g\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$.
Given a chart $(\mathcal{U},\phi)$ of $M$ with $p\in \mathcal{U}$ and $\phi(q)=\bigl(x_1(q),\ldots,x_n(q)\bigr)$ for any $q\in\mathcal{U}$, we have the natural tangent vectors $\left.\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_i}\right|_p$ given by
\[
f\mapsto \frac{\partial(f\circ\phi^{-1})}{\partial x_i}\bigl(\phi(p)\bigr).
\]
Actually, the elements $\left.\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_i}\right|_p$, $i=1,\ldots,n$, form a basis of $T_pM$.
\medskip
The disjoint union
\[
TM:= \bigcup_{p\in M}T_pM
\]
is called the \emph{tangent bundle} of $M$. It has a natural structure of manifold with atlas $\{(\tilde\mathcal{U}_\lambda,\tilde\phi_\lambda):\lambda\in \Lambda\}$, where $\tilde\mathcal{U}_\lambda=\bigcup_{p\in \mathcal{U}_\lambda}T_pM$ and
\[
\begin{split}
\tilde\phi_\lambda:\tilde\mathcal{U}_\lambda&\longrightarrow \mathbb{R}^{2n}=\mathbb{R}^n\times\mathbb{R}^n\\
\sum_{i=1}^n\alpha_i\left.\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_i}\right|_p\in T_pM
&\mapsto \bigl(\phi_\lambda(p),(\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_n)\bigr).
\end{split}
\]
A \emph{vector field} of a manifold $M$ is a smooth section of the natural projection $\pi:TM\rightarrow M$, $v_p\in T_pM\mapsto p$. That is, a vector field is a smooth map
\[
\begin{split}
X:M&\longrightarrow TM\\
p&\mapsto \ X_p,
\end{split}
\]
such that $X_p\in T_pM$ for any $p\in M$. Any vector field $X$ induces a derivation of the algebra $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$ as follows: for any $f\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$, the image of $f$ under this derivation, also denoted by $X$, is the smooth map
\[
Xf: p\mapsto X_p(f).
\]
Any derivation of $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$ is obtained in this way from a vector field. Therefore, we will identify the set of vector fields, denoted by $\mathfrak{X}(M)$, with the Lie algebra $\Der\bigl(\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)\bigr)$.
\begin{exercise}\label{exe:RDer}
Let $R$ be a commutative associative algebra and let $\mathcal{L}=\Der(R)$ be its Lie algebra of derivations (keep in mind the case $R=\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$!).
\begin{itemize}
\item Prove that $\mathcal{L}$ is a module over $R$ by means of $(aD)(b)=aD(b)$ for any $a,b\in R$.
\item Prove that $[aD,bE]=ab[D,E]+\bigl(aD(b)\bigr)E-\bigl(bE(a)\bigr)D$ for any $a,b\in R$ and $D,E\in \mathcal{L}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{exercise}
\bigskip
Let $\Phi:M\rightarrow N$ be a smooth map between two manifolds, and let $v_p\in T_pM$ be a tangent vector at a point $p\in M$. Then we can push forward $v_p$ to a tangent vector $\Phi_*(v_p)$ defined by $\Phi_*(v_p)(f)=v_p(f\circ\Phi)$ for any $f\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(N)$. The `tangent map' $\Phi_*:TM\rightarrow TN$, $v_p\in T_pM\mapsto \Phi_*(v_p)\in T_{\Phi(p)}N$ is smooth.
In particular, if $\gamma:(-\epsilon,\epsilon)\rightarrow M$ is a smooth map with $\gamma(0)=p$ (a curve centered at $p$), then
\[
\dot\gamma(0):= \gamma_*\left(\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}\right): f\mapsto
\frac{d(f\circ\gamma)}{dt}(0)
\]
is a tangent vector at $p\in M$. Any tangent vector is obtained in this way.
\smallskip
Two vector fields $X\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ and $Y\in\mathfrak{X}(N)$ are said to be \emph{$\Phi$-related} if $\Phi_*(X_p)=Y_{\Phi(p)}$ for any $p\in M$. In other words, $X$ and $Y$ are $\Phi$-related if
\[
(Yf)\circ\Phi=X(f\circ\Phi)
\]
for any $f\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(N)$.
\begin{exercise}\label{exe:Phi_related}
Consider vector fields $X_1,X_2\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ and $Y_1,Y_2\in\mathfrak{X}(N)$ such that $X_i$ and $Y_i$ are $\Phi$-related, for $i=1,2$. Prove that $[X_1,X_2]$ and $[Y_1,Y_2]$ are also $\Phi$-related.
\end{exercise}
If the smooth map $\Phi$ above is a diffeomorphism (i.e.; it is smooth, bijective, and the inverse is also smooth), then $\Phi$ induces an isomorphism of Lie algebras (denoted by $\Phi_*$ too):
\[
\begin{split}
\Phi_*:\mathfrak{X}(M)&\longrightarrow \mathfrak{X}(N)\\
X\ &\mapsto \Phi_*(X): f\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(N)\mapsto X(f\circ\Phi)\circ\Phi^{-1}\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(N).
\end{split}
\]
In this case, the vector fields $X\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ and $Y\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ are $\Phi$-related if and only if $Y=\Phi_*(X)$.
\bigskip
\subsection{Flows}
Let $X\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ be a vector field on a manifold $M$. For any $p\in M$ there exists a positive real number $\epsilon >0$, a neighborhood $U$ of $p$ in $M$, and a smooth map
\[
\begin{split}
\Phi:(-\epsilon,\epsilon)\times U&\longrightarrow M\\
(t,m)\ &\mapsto \Phi(t,m),
\end{split}
\]
such that for any $f\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$ and any $m\in U$ we have
$\Phi(0,m)=m$, and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:XmfPhi}
X_{\Phi(t,m)}f=\frac{d\ }{dt}f\bigl(\Phi(t,m)\bigr)\,\left(=\lim_{s\rightarrow 0}
\frac{f\bigl(\Phi(t+s,m)\bigr)-f\bigl(\Phi(t,m)\bigr)}{s}\right).
\end{equation}
The map $\Phi$ is a \emph{local flow} of $X$ at $p$.
Local flows always exist by the fundamental existence and uniqueness theorem for first-order differential equations, which also implies that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Phi_t1t2}
\Phi(t_1+t_2,m)=\Phi(t_1,\Phi(t_2,m))
\end{equation}
when this makes sense.
The vector field $X$ is said to be \emph{complete} if there exists a \emph{global flow}
\[
\Phi:\mathbb{R}\times M\rightarrow M,
\]
so that \eqref{eq:XmfPhi} holds for any $m\in M$ and $t\in\mathbb{R}$. (Note that, conversely, any smooth map $\Phi:(-\epsilon,\epsilon)\times M\rightarrow M$ satisfying \eqref{eq:Phi_t1t2} determines a vector field by equation \eqref{eq:XmfPhi}.)
\smallskip
If $X$ is a complete vector field with global flow $\Phi$, for any $t\in \mathbb{R}$ the map $\Phi_t:M\rightarrow M$ given by $\Phi_t(m)=\Phi(t,m)$ is a diffeomorphism and, for any vector field $Y\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$, the Lie bracket $[X,Y]$ can be computed as follows (see \cite[Theorem 4.3.2]{Conlon}):
\begin{equation}\label{eq:XYPhi}
[X,Y]=\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}(\Phi_{-t})_*(Y)=
\lim_{t\rightarrow 0}\frac{(\Phi_{-t})_*(Y)-Y}{t}.
\end{equation}
Thus, the value at a point $p$: $[X,Y]_p$ is given by
\[
[X,Y]_p=\lim_{t\rightarrow 0}\frac{(\Phi_{-t})_*(Y_{\Phi_t(p)})-Y_p}{t}
\]
(a limit in the vector space $T_pM$). Actually, for $f\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$, consider the smooth map
\[
\begin{split}
H:\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R}&\longrightarrow \mathbb{R}\\
(t,s)\,&\mapsto H(t,s)=Y_{\Phi_t(p)}(f\circ\Phi_s).
\end{split}
\]
Then,
\[
\begin{split}
\frac{\partial H}{\partial t}(0,0)&=\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}Y_{\Phi_t(p)}(f)=
\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}(Yf)(\Phi_t(p))=X_p(Yf),\\[6pt]
\frac{\partial H}{\partial s}(0,0)&=\left.\frac{d\ }{ds}\right|_{s=0}Y_{p}(f\circ\Phi_s)
=Y_p\left(\left.\frac{d\ }{ds}\right|_{s=0}(f\circ\Phi_s)\right)\\
&\qquad\qquad\textrm{(by the equality of mixed partial derivatives)}\\
&=Y_p(Xf).
\end{split}
\]
Hence we obtain
\[
\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}Y_{\Phi_t(p)}(f\circ\Phi_{-t})=
\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}H(t,-t)=X_p(Yf)-Y_p(Xf)=[X,Y]_p(f),
\]
as indicated in \eqref{eq:XYPhi}.
Two vector fields $X,Y\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ commute (i.e.; $[X,Y]=0$) if and only if the corresponding flows commute: for any $m\in M$ there is a $\delta_m>0$ such that $\Phi_t\circ \Psi_s(m)=\Psi_s\circ\Phi_t(m)$ for $-\delta_m<t,s<\delta_m$ \cite[Theorem 2.8.20]{Conlon}
\bigskip
\section{Affine connections}\label{se:affine_connections}
Affine connections constitute the extension to ``non flat'' manifolds of the idea of directional derivative of vector fields. It provides the idea of ``parallel transport''.
\begin{definition} An \emph{affine connection} on a manifold $M$ is an $\mathbb{R}$-bilinear map
\[
\begin{split}
\nabla:\mathfrak{X}(M)\times\mathfrak{X}(M)&\longrightarrow \mathfrak{X}(M)\\
(X,Y)\quad &\mapsto\ \nabla_XY,
\end{split}
\]
with the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\nabla$ is $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$-linear in the first component:
\[
\nabla_{fX}Y=f\nabla_XY
\]
for any $X,Y\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ and any $f\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$. (Recall from Exercise \ref{exe:RDer} that $\mathfrak{X}(M)$ is a module for $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$.)
\item For any $X,Y\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ and any $f\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$, the equation
\[
\nabla_X(fY)=(Xf)Y+f\nabla_XY
\]
holds.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
The first property implies that for any $X,Y\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ and any point $p\in M$, $\bigl(\nabla_XY\bigr)_p$ depends only on $X_p$ and $Y$, so we may define $\nabla_vY\in T_pM$ for any $v\in T_pM$ and $Y\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$, which we should think as the derivative of the vector field $Y$ in the direction $v$ at the point $p$.
Also, the second property shows that $\bigl(\nabla_XY\bigr)_p$ depends on the values of $Y$ in a neighborhood of $p$. Thus affine connections can be restricted to open subsets of $M$, in particular to domains of charts. If $(U,\phi)$ is a chart of $M$ with $\phi(q)=\bigl(x_1(q),\ldots,x_n(q)\bigr)$, we obtain the $\mathcal{C}^\infty(U)$-basis of the vector fields in $\mathfrak{X}(U)$: $\left\{\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_1},\cdots,\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_n}\right\}$. By properties (1) and (2), the restriction of the affine connection $\nabla$ on $M$ to $U$ is determined by the values
\[
\nabla_{\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_i}}\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_j}
=\sum_{k=1}^n\Gamma_{ij}^k\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_k},
\]
for some maps $\Gamma_{ij}^k\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(U)$. These maps $\Gamma_{ij}^k$ are called the \emph{Christoffel symbols} of $\nabla$ in the chart $(U,\phi)$.
Then, for $X,Y\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$, their restrictions to $U$ are of the form $X\vert_U=\sum_{i=1}^nf_i\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_i}$ and $Y\vert_U=\sum_{i=1}^ng_i\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_i}$ ($f_i,g_i\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(U)$ for $i=1,\ldots,n$), and the vector field $\bigl(\nabla_XY\bigr)\vert_U$ is given by:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:nablaXY_U}
\bigl(\nabla_XY\bigr)\vert_U=\sum_{k=1}^n\left(\sum_{i=1}^nf_i\frac{\partial g_k}{\partial x_i} +\sum_{i,j=1}^nf_ig_j\Gamma_{ij}^k\right)\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_k}.
\end{equation}
\begin{definition} Given an affine connection $\nabla$ on a manifold $M$, for any vector field $X\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ the \emph{Nomizu operator}
\[
L_X:\mathfrak{X}(M)\rightarrow \mathfrak{X}(M)
\]
is the $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$-linear form such that
\[
L_XY=\nabla_XY-[X,Y]
\]
for any $Y\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$.
\end{definition}
\begin{exercise}
Check that $L_X$ is indeed $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$-linear.
More generally, let $\phi$ be a unital commutative and associative ring, $R$ a commutative associative $\phi$-algebra and $D=\Der(R)$ its Lie algebra of derivations (this is a module over $R$ by Exercise \ref{exe:RDer}). Define an \emph{affine connection} $\nabla$ on $(R,D)$ as a $\phi$-bilinear map
\[
\begin{split}
\nabla: D\times D&\longrightarrow D\\
(\delta_1,\delta_2)&\mapsto \nabla_{\delta_1}\delta_2,
\end{split}
\]
subject to:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\nabla_{r\delta_1}\delta_2=r\nabla_{\delta_1}\delta_2$,
\item $\nabla_{\delta_1}(r\delta_2)=\delta_1(r)\delta_2+r\nabla_{\delta_1}\delta_2$,
\end{itemize}
for any $r\in R$ and $\delta_1,\delta_2\in D$. Prove that for $\delta\in D$, the \emph{Nomizu operator} $L_{\delta}:D\rightarrow D$, $\delta'\mapsto \nabla_\delta\delta'-[\delta,\delta']$, is $R$-linear.
\end{exercise}
\smallskip
The $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$-linearity of $L_X$ implies that for any $q\in M$, the tangent vector $\bigl(L_XY\bigr)_q$ depends only on $Y_q$, so we have a well defined endomorphism $(L_X)\vert_q:T_qM\rightarrow T_qM$. Also, $(L_X)\vert_q$ depends only on the values of $X$ in a neighborhood of $q$.
\medskip
In order to define what we understand by ``parallel transport'' we need some preliminaries.
\begin{definition} Let $a,b\in\mathbb{R}$, $a<b$, and let $\gamma:[a,b]\rightarrow M$ be a smooth map into a manifold $M$ (this means that there is $\epsilon>0$ such that $\gamma$ extends to a smooth map $(a-\epsilon,b+\epsilon)\rightarrow M$). A \emph{vector field} along the curve $\gamma$ is a smooth map $\nu:[a,b]\rightarrow TM$ such that the diagram
\[
\begin{gathered}
\xymatrix{
&TM \ar[d]^\pi \\
[a,b] \ar[r]^\gamma \ar[ru]^\nu &M}
\end{gathered}
\]
commutes.
\end{definition}
We will denote by $\mathfrak{X}(\gamma)$ the vector space of vector fields along $\gamma$.
For example, the derivative $\dot\gamma$ given by:
\[
\dot\gamma(t):= \gamma_*\left(\frac{d\ }{dt}\right)\,\in T_{\gamma(t)}M
\]
is a vector field along $\gamma$. If $(U,\phi)$ is a chart such that the image of $\gamma$ is contained in $U$ and $\phi(\gamma(t))=(\gamma_1(t),\ldots,\gamma_n(t))$, then
\[
\dot\gamma(t)=\sum_{i=1}^n\gamma_i'(t)\left(\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_i}\right)_{\gamma(t)}.
\]
Given an affine connection $\nabla$ on the manifold $M$, a curve $\gamma:[a,b]\rightarrow M$ and a vector field $Y\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$, in local coordinates we can express $Y$ as
\[
Y=\sum_{i=1}^ng_i\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_i},
\]
for smooth maps $g_i$. Then we can compute
\[
\begin{split}
\nabla_{\dot\gamma(t)}Y
&=\sum_{i=1}^n\nabla_{\dot\gamma(t)}\left(g_i\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_i}\right)\\
&=\sum_{i=1}^n\left(\dot\gamma(t)(g_i)\left.\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_i}\right|_{\gamma(t)} +
g_i(\gamma(t))\sum_{k=1}^n\gamma_j'(t)\Gamma_{ji}^k(\gamma(t))\left.\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_k}\right|_{\gamma(t)}\right)\\
&=\sum_{k=1}^n\left(\frac{d g_k(\gamma(t))}{dt}
+\sum_{i,j=1}^n\gamma_j'(t)g_i(\gamma(t))\Gamma_{ji}^k(\gamma(t))\right)
\left.\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_k}\right|_{\gamma(t)},
\end{split}
\]
and this depends only on the values of $Y$ in the points $\gamma(t)$. This allows us, given a vector field along $\gamma$: $\nu\in\mathfrak{X}(\gamma)$, which in local coordinates appears as $\nu(t)=\sum_{i=1}^n\nu_i(t)\left.\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_i}\right|_{\gamma(t)}$, to define
\[
\nabla_{\dot\gamma(t)}\nu\in T_{\gamma(t)}M,
\]
by means of
\[
\nabla_{\dot\gamma(t)}\nu=
\sum_{k=1}^n\left(\frac{d\nu_k(t)}{dt}
+\sum_{i,j=1}^n\gamma_j'(t)\nu_i(t)\Gamma_{ji}^k(\gamma(t))\right)
\left.\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_k}\right|_{\gamma(t)} \,\in T_{\gamma(t)}M.
\]
In this way we obtain an operator
\[
\begin{split}
\mathfrak{X}(\gamma)&\longrightarrow \mathfrak{X}(\gamma)\\
\nu&\mapsto \Bigl(t\mapsto \nabla_{\dot\gamma(t)}\nu\Bigr).
\end{split}
\]
\begin{definition}
With $M$ and $\gamma$ as above, a vector field along $\gamma$: $\nu\in\mathfrak{X}(\gamma)$, is said to be \emph{parallel} if $\nabla_{\dot\gamma(t)}\nu=0$ for any $a\leq t\leq b$.
\end{definition}
The existence and uniqueness of solutions for ordinary differential equations prove that for any $a\leq c\leq b$, if $v_0\in T_{\gamma(c)}M$, then there is a unique parallel vector field $\nu$ along $\gamma$ such that $\nu_{\gamma(c)}=v_0$. This field $\nu$ is called the \emph{parallel transport of $v_0$ along $\gamma$}.
\begin{definition}
The curve $\gamma$ is said to be a \emph{geodesic} if $\dot\gamma$ is parallel along $\gamma$.
\end{definition}
\medskip
There are two important tensors attached to any affine connection on a manifold.
\begin{definition}
Let $\nabla$ be an affine connection on a manifold $M$.
\begin{itemize}
\item The \emph{torsion tensor} of $\nabla$ is the $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$-bilinear map:
\[
\begin{split}
T:\mathfrak{X}(M)\times\mathfrak{X}(M)&\longrightarrow \mathfrak{X}(M)\\
(X,Y)\quad &\mapsto\ T(X,Y):= \nabla_XY-\nabla_YX-[X,Y].
\end{split}
\]
If the torsion tensor is identically $0$, then $\nabla$ is said to be \emph{symmetric} (or \emph{torsion-free}).
\smallskip
\item The \emph{curvature tensor} of $\nabla$ is the $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$-trilinear map:
\[
\begin{split}
R:\mathfrak{X}(M)\times\mathfrak{X}(M)\times\mathfrak{X}(M)&\longrightarrow \mathfrak{X}(M)\\
(X,Y,Z)\quad &\mapsto\ R(X,Y)Z:= \nabla_X\nabla_YZ-\nabla_Y\nabla_XZ-\nabla_{[X,Y]}Z.
\end{split}
\]
If the curvature tensor is identically $0$, then $\nabla$ is said to be \emph{flat}.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
\begin{exercise} Check that the torsion and curvature tensors are indeed $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$-linear in each component. Define these concepts in the general setting of Exercise \ref{exe:RDer}.
\end{exercise}
The $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$-linearity implies that the values of $T(X,Y)$ or $R(X,Y)Z$ at a given point $p\in M$ depend only on the values of the vector fields $X$, $Y$ and $Z$ at this point. Hence it makes sense to consider the torsion $T(u,v)$ or curvature $R(u,v)w$ for $u,v,w\in T_pM$.
\begin{exercise}
Prove that an affine connection $\nabla$ is symmetric if its Christoffel symbols in any chart satisfy $\Gamma_{ij}^k=\Gamma_{ji}^k$ for any $1\leq i,j,k\leq n$.
\end{exercise}
\begin{exercise} A \emph{pseudo-Riemannian} manifold is a manifold $M$ endowed with a nondegenerate symmetric $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$-bilinear form (the \emph{pseudo-metric})
\[
g:\mathfrak{X}(M)\times\mathfrak{X}(M)\rightarrow \mathcal{C}^\infty(M).
\]
Again the value $g(X,Y)$ at a point $p$ depends only on $X_p$ and $Y_p$, so $g$ restricts to an $\mathbb{R}$-bilinear map $g_p:T_pM\times T_pM\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$. The nondegeneracy of $g$ means that $g_p$ is nondegenerate for any $p\in M$.
Prove that for any pseudo-Riemannian manifold $(M,g)$ there is a unique affine connection $\nabla$ such that:
\begin{romanenumerate}
\item $\nabla$ is symmetric,
\item $Xg(Y,Z)=g(\nabla_XY,Z)+g(Y,\nabla_XZ)$ for any $X,Y,Z\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$.
\end{romanenumerate}
This connection is called the \emph{Levi-Civita connection}. For this connection, the parallel transport defines isometries among the tangent spaces at different points.
\noindent{\small [Hint: Permute cyclically $X,Y,Z$ in condition (ii) and combine the resulting equations, using (i), to get that $g(\nabla_XY,Z)$ is uniquely determined. Now use that $g$ is nondegenerate.]}
\end{exercise}
\bigskip
\section{Lie groups and Lie algebras}\label{se:LGLA}
A \emph{Lie group} is a manifold $G$ which is also an abstract group such that the multiplication map
\[
\begin{split}
G\times G&\longrightarrow G\\
(g_1,g_2)&\mapsto g_1g_2,
\end{split}
\]
and the inversion map
\[
\begin{split}
G&\longrightarrow G\\
g& \mapsto g^{-1}
\end{split}
\]
are smooth maps.
\begin{exercise} Identify the unit circle $\mathbb{S}^1$ with the set of norm one complex numbers. This set is a group under complex multiplication. Check that in this way $\mathbb{S}^1$ becomes a Lie group.
\end{exercise}
\begin{remark} Given an element $g$ in a Lie group $G$, the left multiplication by $g$ gives a map $L_g:G\rightarrow G$ which is a diffeomorphism (with inverse $L_{g^{-1}}$). The same applies to the right multiplication $R_g$.
\end{remark}
The \emph{Lie algebra} of a Lie group $G$ is the real vector subspace of ``left-invariant vector fields'':
\[
\mathcal{Lie}(G):= \{X\in\mathfrak{X}(G): (L_g)_*(X)=X\ \forall g\in G\}.
\]
By Exercise \ref{exe:Phi_related}, $\frg=\mathcal{Lie}(G)$ is a Lie subalgebra of $\mathfrak{X}(G)$. Moreover, the natural map
\[
\begin{split}
\frg&\longrightarrow T_eG\\
X&\mapsto \ X_e,
\end{split}
\]
where $e$ denotes the neutral element of the group structure, turns out to be a linear isomorphism (check this!), as any left-invariant vector field is determined uniquely by its value at any given point. Hence the dimension of $\frg$ as a vector space coincides with the dimension of $G$ as a manifold.
\begin{example} The general linear group $\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{R})$ consists of the $n\times n$ regular matrices over $\mathbb{R}$. This is the inverse image of the open set $\mathbb{R}\setminus\{0\}$ under the smooth map (actually it is a polynomial map) given by the determinant $\det: \Mat_n(\mathbb{R})\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$. Thus $\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{R})$ is an open set in the euclidean space $\Mat_n(\mathbb{R})\simeq \mathbb{R}^{n^2}$ and hence it is a manifold too. The multiplication is given by a polynomial map and the inversion by a rational map, and hence they are both smooth.
Since $\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{R})$ is open in $\mathbb{R}^{n^2}$ there is the global chart with standard coordinates $\{x_{ij}: 1\leq i,j\leq n\}$, where $x_{ij}(A)$ denotes the $(i,j)$-entry of the matrix $A$. Then the tangent space at any point $A\in G=\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{R})$ can be identified with the vector space of $n\times n$-matrices $\Mat_n(\mathbb{R})$ by means of the map:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:TAG}
\begin{split}
T_A G&\longrightarrow \Mat_n(\mathbb{R})\\
v\ &\mapsto\ \Bigl(v(x_{ij})\Bigr)_{i,j=1}^n.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
(Note that $v=\sum_{i,j}v(x_{ij})\left.\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_{ij}}\right|_{A}$.)
Let $\frg$ be the Lie algebra of $G=\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{R})$, and let $X\in \frg$. For any $A=\bigl(a_{ij}\bigr)\in G$, the left-invariance of $X$ gives:
\[
\begin{split}
X_A(x_{ij})&=(L_A)_*(X_{I_n})(x_{ij})=X_{I_n}(x_{ij}\circ L_A)\\
&=X_{I_n}\left(\sum_{k=1}^n a_{ik}x_{kj}\right)\quad\textrm{(the $(i,j)$-entry of $AB$ is $\sum_{k=1}^n a_{ik}b_{kj}$)}\\
&=\sum_{k=1}^n a_{ik}X_{I_n}(x_{kj})=\sum_{k=1}^nX_{I_n}(x_{kj})x_{ik}(A).
\end{split}
\]
Therefore, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:X_left_invariant}
Xx_{ij}=\sum_{k=1}^nX_{I_n}\bigl(x_{kj}\bigr)x_{ik}.
\end{equation}
(Here $I_n$ denotes the identity matrix, which is the neutral element of $G$.)
Consider now two elements $X,Y\in\frg$. $X$ and $Y$ are determined by $X_{I_n}$ and $Y_{I_n}$ respectively, and these can be identified as in \eqref{eq:TAG} with the matrices $A:= \Bigl(X_{I_n}(x_{ij})\Bigr)$ and $B:= \Bigl(Y_{I_n}(x_{ij})\Bigr)$.
Then we get
\[
\begin{split}
[X,Y]_{I_n}(x_{ij})&=X_{I_n}(Yx_{ij})-Y_{I_n}(Xx_{ij})\\
&=X_{I_n}\bigl(\sum_{k=1}^nb_{kj}x_{ik}\bigr)
-Y_{I_n}\bigl(\sum_{k=1}^n a_{kj}x_{ik}\bigr)\qquad\textrm{(because of \eqref{eq:X_left_invariant})}\\
&=\sum_{k=1}^nb_{kj}a_{ik}-\sum_{k=1}^na_kjb_{ik}=x_{ij}\bigl([A,B]\bigr).
\end{split}
\]
Denote by ${\mathfrak{gl}}_n(\mathbb{R})$ the Lie algebra defined on the vector space $\Mat_n(\mathbb{R})$ with the usual Lie bracket $[A,B]=AB-BA$. Then the above computation shows that the linear map
\[
\begin{split}
\frg&\longrightarrow {\mathfrak{gl}}_n(\mathbb{R})\\
X&\mapsto \Bigl(X_{I_n}(x_{ij})\Bigr)_{i,j=1}^n,
\end{split}
\]
is a Lie algebra isomorphism.
Moreover, for any $A\in{\mathfrak{gl}}_n(\mathbb{R})$ the map
\[
\begin{split}
\gamma_A:\mathbb{R}&\longrightarrow G\\
t&\mapsto \exp(tA):= \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{t^nA^n}{n!},
\end{split}
\]
is a smooth group homomorphism. Besides, $\dot\gamma(0)=A$ (with the identification above $T_{I_n}G\simeq {\mathfrak{gl}}_n(\mathbb{R})$). We conclude that the smooth map
\[
\begin{split}
\Phi_A:\mathbb{R}\times G&\longrightarrow G\\
(t,B)&\mapsto B\exp(tA)
\end{split}
\]
is the global flow of the left-invariant vector field $X$ with $X_{I_n}=A$.
\end{example}
We may substitute $\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{R})$ by $\mathrm{GL}(V)$ (the group of linear automorphisms of $V$) for a finite-dimensional real vector space $V$, and ${\mathfrak{gl}}_n(\mathbb{R})$ by ${\mathfrak{gl}}(V)$ (the Lie algebra of linear endomorphisms of $V$ with the natural Lie bracket) in the Example above.
Once we fix a basis of $V$ we get isomorphisms $\mathrm{GL}(V)\cong\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{R})$ (of Lie groups) and ${\mathfrak{gl}}(V)\cong{\mathfrak{gl}}_n(\mathbb{R})$ (of Lie algebras).
\medskip
In general, left-invariant vector fields on a Lie group $G$ are always complete and there is a smooth map from the Lie algebra $\frg$ to $G$, called the \emph{exponential}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:exp}
\exp:\frg\rightarrow G,
\end{equation}
which restricts to a diffeomorphism of a neighborhood of $0\in\frg$ ($\frg\simeq\mathbb{R}^n$) onto an open neighborhood of $e\in G$ such that for any $X\in\frg$, its global flow is given by the map
\[
\begin{split}
\Phi:\mathbb{R}\times G&\longrightarrow G\\
(t,g)\ &\mapsto g\exp(tX).
\end{split}
\]
Any open neighborhood of $e\in G$ generates, as an abstract group, the connected component of $e$, which is a normal subgroup. In particular, the subgroup generated by $\exp(\frg)$ is the connected component $G_0$ of $e$.
\begin{remark}\label{re:PhitR}
In this situation, for any $t\in\mathbb{R}$, $\Phi_t$ is the diffeomorphism $R_{\exp(tX)}$ (right multiplication by $\exp(tX)$). Note that for any $h\in G$, the left invariance of any $X\in\frg$ gives $(L_h)_*(X)=X$, so for any $g,h\in G$,
\[
\Bigl((L_h)_*(X)\Bigr)_{hg}f=X_g(f\circ L_h)
=\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}(f\circ L_h)(g\exp(tX)),
\]
and this certainly agrees with
\[
X_{hg}f=\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}f(hg\exp(tX)).
\]
Also, condition \eqref{eq:Phi_t1t2} implies that the smooth map $\mathbb{R}\rightarrow G$, $t\mapsto \exp(tX)$ is a group homomorphism (called a \emph{one-parameter subgroup}).
\end{remark}
We may consider too the real subspace of ``right-invariant'' vector fields:
\[
\frg_\textrm{right}:= \{X\in\mathfrak{X}(G): \bigl(R_g\bigr)_*(X)=X\ \forall g\in G\}.
\]
Again, the natural map $\frg_\textrm{right}\rightarrow T_eG$, $X\mapsto X_e$, is a linear isomorphism.
\begin{proposition}\label{pr:XXhat}
Let $G$ be a Lie group with Lie algebra $\frg$. Consider the linear isomorphisms
\begin{align*}
\varphi_\textrm{left}:\frg&\longrightarrow T_eG\quad&
\quad\varphi_\textrm{right}: \frg_\textrm{right}&\longrightarrow T_eG\\
X&\mapsto\ X_e&\hat X\ &\mapsto\ \hat X_e.
\end{align*}
Then the map
\[
\begin{split}
\frg&\longrightarrow\frg_\textrm{right}\\
X&\mapsto -\varphi_\textrm{right}^{-1}\circ\varphi_\textrm{left}(X)
\end{split}
\]
is an isomorphism of Lie algebras.
In other words, given $v\in T_eG$, let $X\in\frg$ (respectively $\hat X\in\frg_\textrm{right}$) be the left (respectively right) invariant vector field with $X_e=v$ (respectively $\hat X_e=v$). Then the map $X\mapsto -\hat X$ is a Lie algebra isomorphism.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The smooth map
\[
\begin{split}
\Phi^\textrm{right}:\mathbb{R}\times G&\longrightarrow G\\
(t,g)&\mapsto \exp(tX)g.
\end{split}
\]
is the global flow of $\hat X$, because for any $f\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(G)$:
\[
\begin{split}
\hat X_g(f)&=\Bigl((R_g)_*(\hat X_e)\Bigr)(f)=\hat X_e(f\circ R_g)\\
&=v(f\circ R_g)=X_e(f\circ R_g)\\
&=\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}(f\circ R_g)(\exp(tX))
= \left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}f(\exp(tX)g).
\end{split}
\]
Now consider the inversion map $\iota:G\rightarrow G$, $g\mapsto g^{-1}$. It is a diffeomorphism, so $\iota_*:\mathfrak{X}(G)\rightarrow \mathfrak{X}(G)$ is an isomorphism of Lie algebras.
For $g\in G$, $X$ and $\hat X$ as in the Proposition, and $f\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(G)$ we get:
\[
\begin{split}
\bigl(\iota_*X)_{g^{-1}}f&=X_g(f\circ \iota)
=\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}(f\circ\iota)(g\exp(tX))\\
&=\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}f\bigl((g\exp(tX))^{-1}\bigr)\\
&=\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}f(\exp(-tX)g^{-1})=-\hat X_{g^{-1}}(f).
\end{split}
\]
We conclude that $\iota_*(X)=-\hat X$, so $X$ and $-\hat X$ are $\iota$-related. In particular, this shows that $\iota_*$ takes left invariant vector fields to right invariant vector fields, and hence it gives an isomorphism from $\frg$ to $\frg_\textrm{right}$.
\end{proof}
\medskip
For any element $g$ in a Lie group $G$, conjugation by $g$ gives a diffeomorphism:
\[
\begin{split}
\iota_g:G&\longrightarrow G\\
x&\mapsto gxg^{-1},
\end{split}
\]
and this induces a Lie algebra isomorphism $\mathrm{Ad}_g:= (\iota_g)_*:\mathfrak{X}(G)\rightarrow \mathfrak{X}(G)$ that preserves $\frg$. Indeed, for $X\in\frg$ and $h\in G$
\[
\begin{split}
(L_h)_*(\mathrm{Ad}_g X)&=(L_h)_*\circ(\iota_g)_*(X)=
(L_h)_*\circ(L_g)_*\circ(R_{g^{-1}})_*(X)\\
&=(R_{g^{-1}})_*\circ (L_h)_*\circ (L_g)_*(X)\\
&\qquad\textrm{(because $L_xR_y=R_yL_x$ for any $x,y\in G$)}\\
&=(R_{g^{-1}})_*X\quad\textrm{(as $X$ is left invariant)}\\
&=(R_{g^{-1}})_*\circ(L_g)_*(X)=\mathrm{Ad}_g X.
\end{split}
\]
We obtain in this way the so called \emph{adjoint representation}:
\[
\begin{split}
\mathrm{Ad}: G&\longrightarrow \mathrm{GL}(\frg)\\
g&\mapsto \mathrm{Ad}_g\, ,
\end{split}
\]
which is a homomorphism of Lie groups (i.e., a smooth group homomorphism).
\medskip
Given a homomorphism of Lie groups $\varphi:G\rightarrow H$ and a left invariant vector field $X\in\frg$ (the Lie algebra of $G$), the map $t\mapsto \varphi(\exp(tX))$ gives a Lie group homomorphism $\mathbb{R}\rightarrow H$ and hence the map
\[
\begin{split}
\Phi:\mathbb{R}\times H&\longrightarrow H\\
(t,h)&\mapsto h\varphi(\exp(tX))
\end{split}
\]
is the global flow of a left invariant vector field $Y\in{\mathfrak h}$ (the Lie algebra of $H$), which is $\varphi$-related to $X$. This induces a Lie algebra homomorphism $\varphi_*:\frg\rightarrow{\mathfrak h}$ such that the diagram
\begin{equation}\label{eq:varphi_exp}
\begin{gathered}
\xymatrix{
\frg \ar[r]^{\varphi_*} \ar[d]_\exp &{\mathfrak h} \ar[d]^\exp \\
G \ar[r]^\varphi &H}
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
is commutative.
In particular, we obtain a commutative diagram
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Ad_exp}
\begin{gathered}
\xymatrix{
\frg \ar[r]^{\mathrm{Ad}_*\ } \ar[d]_\exp &{\mathfrak{gl}}(\frg) \ar[d]^\exp \\
G \ar[r]^{\mathrm{Ad}\quad} &\mathrm{GL}(\frg)}
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where, on the right $\exp$ denotes the standard exponential of linear endomorphisms.
For $X,Y\in\frg$ we get:
\[
\begin{split}
\mathrm{Ad}_{\exp(tX)}Y&=\bigl(\iota_{\exp(tX)}\bigr)_*Y\\
&=\bigl(R_{\exp(-tX)}\bigr)_*\circ\bigl(L_{\exp(tX)}\bigr)_*(Y)\\
&=\bigl(R_{\exp(-tX)}\bigr)_*(Y)\quad\textrm{(as $Y$ is left invariant).}
\end{split}
\]
Since $\Phi_t=R_{\exp(tX)}$ is the global flow of $X$ (Remark \ref{re:PhitR}), we obtain from \eqref{eq:XYPhi} the equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Rexp-tXY}
\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}\bigl(R_{\exp(-tX)}\bigr)_*(Y)=[X,Y].
\end{equation}
Therefore the map $t\mapsto \mathrm{Ad}_{\exp(tX)}Y$ is the one-parameter group in $\frg\simeq T_eG$ whose derivative at $0$ is $[X,Y]$. Alternatively, $t\mapsto \mathrm{Ad}_{\exp(tX)}$ is the one-parameter group in the Lie group $\mathrm{GL}(\frg)$ whose derivative at $0$ is the linear endomorphism $\mathrm{ad}_X:Y\mapsto [X,Y]$ ($\mathrm{ad}_X\in{\mathfrak{gl}}(\frg)$, the Lie algebra of $\mathrm{GL}(\frg)$).
We conclude that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:AdtXad}
\mathrm{Ad}_{\exp(tX)}=\exp(t\mathrm{ad}_X)
\end{equation}
for any $X\in\frg$ and $t\in\mathbb{R}$. Hence we obtain $(\mathrm{Ad})_*=\mathrm{ad}:\frg\rightarrow{\mathfrak{gl}}(\frg)$, and the diagram in \eqref{eq:Ad_exp} becomes the following commutative diagram:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Adad}
\begin{gathered}
\xymatrix{
\frg \ar[r]^{\mathrm{ad}\ } \ar[d]_\exp &{\mathfrak{gl}}(\frg) \ar[d]^\exp \\
G \ar[r]^{\mathrm{Ad}\quad} &\mathrm{GL}(\frg)}
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}
On the left hand side of \eqref{eq:AdtXad} we have an arbitrary Lie group and its Lie algebra, while on the right hand side we have a very concrete Lie group: the general linear Lie group on a vector space, and its Lie algebra.
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\section{Invariant affine connections on homogeneous spaces}\label{se:Homog_spaces}
\subsection{Homogeneous spaces}
Let $G$ be a Lie group with Lie algebra $\frg$, $M$ a manifold and let
\[
\begin{split}
\tau:G\times M&\longrightarrow M\\
(g,p)\ &\mapsto \tau(g,p)=g\cdot p
\end{split}\]
be a smooth action. That is, $\tau$ is both a smooth map and a group action.
If the group action $\tau$ is transitive (i.e., for any $p,q\in M$ there is an element $g\in G$ such that $g\cdot p=q$), then $M$ is said to be a \emph{homogeneous space}.
(Formally, we should consider homogeneous spaces as triples $(M,G,\tau)$.)
\begin{example}
The $n$-dimensional sphere $\mathbb{S}^n:= \{(x_1,\ldots,x_{n+1})\in\mathbb{R}^{n+1}:\sum_{i=1}^{n+1}x_i^2=1\}$ is a homogeneous space relative to the natural action of the special orthogonal group: $SO(n+1)\times\mathbb{S}^N\rightarrow \mathbb{S}^n$.
On the other hand, $\mathbb{S}^{2n-1}$ can be identified with the set $\{(z_1,\ldots,z_n)\in\mathbb{C}^n:\sum_{i=1}^n|z_i|^2=1\}$, and hence it is a homogeneous space relative to the natural action of the special unitary group: $SU(n)\times \mathbb{S}^{2n-1}\rightarrow \mathbb{S}^{2n-1}$.
\end{example}
Given a homogeneous space $M$, fix an element $p\in M$ and consider the corresponding \emph{isotropy subgroup}:
\[
H:= \{g\in G: g\cdot p=p\}.
\]
This is a closed subgroup of $G$ and hence (see e.g. \cite[Theorem 5.3.2]{Conlon}) it is a Lie group too, with Lie algebra
\[
{\mathfrak h}:= \{X\in\frg : \exp(tX)\in H\ \forall t\in\mathbb{R}\}.
\]
(Recall the map $\exp:\frg\rightarrow G$ in equation \eqref{eq:exp}.) The Lie algebra ${\mathfrak h}$ is then a subalgebra of $\frg$.
Moreover, the set of left cosets $G/H$ is a manifold with a suitable atlas such that the bijection
\[
\begin{split}
G/H&\longrightarrow M\\
gH&\mapsto g\cdot p
\end{split}
\]
is a diffeomorphism (see e.g. \cite[Proposition 5.4.12]{Conlon}).
For any $X\in\frg$ we can define a global flow:
\[
\begin{split}
\Phi:\mathbb{R}\times M&\longrightarrow M\\
(t,m)\ &\mapsto \exp(tX)\cdot m.
\end{split}
\]
The associated vector field in $\mathfrak{X}(M)$ will be denoted by $X^+$. Hence we have
\[
X_m^+(f)=\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}f\bigl(\exp(tX)\cdot m\bigr)
\]
for any $m\in M$ and $f\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$. The next result summarizes some of the main properties of these vector fields.
\begin{proposition}\label{pr:properties_X+}
Let $M$ be a homogenous space of the Lie group $G$ as above. Then the following properties hold:
\begin{romanenumerate}
\item For any $q\in M$, let $\pi_q:G\rightarrow M$ be the smooth map $g\mapsto g\cdot q$. Then for any $X\in\frg$ and $f\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$
\[
X_q^+(f)=X_e(f\circ\pi_q).
\]
In other words, $X^+_q=(\pi_q)_*(X_e)$.
\item For any $X\in\frg$, let $\hat X$ be the right invariant vector field on $G$ with $X_e=\hat X_e$ (see Proposition \ref{pr:XXhat}). Then $\hat X$ and $X^+$ are $\pi_q$-related for any $q\in M$. Moreover, $X^+$ is determined by this property.
\item The map
\[
\begin{split}
\frg&\longrightarrow \mathfrak{X}(M)\\
X&\mapsto\ -X^+
\end{split}
\]
is a Lie algebra homomorphism.
\item For any $g\in G$, denote by $\tau(g)$ the diffeomorphism $M\rightarrow M$, $q\mapsto g\cdot q$. Then for any $g\in G$ and $X\in\frg$ we have
\[
\tau(g)_*(X^+)=\bigl(\mathrm{Ad}_gX)^+.
\]
\item Fix, as before, a point $p\in M$, then $\pi:= \pi_p:G\rightarrow M$ induces a linear surjection
\[
\begin{split}
\pi_*:\frg\,(\simeq T_e(G))&\longrightarrow T_pM\\
X\quad&\mapsto \left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}\pi(\exp(tX))=X^+_p,
\end{split}
\]
with $\mathrm{ker}\,\pi_*={\mathfrak h}$ (the Lie algebra of the isotropy subgroup $H$ at $p$).
\end{romanenumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
For (i), we proceed as follows:
\[
X_q^+(f)=\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}f\bigl(\exp(tX)\cdot q\bigr)=
\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}f\bigl(\pi_q(\exp(tX))\bigr)=X_e(f\circ\pi_q).
\]
For (ii), take any $f\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$ and $g\in G$ to obtain
\[
\begin{split}
\bigl(X^+f\bigr)\circ\pi_q(g)&=\bigl(X^+f\bigr)(g\cdot q)=X^+_{g\cdot q}(f)\\
&=X_e(f\circ\pi_{g\cdot q})=X_e(f\circ\pi_q\circ R_g)\\
&=\hat X_g(f\circ\pi_q)=\bigl(\hat X(f\circ\pi_q)\bigr)(g).
\end{split}\]
Hence $(X^+f)\circ\pi_q=\hat X(f\circ\pi_q)$, as required.
By Exercise \ref{exe:Phi_related}, for any $X,Y\in\frg$, the vector fields $[\hat X,\hat Y]$ in $G$ and $[X^+,Y^+]$ in $M$ are $\pi_q$-related for any $q\in M$. But $[\hat X,\hat Y]=-\widehat{[X,Y]}$ by Proposition \ref{pr:XXhat}, so $-\widehat{[X,Y]}$ and $[X^+,Y^+]$ are $\pi_q$-related for any $q\in M$, and this shows that $[X^+,Y^+]=-[X,Y]^+$, thus proving (iii).
Now, for any $q\in M$ and $f\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$ we obtain:
\[
\begin{split}
\bigl(\tau(g)_*(X^+)\bigr)_{g\cdot q}(f)
&=X^+_q(f\circ\tau(g))=X_e(f\circ\tau(g)\circ\pi_q)\\
&=X_e(f\circ\pi_{g\cdot q}\circ \iota_g)\\
&\qquad\textrm{(as $\pi_{g\cdot q}\circ\iota_g(h)=\pi_{g\cdot q}(ghg^{-1})=(gh)\cdot q
=\tau(g)\circ\pi_q(h)$)}\\
&=\bigl(\mathrm{Ad}_g X\bigr)_e(f\circ\pi_{g\cdot q})=\bigl(\mathrm{Ad}_g X\bigr)^+_{g\cdot q}(f),
\end{split}
\]
and this proves (iv).
Finally,
\[
\begin{split}
\mathrm{ker}\,\pi_*&=\left\{X\in\frg : \left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}\pi\bigl(\exp(tX)\bigr)=0\right\}\\
&=\left\{X\in\frg : \left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}\exp(tX).p=0\right\}
\end{split}
\]
contains ${\mathfrak h}$. But $\pi_*$ is a surmersion, and hence $\mathrm{ker}\,\pi_*={\mathfrak h}$ by dimension count.
\end{proof}
Therefore, in the conditions of the Proposition above, the map
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ghTpM}
\begin{split}
\phi:\frg/{\mathfrak h}&\longrightarrow T_pM\\
X+{\mathfrak h}&\mapsto\quad X^+_p
\end{split}
\end{equation}
is a linear isomorphism that allows us to identify $T_pM$ with $\frg/{\mathfrak h}$. Under this identification, for any $h\in H$, the map $\tau(h)_*:T_pM\rightarrow T_pM$ corresponds, because of Proposition \ref{pr:properties_X+}(iv), to the map
\begin{equation}\label{eq:jh}
\begin{split}
j(h):\frg/{\mathfrak h}&\longrightarrow \frg/{\mathfrak h}\\
X+{\mathfrak h}&\mapsto \bigl(\mathrm{Ad}_h X\bigr)+{\mathfrak h}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
That is, we get a commutative diagram
\begin{equation}\label{eq:jhtauh}
\begin{gathered}
\xymatrix{
\frg/{\mathfrak h} \ar[r]^{j(h)} \ar[d]_\phi &\frg/{\mathfrak h} \ar[d]^\phi\\
T_pM \ar[r]_{\tau(h)_*} &T_pM}
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
The map $j:H\rightarrow GL(\frg/{\mathfrak h})$, $h\mapsto j(h)$, is the natural representation of $H$ on $\frg/{\mathfrak h}$ (induced by the adjoint representation).
\medskip
In what follows, when we refer to a homogeneous space $M\simeq G/H$, we mean that $G$ is a Lie group acting smoothly and transitively on $M$, and that a point $p\in M$ has been fixed with $H$ as isotropy subgroup.
\begin{remark}\label{re:X+_span}
Proposition \ref{pr:properties_X+}(v) shows that for any $q\in M$, the subspace $\{X^+_q:X\in\frg\}$ fills the whole $T_qM$. In other words, the space $\{X^+: X\in\frg\}$ spans $\mathfrak{X}(M)$ as a $\mathcal{C}^\infty(M)$-module.
\end{remark}
\medskip
\subsection{Invariant affine connections on homogeneous spaces}
\begin{definition}
Let $M\simeq G/H$ be a homogeneous space. An affine connection $\nabla$ on $M$ is said to be \emph{invariant} if for any $X,Y\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ and $g\in G$,
\[
\tau(g)_*\Bigl(\nabla_XY\Bigr)=\nabla_{\tau(g)_*(X)}\tau(g)_*(Y).
\]
\end{definition}
\begin{proposition}\label{pr:Ltau}
Let $\nabla$ be an invariant affine connection on a homogeneous space $M\simeq G/H$. Then for any $X\in\frg$ (the Lie algebra of $G$) and any $g\in G$ we have:
\[
L_{(\mathrm{Ad}_g X)^+}=\tau(g)_*\circ L_{X^+}\circ\tau(g^{-1})_*.
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
For any $X\in\frg$, recall from Proposition \ref{pr:properties_X+}(iv) that $(\mathrm{Ad}_g X)^+=\tau(g)_*(X^+)$, so it is enough to prove that $L_{\tau(g)_*U}\circ\tau(g)_*=\tau(g)_*\circ L_U$ for any $U\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$, and this is a straightforward consequence of the invariance of $\nabla$.
\end{proof}
Therefore, the invariant affine connection $\nabla$, which is determined by the Nomizu operators $L_{X^+}$ for $X\in\frg$ because of Remark \ref{re:X+_span}, is actually determined by the endomorphisms $\left.L_{X^+}\right|_p$, because for any $q\in M$, there is an element $g\in G$ such that $q=g\cdot p$, and for $Y\in\frg$ we have
\[
\begin{split}
L_{X^+}(Y^+_{g\cdot p})&=
L_{X^+}\Bigl(\tau(g)_*(\mathrm{Ad}_{g^{-1}}Y)^+_p\Bigr)\quad\textrm{(Proposition \ref{pr:properties_X+}(iv))}\\
&=\tau(g)_*L_{(\mathrm{Ad}_{g^{-1}} X)^+}\Bigl((\mathrm{Ad}_{g^{-1}} Y)^+_p\Bigr).
\end{split}
\]
If we identify $T_pM$ with $\frg/{\mathfrak h}$ via the map $\phi$ in \eqref{eq:ghTpM} we may think of $\left.L_{X^+}\right|_p$ as a linear endomorphism of $\frg/{\mathfrak h}$.
Hence $\nabla$ is determined by the linear map, also denoted by $L$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:L}
\begin{split}
L:\frg&\longrightarrow \End_\mathbb{R}(\frg/{\mathfrak h})\\
X&\mapsto \begin{aligned}[t]
L_X:\frg/{\mathfrak h}&\longrightarrow \frg/{\mathfrak h}\\
Y+{\mathfrak h}&\mapsto \phi^{-1}\bigl(L_{X^+}(Y^+_p)\bigr).\end{aligned}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{proposition}\label{pr:properties_ab}
Let $\nabla$ be an invariant affine connection on the homogeneous space $M\simeq G/H$. Then the linear map $L$ just defined satisfies the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)] $L_{\mathrm{Ad}_hX}=j(h)\circ L_X\circ j(h^{-1})$ for any $X\in\frg$ and $h\in H$.
\item[(b)] $L_X(Y+{\mathfrak h})=[X,Y]+{\mathfrak h}$ for any $X\in{\mathfrak h}$ and $Y\in\frg$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
In other words, $L:\frg\rightarrow \End_{\mathbb{R}}(\frg/{\mathfrak h})$ is a homomorphism of $H$-modules that extends the natural (adjoint) representation of ${\mathfrak h}$ on $\frg/{\mathfrak h}$.
Actually, (a) is a direct consequence of Proposition \ref{pr:Ltau} and the commutativity of \eqref{eq:jhtauh}, and (b) follows because for $X\in{\mathfrak h}$, $X^+_p=0$, so $\bigl(\nabla_{X^+}Y^+\bigr)_p=0$, and hence $\bigl(L_{X^+}(Y^+)\bigr)_p=\bigl(\nabla_{X^+}Y^+\bigr)_p-[X^+,Y^+]_p=[X,Y]^+_p$.
Conversely, given an $\mathbb{R}$-linear map $L:\frg\rightarrow \End_\mathbb{R}(\frg/{\mathfrak h})$ satisfying the properties (a) and (b) above, we may define, for $X,Y\in\frg$ and $g\in G$:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\nabla_{X^+_p}Y^+:=\phi\bigl(L_X(Y+{\mathfrak h})\bigr)-[X,Y]^+_p\in T_pM$ (well defined by property (b)),
\item $\nabla_{X^+_{g\cdot p}}Y^+:=\tau(g)_*\left(\nabla_{(\mathrm{Ad}_{g^{-1}} X)_p^+}(\mathrm{Ad}_{g^{-1}}Y)^+\right)$ (well defined by property (a)),
\end{itemize}
and this defines an invariant affine connection on $M$.
We summarize the above arguments in the next result, which goes back to Vinberg \cite[Theorem 2]{Vinberg}.
\begin{theorem}\label{th:nablaL}
The invariant affine connections on a homogeneous space $M\simeq G/H$ are in bijection with the $\mathbb{R}$-linear maps $L:\frg\rightarrow\End_\mathbb{R}(\frg/{\mathfrak h})$ satisfying the properties \textrm{(a)} and \textrm{(b)} in Proposition \ref{pr:properties_ab}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark} Condition (a) above means that the map $L$ in the Theorem is a homomorphisms of $H$-modules, and this implies that it is a homomorphism of ${\mathfrak h}$-modules:
\[
L_{[U,X]}=[\tilde\jmath(U),L_X]
\]
for any $U\in{\mathfrak h}$ and $X\in\frg$, where $\tilde\jmath(U)$ is the endomorphism of $\frg/{\mathfrak h}$ such that $\tilde\jmath(U)(Y+{\mathfrak h})=[U,Y]+{\mathfrak h}$ for any $Y\in\frg$. Indeed, property (a) gives
\[
L_{\mathrm{Ad}_{\exp(tU)}X}\circ j(\exp(tU))=j(\exp(tU))\circ L_X
\]
in $\End_\mathbb{R}(\frg/{\mathfrak h})$ for any $t\in\mathbb{R}$. Taking the derivative at $t=0$ we get $L_{[U,X]}+L_X\circ\tilde\jmath(U)=\tilde\jmath(U)\circ L_X$, as required.
\end{remark}
\medskip
The torsion and curvature tensors of an invariant affine connection on a homogeneous space $M\simeq G/H$ can now be expressed in terms of the linear map $L$ in \eqref{eq:L}, because, by invariance, it is enough to compute them at the point $p$.
\begin{description}
\item[Torsion] For $X,Y\in\frg$ we have
\[
\begin{split}
T(X^+,Y^+)&:= \nabla_{X^+}Y^+-\nabla_{Y^+}X^+-[X^+,Y^+]\\
&=L_{X^+}(Y^+)-L_{Y^+}(X^+)+[X^+,Y^+]\\
&=L_{X^+}(Y^+)-L_{Y^+}(X^+)-[X,Y]^+\quad\textrm{(by Proposition \ref{pr:properties_X+}(iii)),}
\end{split}
\]
so at the point $p$ we get
\[
T(X^+,Y^+)_p=\phi\left(L_X(Y+{\mathfrak h})-L_Y(X+{\mathfrak h})-\bigl([X,Y]+{\mathfrak h}\bigr)\right),
\]
which corresponds, through the map $\phi$ in \eqref{eq:ghTpM} to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:TXhYh}
T(X+{\mathfrak h},Y+{\mathfrak h}):= L_X(Y+{\mathfrak h})-L_Y(X+{\mathfrak h})-\bigl([X,Y]+{\mathfrak h}\bigr).
\end{equation}
\item[Curvature] Again, for $X,Y\in\frg$ we have
\[
\begin{split}
R(X^+,Y^+)&:= [\nabla_{X^+},\nabla_{Y^+}]-\nabla_{[X^+,Y^+]}\\
&=[L_{X^+}+\mathrm{ad}_{X^+},L_{Y^+}+\mathrm{ad}_{Y^+}]-\nabla_{[X^+,Y^+]}\\
&=[L_{X^+},L_{Y^+}]+[\mathrm{ad}_{X^+},L_{Y^+}]+[L_{X^+},\mathrm{ad}_{Y^+}]+\mathrm{ad}_{[X^+,Y^+]}-\nabla_{[X^+,Y^+]}\\
&=[L_{X^+},L_{Y^+}]+[\mathrm{ad}_{X^+},L_{Y^+}]+[L_{X^+},\mathrm{ad}_{Y^+}]-L_{[X^+,Y^+]}.
\end{split}
\]
Now, given a manifold $M$ with an affine connection, an \emph{affine transformation} is a diffeomorphism $\varphi$ such that $\varphi_*(\nabla_XY)=\nabla_{\varphi_*(X)}\varphi_*(Y)$ for any vector fiels $X,Y\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$, and a vector field $X\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ is called an \emph{infinitesimal affine transformation} if its local flow $\Phi_t$ is an affine transformation for $-\epsilon<t<\epsilon$ for some $\epsilon>0$.
If $X\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ is an infinitesimal affine transformation, for any $Y,Z\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ we get:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:infinitesima_affine}
\begin{split}
[X,\nabla_YZ]&=\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}(\Phi_{-t})_*(\nabla_YZ)\ \textrm{(because of \eqref{eq:XYPhi})}\\
&=\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}\left(\nabla_{(\Phi_{-t})_*(Y)}(\Phi_{-t})_*(Z)\right)\\
&=\nabla_{[X,Y]}Z+\nabla_Y[X,Z].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The last equality above is proved as follows. Locally (i.e., in local coordinates) $Y(t,q):=(\Phi_{-t})_*Y=\sum_i f_i(t,q)\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_i}$ and $Z(t,q):=(\Phi_{-t})_*Z=\sum_i g_i(t,q)\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_i}$. Hence
\[
\begin{split}
\nabla_{Y(t,q)}Z(t,q)
=\sum_{i,j}f_i(t,q)\frac{\partial g_j(t,q)}{\partial x_i}\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_j}
\,+\,\sum_{i,j}f_i(t,q)g_j(t,q)\Gamma_{i,j}(q)\frac{\partial\ }{\partial x_k}.
\end{split}
\]
(Note that the Christoffel symbols do not depend on $t$.) Now take the derivative with respect to $t$ at $t=0$ using Leibniz's rule to get the required equality.
Returning to our homogeneous space $M\simeq G/H$ with an invariant affine connection $\nabla$, for any $X\in\frg$, $X^+$ is an infinitesimal affine transformation, because its global flow is $\tau(\exp(tX))$ and $\nabla$ is invariant. Hence, by \eqref{eq:infinitesima_affine}, we get for any $X,Y\in\frg$:
\[
\begin{split}
[\mathrm{ad}_{X^+},L_{Y^+}]&=[\mathrm{ad}_{X^+},\nabla_{Y^+}+\mathrm{ad}_{Y^+}]
=\nabla_{[X^+,Y^+]}+\mathrm{ad}_{[X^+,Y^+]}\\
&=L_{[X^+,Y^+]}=-L_{[X,Y]^+},
\end{split}
\]
so the formula above for $R(X^+,Y^+)$ becomes:
\[
\begin{split}
R(X^+,Y^+)&=[L_{X^+},L_{Y^+}]+L_{[X^+,Y^+]}-L_{[Y^+,X^+]}-L_{[X^+,Y^+]}\\
&=[L_{X^+},L_{Y^+}]+L_{[X^+,Y^+]}=[L_{X^+},L_{Y^+}]-L_{[X,Y]^+},
\end{split}
\]
which at the point $p\in M$ corresponds via $\phi$ in \eqref{eq:ghTpM} to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:RXhYh}
R(X+{\mathfrak h},Y+{\mathfrak h})=[L_X,L_Y]-L_{[X,Y]}\,\in\End_\mathbb{R}(\frg/{\mathfrak h}).
\end{equation}
\end{description}
\begin{remark} Equation \eqref{eq:RXhYh} shows that the connection $\nabla$ is flat (i.e., its curvature is trivial) if and only if the map $L:\frg\rightarrow {\mathfrak{gl}}(\frg/{\mathfrak h})$ is a homomorphism of Lie algebras, that is, $L$ gives a representation of $\frg$ in the quotient space $\frg/{\mathfrak h}$.
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\section{Nomizu's Theorem}\label{se:Nomizu}
\subsection{Reductive homogeneous spaces}
\begin{definition}
The homogeneous space $M\simeq G/H$ is said to be \emph{reductive} if there is a decomposition as a direct sum of vector spaces $\frg= {\mathfrak h}\oplus\frmm$ such that $\mathrm{Ad}_h(\frmm)\subseteq \frmm$ for any $h\in H$.
(Such decomposition is called a \emph{reductive decomposition}.)
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
Because of \eqref{eq:AdtXad}, the condition $\mathrm{Ad}_H(\frmm)\subseteq \frmm$ implies $[{\mathfrak h},\frmm]\subseteq \frmm$, and the converse holds if $H$ is connected.
\end{remark}
A big deal of information on the reductive homogneous space $M\simeq G/H$ is located in the following two products defined on $\frmm\, (\simeq \frg/{\mathfrak h}\simeq T_pM)$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:binter}
\begin{split}
\textrm{Binary product:}&\ X\cdot Y:= [X,Y]_\frmm\\
&\qquad\textrm{(the projection of $[X,Y]$ on $\frmm$)}\\[6pt]
\textrm{Ternary product:}&\ [X,Y,Z]:= [[X,Y]_{\mathfrak h},Z]\\
&\textrm{(where $[X,Y]_{\mathfrak h}$ denotes the projection of $[X,Y]$ on ${\mathfrak h}$).}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{exercise}
Let $\frg$ be a Lie algebra, ${\mathfrak h}$ a subalgebra and $\frmm$ a subspace such that $\frg={\mathfrak h}\oplus\frmm$ and $[{\mathfrak h},\frmm]\subseteq \frmm$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
Prove the following properties:
\begin{description}
\item[(LY1)] $X\cdot X=0$,
\item[(LY2)] $[X,X,Y]=0$,
\item[(LY3)] $\sum_{(X,Y,Z)}\Bigl([X,Y,Z]+(X\cdot Y)\cdot Z\Bigr)=0$,
\item[(LY4)] $\sum_{(X,Y,Z)}[X\cdot Y,Z,T]=0$,
\item[(LY5)] $[X,Y,U\cdot V]=[X,Y,U]\cdot V+U\cdot [X,Y,V]$,
\item[(LY6)] $[X,Y,[U,V,W]]=[[X,Y,U],V,W]+[U,[X,Y,V],W]$\newline \null\hfill $+[U,V,[X,Y,W]]$,
\end{description}
for any $X,Y,Z,T,U,V,W\in\frmm$, where $\sum_{(X,Y,Z)}$ stands for the cyclic sum on $X,Y,Z$.
A vector space endowed with a binary and a ternary multilinear products satisfying these properties is called a \emph{Lie-Yamaguti algebra}. These algebras were named `general Lie triple systems' by Yamaguti \cite{Yam58}. The name `Lie-Yamaguti algebras' was given by Kinyon and Weinstein \cite{KW01}. Irreducible Lie-Yamaguti algebras have been studied in \cite{BEM1,BEM2}.
\smallskip
\item Prove that if $(\frmm,\cdot,[...])$ is a Lie-Yamaguti algebra, then there is a Lie algebra $\frg$ containing $\frmm$ and a subalgebra ${\mathfrak h}$ of $\frg$ complementing $\frmm$ with $[{\mathfrak h},\frmm]\subseteq \frmm$ such that $X\cdot Y=[X,Y]_\frmm$ and $[X,Y,Z]=[[X,Y]_{\mathfrak h},Z]$ for any $X,Y,Z\in\frmm$.
\noindent{\small [Hint: Let ${\mathfrak h}$ be the subspace of $\End(\frmm)$ spanned by the endomorphismsm $[X,Y,.]$ for $X,Y\in\frmm$, and define $\frg={\mathfrak h}\oplus\frmm$ with a suitable bracket.]}
\end{enumerate}
\end{exercise}
\smallskip
\subsection{Invariant affine connections on reductive homogeneous spaces}
Let $M\simeq G/H$ be a reductive homogeneous space with reductive decomposition $\frg={\mathfrak h}\oplus\frmm$. In this case we will identify the quotient space $\frg/{\mathfrak h}$ with $\frmm$. Hence any linear map $L:\frg\rightarrow \End_\mathbb{R}(\frg/{\mathfrak h})$ satisfying properties (a) and (b) in Proposition \ref{pr:properties_ab} is determined by the linear map
\[
\begin{split}
\tilde L: \frmm &\longrightarrow \End_\mathbb{R}(\frmm)\\
X&\mapsto \begin{aligned}[t]
\tilde L_X:\frmm &\rightarrow \frmm \\
Y&\mapsto \tilde\phi^{-1}\bigl(L_{X^+}(Y^+_p)\bigr),
\end{aligned}
\end{split}
\]
where $\tilde\phi:\frmm\rightarrow T_pM$ is the composition of the identification $\frmm\simeq\frg/{\mathfrak h}$ and the map $\phi:\frg/{\mathfrak h}\rightarrow T_pM$ in \eqref{eq:ghTpM}.
Note that the restriction of the map $L$ in \eqref{eq:L} to ${\mathfrak h}$ is determined by property (b) in Proposition \ref{pr:properties_ab}, while property (a) translates, thanks to \eqref{eq:jh}, into the condition
\begin{equation}\label{eq:tildeLhX}
\tilde L_{\mathrm{Ad}_h X}=\left.\mathrm{Ad}_h\right|_\frmm\circ\tilde L_X\circ\left.\mathrm{Ad}_{h^{-1}}\right|_\frmm
\end{equation}
for any $h\in H$ and $X\in\frmm$.
But any such map $\tilde L$ determines (and is determined by) the bilinear map
\[
\begin{split}
\alpha:\frmm\times\frmm&\longrightarrow \frmm\\
(X,Y)&\mapsto \alpha(X,Y):= \tilde L_X(Y),
\end{split}
\]
and Equation \ref{eq:tildeLhX} is equivalent to the condition
\[
\alpha\bigl(\mathrm{Ad}_hX,\mathrm{Ad}_hY)=\mathrm{Ad}_h\bigl(\alpha(X,Y)\bigr)
\]
for any $h\in H$ and $X,Y\in\frmm$.
This proves the following theorem of Nomizu, which is the main result of this course:
\bigskip
\noindent\fbox{\begin{minipage}{0.98\textwidth}
\begin{theorem}[Nomizu, 1954]\label{th:Nomizu}
The invariant affine connections on a reductive homogeneous space $M\simeq G/H$ with reductive decomposition $\frg={\mathfrak h}\oplus\frmm$ are in bijection with the vector space of nonassociative multiplications $\alpha:\frmm\times\frmm\rightarrow \frmm$ such that $H$ acts by automorphisms, i.e., $\left.\mathrm{Ad}_H\right|_\frmm\subseteq \Aut(\frmm,\alpha)$.
\end{theorem}
\end{minipage}}
\bigskip
\begin{remark}
The vector space $\frmm$ is a module for the group $H$, and the vector space of nonassociative multiplications as in the Theorem above is naturally isomorphic to $\Hom_H(\frmm\otimes_\mathbb{R}\frmm,\frmm)$.
Moreover, the condition $\left.\mathrm{Ad}_H\right|_\frmm\subseteq \Aut(\frmm,\alpha)$ implies that $\left.\mathrm{ad}_{\mathfrak h}\right|_\frmm$ is contained in $\Der(\frmm,\alpha)$. The converse is valid if $H$ is connected.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
Nomizu \cite{Nom54} proved this result in a very different way. He defined the product $\alpha(X,Y)$ by extending locally $X$ and $Y$ to some invariant vector fields $\tilde X$ and $\tilde Y$ defined on a neighborhood of $p$ and imposing $\alpha(X,Y):=\nabla_{\tilde X_p}\tilde Y\in T_pM\simeq \frmm$.
\end{remark}
The torsion and curvature tensors are determined in equations \eqref{eq:TXhYh} and \eqref{eq:RXhYh}, which now become simpler:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:TRm}
\begin{split}
T(X,Y)&=\alpha(X,Y)-\alpha(Y,X)-X\cdot Y,\\
R(X,Y)Z&=\alpha(X,\alpha(Y,Z))-\alpha(Y,\alpha(X,Z))-\alpha(X\cdot Y,Z)-[X,Y,Z],
\end{split}
\end{equation}
for any $X,Y,Z\in\frmm$, where $X\cdot Y=[X,Y]_\frmm$ and $[X,Y,Z]=[[X,Y]_{\mathfrak h},Z]$ as in \eqref{eq:binter}.
\medskip
There are always two distinguished invariant affine connections in this case:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Natural connection} (or canonical connection of the first kind), given by
\[
\alpha (X,Y)=\frac{1}{2}X\cdot Y,
\]
for $X,Y\in\frmm$, which is symmetric ($T(X,Y)=0$ for any $X,Y\in\frmm$).
\smallskip
\item \textbf{Canonical connection} (of the second kind), given by $\alpha(X,Y)=0$ for any $X,Y\in\frmm$.
\end{itemize}
\begin{remark}
These two connections coincide if and only if $X\cdot Y=0$ for any $X,Y\in\frmm$, and this is equivalent to the fact that the reductive decomposition $\frg={\mathfrak h}\oplus\frmm$ be a $\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}$-grading: $\frg_{\bar 0}={\mathfrak h}$ is a subalgebra, $\frg_{\bar 1}=\frmm$ is a $\frg_{\bar 0}$-module, and $[\frg_{\bar 1},\frg_{\bar 1}]\subseteq \frg_{\bar 0}$.
This is the case for the \emph{symmetric spaces}, which are the coset spaces $G/H$ for a Lie group $G$ endowed with an order $2$ automorphism $\sigma$ such that
\[
G_0^\sigma\subseteq H\subseteq G^\sigma,
\]
where $G^\sigma=\{g\in G: \sigma(g)=g\}$ is the subgroup of fixed elements by $\sigma$ and $G_0^\sigma$ is the connected component of $G^\sigma$ containing the neutral element. In this case ${\mathfrak h}=\{X\in\frg: \sigma_*(X)=X\}$ is the Lie algebra of $H$, and $\frmm:=\{X\in\frg: \sigma_*(X)=-X\}$ is a complementary subspace. Since $(\sigma_*)^2=(\sigma^2)_*$ is the identity, and $\left.\sigma_*\right|_\frg$ is an automorphism, this gives a reductive decomposition $\frg={\mathfrak h}\oplus\frmm$, which is clearly a $\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}$-grading.
(Gradings on Lie algebras are the subject of \cite{EKmon}.)
\end{remark}
\medskip
Nomizu's Theorem allows us to transfer geometric conditions to algebra, or algebraic conditions to geometry.
For example, given a homogeneous space $M\simeq G/H$, and a vector field $X\in\frg$, the curve $\gamma: t\mapsto \exp(tX)\cdot p$ is a geodesic with respect to an invariant affine connection $\nabla$ if and only if
\[
\nabla_{X^+_{\exp(tX)\cdot p}}X^+=0
\]
for any $t\in\mathbb{R}$. (Recall that $\dot\gamma(t)=X^*_{\exp(tX)\cdot p}$ by the definition of $X^+$.) But
\[
\nabla_{X^+_{g\cdot p}}Y^+=\tau(g)_*\left(\nabla_{(\mathrm{Ad}_{g^{-1}}X)^+_p}(\mathrm{Ad}_{g^{-1}}Y)^+\right)
\]
by Proposition \ref{pr:properties_X+}, since $\nabla$ is invariant. From
$\mathrm{Ad}_{\exp(-tX)}X=X$ (see \eqref{eq:AdtXad}), we check that $\nabla_{X^+_{\exp(tX)\cdot p}}X^+=0$ for any $t\in\mathbb{R}$ if and only if $\nabla_{X^+_p}X^+=0$, or $L_{X^+}(X^+_p)=0$.
The last condition is equivalent to $L_X(X+{\mathfrak h})=0$, where $L:\frg\rightarrow \End_\mathbb{R}(\frg/{\mathfrak h})$ is the linear map in \eqref{eq:L}. Hence, if $M\simeq G/H$ is reductive and $\alpha$ is the multiplication on $\frmm$ determined by $\nabla$ we obtain the following result:
\begin{proposition}
Under the hypotheses above, the multiplication $\alpha$ attached to $\nabla$ is anticommutative (i.e., $\alpha(X,X)=0$ for any $X\in\frmm$) if and only if the geodesics through $p$ are exactly the curves $t\mapsto \exp(tX)\cdot p$ for $X\in\frmm$.
\end{proposition}
Note that given a tangent vector $v\in T_pM$ there is a unique geodesic $\mu(t)$ through $p$: $\mu(0)=p$, such that $\dot\mu(0)=v$ (in general, $\mu$ is defined only locally). The geodesics through other points are given by `translation'. Actually, if $q=g.p$, then $\tau(g^{-1})_*\nabla_{X_q^+}X^+=\nabla_{\tau(g^{-1})_*(X^+_q)}\tau(g^{-1})_*(X^+)=\nabla_{(\mathrm{Ad}_{g^{-1}}X)^+_p}(\mathrm{Ad}_{g^{-1}}X)^+_p$, so if $\nabla_{X^+_p}X^+=0$ for any $X\in \frg$, also $\nabla_{X^+_q}X^+=0$ for any $X\in\frg$ and $q\in M$.
\begin{corollary}
The natural connection is the only symmetric invariant affine connection such that the curves $t\mapsto \exp(tX)\cdot q$ are geodesic for any $X\in\frmm$ and $q\in M$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
If $\alpha$ is anticommutative, then we have $T(X,Y)=2\alpha(X,Y)-X\cdot Y$. So the connection is symmetric (zero torsion) if and only if $\alpha(X,Y)=\frac{1}{2}X\cdot Y$.
\end{proof}
\begin{exercise}
Let $M\simeq G/H$ be a homogeneous space endowed with an invariant pseudo-metric $g$. This means that $M$ is pseudo-Riemannian with the pseudo-metric $g$ satisfying
\[
g(\tau(x)_*(u),\tau(x)_*(v))_{x\cdot q}=g(u,v)_q
\]
for any $x\in G$ and $u,v\in T_qM$. Hence, for any $q\in M$, $X\in\frg$, and $U,V\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$ we have:
\[
\begin{split}
X^+_q\bigl(g(U,V)\bigr)
&=\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}g(U,V)_{\exp(tX)\cdot q}\\
&=\left.\frac{d\ }{dt}\right|_{t=0}g\bigl(\tau(\exp(-tX))_*(U),\tau(\exp(-tX))_*(V)\bigr)_q\\
&=g\bigl([X^+,U],V\bigr)_q+g\bigl(U,[X^+,V]\bigr)_q\quad\textrm{(see \eqref{eq:XYPhi}).}
\end{split}
\]
In particular, for $X\in{\mathfrak h}$, $X^+_p=0$, so $g\bigl([X^+,U],V\bigr)+g\bigl(U,[X^+,V]\bigr)=0$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Prove that the Levi-Civita connection of $(M,g)$ is invariant.
\item Check that the Nomizu operator $L_{X^+}$ for $X\in\frg$ satisfies
\[
g\bigl(L_{X^+}(U),V)\bigr)+g\bigl(U,L_{X^+}(V)\bigr)=0
\]
for any $U,V\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$.
\item Conclude that for $X,Y,Z\in\frg$ we have
\[
2g\bigl(L_{X^+}(Y^+),Z^+\bigr)=
g\bigl([X,Y]^+,Z^+\bigr)-g\bigl([X,Z]^+,Y^+\bigr)-g\bigl(X^+,[Y,Z]^+\bigr).
\]
\item Prove that if $L:\frg\rightarrow\End_\mathbb{R}(\frg/{\mathfrak h})$ is the associated linear map in Theorem \ref{th:nablaL} and we identify $g_p:T_pM\times T_pM\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ with a bilinear map
\[
\bar g:\frg/{\mathfrak h}\times\frg/{\mathfrak h}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}
\]
by means of \eqref{eq:ghTpM}, then for any $X,Y,Z\in\frg$ we get
\begin{multline*}
2\bar g\bigl(L_X(Y+{\mathfrak h}),Z+{\mathfrak h}\bigr)\\
=\bar g\bigl([X,Y]+{\mathfrak h},Z+{\mathfrak h}\bigr)-\bar g\bigl(Y+{\mathfrak h},[X,Z]+{\mathfrak h}\bigr)
-\bar g\bigl(X+{\mathfrak h},[Y,Z]+{\mathfrak h}\bigr).
\end{multline*}
\item Deduce that if $M$ is reductive with reductive decomposition $\frg={\mathfrak h}\oplus\frmm$, and we identify $\bar g$ with a bilinear map (also denoted by $\bar g$) $\frmm\times\frmm\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$, the multiplication $\alpha$ in $\frmm$ attached by Nomizu's Theorem \ref{th:Nomizu} with the Levi-Civita connection on $M$ is determined by the equation:
\[
2\bar g\bigl(\alpha(X,Y),Z\bigr)=\bar g(X\cdot Y,Z)-\bar g(X\cdot Z,Y)-\bar g(X,Y\cdot Z)
\]
for any $X,Y,Z\in\frmm$. Conclude from (2) that
\[
\bar g(\alpha(X,Y),Z)+\bar g(Y,\alpha(X,Z))=0
\]
for any $X,Y,Z\in\frmm$.
\item Since the Levi-Civita connection is symmetric, $\alpha(X,Y)=\frac{1}{2}X\cdot Y+ \mu(X,Y)$, where $\mu(X,Y)$ is a commutative multiplication in $\frmm$. Prove that this commutative multiplication is determined by the equation:
\[
2\bar g\bigl(\mu(X,Y),Z\bigr)=\bar g(Z\cdot X,Y)+\bar g(X,Z\cdot Y)
\]
for any $X,Y,Z\in\frmm$.
\item Prove that the Levi-Civita connection coincides with the natural connection if and only if
\[
\bar g(Y\cdot X,Z)=\bar g(Y,X\cdot Z)
\]
for any $X,Y,Z\in\frmm$ (i.e., $\bar g$ is associative relative to the product $X\cdot Y$). In this case $M$ is said to be a \emph{naturally reductive homogeneous manifold} (see \cite{Nagai97}).
\end{enumerate}
\end{exercise}
\bigskip
\section{Examples}\label{se:examples}
\subsection{Left invariant affine connections on Lie groups}
Any Lie group $G$ is a reductive homogeneous space under the action of $G$ into itself by left multiplication. The isotropy subgroup at any point is trivial. Hence $G$ is a reductive homogeneous space with ${\mathfrak h}=0$ and $\frmm=\frg$. Also, for any $X\in\frg$, the vector field $X^+$ is nothing else but the right invariant vector field $\hat X\in\frg_\textrm{right}$ with $\hat X_e=X_e$ (see Proposition \ref{pr:XXhat}).
According to Nomizu's Theorem (Theorem \ref{th:Nomizu}) we have a bijection
\begin{align*}
\left\{\begin{matrix} \textrm{Left invariant affine}\\
\textrm{connections on $G$}\end{matrix}\right\}
&\longleftrightarrow
\left\{\begin{matrix}\textrm{bilinear maps}\\
\alpha:\frg\times\frg\rightarrow\frg\end{matrix}\right\}\\
\nabla\qquad &\mapsto\qquad \alpha(X,Y):= \phi^{-1}\Bigl((L_{X^+}(Y^+)_e\Bigr)
\end{align*}
where $\phi:\frg\rightarrow T_eM$, $X\mapsto X_e$, as in \eqref{eq:ghTpM}.
For $X,Y\in\frg$ we get
\[
\bigl(L_{X^+}(Y^+)\bigr)_e=L_{\hat X}(\hat Y_e)=L_{\hat X}(Y_e)=\bigl(L_{\hat X}(Y)\bigr)_e=\Bigl( \nabla_{\hat X}Y-[\hat X,Y]\Bigr)_e,
\]
and
\[
\bigl(\nabla_{\hat X}Y\bigr)_e=\nabla_{\hat X_e}Y=\nabla_{X_e}Y=\bigl(\nabla_XY\bigr)_e.
\]
Besides, $\nabla_XY\in \frg$ by left invariance, and $[\hat X,Y]=0$ since the corresponding flows commute: the flow of $\hat X$ is $L_{\exp(tX)}$ and the flow of $Y$ is $R_{\exp(tY)}$ and left and right multiplications commute by associativity of the multiplication in the group $G$.
\medskip
Therefore $\bigl(L_{X^+}(Y^+)\bigr)_e=\bigl(\nabla_XY\bigr)_e$ and $\phi^{-1}\bigl((L_{X^+}(Y^+)_e\bigr)=\nabla_XY$. Hence the bijection in Nomizu's Theorem becomes a very natural one:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Nomizu_left}
\begin{aligned}
\left\{\begin{matrix} \textrm{Left invariant affine}\\
\textrm{connections on $G$}\end{matrix}\right\}
&\longleftrightarrow
\left\{\begin{matrix}\textrm{bilinear maps}\\
\alpha:\frg\times\frg\rightarrow\frg\end{matrix}\right\}\\[4pt]
\nabla\qquad &\mapsto\qquad \alpha(X,Y)=\nabla_XY
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}\label{re:Nomizu_left}
\begin{itemize}
\item The canonical connection is then the connection that satisfies $\nabla_XY=0$ for any $X,Y\in \frg$. That is, it is the affine connection in which the left invariant vector fields are parallel.
\item A left invariant affine connection $\nabla$ on a Lie group $G$ is symmetric if and only if $\nabla_XY-\nabla_YX=[X,Y]$ for any $X,Y\in\frg$. This means that the algebra $(\frg,\alpha)$ (with multiplication $\alpha(X,Y)=\nabla_XY$) is \emph{Lie-admissible} with associated Lie algebra $\frg$:
A nonassociative algebra $(A,\alpha)$ is said to be \emph{Lie-admissible} if the new algebra defined on $A$ but with multiplication $\alpha^-(x,y):= \alpha(x,y)-\alpha(y,x)$ is a Lie algebra (the associated Lie algebra). For instance, associative algebras and Lie algebras are Lie-admissible.
\item A left invariant affine connection $\nabla$ on a Lie group $G$ is flat if and only if $[\nabla_X,\nabla_Y]=\nabla_{[X,Y]}$ for any $X,Y\in\frg$.
\end{itemize}
\end{remark}
\begin{exercise}\label{exe:leftsymmetric}
A nonassociative algebra $(A,\alpha)$ is \emph{left-symmetric} if the associator, defined as the trilinear map $(x,y,z):= \alpha(\alpha(x,y),z)-\alpha(x,\alpha(y,z))$ (the associator measures the lack of associativity of $\alpha$!), is symmetric in the first two components.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
Prove that any left-symmetric algebra is Lie-admissible.
\item Deduce that a left invariant affine connection on a Lie group $G$ is symmetric and flat if and only if the corresponding nonassociative algebra $(\frg,\alpha)$ (where $\alpha(X,Y)=\nabla_XY$) is left-symmetric and the algebra $(\frg,\alpha^-)$ is just the Lie algebra $\frg$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{exercise}
\bigskip
\subsection{Bi-invariant affine connections on Lie groups}
Let $\nabla$ be a left invariant affine connection on a Lie group $G$. Then $\nabla$ is also right invariant if for any $g\in G$ and $X,Y\in\frg$,
\[
(R_{g^{-1}})_*(\nabla_XY)=\nabla_{(R_{g^{-1}})_*(X)}(R_{g^{-1}})_*(Y).
\]
But by left invariance $(R_{g^{-1}})_*(X)=(R_{g^{-1}})_*\circ (L_g)_*(X)=\mathrm{Ad}_gX$, and similarly for $Y$ and $\nabla_XY$. Hence $\nabla$ is bi-invariant if and only if
\[
\mathrm{Ad}_g(\nabla_XY)=\nabla_{\mathrm{Ad}_gX}(\mathrm{Ad}_gY)
\]
for any $g\in G$ and $X,Y\in\frg$. Therefore the bijection in \eqref{eq:Nomizu_left} restricts to a bijection
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Nomizu_bi}
\begin{aligned}
\left\{\begin{matrix} \textrm{Bi-invariant affine}\\
\textrm{connections on $G$}\end{matrix}\right\}
&\longleftrightarrow
\left\{\begin{matrix}\textrm{bilinear maps}\\
\alpha:\frg\times\frg\rightarrow\frg\\
\textrm{with $\mathrm{Ad}_G\subseteq \Aut(\frg,\alpha)$}\end{matrix}\right\}\\[4pt]
\nabla\qquad &\mapsto\qquad \alpha(X,Y)=\nabla_XY.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Note that the space on the right can be canonically identified with $\Hom_G(\frg\otimes_\mathbb{R}\frg,\frg)$, which is contained in $\Hom_\frg(\frg\otimes_\mathbb{R}\frg,\frg)$ (and they coincide if $G$ is connected).
\begin{remark}
\begin{itemize}
\item If $\nabla$ is a symmetric bi-invariant affine connection on a Lie group $G$, and $\alpha:\frg\times\frg\rightarrow\frg$ is the associated multiplication ($\alpha(X,Y)=\nabla_XY$), then we know from Remark \ref{re:Nomizu_left} that $(\frg,\alpha)$ is Lie-admissible with associated Lie algebra $\frg$. But here $\alpha$ lies in $\Hom_\frg(\frg\otimes_\mathbb{R}\frg,\frg)$. This means that
\[
[X,\alpha(Y,Z)]=\alpha([X,Y],Z)+\alpha(Y,[X,Z])
\]
for any $X,Y,Z\in\frg$. That is, $\mathrm{ad}_X$ is a derivation of $(\frg,\alpha)$. Then the algebra $(\frg,\alpha)$ is flexible and Lie-admissible.
(See Exercise \ref{exe:flexibleLA}). Flexible Lie-admissible algebras are studied in \cite{Myung}.
\item If $\nabla$ is a symmetric and flat bi-invariant affine connection on a Lie group $G$, and $\alpha:\frg\times\frg\rightarrow\frg$ is the associated multiplication: $\alpha(X,Y)=\nabla_XY$, then we know from Remark \ref{re:Nomizu_left} that $(\frg,\alpha)$ is left-symmetric and flexible, but then the algebra $(\frg,\alpha)$ is associative \cite{Medina81}. (See Exercise \ref{exe:flexibleLA}.)
\end{itemize}
\end{remark}
\begin{exercise}\label{exe:flexibleLA}
Let $(A,\alpha)$ be a nonassociative algebra. By simplicity, write $\alpha(x,y)=xy$ for any $x,y\in A$. Recall from Exercise \ref{exe:leftsymmetric} that the associator of the elements $x,y,z\in A$ is the element $(x,y,z)=(xy)z-x(yz)$. The algebra $(A,\alpha)$ is said to be \emph{flexible} if $(x,y,x)=0$ for any $x,y\in A$. That is, the associator is alternating in the first and third arguments.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Assume that this algebra is Lie-admissible (i.e.; the bracket $[x,y]:= xy-yx$ satisfies the Jacobi identity). Prove that it is flexible if and only if the map $\mathrm{ad}_x:y\mapsto [x,y]$ is a derivation of $(A,\alpha)$ for any $x\in A$: $[x,yz]=[x,y]z+y[x,z]$ for any $x,y,z\in A$.
\item Check that the Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{su}}(n)$ of the special unitary group $SU(n)$, endowed with the multiplication given by:
\[
\alpha(X,Y)=\mu XY-\bar \mu YX-\frac{\mu-\bar\mu}{n}\mathrm{trace}(XY),
\]
where $\mu\in\mathbb{C}$ satisfies $\mu+\bar \mu=1$, is a flexible and Lie-admissible algebra.\\
This example plays a key role in the classification of the invariant connections on compact simple Lie groups by Laquer \cite{Laquer}.
\item Prove that an algebra $(A,\alpha)$ is flexible and left-symmetric if and only if it is associative.
\end{enumerate}
\end{exercise}
\bigskip
|
\section{Introduction}
Aperiodic optical/ultraviolet variability is a significant property of Active Galactic Nuclei (AGNs), but its physical origin is still unclear. Variability asymmetry describes whether the light curve favors a shape of rapid rise and gradual decay, i.e., positive asymmetry, or a shape of gradual rise and rapid decay, i.e., negative asymmetry. There are only a few observational/theoretical works in literature studying the variability asymmetry of AGNs. \citet{kawaguchi98} introduced a structure function approach to estimate the variability asymmetry of AGN light curves. They adopted two structure functions, i.e., $SF_{ic}(\tau)$ and $SF_{dc}(\tau)$, which only include pair epochs with increasing and decreasing flux, respectively. Possible physical models which could produce asymmetry in variations were also discussed in this work. Through Monte Carlo simulations, \citet{kawaguchi98} showed that the disk instability model produces $SF_{ic}(\tau)<SF_{dc}(\tau)$ or negative asymmetry, while the starburst model, which attributes the optical variations to random superposition of supernovae in the nuclear starburst region, yields a contrary asymmetry, i.e., $SF_{ic}(\tau)>SF_{dc}(\tau)$. Shortly thereafter, \citet{hawkins02} added that the micro-lensing model predicts $SF_{ic}(\tau)=SF_{dc}(\tau)$ or no asymmetry statistically.
Observationally, \citet{hawkins02} tested the aforementioned three models using long term optical light curves of 401 quasars and 45 Seyfert galaxies. They found that Seyfert galaxy NGC 5548 appears negative asymmetric variations on timescales of $10\sim70$ days, while for quasars the variations are symmetric on timescales of a year and longer. \citet{deVries05} studied the long term variations of a large sample of 41391 quasars with SDSS and historic photometry, and showed that on timescales of years the quasar variations behave positive asymmetry. \citet{bauer09} analyzed the optical variability of nearly 23000 quasars in the Palomar-QUEST Survey and found no evidence of any asymmetry in variability over $\sim10$ days to several years. \citet{voevodkin10} computed the structure functions for 7562 quasars from SDSS Stripe 82 and detected a significant negative asymmetry on timescales longer than 300 days. All the analyses above were based on structure function method introduced by \citet{kawaguchi98}. Meanwhile, \citet{giveon99} made use of a different method of calculating the difference between medians of brightening phases and fading phases in the light curves of 42 PG quasars and reported a negative asymmetry in variations. To summarize, negative asymmetry is favored by more works, but inconsistencies exist among the few observational studies in literature.
The Kepler space telescope was designed to search for exoplanets (\citealt{borucki10}) and it could produce nearly continuous optical light curves for the targets within its field of view, including AGNs. There are a couple of works in literature reporting the high frequency variability analyses of Kepler AGNs. \citet{mushot11} calculated the power spectral density (PSD) functions for four Seyfert 1 galaxies in the Kepler field and obtained best-fit PSD power-law slopes of $-2.6\sim-3.3$, considerably steeper than those of quasars at timescales of months to years which could be described as damped random walk process \citep[e.g.,][]{Kelly2009}. Complemented with ground based observations, \citet{carini12} presented a further analysis of the Kepler light curve of Zw 229-15. \citet{wehrle13} and \citet{revalski13} reported four radio-loud Kepler AGNs and calculated the PSD functions using light curves stitched by a normalization method. \citet{edelson13} reported the variability analyses of a BL Lac object, i.e., W2R 1926+42, in the Kepler field.
Meanwhile, the Kepler data provide the first ever opportunity to study the short term variability asymmetry of AGNs, which is the aim of this work. We describe the adopted Kepler AGN sample and light curve stitching process in Section \ref{sec:data}. The methods of asymmetry analysis and smoothing-correction are introduced in Section \ref{sec:methods}. In Section \ref{sec:results} we report our major results. Discussion is given in Section \ref{sec:discussion} and conclusions in Section \ref{sec:conclusion}.
\section{Data Reduction}\label{sec:data}
\subsection{Kepler AGN Source}\label{subsec:source}
There are only a few cataloged AGNs in the Kepler's field of view. The 19 AGNs we used in this work and listed in Table \ref{tab:all-beta-source} are collected from literature (\citealt{mushot11}; \citealt{edelson12}; \citealt{wehrle13}). Following \citet{hawkins02}, we divide the AGNs into two subsamples, including 9 quasars with $M_J<-23.6$ and 9 Seyfert galaxies with $M_J>-23.6$. The rest source (W2R 1926+42) in the table is a BL Lac object.
We adopt the SAP FLUX in the Kepler light curve files, since PDCSAP FLUX (calibrated for systematic effects, e.g., pointing and focus changes) may have masked out the intrinsic AGN variations \citep{carini12}.
\subsection{Stitching Light Curves} \label{subsec:stitching}
As a result of the Differential Velocity Aberration effect of Kepler telescope, the target flux is continuously redistributed among neighboring pixels, appearing as artificial long term variations in electron counts within the fixed optimal aperture and discontinuous light curves between adjacent quarters (\citealt{kplr-instrument-handbook}; \citealt{kinemuchi12}). \citet{carini12} rescaled the Kepler light curves with coordinated ground based observations to connect different quarters, however, it is not a general approach. \citet{kinemuchi12} gave another method, which increases the number of pixels in target mask for photometry with the PyKE tasks $kepmask$ and $kepextract$. With reset target mask, a new light curve can be extracted from the counterpart Target Pixel File. The later method could reduce target flux losses out of the aperture, but it might also get contamination from nearby sources.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Zw_229-15_reextracted.eps}
\caption{The original and stitched light curves with bin size of 30 minutes (hereafter the same) of Zw 229-15. Vertical axis denotes the flux (count rate). The original data is shown in red, while the re-extracted light curves are shown in yellow, green, blue, and pink. Four reset target masks are adopted (plotted with different colors in the light curves) and duplicately used for four quarters in each year. The four masks are shown at the bottom for demonstration. \label{fig:reextracted}}
\end{figure}
Following \citet{kinemuchi12}, we perform the pixels re-extraction process as illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:reextracted}. Since not all the sources have enough observational quarters and clear surrounding and, during the process, enough `halo' pixels surrounding the target are needed, only four sources, i.e., Zw 229-15, W2 1925+50, W2R 1904+37, and CGRaBS J1918+4937, can be stitched. The results are shown in Section \ref{subsec:stitched-results}.
\section{Analysis Methods}\label{sec:methods}
\subsection{Structure Function and Asymmetry Parameter}\label{subsec:beta-definiton}
The general definition of structure function and its properties were given by \citet{simonetti85}. The first-order structure function $SF(\tau)$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
SF^2(\tau)=\frac{1}{N(\tau)}\sum_t{[f(t+\tau)-f(\tau)]^2}, \label{equ:sf}
\end{equation}
where $N(\tau)$ is the number of data pairs for a certain time lag $\tau$, and $f$ the observed source flux\footnote{Computing the structure function and then the asymmetry parameter using magnitude does not alter the results presented in this work.}. To quantify variability asymmetry, an asymmetry parameter $\beta(\tau)$ is defined as \citep[see][]{kawaguchi98}
\begin{equation}
\beta(\tau)=\frac{SF_{ic}(\tau)-SF_{dc}(\tau)}{SF_{tot}(\tau)}, \\\label{equ:beta}
\end{equation}
where the suffix $ic$ and $dc$ denote data pairs with increasing and decreasing flux, respectively, and $tot$ for the total data pairs. $\beta(\tau)$ quantifies the normalized difference between the increasing and decreasing variability. A positive $\beta(\tau)$ represents that the light curve favors a shape of rapid rise and gradual decay, i.e., positive asymmetry, while a negative $\beta(\tau)$ characterizes the opposite situation.
\subsection{Smoothing-Correcttion}\label{subsec:smooth}
Since the light curves have limited duration, the long term variations are poorly sampled and will yield unphysical and large scatter in the measurement of the asymmetry parameter. In other words, for individual light curves, asymmetry analyses could only be performed to short term variations (the ratio of the duration of the light curve to the concerned timescale of variations $\gg$ 1), which have been well sampled. Furthermore, the long term trend in the light curves could also introduce biases into the short term asymmetry analyses.
Such effect can be reduced using smoothing-correction method, in which the corrected light curve is produced by the inverse Fourier transform of the power spectrum with the low frequency part set to zero. The cutoff frequency in the power spectrum is set to 2$\times$10$^{-7}$ Hz, which corresponds to about 60 days and is shorter than the duration of light curves for each quarter of all sources. An example is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:smooth} and Section \ref{sec:results} presents the results of asymmetry analysis for both the original and smoothing-corrected light curves.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{kplr006932990-2011271113734_llc_fits_sf_lc.eps}
\figcaption{An example shows the smoothing-correction applied to the tenth quarter of Zw 229-15. The left two panels show light curves with the vertical axis denoting the flux (count rate), where the original (grey) and smoothing-corrected high-frequency (red) light curves are shown in the upper and lower panels, respectively. The low-frequency curve (green) in the upper-left panel is the difference between the original and the high frequency curves. The right two panels show the corresponding structure functions. $SF_{ic}(\tau)$ and $SF_{dc}(\tau)$ are shown in orange and blue, separately, and the total $SF_{tot}(\tau)$ in grey. Strong positive asymmetry, i.e., $SF_{ic}(\tau)$ $>$ $SF_{dc}(\tau)$, is visible at timescales above a couple of days in upper-right panel, due to the long term increasing trend seen in the original light curve. Weak positive asymmetry is also visible at shorter timescales in the original structure function (upper-right panel), but disappears after smoothing-correction (lower-right panel). \label{fig:smooth}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Uncertainty Estimation}\label{subsec:simulate}
Estimating the uncertainties in $SF(\tau)$ and $\beta(\tau)$ is not straightforward \citep[see][]{emma10}. The $[f(t+\tau)-f(\tau)]$ series (in Equation \ref{equ:sf}) of a single light curve are not mutually independent, thus the uncertainties in $SF(\tau)$ and $\beta(\tau)$ at given $\tau$ would be significantly underestimated with the standard deviation definition. Furthermore, the values of $SF(\tau)$ and $\beta(\tau)$ at different timescales $\tau$ are not independent either. Therefore, following \cite{emma10}, we estimate the uncertainties through extensive Monte-Carlos simulations.
We adopt the algorithm of \citet{timmer95} to generate artificial light curves for given power spectrum. In order to make the simulated light curves possessing similar power spectrum shape and noise level with the observed ones, we use the original periodogram, calculated from the original observed (and not the smoothing-corrected) light curves, as the input spectrum, instead of using power spectrum with a specific fixed power-law slope. The observed light curve is end-matched before periodogram calculation to reduce contamination caused by the mismatch between beginning and end points \citep[e.g.,][]{mushot11,wehrle13,edlson14}
\footnote{Without end-matching the high frequency components of the power spectrum will be spuriously enhanced, then the spectrum slope will be flatter than reality \citep{fougere85,mart12}. The simulated light curves, based on such input power spectrum, will be significantly biased against the observed one. Note that in this work the end-matching was only adopted to calculate the power spectrum. No end-matching is performed for calculations of structure function and asymmetry parameter.}.
To simulate the effect of red noise leak to the short light curves, the artificial light curves should be much longer than the observed ones, by extending the input power spectrum to lower frequencies \citep[e.g.,][]{uttley02,vaughan03,emma10}. We fit the low frequency part of the original power spectrum to measure the low frequency extending slope. If the best-fitted slope is steeper than -2, we adopt a fixed value of -2, as seen in the observed (lower frequency comparing with Kepler) power spectrum of quasars \citep[e.g.,][]{Kelly2009}
\footnote{Note that adopting steeper lower frequency power spectrum slope would yield slightly larger scatter in the derived $SF(\tau)$ and $\beta(\tau)$, due to stronger red noise leak. However, the asymmetric scatter of smoothing-correction data, which we mostly care about, will not be influenced by the enhanced low frequency leak.}.
For each observed Kepler light curve, we generate a single, 3000 times longer light curve, which is then split into 3000 segments. We then randomly select 1000 segments of them to calculate the corresponding $SF(\tau)$ and $\beta(\tau)$, following exactly the same procedures as we applied on the observed light curves, and take their scatters as the uncertainties of the observed $SF(\tau)$ and $\beta(\tau)$, respectively. Note that during the simulations, it has been assumed that the variations are intrinsically symmetric, thus the output mean of simulated $\beta(\tau)$ equals zero, and its scatter represents the uncertainty of the observed $\beta(\tau)$ if not severely different from zero.
\section{Variability Asymmetry Results}\label{sec:results}
\subsection{Results of Quarterly-Stitched Light Curves}\label{subsec:stitched-results}
In this section, we present the results from asymmetry analysis of the stitched light curves, constructed for the four sources listed in Section \ref{subsec:stitching} (i.e., Zw 229-15, W2 1925+50, W2R 1904+37, and CGRaBS J1918+4937). The stitched light curve of Zw 229-15, spanning $\sim3.3$ years with a time resolution of 30 minutes, is presented in Figure \ref{fig:zw229-15-lc-eps}. Zw 229-15 is a narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxy, observed by Kepler during 13 quarters (Q4$\sim$Q16, the most among Kepler AGNs).
\begin{figure}[!t]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{kplr006932990_cn_lc.eps}
\figcaption{The stitched light curves of Zw 229-15. The vertical axis denotes the flux (count rate). The original (grey) and smoothing-corrected high-frequency (red) light curves are shown in the upper and lower panels, respectively. The low-frequency curve (green) in the upper panel is the difference between the original and the high frequency curves. Blue dotted lines represent boundaries of intervals of different quarters. \label{fig:zw229-15-lc-eps}}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:zw229-15-sf-eps} shows structure functions of both the original and smoothing-corrected light curves of Zw 229-15. The original $SF(\tau)$ shows a rise towards longer timescales with a gradually decreasing slope. At timescales above 200 days, $SF_{ic}(\tau)$ is significantly larger than $SF_{dc}(\tau)$, consistent with the general increasing trend in the original light curve. At very short timescales, the $SF(\tau)$ reaches a plateau due to the photometric uncertainty of the light curve, with value of $\sqrt{2}\sigma_m$, where $\sigma_m$ is the photometric uncertainty. On the long term end, $SF(\tau)$ converges to $\sqrt{2}\sigma_l$, where $\sigma_l$ is the standard deviation of whole light curve. As a result of the smoothing-correction, the corrected $SF(\tau)$ becomes remarkably flat at long timescales, and equals $\sqrt{2}\sigma_l$ at timescales longer than $\sim20$ days, which appears as an `ideal' $SF(\tau)$ where the related light curve is long enough that the edge effects and aliasing are negligible (\citealt{hughes92}). From the smoothing-corrected $SF(\tau)$, we see no clear asymmetry in the variations.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{kplr006932990_cn_sf.eps}
\figcaption{$SF(\tau)$ of stitched light curves of Zw 229-15. $SF_{ic}(\tau)$ and $SF_{dc}(\tau)$ are shown in orange and blue, separately, and the total $SF_{tot}(\tau)$ in grey; shadow areas represent $2\sigma$ error range of $SF_{tot}(\tau)$. The top panel is for the original data and the bottom for the smoothing-corrected data. \label{fig:zw229-15-sf-eps}}
\end{figure}
We plot the $\beta(\tau)$ curves for both the light curves in Figure \ref{fig:zw229-15-beta-eps}. The original $\beta(\tau)$ curve has a positive excess at long timescales, while the smoothing-corrected $\beta(\tau)$ curve appears approximately with $|\beta(\tau)|<0.1$ at the whole range. The $\beta(\tau)$ curves of the other three stitched sources are shown in Figure \ref{fig:other3-beta-eps}, all of which appear similar to Zw 229-15, and we find no evidence of asymmetry after smoothing-correction.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{kplr006932990_cn_beta_fr.eps}
\figcaption{$\beta(\tau)$ of stitched light curves of Zw 229-15. The one from original data is shown in grey and that after smoothing-correction in red. The $1\sigma$ and $3\sigma$ uncertainty ranges of $\beta(\tau)$, measured from simulated light curves assuming the variations are intrinsically symmetric, i.e., with mean $\beta(\tau)$ = 0, are shown in filled areas and narrow lines with light-color, respectively. The dotted green line marks $\beta(\tau)=\pm0.1$. \label{fig:zw229-15-beta-eps}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim=0cm 1.39cm 0cm 0cm,clip,width=\columnwidth]{kplr012158940_cn_beta_fr.eps}
\includegraphics[trim=0cm 1.39cm 0cm 0.59cm,clip,width=\columnwidth]{kplr002694186_cn_beta_fr.eps}
\includegraphics[trim=0cm 0cm 0cm 0.59cm,clip,width=\columnwidth]{kplr011606854_cn_beta_fr.eps}
\figcaption{$\beta(\tau)$ of stitched light curves of W2 1925+50(top), W2 1925+50(middle), and CGRaBS J1918+4937(bottom). The figure legends are the same as Figure \ref{fig:zw229-15-beta-eps}. \label{fig:other3-beta-eps}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Averaged Asymmetry Parameter of the Sample}
We have analyzed 19 Kepler AGNs, each of which has $3\sim13$ observational quarters. For each AGN, we derive $\beta(\tau)$ curve for each of the observational quarter, and average them to get $\overline{\beta}(\tau)$ for each source. There is an alternative process, in which we average structure functions of different quarters first and then derive $\overline{\beta}(\tau)$ from $\overline{SF}(\tau)$ with Equation \ref{equ:beta}. However, with the second approach, the averaged asymmetry could be dominated by the quarter(s) with larger variation amplitudes, while with the first method the asymmetry parameter is simply averaged over time. For the same reason, no weight is introduced during averaging.
\begin{table*}[!ht]
\centering
\begin{threeparttable}[b]
\caption{The time-mean $\overline{\beta}_x$ of all AGNs.\label{tab:all-beta-source}}
\begin{tabular*}{1.0\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} c r c c c c c c c c c c l }
\hline
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Source Name} &\multirow{2}{*}{Kepler ID} &\multirow{2}{*}{RA} &\multirow{2}{*}{Dec} &\multirow{2}{*}{z} &\multirow{2}{*}{$n(q)$\tnote{d}} &\multicolumn{2}{c}{original} &\multicolumn{2}{c}{smoothing-corrected} &\multirow{2}{*}{type}\\
& & & & & &$\overline{\beta}_{1\sim5}$ &$\overline{\beta}_{5\sim20}$ &$\overline{\beta}_{1\sim5}$ &$\overline{\beta}_{5\sim20}$ & \\ \hline
Zw 229-15\tnote{a} &6932990 &19 05 26.0 &+42 27 40 &0.028 &13 &\phantom{-}0.04$\pm$0.07 &\phantom{-}0.10$\pm$0.11 &\phantom{-}0.01$\pm$0.05 &-0.01$\pm$0.05 &Sy1\\
W2 1925+50\tnote{a} &12158940 &19 25 02.2 &+50 43 14 &0.067 &11 &\phantom{-}0.04$\pm$0.10 &-0.04$\pm$0.12 &\phantom{-}0.02$\pm$0.06 &-0.02$\pm$0.06 &Sy1\\
W2R 1858+48 &11178007 &18 58 01.1 &+48 50 23 &0.079 &8 &-0.23$\pm$0.09 &-0.24$\pm$0.12 &-0.10$\pm$0.06 &-0.01$\pm$0.07 &Sy1\\
$\ $W2R 1904+37\tnote{a}&2694186 &19 04 58.7 &+37 55 41 &0.089 &10 &\phantom{-}0.03$\pm$0.08 &\phantom{-}0.09$\pm$0.13 &-0.04$\pm$0.04 &-0.04$\pm$0.06 &Sy1\\
W2R 1914+42 &6595745 &19 14 15.5 &+42 04 59 &0.502 &6 &-0.03$\pm$0.08 &\phantom{-}0.06$\pm$0.15 &\phantom{-}0.00$\pm$0.04 &\phantom{-}0.09$\pm$0.07 &QSO\tnote{b} \\
W2R 1920+38 &3337670 &19 20 47.7 &+38 26 41 &0.368 &6 &\phantom{-}0.10$\pm$0.10 &\phantom{-}0.18$\pm$0.17 &\phantom{-}0.00$\pm$0.04 &\phantom{-}0.00$\pm$0.06 &QSO\tnote{b} \\
W2R 1931+43 &7610713 &19 31 12.5 &+43 13 27 &0.439 &7 &\phantom{-}0.00$\pm$0.12 &\phantom{-}0.00$\pm$0.18 &-0.03$\pm$0.05 &-0.04$\pm$0.07 &QSO\tnote{b,c} \\
W2R 1910+38 &2837332 &19 10 02.5 &+38 00 09 &0.130 &6 &\phantom{-}0.04$\pm$0.10 &\phantom{-}0.08$\pm$0.16 &-0.05$\pm$0.06 &-0.04$\pm$0.08 &Sy1\tnote{b} \\
W2R 1853+40 &5597763 &18 53 19.2 &+40 53 36 &0.625 &5 &\phantom{-}0.01$\pm$0.12 &-0.07$\pm$0.19 &\phantom{-}0.01$\pm$0.05 &-0.04$\pm$0.07 &QSO\tnote{b} \\
W2R 1845+48 &10841941 &18 45 59.5 &+48 16 47 &0.152 &6 &\phantom{-}0.05$\pm$0.08 &\phantom{-}0.11$\pm$0.15 &\phantom{-}0.00$\pm$0.05 &-0.06$\pm$0.07 &QSO\tnote{b} \\
W2R 1931+38 &3347632 &19 31 15.4 &+38 28 17 &0.158 &6 &\phantom{-}0.11$\pm$0.11 &\phantom{-}0.02$\pm$0.17 &\phantom{-}0.14$\pm$0.06 &\phantom{-}0.08$\pm$0.07 &Sy1\tnote{b} \\
W2R 1926+42 &6690887 &19 26 31.0 &+42 09 59 &0.154 &6 &\phantom{-}0.00$\pm$0.04 &-0.03$\pm$0.07 &\phantom{-}0.00$\pm$0.03 &\phantom{-}0.04$\pm$0.05 &BL Lac\\
KA 1915+41 &5781475 &19 15 09.1 &+41 02 39 &0.220 &3 &-0.27$\pm$0.20 &-0.37$\pm$0.28 &\phantom{-}0.00$\pm$0.10 &-0.13$\pm$0.12 &QSO\tnote{b} \\
KA 1922+45 &9215110 &19 22 11.2 &+45 38 06 &0.115 &7 &-0.07$\pm$0.06 &\phantom{-}0.09$\pm$0.11 &-0.05$\pm$0.04 &\phantom{-}0.01$\pm$0.06 &Sy1.9\\
1RXS J192949.7+462231 &9650715 &19 29 50.5 &+46 22 24 &0.127 &4 &-0.10$\pm$0.16 &-0.14$\pm$0.21 &\phantom{-}0.09$\pm$0.09 &\phantom{-}0.04$\pm$0.09 &Sy1\\
MG4 J192325+4754 &10663134 &19 23 27.2 &+47 54 17 &1.520 &11 &\phantom{-}0.01$\pm$0.04 &\phantom{-}0.06$\pm$0.09 &\phantom{-}0.00$\pm$0.02 &\phantom{-}0.02$\pm$0.04 &QSO\\
MG4 J190945+4833 &11021406 &19 09 46.5 &+48 34 32 &0.513 &8 &-0.15$\pm$0.05 &-0.32$\pm$0.11 &-0.01$\pm$0.01 &-0.06$\pm$0.03 &QSO\\
CGRaBS J1918+4937\tnote{a} &11606854 &19 18 45.6 &+49 37 55 &0.926 &11 &\phantom{-}0.04$\pm$0.06 &\phantom{-}0.14$\pm$0.11 &-0.02$\pm$0.03 &-0.10$\pm$0.05 &QSO\\
{}[HB89] 1924+507 &12208602 &19 26 06.3 &+50 52 57 &1.098 &11 &-0.15$\pm$0.03 &-0.35$\pm$0.08 &\phantom{-}0.01$\pm$0.01 &\phantom{-}0.00$\pm$0.03 &Sy1.5\\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\begin{tablenotes}
\item [a] The four AGNs have stitched light curves, which have been analyzed in Section \ref{subsec:stitched-results}.
\item [b] The eight AGNs are classified as QSOs or Seyfert galaxies according to their $M_J$.
\item [c] \citet{edelson13} classified W2R 1931+43 as a Seyfert 1 galaxy.
\item [d] The column shows number of observational quarters for each Kepler AGN (the same in Table \ref{tab:mix-beta}).
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table*}
The mean $\overline{\beta}$ over timescales of $1\sim5$ days and $5\sim20$ days are also derived and listed in Table \ref{tab:all-beta-source}. The uncertainties of $\overline{\beta}_{1\sim5}$ and $\overline{\beta}_{5\sim20}$ for individual sources are also calculated through simulations. Again, after smoothing-correction, most of the sources show very small asymmetry parameter (both positive and negative values are seen with $|\overline{\beta}|<0.1$), consistent with zero within the statistical uncertainties. For the whole sample there is not a general trend towards a positive or negative asymmetry. This indicates there is no or at most very weak variability asymmetry in Kepler AGNs.
To derive better constraint on the asymmetry parameter, we average $\beta(\tau)$ from all quarters of all sources. The uncertainties in $\overline{\beta}(\tau)$ are also derived from simulations\footnote{Since there is a large number (145) of Kepler quarters (real data), we can measure the intrinsic scatter of $\beta(\tau)$ from different quarters and derive the uncertainties in the averaged $\overline{\beta}(\tau)$. The uncertainties in $\overline{\beta}(\tau)$ derived with this approach are slightly smaller than those from simulations, by a factor of 1.5 -- 2.0. In this work, we adopt the more conservative measurements from simulations. Nevertheless, our conclusions are not affected by the selection.}. The co-added $\overline{\beta}(\tau)$ averaged over all sources and its uncertainty are plotted in Figure \ref{fig:mix-beta-eps}. There is little difference between the original and smoothing-corrected $\overline{\beta}(\tau)$ curves in Figure \ref{fig:mix-beta-eps}, which implies that the bias due to long term variations with limited duration of light curves has been extensively reduced after averaging a large number (145) of quarters. However, we note the smoothing-corrected co-added $\overline{\beta}(\tau)$ has considerably smaller scatter (Figure \ref{fig:mix-beta-eps}), as the scatter due to long term variations has been reduced.
The $\overline{\beta}(\tau)$ averaged over timescales of $1\sim5$ days and $5\sim20$ days of the whole sample and two subsamples (quasars and Seyfert galaxies) are listed in Table \ref{tab:mix-beta}. We see that the values of the co-added $\overline{\beta}(\tau)$ on timescales of $1\sim20$ days are all consistent with zero within the small statistical uncertainties (again derived with simulations), suggesting the variations are highly symmetric.
\begin{table*}[!ht]
\caption{The time-mean $\overline{\beta}_x$ of mixed samples.\label{tab:mix-beta}}
\centering
\begin{tabular*}{1.0\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}} c r c c c c }
\hline
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Sample} &\multirow{2}{*}{$n(q)$} &\multicolumn{2}{c}{original} &\multicolumn{2}{c}{smoothing-corrected}\\
& &$\overline{\beta}_{1\sim5}$ &$\overline{\beta}_{5\sim20}$ &$\overline{\beta}_{1\sim5}$ &$\overline{\beta}_{5\sim20}$\\ \hline
Quasars &63 &-0.01$\pm$0.06 &\phantom{-}0.00$\pm$0.12 &-0.01$\pm$0.03 &-0.03$\pm$0.05 \\
Seyfert Galaxies &76 &-0.03$\pm$0.06 &-0.04$\pm$0.10 &\phantom{-}0.00$\pm$0.04 &-0.01$\pm$0.05 \\
All Sources &145 &-0.02$\pm$0.06 &-0.02$\pm$0.10 &\phantom{-}0.00$\pm$0.03 &-0.02$\pm$0.04 \\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{sum_avg_beta_sr_tot_1000.eps}
\figcaption{The average $\overline{\beta}(\tau)$ of the whole sample including all sources. The figure legends are the same as Figure \ref{fig:zw229-15-beta-eps}.
\label{fig:mix-beta-eps}
}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion}\label{sec:discussion}
Using all Kepler light curves of 19 AGNs, we find the variability asymmetry at timescales of $1\sim20$ days is rather weak. The averaged $\overline{\beta}$ is 0.00$\pm$0.03 and -0.02$\pm$0.04 over timescales of 1$\sim$5 days and 5$\sim$20 days, respectively, statistically consistent with zero.
It's convenient to interpret the asymmetry parameter in terms of shot-noise model, in which the variations in AGNs are attributed to the stochastic superposition of independent discrete flares \citep[e.g.,][]{negoro95}. Such model provides a mathematical framework for a series of physical models \citep{cid00,favre05}, including starburst and micro-lensing \citep{kawaguchi98,hawkins02}. Generally, a positive asymmetry parameter $\beta$ indicates the flare rises rapidly and decays gradually, such as expected in the starburst model, which attributes the variations in AGNs to random superposition of supernovae in the nuclear starburst region. Clearly, our detection of highly symmetric variations in Kepler AGNs does not favor the starburst model. Micro-lensing model does predict symmetric variations \citep{hawkins02}, however, for our low redshift sample, the probability of micro-lensing would be insignificant \citep{hawkins02}. Actually, independent to variability asymmetry studies, these two models (starburst and micro-lensing) are disfavored by observations which show the variations of emission lines in AGNs closely correlate with but lag continuum variations \citep[e.g.,][]{Peterson2004}.
In the disk instability (hereafter DI) model of \citet{kawaguchi98}, the optical variability is ascribed to instabilities of accretion disk as matter flows, and the asymmetry is due to single large scale avalanches. By considering a disk atmosphere emitting a power-law X-ray spectrum that fluctuating in time and assuming optical variations simply follows X-ray with little delay. \citet{kawaguchi98} made Monte-Carlo simulations adopting the cellular-automaton model of \citet{Mineshige1994} and treated the atmosphere as advection-dominated accretion flow. The simulated light curve shows an negative asymmetry with slow rise and rapid decline on timescales of one to several hundred days. As simulated by \citet{kawaguchi98}, in DI model, $\beta(\tau)=-0.1$ corresponds approximately to the ratio of diffusion mass to inflow mass of $0.1\sim0.5$ (cf. their Fig. 7), with the ratio of outer to inner disk radii fixed to be 20. Our strong constraints to the asymmetry parameter from the co-added sample therefore request an even higher ratio of diffusion mass to inflow mass based on this model.
Theoretical calculations on the variability asymmetry parameter for more specific physical models are required to make comparison with observations. Nevertheless, the result of this work indicates the variations in AGNs rise and decay highly symmetrically. If we attribute AGN variations to perturbations in the accretion disk, such perturbations need also behave symmetrically in both directions of time.
\section{Conclusions}\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper we use the high quality light curves from Kepler space telescope to analyze the variability asymmetry of 19 AGNs. An asymmetry parameter $\beta(\tau)$ is introduced for quantitive description. We perform extensive Monte-Carlo simulations to derive the statistical uncertainties in $\beta(\tau)$, which can not be obtained through the standard error analyses approach. After correction of observational bias due to long term trend in the light curves, we find no evidence of asymmetry in individual sources at timescales below 20 days. For the whole sample there is not a general trend towards a positive or negative asymmetry. Co-adding data for all 19 AGNs, we derive an averaged $\overline{\beta}$ of 0.00$\pm$0.03 and -0.02$\pm$0.04 over timescales of 1$\sim$5 days and 5$\sim$20 days, respectively, statistically consistent with zero. Quasars and Seyfert galaxies tend to show similar asymmetry parameter at the observed timescales. The constraint on longer timescale variability asymmetry is weaker as it requires much larger samples or much longer light curves which could better sample the long term variations. The fact that the short term optical variations in quasars and Seyfert galaxies are highly symmetric could put independent constraints on physical models of AGN variations.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
We acknowledge the anonymous referee for valuable comments and constructive suggestions. This work is supported by Chinese NSF (grant No.11233002 $\&$ 11421303) and National Basic Research Program of China (973 program, grant No. 2015CB857005). J.X.W. acknowledges support from Chinese Top-notch Young Talents Program and the Strategic Priority Research Program ``The Emergence of Cosmological Structures" of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (grant No.XDB09000000). We gratefully thank Prof.Wei-Min Gu for discussion on accretion disk theories. We thank Zhen-Yi Cai for careful readings of the manuscript, the Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes (MAST), and the Kepler team groups, especially Karen Levay, for data access. We use PyKE for stitching light curves, which is an open source suite of python software tools developed by the NASA Kepler Guest Observer Office, to reduce and analyze Kepler light curves, TPFs, and FFIs. We also thank the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED), which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the SIMBAD database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France, for AGN identifications.
|
\section{Introduction}
In the solution of many problems in physics Green's functions
or fundamental solutions play an essential role.
The elastic Green's function tensor has been derived for isotropic
media by Sir Thompson \cite{Kelvin} and implicitely for anisotropic media
by Fredholm \cite{Fredholm}. \\
Especially the elastic Green's function of the infinite hexagonal medium
has been calculated explicitely by Lifshitz and Rosenzweig \cite{Lifshitz}
and by Kr\"oner \cite{Kroener4}. \\ \\
A first treatment of the electroelastic Green's function has been given
by Deeg \cite{Deeg}. Further contributions have been presented
by Dunn
\cite{Dunn}, Wang \cite{Wang} and Huang and Yu \cite{HuYu}
in the framework of inclusion problems.
But no compact explicit form for the electroelastic Green's function
has been given there. Thus, according to the author's knowledge,
a {\it compact} closed form representation
of the electroelastic Green's function does not exist.
But, due to the widespread interest in piezoelectric materials
a compact explicit representation
is highly desirable. \\
The residue method which is applied here is a useful tool to obtain
Green's functions in media with hexagonal symmetry as shown by Michelitsch
\cite{Michelitsch} and
Michelitsch and Wunderlin \cite{MiWuA} for a treatment of the incompatibility
problem. \\
In the following we calculate using this residue method
the electroelastic $4 \times 4$ Green's function for the hexagonal infinite piezoelectric
medium. We shall obtain this Green's function analytically in closed form
(eqs. (\ref{Greenform}) ff. and (\ref{Greentensor}) ff., respectively).
To obtain a compact formulation the use of a convenient symmetric
tensor basis is essential \cite{Levin,LevKre}. The basis tensors
used here are very useful for the solution of several problems in
hexagonal media \cite{Michelitsch,MiWu,MiWuD}. \\
The result for the electroelastic Green's function
presented here may be useful for the treatment of many problems, e.g.
the inclusion problem in piezoelectric hexagonal (transversely isotropic) media.
\section{Basic Equations}
We start from the field equations for the stress tensor ${\vt \sigma}$ and the dielectric
displacements ${\vt D}$.
The equilibrium conditions for the stresses are:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq}
\partial_j\sigma_{ij}=-K_i \,,\,\,\, \sigma_{ij} =\sigma_{ji}
\end{equation}
$\partial_j$ indicate the spacial derivatives and
${\vt K}$ the density of body forces, respectively. A further field equation describes the
conservation of free electric charges:
\begin{equation}
\label{lo}
\partial_lD_l =\rho_{e}
\end{equation}
$\rho_{e}$ represents the density of free electric charges.
The constitutive equations (material law) of the piezoelectric medium
which connect the electric field ${\vt E}$ and
the elastic deformation ${\vt \epsilon}$ with the
dielectric displacement ${\vt D}$ and the stress ${\vt \sigma}$ are given by:
\begin{equation}
\label{constlaw}
\begin{array}{lcc}
\sigma _{ij}&=&{\cal C}_{ijkl}\epsilon _{kl}-e_{kij}E_k \\
D_i&=&e_{ikl}\epsilon _{kl}+\eta _{ik}E_k \\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
${\cal C}_{ijkl}$, $e_{kij}$ and $\eta_{ij}$ denote the elastic moduli, the
piezoelectric moduli and the dielectric moduli, respectively.
They have the symmetry properties
${\cal C}_{ijkl}={\cal C}_{klij}={\cal C}_{jikl}={\cal C}_{ijlk}$, $e_{ikl}=e_{ilk}$ and
$\eta_{ij}=\eta_{ji}$.
Introducing the electric potential $\Phi$ and the elastic displacement field
${\vt u}$ the ansatz for the strain ${\vt \epsilon}$ and the electric
field ${\vt E}$ is given by:
\begin{equation}
\label{fieldans}
\begin{array}{lcc}
\epsilon_{ij}&=&\frac{1}{2}\left(\partial_iu_j+\partial_ju_i\right)\\
E_i&=&-\partial_i\Phi \\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Putting ansatz (\ref{fieldans}) using (\ref{constlaw}) into
the field equations (\ref{eq}) and (\ref{lo}) we obtain
a $4 \times 4$ differential equation of degree two for the field
${\vt {\cal U}}=({\vt u},\Phi)$ of the form:
\begin{equation}
\label{tensdef}
{\vt {\cal T}}\left(\nabla\right){\vt {\cal U}} + {\vt {\cal F}}=0
\end{equation}
$\nabla$ indicates the gradient operator.
Here we have introduced the generalized force density
${\vt {\cal F}}=({\vt K},-\rho_{e})$. The symmetric $4 \times 4$
second order differential operator
${\vt {\cal T}}\left(\nabla\right)$ can be
written in the form:
\begin{equation}
\label{tensop}
\begin{array}{lcrr}
{\vt {\cal T}}\left(\nabla\right) & = &
\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
{\vt T}\left(\nabla\right) & {\vt t}\left(\nabla\right) \\
{\vt t}^T\left(\nabla\right) & {\vt \tau}\left(\nabla\right)
\end{array} \right]
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Here ${\vt T}\left(\nabla\right)$ is a $3 \times 3$ tensor operator
and represents the elastic part and is given by:
\begin{equation}
\label{elast}
T_{ij}\left(\nabla\right) = {\cal C}_{ipjq}\partial_p\partial_q
\end{equation}
${\vt t}\left(\nabla\right)$ is a ($3 \times 1$ tensor) vector operator given by
\begin{equation}
\label{piez}
t_i\left(\nabla\right) = e_{piq}\partial_p\partial_q
\end{equation}
and represents the piezoelectric coupling.
Finally the ($1 \times 1$ tensor) scalar operator
\begin{equation}
\label{diel}
\tau\left(\nabla\right) = -\eta_{pq}\partial_p\partial_q
\end{equation}
describes the dielectric part. \\
The vector field ${\vt {\cal U}}$ can then be represented by the
$4 \times 4$ electroelastic Green's function ${\vt {\cal G}}$
according to
\begin{equation}
\label{sol}
{\vt {\cal U}}\left({\vt r}\right)=
{\displaystyle \int{{\vt {\cal G}}\left({\vt r}-{\vt r}^{'}\right)
{\vt {\cal F}}\left({\vt r}^{'}\right){\rm d}^3{\vt r}^{'}}}
\end{equation}
${\vt r}$ denotes the space point.
The electroelastic Green's function ${\vt {\cal G}}$ then is defined according to
\begin{equation}
\label{Greendef}
{\vt {\cal T}}\left(\nabla\right){\vt {\cal G}}\left({\vt r}\right)+
\delta^3\left({\vt r}\right){\vt 1}=0
\end{equation}
$\delta^3\left({\vt r}\right)$ represents the three-dimensional
$\delta$-function and ${\vt 1}$ denotes the $4 \times 4$ unit matrix. \\ \\
The electroelastic Green's function ${\cal G}_{pq}$ ($p,q=1,2,3,4$) has the
following physical interpretation \cite{Dunn}: \\
${\cal G}_{mj}\left({\vt r}\right)$ ($m,j=1,2,3$)
is the elastic displacement at spacepoint ${\vt r}$ in the $m$-direction
caused by a unit point force
at spacepoint ${\vt r}^{'}=0$ in the $j$-direction; \\
${\cal G}_{m4}\left({\vt r}\right)$ ($m=1,2,3$) is the elastic displacement
at spacepoint ${\vt r}$
in $m$-direction caused by a unit point charge at spacepoint ${\vt r}^{'}=0$;\\
${\cal G}_{4j}\left({\vt r}\right)$ ($j=1,2,3$) is the electric potential at
spacepoint ${\vt r}$ caused by a unit point force at spacepoint
${\vt r}^{'}=0$ in the $j$-direction;\\
${\cal G}_{44}\left({\vt r}\right)$ is the electric potential at spacepoint
${\vt r}$ caused by a unit point charge at spacepoint ${\vt r}^{'}=0$. \\
\\
We note that our electroelastic Green's function defined in equation
(\ref{Greendef}) is symmetric, i. e.
${\cal G}_{pq}={\cal G}_{qp}$. This property follows from the symmetry
of the operator ${\cal T}_{rs}\left(\nabla\right)=
{\cal T}_{sr}\left(\nabla\right)$ from equation (\ref{tensop}).
For our further calculation we use the following convenient
representation for the Green's function \cite{Deeg,Levin,LevKre,Michelitsch,MiWuA}:
\begin{equation}
\label{repres}
{\vt {\cal G}}\left({\vt r}\right) = {\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi^2r}}
\int_0^{2\pi}{{\vt {\cal T}}^{-1}\left({\vt \xi}\left(\alpha\right)\right)
{\rm d}\alpha}
\end{equation}
This relation can be derived from (\ref{Greendef}) in straight forward
manner by using Fourier transformation \cite{Michelitsch,MiWuA}.
One gets ${\vt {\cal T}}\left({\vt \xi}\right)$ from equation (\ref{tensop})
by replacing $\partial_i$
by $\xi_i$ ($i=1,2,3$) in equations (\ref{elast}), (\ref{piez}) and (\ref{diel}).
The vector ${\vt \xi}$ is then given by \cite{Michelitsch,MiWuA}
\begin{equation}
\label{xi}
{\vt \xi}\left(\alpha\right)= {\vt e}_1\cos{\alpha}+{\vt e}_2\sin{\alpha}
\end{equation}
The vectors ${\vt e}_i$ form a useful orthonormal basis
\begin{equation}
\label{evec}
\begin{array}{lcrclcrclcr}
{\vt e}_1 & = & \frac{\displaystyle 1}{\displaystyle \rho}
\left( \begin{array}{c}
-y \\ x \\ 0
\end{array} \right) &,&
{\vt e}_2 & = &\frac{\displaystyle 1}{\displaystyle \rho r}
\left( \begin{array}{c}
-zx \\ -zy \\ \rho^2
\end{array} \right) &,&
{\vt e}_3 & = & \frac{\displaystyle 1}{\displaystyle r}
\left( \begin{array}{c}
x \\ y \\ z
\end{array} \right) ,\\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $\rho^2=x^2+y^2$, $r^2=\rho^2+z^2$ and ${\vt r}=r{\vt e}_3$.
The orientation of this coordinate system can be expressed by
${\vt e}_i = \frac{\displaystyle 1}{\displaystyle 2}
\epsilon_{ijk}{\vt e}_j\times{\vt e}_k$. $\epsilon_{ijk}$ denotes
the antisymmetric permutation tensor.
\section{Residue Calculation}
Our goal is to formulate the residue calculation ansatz
to obtain the Green's function
from equation (\ref{repres}).\\
First of all we introduce for convenience a useful orthonormal basis to
represent the $4 \times 4$ matrix ${\vt {\cal T}}\left({\vt \xi}\right)$
and later ${\vt {\cal T}}^{-1}\left({\vt \xi}\right)$:
\begin{equation}
\label{hexbasis}
\begin{array}{lcrclcrclcrclcr}
{\vt e}_b & = & \frac{\displaystyle 1}{\displaystyle \xi_b}
\left( \begin{array}{c}
\xi_1 \\ \xi_2 \\ 0\\0
\end{array} \right) &,&
{\vt e}_{b\perp} & = &\frac{\displaystyle 1}{\displaystyle \xi_b}
\left( \begin{array}{c}
-\xi_2 \\ \xi_1 \\ 0 \\ 0
\end{array} \right) &,&
{\vt e}_c & = &
\left( \begin{array}{c}
0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \\0
\end{array} \right) &,&
{\vt e}_4 & = &
\left( \begin{array}{c}
0 \\ 0 \\ 0 \\1
\end{array} \right) \\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
($\xi_{\rm b}=\sqrt{\xi_1^2+\xi_2^2}$, $\xi_{\rm c}=\xi_3$).
This basis represents the hexagonal symmetry.
${\vt e}_b$ and ${\vt e}_{b\perp}$ are parallel to the basal plane
and ${\vt e}_c$ represents the $c$-direction. ${\vt e}_4$ comes into play
because of the electric potential component $\Phi$.
We then obtain the following useful representation:
\begin{equation}
\label{userep}
\begin{array}{lll}
{\vt {\cal T}}\left({\vt \xi}\right) &=&
T_{{\rm b}\perp}{\vt e}_{b\perp}\otimes{\vt e}_{b\perp}
+T_{\rm b}{\vt e}_{b}\otimes{\vt e}_{b}
+T_{\rm{bc}}\left({\vt e}_{b}\otimes{\vt e}_{c}+
{\vt e}_{c}\otimes{\vt e}_{b}\right)
+T_{\rm c}{\vt e}_{c}\otimes{\vt e}_{c} \nonumber \\ &&
+t_{\rm{b4}}\left({\vt e}_{b}\otimes{\vt e}_{4}+{\vt e}_{4}\otimes{\vt e}_{b}\right)
+t_{\rm{c4}}\left({\vt e}_{c}\otimes{\vt e}_{4}+{\vt e}_{4}\otimes{\vt e}_{c}\right)
+\tau{\vt e}_{4}\otimes{\vt e}_{4}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
The scalar quantities $T_{{\rm b}\perp}, T_{\rm b}, T_{\rm{bc}},
T_{\rm c}$, $t_{\rm{b4}}, t_{\rm{c4}}$, and $\tau$
correspond to the tensors ${\vt T}$, ${\vt t}$
and ${\vt \tau}$ from equations (\ref{elast}), (\ref{piez}) and
(\ref{diel}), respectively ($\otimes$ indicates dyadic multiplication).
They are obtained as:
\begin{equation}
\label{TTT-a}
T_{{\rm b}\perp} = {\cal C}_{66}\xi_{\rm b}^2+{\cal C}_{44}\xi_{\rm c}^2 ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{TTT-b}
T_{\rm b} = {\cal C}_{11}\xi_{\rm b}^2+{\cal C}_{44}\xi_{\rm c}^2 ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{TTT-c}
T_{\rm{bc}} = \left({\cal C}_{13}+{\cal C}_{44}\right)\xi_{\rm b}\xi_{\rm c} ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{TTT-d}
T_{\rm c} = {\cal C}_{44}\xi_{\rm b}^2+{\cal C}_{33}\xi_{\rm c}^2 ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{TTT-e}
t_{\rm{b4}} = \left(e_{31}+e_{15}\right)\xi_{\rm b}\xi_{\rm c} ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{TTT-f}
t_{\rm{c4}} = e_{15}\xi_{\rm b}^2+e_{33}\xi_{\rm c}^2 ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{TTT-g}
\tau = -\left(\eta_{11}\xi_{\rm b}^2+\eta_{33}\xi_{\rm c}^2\right)
\end{equation}
${\cal C}_{AB}=\left\{{\cal C}_{11}, {\cal C}_{44}, {\cal C}_{66}, {\cal C}_{13},
{\cal C}_{33}\right\}$ denote the elastic,
$e_{iA}=\left\{e_{15}, e_{31}, e_{33}\right\}$ the piezoelectric, and
$\eta_{ij}=\left\{\eta_{11}, \eta_{33}\right\}$ the dielectric moduli
of the hexagonal material. Subscripts $A,B$ represent
Voigt's notation whereas $i,j$ represent cartesian
subscripts, respectively. \\
${\vt {\cal T}}^{-1}\left({\vt \xi}\right)$ can be written as:
\begin{equation}
\label{Tinv}
{\vt {\cal T}}^{-1}\left({\vt \xi}\right) =
{\displaystyle \frac{{\vt \Lambda}\left({\vt \xi}\right)}
{f\left({\vt \xi}\right)}}
\end{equation}
Here $\Lambda_{ij}$ denotes the matrix of $3 \times 3$
subdeterminants (multiplied by the prefactor $(-1)^{i+j}$)
and $f\left({\vt \xi}\right)$ the determinant of ${\vt {\cal T}}$,
respectively. \\
We now can write for ${\vt \Lambda}$ by using
(\ref{userep}):
\begin{equation}
\label{Tinvrep}
\begin{array}{lll}
{\vt \Lambda}\left({\vt \xi}\right) &=&
\Lambda_{{\rm b}\perp}{\vt e}_{b\perp}\otimes{\vt e}_{b\perp}
+\Lambda_{\rm b}{\vt e}_{b}\otimes{\vt e}_{b}
+\Lambda_{\rm{bc}}\left({\vt e}_{b}\otimes{\vt e}_{c}+
{\vt e}_{c}\otimes{\vt e}_{b}\right)
+\Lambda_{\rm c}{\vt e}_{c}\otimes{\vt e}_{c} \nonumber \\ &&
+\Lambda_{\rm{b4}}\left({\vt e}_{b}\otimes{\vt e}_{4}+{\vt e}_{4}\otimes{\vt e}_{b}\right)
+\Lambda_{\rm{c4}}\left({\vt e}_{c}\otimes{\vt e}_{4}+{\vt e}_{4}\otimes{\vt e}_{c}\right)
+\Lambda_{\rm{4}}{\vt e}_{4}\otimes{\vt e}_{4}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Here the scalar quantities are introduced:
\begin{equation}
\label{lam-a}
\Lambda_{{\rm b}\perp}=\tau\left(T_{\rm b}T_{\rm c}
-T_{\rm{bc}}^2\right)-\left(t_{\rm{c4}}^2T_{\rm b}-2t_{\rm{c4}}t_{\rm{b4}}T_{\rm{bc}}
+t_{\rm{b4}}^2T_{\rm c}\right) ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{lam-b}
\Lambda_{\rm b}=T_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(T_{\rm c}\tau-t_{\rm{c4}}^2\right) ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{lam-c}
\Lambda_{\rm{bc}}=-T_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(T_{\rm{bc}}\tau
-t_{\rm{b4}}t_{\rm{c4}}\right) ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{lam-d}
\Lambda_{\rm c}=T_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(T_{\rm b}\tau-t_{\rm{b4}}^2\right) ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{lam-e}
\Lambda_{\rm{b4}}=T_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(T_{\rm{bc}}t_{\rm{c4}}
-T_{\rm c}t_{\rm{b4}}\right) ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{lam-f}
\Lambda_{\rm{c4}} =-T_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(T_{\rm b}t_{\rm{c4}}
-T_{\rm{bc}}t_{\rm{b4}}\right) ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{lam-g}
\Lambda_{\rm{4}} =T_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(T_{\rm b}T_{\rm c}-T_{\rm{bc}}^2\right)
\end{equation}
The determinant $f\left({\vt \xi}\right)$ of ${\vt {\cal T}}$ then takes the
form
\begin{equation}
\label{deterrep}
f\left({\vt \xi}\right)=Det {\vt {\cal T}}\left({\vt \xi}\right)=T\left({\vt \xi}\right)_{{\rm b}\perp}
\Lambda_{{\rm b}\perp}\left({\vt \xi}\right)
\end{equation}
Putting equations (\ref{TTT-a})-(\ref{TTT-g}) into (\ref{deterrep}) shows that
only terms proportional $\xi_{\rm b}^{2n}\xi_{\rm c}^{8-2n}$
($n=0,1,2,3,4$) appear. This is a
unique property of the hexagonal medium. As we shall show this is
the central property which is needed to solve
our integration problem (\ref{repres}) explicitely.
Thus (\ref{lam-a})
is a polynomial of degree $3$ in $a$ when we put $a=\xi_{\rm b}^2/\xi_{\rm c}^2$.
We then can write
\begin{equation}
\label{poly}
\Lambda_{{\rm b}\perp}=P\left(a\right)\xi_{\rm c}^6
\end{equation}
where $P\left(a\right)$ is a polynomial of degree $3$ in $a$ and takes the
form:
\begin{equation}
\label{polynomy}
P\left(a\right)=Aa^3+Ba^2+Ca+D
\end{equation}
We obtain for the coefficients $A,B,C,D$:
\begin{equation}
\label{coeff-A}
\begin{array}{rcl}
A&=&-\eta_{11}{\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{44}-{\cal C}_{11}e_{15}^2
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{coeff-B}
\begin{array}{rcl}
B&=&-\eta_{33}{\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{44}
-\eta_{11}\left({\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{33}-2{\cal C}_{13}{\cal C}_{44}
-{\cal C}_{13}^2\right)-{\cal C}_{44}e_{15}^2-2{\cal C}_{11}e_{15}e_{33} \nonumber \\ &&
+2\left({\cal C}_{13}+{\cal C}_{44}\right)e_{15}\left(e_{31}+e_{15}\right)
-{\cal C}_{44}\left(e_{31}+e_{15}\right)^2
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{coeff-C}
\begin{array}{rcl}
C&=&-\eta_{33}\left({\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{33}
-2{\cal C}_{13}{\cal C}_{44}-{\cal C}_{13}^2\right)-\eta_{11}{\cal C}_{33}
{\cal C}_{44}-2e_{15}e_{33}{\cal C}_{44}-e_{33}^2{\cal C}_{11} \nonumber \\ &&
+2e_{33}\left(e_{31}+e_{15}\right)\left({\cal C}_{13}+{\cal C}_{44}\right)
-{\cal C}_{33}\left(e_{31}+e_{15}\right)^2
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{coeff-D}
\begin{array}{rcl}
D&=&-\eta_{33}{\cal C}_{33}{\cal C}_{44}-e_{33}^2{\cal C}_{44}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Thus we can factorize the determinant $f$ according to:
\begin{equation}
\label{factor}
f\left({\vt \xi}\right)=\xi_{\rm c}^8{\cal C}_{66}A\left(a+A_1\right)
\left(a+A_2\right)\left(a+A_3\right)\left(a+A_4\right) ,
\end{equation}
with $T\left(a\right)_{{\rm b}\perp}={\cal C}_{66}\left(a+A_1\right)\xi_{\rm c}^2$,
($A_1={\cal C}_{44}/{\cal C}_{66}$) and
\begin{equation}
\label{polyfact}
P\left(a\right)=A\left(a+A_2\right)\left(a+A_3\right)\left(a+A_4\right)
\end{equation}
The $\Lambda's$ from equations (\ref{lam-a})-(\ref{lam-g}) yield
with $a=\xi_{\rm b}^2/\xi_{\rm c}^2$ and $\xi_c^2=1$:
\begin{equation}
\label{L-a}
\Lambda_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(a\right)=P\left(a\right)=Aa^3+Ba^2+Ca+D
\end{equation}
The numbers $A_2,A_3,A_4$ are the zeros of the equation:
\begin{equation}
\label{zeros}
Aa^3-Ba^2+Ca-D=0
\end{equation}
with above coefficients $A,B,C,D$ from equations
(\ref{coeff-A})-(\ref{coeff-D}). The $A_l$ are material quantities and
fully determined by the moduli ${\cal {\vt C}}, {\vt e}, {\vt \eta}$.
Furthermore, the subdeterminants (\ref{lam-b})-(\ref{lam-g}) yield:
\begin{equation}
\label{L-b}
\Lambda_{\rm b}\left(a\right)=-\left({\cal C}_{66}a+{\cal C}_{44}\right)
\left[\left(\eta_{11}a+\eta_{33}\right)\left({\cal C}_{44}a+{\cal C}_{33}\right)
+\left(e_{15}a+e_{33}\right)^2\right] ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{L-c}
\Lambda_{\rm{bc}}\left(a\right)=\sqrt{a}\left({\cal C}_{66}a+{\cal C}_{44}\right)
\left[\left(e_{31}+e_{15}\right)\left(e_{15}a+e_{33}\right)+
\left(\eta_{11}a+\eta_{33}\right)\left({\cal C}_{13}+{\cal C}_{44}\right)\right] ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{L-d}
\Lambda_{\rm c}\left(a\right)=-\left({\cal C}_{66}a+{\cal C}_{44}\right)
\left[\left(\eta_{11}a+\eta_{33}\right)\left({\cal C}_{11}a+{\cal C}_{44}\right)
+a\left(e_{31}+e_{15}\right)^2\right] ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{L-e}
\Lambda_{\rm{b4}}\left(a\right)=\sqrt{a}\left({\cal C}_{66}a+{\cal C}_{44}\right)
\left[\left({\cal C}_{13}+{\cal C}_{44}\right)\left(e_{15}a+e_{33}\right)
-\left({\cal C}_{44}a+{\cal C}_{33}\right)\left(e_{31}+e_{15}\right)\right] ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{L-f}
\Lambda_{\rm{c4}}\left(a\right)=-\left({\cal C}_{66}a+{\cal C}_{44}\right)
\left[\left({\cal C}_{11}a+{\cal C}_{44}\right)\left(e_{15}a+e_{33}\right)
-a\left({\cal C}_{13}+{\cal C}_{44}\right)\left(e_{31}+e_{15}\right)\right] ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{L-g}
\Lambda_{\rm{4}}\left(a\right)=\left({\cal C}_{66}a+{\cal C}_{44}\right)
\left[a^2{\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{44}
+a\left({\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{33}
-2{\cal C}_{13}{\cal C}_{44}-{\cal C}_{13}^2\right)
+{\cal C}_{33}{\cal C}_{44}\right]
\end{equation}
The dependence on $a$ is obtained by putting
$\xi_b=\sqrt{a}$ and $\xi_c=1$ in equations
(\ref{TTT-a})-(\ref{TTT-g}) and (\ref{lam-a})-(\ref{lam-g}), respectively.
\\ \\
To evaluate (\ref{repres}) we make use of the properties:
\begin{equation}
\label{homog6}
\Lambda_{ij}\left({\vt \xi}\lambda\right)=
\lambda^6\Lambda_{ij}\left({\vt \xi}\right)
\end{equation}
$\lambda$ denotes an arbitrary scalar number.
The components $\Lambda_{ij}$ are homogeneous functions of degree $6$.
Whereas the determinant $f$ is homogeneous of degree $8$:
\begin{equation}
\label{homog8}
f\left({\vt \xi}\lambda\right)=
\lambda^8f\left({\vt \xi}\right)
\end{equation}
Thus
\begin{equation}
\label{Tinho}
{\vt {\cal T}}^{-1}\left({\vt \xi}\right) =
{\displaystyle \lambda^2\frac{{\vt \Lambda}\left(\lambda{\vt \xi}\right)}
{f\left(\lambda{\vt \xi}\right)}}
\end{equation}
We now introduce the complex vector \cite{MiWuA}
\begin{equation}
\label{covec}
{\vt \gamma}\left(\alpha\right)=2e^{i\alpha}{\vt \xi}\left(\alpha\right)
\end{equation}
with ${\vt \xi}\left(\alpha\right)$ from equation (\ref{xi})
($i$ denotes the imaginary unit).
(\ref{covec}) can then be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{com}
{\vt \gamma}\left(s\right)={\vt h}^*s+{\vt h}
\end{equation}
Here we have introduced the complex variable
\begin{equation}
\label{comvar}
s=e^{2i\alpha}
\end{equation}
and the vector
\begin{equation}
\label{hdef}
{\vt h}={\vt e}_1+i{\vt e}_2
\end{equation}
with the basis vectors ${\vt e}_{1,2}$ from equations
(\ref{evec}). When putting $\lambda=2e^{i\alpha}$ equation (\ref{Tinho})
then can be written as:
\begin{equation}
\label{Tinhcom}
{\vt {\cal T}}^{-1}\left({\vt \xi}\right) =
{\displaystyle 4s\frac{{\vt \Lambda}\left({\vt \gamma}\left(s\right)\right)}
{f\left({\vt \gamma}\left(s\right)\right)}}
\end{equation}
Furthermore we observe
\begin{equation}
\label{des}
{\rm d}s=2is{\rm d}\alpha
\end{equation}
Then the integral (\ref{repres}) can be transformed into
a complex integral over the unit circle:
\begin{equation}
\label{egeu}
{\vt {\cal G}}\left({\vt r}\right) =
\frac{1}{8\pi^2r}
\oint_{|s|=1}\frac{4{\vt \Lambda}\left({\vt \gamma}
\left(s\right)\right)}
{f\left({\vt \gamma}\left(s\right)\right)}\frac{{\rm d}s}{i}
\end{equation}
Using the residue theorem we can rewrite integral (\ref{egeu})
as
\begin{equation}
\label{resform}
{\vt {\cal G}}\left({\vt r}\right) =
\frac{1}{8\pi^2r} 2\pi i\sum{{\rm Res}
\left(\frac{4{\vt \Lambda}\left({\vt \gamma}
\left(s\right)\right)}
{i f\left({\vt \gamma}\left(s\right)\right)}\right)}
\end{equation}
To evaluate (\ref{resform}) we have to find all zeros of
$f\left({\vt \gamma}\left(s\right)\right)$
which are located within the unit circle. To find these zeros we
observe that $f\left({\vt \gamma}\left(s\right)\right)$ is a polynomial
of degree $8$ in $s$. Thus there exist $8$ zeros $s_j$ of $f$.
We assume here that $f$ has no multiple zeros $s_j$. \\
Following \cite{MiWuA} we can conclude that there are $4$ pairs
of zeros $s_l, {\bar s}_l$ ($l=1,2,3,4$) having the property:
\begin{equation}
\label{basprop}
|s_l{\bar s}_l|=1
\end{equation}
There are only four zeros $s_l$ which are located within the unit circle.
Four zeros ${\bar s}_l$ lie outside the unit circle.
Thus the zeros can be written in the form \cite{MiWuA}:
\begin{equation}
\label{nustea}
s_l = {\rm e}^{2{\rm i}\Phi_l}{\rm e}^{-2\psi_l} ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{nusteb}
{\bar s}_l = {\rm e}^{2{\rm i}\Phi_l}{\rm e}^{+2\psi_l} ,
\end{equation}
where $\psi_l > 0$ ($l=1,2,3,4$). Here the degenerate case $|s_l|=|{\bar s}_l|$
is excluded by our assumption of no multible zeros.
Only the residues corresponding to the four zeros (\ref{nustea})
lying {\it within} the unit circle contribute to (\ref{resform}).
The residues at $s=s_l$ are obtained as:
\begin{equation}
\label{resi}
{\rm Res}
\left.\left(\frac{4{\vt \Lambda}\left({\vt \gamma}
\left(s\right)\right)}
{i f\left({\vt \gamma}\left(s\right)\right)}\right)\right|_{s=s_l}=
{\displaystyle \frac{4{\vt \Lambda}\left({\vt \gamma}
\left(s_l\right)\right)}
{\displaystyle {i \frac{{\rm d}f\left({\vt \gamma}\left(s\right)\right)}
{{\rm d}s}|_{s=s_l}}}}
\end{equation}
Finally we arrive at
\begin{equation}
\label{ressum}
{\vt {\cal G}}\left({\vt r}\right) =
\frac{1}{4\pi r} \sum_{l=1}^4{{\displaystyle
\frac{4{\vt \Lambda}\left({\vt \gamma}
\left(s_l\right)\right)}
{\displaystyle {\frac{{\rm d}f\left({\vt \gamma}\left(s\right)\right)}
{{\rm d}s}|_{s=s_l}}}}}
\end{equation}
The zeros $s_l$ of $f\left({\vt \gamma}\left(s\right)\right)$ within
the unit circle yield
\begin{equation}
\label{nuhex}
s_l = \frac{\sqrt{A_l\rho^2+z^2}-r}{\sqrt{A_l\rho^2+z^2}+r}
\end{equation}
To obtain (\ref{nuhex}) equation (\ref{factor}) together with
(\ref{com}) and (\ref{hdef}) is used.
\section{Explicit form of the Green's function}
Evaluating (\ref{ressum}) the Green's function takes the form:
\begin{equation}
\label{Green}
{\vt {\cal G}}\left({\vt r}\right)={\displaystyle
\frac{1}{4\pi A{\cal C}_{66}}\sum_{l=1}^{4}
{\frac{{\vt \Lambda}\left({\vt \xi}^{\left(l\right)}\right)}
{\sqrt{A_l\rho^2+z^2}\prod_{j=1,(j\neq l)}^{4}{\left(A_j-A_l\right)}}}}
\end{equation}
${\vt \xi}^{\left(l\right)}$ ($l=1,2,3,4$) are the solutions of the equations
\begin{equation}
\label{fnull}
f\left({\vt \xi}\right)=0
\end{equation}
or
\begin{equation}
\label{zuscon}
\xi_1^2+\xi_2^2+A_l\xi_3^2=0
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{rnull}
{\vt \xi}{\vt r}=\xi_1x+\xi_2y+\xi_3z=0
\end{equation}
with $\xi_3^{\left(l\right)}=1$. Thus equations (\ref{fnull}) and (\ref{rnull})
have the solutions ($l=1,2,3,4$):
\begin{equation}
\label{sol1}
\xi_1^{\left(l\right)}=\frac{1}{\rho^2}\left[-zx+iy\sqrt{A_l\rho^2+z^2}\right]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{sol2}
\xi_2^{\left(l\right)}=\frac{1}{\rho^2}\left[-zy-ix\sqrt{A_l\rho^2+z^2}\right]
\end{equation}
($\rho=\sqrt{x^2+y^2}$).
This formulation is in complete analogy to the result obtained by
Kr\"oner for the Green's function tensor of the hexagonal elastic medium
\cite{Kroener4} by using Fredholm's method
\cite{Fredholm}. \\ \\
The Green's function (\ref{Green}) then assumes the form:
\begin{equation}
\label{Greenform}
\begin{array}{lll}
{\vt {\cal G}}\left({\vt r}\right) &=&
{\cal G}_{\phi \phi}\left(\rho,z\right){\vt e}_{\phi}\otimes{\vt e}_{\phi}
+{\cal G}_{\rho \rho}\left(\rho,z\right){\vt e}_{\rho}\otimes{\vt e}_{\rho}
+{\cal G}_{\rm{\rho z}}\left(\rho,z\right)\left({\vt e}_{\rho}\otimes{\vt e}_{z}
+{\vt e}_{z}\otimes{\vt e}_{\rho}\right) \nonumber \\ &&
+{\cal G}_{z z}\left(\rho,z\right){\vt e}_{z}\otimes{\vt e}_{z}
+{\cal G}_{\rm{\rho 4}}\left(\rho,z\right)\left({\vt e}_{\rho}\otimes{\vt e}_{4}+
{\vt e}_{4}\otimes{\vt e}_{\rho}\right) \nonumber \\ &&
+{\cal G}_{z 4}\left(\rho,z\right)\left({\vt e}_{z}\otimes{\vt e}_{4}
+{\vt e}_{4}\otimes{\vt e}_{z}\right)
+{\cal G}_{4 4}\left(\rho,z\right){\vt e}_{4}\otimes{\vt e}_{4}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Here we have introduced the following basis:
\begin{equation}
\label{hexbas}
\begin{array}{lcrclcrclcrclcr}
{\vt e}_{\rho} & = & \frac{\displaystyle 1}{\displaystyle \rho}
\left( \begin{array}{c}
x \\ y \\ 0\\0
\end{array} \right) &,&
{\vt e}_{\phi} & = &\frac{\displaystyle 1}{\displaystyle \rho}
\left( \begin{array}{c}
-y \\ x \\ 0 \\ 0
\end{array} \right) &,&
{\vt e}_{z} & = &
\left( \begin{array}{c}
0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \\0
\end{array} \right) &,&
{\vt e}_{4} & = &
\left( \begin{array}{c}
0 \\ 0 \\ 0 \\1
\end{array} \right) \\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
To obtain (\ref{Greenform}) we have used (\ref{Tinvrep}) together with
(\ref{sol1}) and (\ref{sol2}).
Equation (\ref{Green}) then yields the ${\cal G}'s$ introduced in
(\ref{Greenform}) as:
\begin{equation}
\label{Gfi}
{\cal G}_{\phi \phi}\left(\rho,z\right)={\displaystyle
\frac{1}{4\pi A{\cal C}_{66}}\sum_{l=1}^{4}
{\frac{
\rho^2\Lambda_{\rm b}\left(a=-A_l\right)+z^2\Gamma_{\rm b}\left(a=-A_l\right)}
{\rho^2\sqrt{A_l\rho^2+z^2}\prod_{j=1,(j\neq l)}^{4}{\left(A_j-A_l\right)}}}}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{Gro}
{\cal G}_{\rho \rho}\left(\rho,z\right)={\displaystyle
\frac{1}{4\pi A{\cal C}_{66}}\sum_{l=1}^{4}
{\frac{
\rho^2\Lambda_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(a=-A_l\right)-z^2\Gamma_{\rm b}\left(a=-A_l\right)}
{\rho^2\sqrt{A_l\rho^2+z^2}\prod_{j=1,(j\neq l)}^{4}{\left(A_j-A_l\right)}}}}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{Groz}
{\cal G}_{\rho z}\left(\rho,z\right)={\displaystyle
\frac{1}{4\pi A{\cal C}_{66}}\sum_{l=1}^{4}
{\frac{\left(-z\right)\Gamma_{\rm{bc}}\left(a=-A_l\right)}
{\rho\sqrt{A_l\rho^2+z^2}\prod_{j=1,(j\neq l)}^{4}{\left(A_j-A_l\right)}}}}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{Gro4}
{\cal G}_{\rho 4}\left(\rho,z\right)={\displaystyle
\frac{1}{4\pi A{\cal C}_{66}}\sum_{l=1}^{4}
{\frac{\left(-z\right)\Gamma_{\rm{b4}}\left(a=-A_l\right)}
{\rho\sqrt{A_l\rho^2+z^2}\prod_{j=1,(j\neq l)}^{4}{\left(A_j-A_l\right)}}}}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{Grzz}
{\cal G}_{z z}\left(\rho,z\right)={\displaystyle
\frac{1}{4\pi A{\cal C}_{66}}\sum_{l=1}^{4}
{\frac{\Lambda_{\rm{ c}}\left(a=-A_l\right)}
{\sqrt{A_l\rho^2+z^2}\prod_{j=1,(j\neq l)}^{4}{\left(A_j-A_l\right)}}}}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{Grz4}
{\cal G}_{z 4}\left(\rho,z\right)={\displaystyle
\frac{1}{4\pi A{\cal C}_{66}}\sum_{l=1}^{4}
{\frac{\Lambda_{\rm{c4}}\left(a=-A_l\right)}
{\sqrt{A_l\rho^2+z^2}\prod_{j=1,(j\neq l)}^{4}{\left(A_j-A_l\right)}}}}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{Gr44}
{\cal G}_{4 4}\left(\rho,z\right)={\displaystyle
\frac{1}{4\pi A{\cal C}_{66}}\sum_{l=1}^{4}
{\frac{\Lambda_{\rm{ 4}}\left(a=-A_l\right)}
{\sqrt{A_l\rho^2+z^2}\prod_{j=1,(j\neq l)}^{4}{\left(A_j-A_l\right)}}}}
\end{equation}
Here we have introduced the quantities
\begin{equation}
\label{gabdef}
\Lambda_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(a\right)-\Lambda_{\rm b}\left(a\right)=a\Gamma_{\rm b}\left(a\right)
\end{equation}
to arrive at
\begin{equation}
\label{gab}
\begin{array}{lcl}
\Gamma_{\rm b}\left(a\right)&=&\left({\cal C}_{11}-{\cal C}_{66}\right)
\left(T_{\rm c}\left(a\right)\tau\left(a\right)
-t_{\rm{c4}}^2\left(a\right)\right) \nonumber \\ &&
-\left({\cal C}_{13}+{\cal C}_{44}\right)^2\tau\left(a\right)
+2\left({\cal C}_{13}+{\cal C}_{44}\right)
\left(e_{31}+e_{15}\right)t_{\rm{c4}}\left(a\right)
\nonumber \\ &&
+\left(e_{31}+e_{15}\right)^2T_{\rm c}\left(a\right)
\end{array}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{gabc}
\Lambda_{\rm{bc}}\left(a\right)=\sqrt{a}\Gamma_{\rm{bc}}\left(a\right)
\end{equation}
where (compare eq. (\ref{L-c}))
\begin{equation}
\label{L-c-g}
\Gamma_{\rm{bc}}\left(a\right)=\left({\cal C}_{66}a+{\cal C}_{44}\right)
\left[\left(e_{31}+e_{15}\right)\left(e_{15}a+e_{33}\right)+
\left(\eta_{11}a+\eta_{33}\right)\left({\cal C}_{13}+{\cal C}_{44}\right)\right] ,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{gab4def}
\Lambda_{\rm{b4}}\left(a\right)=\sqrt{a}\Gamma_{\rm{b4}}\left(a\right)
\end{equation}
where (compare eq. (\ref{L-e}))
\begin{equation}
\label{L-e-g}
\Gamma_{\rm{b4}}\left(a\right)=\left({\cal C}_{66}a+{\cal C}_{44}\right)
\left[\left({\cal C}_{13}+{\cal C}_{44}\right)\left(e_{15}a+e_{33}\right)
-\left({\cal C}_{44}a+{\cal C}_{33}\right)\left(e_{31}+e_{15}\right)\right]
\end{equation}
Equation (\ref{Greenform}) together with (\ref{Gfi})-(\ref{Gr44})
represents the electroelastic Green's function explicitely in compact form.
Especially for the calculation of the electroelastic Eshelby tensor
the use of representation (\ref{Greenform}) may be convenient. \\
The cartesian representation of the the electroelastic Green's function
becomes:
\begin{equation}
\label{Greentensor}
\begin{array}{ll}
{\vt {\cal G}}\left({\vt r}\right) = {\displaystyle
{\sum_{l=1}^{4}\frac{1}{\sqrt{A_l\rho^2+z^2}}}}
\times&\left( \begin{array}{llll}
g_{11}^{(l)}
&g_{12}^{(l)}&g_{13}^{(l)}&g_{14}^{(l)} \\g_{12}^{(l)}
&g_{22}^{(l)}
&g_{23}^{(l)}&g_{24}^{(l)} \\
g_{13}^{(l)}&
g_{23}^{(l)}&g_{33}^{(l)}&g_{34}^{(l)} \\
g_{14}^{(l)}&g_{24}^{(l)}&g_{34}^{(l)}&g_{44}^{(l)} \\
\end{array} \right) \\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Here we have used the abbreviations:
\begin{equation}
\label{g11}
g_{11}^{(l)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{{\cal E}_l}}\left[{\displaystyle {-\Gamma_{\rm b}\left(-A_l\right)\frac{x^2z^2-y^2\left(A_l\rho^2+z^2\right)}
{\rho^4}+\Lambda_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(-A_l\right)}}\right]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{g22}
g_{22}^{(l)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{{\cal E}_l}}\left[{\displaystyle
{-\Gamma_{\rm b}\left(-A_l\right)\frac{y^2z^2-x^2\left(A_l\rho^2+z^2\right)}
{\rho^4}+\Lambda_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(-A_l\right)}}\right]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{g12}
g_{12}^{(l)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{{\cal E}_l}}\left[{\displaystyle {-\Gamma_{\rm b}\left(-A_l\right)
\frac{xy\left(A_l\rho^2+2z^2\right)}{\rho^4}}}\right]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{g13}
g_{13}^{(l)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{{\cal E}_l}}\left[{\displaystyle -\Gamma_{\rm{bc}}
\left(-A_l\right)\frac{xz}{\rho^2}}\right]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{g23}
g_{23}^{(l)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{{\cal E}_l}}\left[{\displaystyle -\Gamma_{\rm{bc}}
\left(-A_l\right)\frac{yz}{\rho^2}}\right]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{g33}
g_{33}^{(l)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{{\cal E}_l}}{\displaystyle \Lambda_{\rm c}
\left(-A_l\right)}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{g14}
g_{14}^{(l)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{{\cal E}_l}}\left[{\displaystyle -\Gamma_{\rm{b4}}
\left(-A_l\right)\frac{xz}{\rho^2}}\right]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{g24}
g_{24}^{(l)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{{\cal E}_l}}\left[{\displaystyle -\Gamma_{\rm{b4}}
\left(-A_l\right)\frac{yz}{\rho^2}}\right]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{g34}
g_{34}^{(l)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{{\cal E}_l}}{\displaystyle \Lambda_{\rm{c4}}\left(-A_l\right)}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{g44}
g_{44}^{(l)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{{\cal E}_l}}{\displaystyle \Lambda_{\rm 4}\left(-A_l\right)}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{epsel}
{\cal E}_l = 4\pi{\cal C}_{66}A\prod_{j=1,(j\neq l)}^{4}{\left(A_j-A_l\right)}
\end{equation}
As we shall show in the appendix the Green's
function (\ref{Greentensor}) yields in the case of vanishing
piezoelectric coupling $e_{ijk}=0$ the well known results:
For the elastic part ${\cal G}_{ij}$
(i,j=1,2,3) Kr\"oner's elastic Green's tensor
of the hexagonal medium \cite{Kroener4} and the dielectric part
${\cal G}_{44}$ then represents the solution of Poisson equation
of a unit point charge in a hexagonal dielectric medium,
whereas the ${\cal G}_{j4}$ ($j=1,2,3$) are vanishing.
\section{Appendix}
Here we consider the case of vanishing piezoelectric coupling
($e_{ijk}=0$).
As a consequence the terms (eqs. (\ref{TTT-e}), (\ref{TTT-f}))
\begin{equation}
\label{coseq}
t_{\rm{b4}}=t_{\rm{c4}}=0
\end{equation}
are vanishing. Thus the determinant $f$ (eq. (\ref{deterrep})) simplifies according to
\begin{equation}
\label{detokop}
f\left(a\right)=Det {\vt {\cal T}}\left(a\right)=
\tau\left(a\right)T_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(a\right)
\left(T_{\rm b}\left(a\right)T_{\rm c}\left(a\right)-
T_{\rm{bc}}^2\left(a\right)\right)
\end{equation}
and can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{defa}
f\left(a\right)=-\eta_{11}{\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{44}{\cal C}_{66}
\left(a+a_1\right)\left(a+a_2\right)\left(a+a_3\right)\left(a+a_4\right)
\end{equation}
where $a_l=A_l$ denote the zeros of $f\left(-a\right)$ in the decoupled case.
\begin{equation}
\label{a1}
a_1=\frac{{\cal C}_{44}}{{\cal C}_{66}}
\end{equation}
represents the zero of $T_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(-a\right)$.
The numbers $a_{2,3}$ are the zeros of the quadratic equation
\begin{equation}
\label{quadr}
T_{\rm b}\left(-a\right)T_{\rm c}\left(-a\right)-
T_{\rm{bc}}^2\left(-a\right)=
{\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{44}a^2+\left({\cal C}_{13}^2+2{\cal C}_{13}{\cal C}_{44}-{\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{33}\right)a+{\cal C}_{33}{\cal C}_{44}
=0
\end{equation}
The zeros $a_l$ for $l=1,2,3$ (elastic part) are those introduced in \cite{Kroener4}.
$a_4$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{a4}
a_4=\frac{\eta_{33}}{\eta_{11}}
\end{equation}
and represents the zero of $\tau\left(-a\right)$.
Furthermore we find when using (\ref{L-a})-(\ref{L-g}) together with
(\ref{gabdef})-(\ref{L-e-g})
\begin{equation}
\label{lo-a}
\Lambda_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(a=-a_l\right)=
-\eta_{11}{\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{44}\left(a_2-a_l\right)
\left(a_3-a_l\right)\left(a_4-a_l\right)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{lo-b}
\Lambda_{{\rm b}}\left(a=-a_l\right)=
-\eta_{11}{\cal C}_{66}\left({\cal C}_{33}-a_l{\cal C}_{44}\right)
\left(a_1-a_l\right)
\left(a_4-a_l\right)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{Gam}
\Gamma_{\rm b}\left(a=-a_l\right)=\eta_{11}\left(a_4-a_l\right)
\left[\left({\cal C}_{66}-{\cal C}_{11}\right)\left({\cal C}_{33}
-a_l{\cal C}_{44}\right)+\left({\cal C}_{13}+{\cal C}_{44}\right)^2\right]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{lga-c}
\Gamma_{\rm{bc}}\left(a=-a_l\right)=
\eta_{11}{\cal C}_{66}\left({\cal C}_{13}+{\cal C}_{44}\right)
\left(a_1-a_l\right)\left(a_4-a_l\right)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{lo-d}
\Lambda_{\rm c}\left(a=-a_l\right)=
-\eta_{11}{\cal C}_{66}\left({\cal C}_{44}-a_l{\cal C}_{11}\right)
\left(a_1-a_l\right)\left(a_4-a_l\right)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{galo}
\Gamma_{\rm{b4}}\left(a=-a_l\right)=\Lambda_{\rm{c4}}\left(a=-a_l\right)=0
\end{equation}
to obtain ${\cal G}_{j4}=0$ ($j=1,2,3$) and
\begin{equation}
\label{LA-4}
\Lambda_{\rm 4}\left(a=-a_l\right)={\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{44}{\cal C}_{66}
\left(a_1-a_l\right)\left(a_2-a_l\right)\left(a_3-a_l\right)
\end{equation}
and for $l=1,2,3$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eps}
{\cal E}_l = -\eta_{11}\left(a_4-a_l\right){\rm E}_l
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\label{Elk}
{\rm E}_l=4\pi{\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{44}{\cal C}_{66}\prod_{j=1,(j\neq l)}^{3}{\left(a_j-a_l\right)}
\end{equation}
The terms (\ref{Elk}) coincide with Kr\"oner's (corrected) $"{\rm E}_l"$
(the terms ${\rm E}_l$ defined in \cite{Kroener4} have to
be corrected by a prefactor $-{\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{44}{\cal C}_{66}$
to obtain the correct result for the elastic Green's tensor \cite{Yoo}).\\
For $l=4$ we obtain:
\begin{equation}
\label{elep}
{\cal E}_4 = -4\pi\eta_{11}{\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{44}{\cal C}_{66}
\left(a_1-a_4\right)\left(a_2-a_4\right)\left(a_3-a_4\right)=
-4\pi\eta_{11}\Lambda_{\rm 4}\left(-a_4\right)
\end{equation}
We observe from equation (\ref{lo-a})-(\ref{lo-d}) the properties:
\begin{equation}
\label{agitprop1}
\frac{\Lambda_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(a=-a_4\right)}{{\cal E}_4}=
\frac{\Lambda_{\rm b}\left(a=-a_4\right)}{{\cal E}_4}=
\frac{\Gamma_{\rm b}\left(a=-a_4\right)}{{\cal E}_4}
=\frac{\Gamma_{\rm{bc}}\left(a=-a_4\right)}{{\cal E}_4}=
\frac{\Lambda_{\rm c}\left(a=-a_4\right)}{{\cal E}_4}=0
\end{equation}
(${\cal E}_4 \neq 0$, eq. (\ref{elep})). Thus the term $l=4$
in sum (\ref{Greentensor}) does not contribute to the elastic
components ${\cal G}_{ij}$ ($i,j=1,2,3$).
Using equations (\ref{LA-4}) and (\ref{eps}) together with (\ref{Elk})
we obtain for $l=1,2,3$:
\begin{equation}
\label{agitprop2}
\frac{\Lambda_{\rm 4}\left(a=-a_l\right)}{{\cal E}_l}=0
\end{equation}
Thus there are no contributions
to sum (\ref{Greentensor}) for $l=1,2,3$ to the dielectric part
${\cal G}_{44}$. For $l=4$ we find from equations (\ref{LA-4})
and (\ref{elep}):
\begin{equation}
\label{agitprop3}
\frac{\Lambda_{\rm 4}\left(a=-a_4\right)}{{\cal E}_4}=\frac{-1}{4\pi\eta_{11}}
\end{equation}
(\ref{agitprop3}) is independent on the elastic moduli ${\cal C}_{ijkl}$ which is a consequence
of $e_{ijk}=0$. Thus the dielectric part ${\cal G}_{44}$ of the Green's function
(\ref{Greentensor}) yields
\begin{equation}
\label{G44}
{\cal G}_{44}\left({\vt r}\right)=
\frac{\Lambda_{\rm 4}\left(a=-a_4\right)}{{\cal E}_4}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{a_4\rho^2+z^2}} = \frac{-1}{4\pi\eta_{11}\sqrt{a_4\rho^2+z^2}}
\end{equation}
where $a_4=\eta_{33}/\eta_{11}$. Indeed it is easily checked that (\ref{G44})
is the solution of the Poisson equation of a unit point charge
(compare (\ref{diel}) and (\ref{Greendef}))
\begin{equation}
\label{Poisson}
\tau\left(\nabla\right){\cal G}_{44}\left({\vt r}\right)+
\delta^3\left({\vt r}\right)=0
\end {equation}
where (compare equation (\ref{diel}))
\begin{equation}
\label{deta}
\tau\left(\nabla\right)=-{\displaystyle \left[\eta_{11}
\left(\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial^2}{\partial y^2}\right)
+\eta_{33}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial z^2}\right]}
\end{equation}
Let us consider now the cases $l=1,2,3$:\\
From equations (\ref{lo-a})-(\ref{lo-d}) together with
(\ref{eps}) we obtain:
\begin{equation}
\label{elaprop2}
-\frac{\Gamma_{\rm b}\left(a=-a_l\right)}{{\cal E}_l}={\rm {\cal A}}_l=
\frac{\left({\cal C}_{66}-{\cal C}_{11}\right)
\left({\cal C}_{33}-a_l{\cal C}_{44}\right)+
\left({\cal C}_{13}+{\cal C}_{44}\right)^2}{{\rm E}_l}
\end{equation}
These terms coincide with Kr\"oner's $"{\rm {\cal A}}_l"$ from \cite{Kroener4}.
Furthermore we obtain:
\begin{equation}
\label{elaprop1}
\frac{\Lambda_{{\rm b}\perp}\left(a=-a_l\right)}{{\cal E}_l}={\rm B}_l=
\frac{{\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{44}a_l^2+\left({\cal C}_{13}^2+
2{\cal C}_{13}{\cal C}_{44}-{\cal C}_{11}{\cal C}_{33}\right)a_l
+{\cal C}_{33}{\cal C}_{44}}{{\rm E}_l}
\end{equation}
These terms coincide with Kr\"oner's $"{\rm B}_l"$ from \cite{Kroener4}.
\\
Furthermore we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{elaprop3}
-\frac{\Gamma_{\rm{bc}}\left(a=-a_l\right)}{{\cal E}_l}={\rm C}_l=
\frac{\left({\cal C}_{44}-a_l{\cal C}_{66}\right)
\left({\cal C}_{13}+{\cal C}_{44}\right)}{{\rm E}_l}
\end{equation}
These terms coincide with Kr\"oner's $"{\rm C}_l"$ from \cite{Kroener4}.\\
Finally we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{elaprop4}
\frac{\Lambda_{\rm c}\left(a=-a_l\right)}{{\cal E}_l}={\rm D}_l=\frac{
\left({\cal C}_{44}-a_l{\cal C}_{66}\right)
\left({\cal C}_{44}-a_l{\cal C}_{11}\right)}{{\rm E}_l}
\end{equation}
These terms concide with Kr\"oner's $"{\rm D}_l"$ from \cite{Kroener4}.\\
Because of the property (\ref{agitprop1}) the elastic part of the
Green's function ${\cal G}_{ij}=G_{ij}$ ($i,j=1,2,3$) yields by putting
(\ref{elaprop2})-(\ref{elaprop4}) into (\ref{Greentensor}) and by using
the abbreviations (\ref{g11})-(\ref{g33}) Kr\"oner's
result \cite{Kroener4}:
\begin{equation}
\label{GreenscherTensor}
\begin{array}{ll}
{\rm {\bf G}}\left({\vt r}\right) = {\displaystyle
{\sum_{l=1}^{3}\frac{1}{\sqrt{a_l\rho^2+z^2}}}}\times &\\ \\
\left( \begin{array}{lll}
{\displaystyle {{\rm {\cal A}}_l\frac{x^2z^2-y^2\left(a_l\rho^2+z^2\right)}
{\rho^4}+{\rm B}_l}};
&{\displaystyle {{\rm {\cal A}}_l\frac{xy\left(a_l\rho^2+2z^2\right)}{\rho^4}}};
&{\displaystyle {\rm C}_l\frac{xz}{\rho^2}} \\{\displaystyle
{{\rm {\cal A}}_l\frac{xy\left(a_l\rho^2+2z^2\right)}{\rho^4}}};
&{\displaystyle
{{\rm {\cal A}}_l\frac{y^2z^2-x^2\left(a_l\rho^2+z^2\right)}{\rho^4}+{\rm B}_l}};
&{\displaystyle {{\rm C}_l\frac{yz}{\rho^2}}} \\
{\displaystyle {{\rm C}_l\frac{xz}{\rho^2}}}; &
{\displaystyle {{\rm C}_l\frac{yz}{\rho^2}}}; &{\displaystyle {{\rm D}_l}} \\
\end{array} \right) \\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\newline
Here we used Kr\"oner's notation. Above constants ${\rm {\cal A}}_l,
{\rm B}_l, {\rm C}_l, {\rm D}_l$ are defined in equations
(\ref{elaprop2})-(\ref{elaprop4}), respectively.
\section{Conclusion}
The electroelastic 4$\times$4 Green's function of a piezoelectric
hexagonal medium which is infinitely extended has been calculated
explicitely by using residue theory. The obtained expression
(\ref{Greentensor}) is highly convenient for a treatment of the electroelastic
Eshelby tensor \cite{KuhnMichel}.\\
An important future application may be the following: The obtained
Green's function will be an important quantity even for a
treatment of nonlinear, e.g. hysteretic material behavior
in piezoelectric ceramics. To model these effects has become of great interest
since the increasing technological importance of
piezoelectric materials, in particular as electromechanical
actuators and sensors \cite{NanClarke,Kamlah,MichelKreher}.
Key contributions for a
treatment of such nonlinear effects using
the technique of Green's functions had been presented by
Wunderlin and Haken \cite{WunderHaken,HakenWunder}.
\begin{center}
{\bf \it{Acknowledgements}}
\end{center}
The author is grateful to Dr. W. Kreher, Professors V. M. Levin
and E. Kr\"oner for
helpful discussions
and their steady interest in this work and to R. Kuhn for checking some
expressions with MATHEMATICA.
|
\section{Introduction}
Mathematical models of financial derivatives were arguably pioneered by Black and Scholes (B-S) \cite{BS73} and this led to the scientific legitimization of the options market. Many empirical tests have since shown that the price from this model is fairly close to the observed price \cite{BAA08}. A large number of financial derivatives are now modeled after the B-S equation with general form
\begin{equation}
\label{aa}
V_t + X S^{2} V_{SS} + Y S V_{S} - Z V = 0,
\end{equation}
where $S$ is the underlying asset price, $V(S,t)$ is the option price and $X, Y, Z$ include important financial parameters like the stock volatility and interest rate. In reality though, these parameters change over time throughout the duration of the option. This necessitated the need to study equations that capture a scenario wherein the parameters are time dependent, viz.
\begin{equation}
\label{a}
V_t + X(t) S^{2} V_{SS} + Y(t) S V_{S} - Z(t) V = 0.
\end{equation}
In our study we give the general symmetry structure of these financial derivatives (particularly when the model parameters are time dependent) and the route to their solution satisfying accompanying boundary conditions. We illustrate this method by looking at an exotic option called the power options.
Exotic options are financial derivatives that have more complex features than commonly traded products. They are used to capture the increasing complexities of the financial market -- especially the nonlinear dependence of the option payoff on the asset price -- and are mostly traded over the counter to suit client needs. Power options are generally characterized by the nonlinear payoff structure of the underlying asset price raised to a certain power ($\beta$) at expiration time. Previous studies by Cox and Rubenstein \cite{CR78} looked at the case of squared power options and Tompkins \cite{TRG99} subsequently produced the complete solution to the problem of the power parameter as any given integer value. Esser \cite{ESS04} produced solutions to the problem when the asset price is raised to any real valued number. Okelola {\it et al} \cite{OGO14} then looked at the realistic case of the model parameters being time dependent.
We note that the PDE (\ref{a}) is linear and a study by Johnpillai and Mahomed \cite{JM01} has found criteria for parabolic linear homogeneous equations to be equivalent to the classical heat equation. They showed that if the relative invariant of the equation is zero, it can then be concluded that the equation is equivalent to the heat equation. It should however be noted that for the problem we look at in this paper, it will not be a straightforward matter to transform the solutions and determine the {\it behavior} of equation (\ref{a}) from that of the heat equation. In addition, the solution to equation (\ref{a}) is required to satisfy certain boundary conditions and this demand cannot be forced on the heat equation in a direct manner. Due to these reasons, we decided to examine the PDE {\it apriori}.
\section{Lie group approach} The Lie group technique utilizes the notion of symmetry to obtain solutions to DEs in an algorithmic manner. Consider an $n$th order system of DEs
\begin{equation}\label{6}
\Xi_d(t,y,\partial y,\ldots ,\partial^{n}y)=0, \hspace{2cm} d=1,\ldots,m
\end{equation}
where $t = t^1,\ldots,t^e$ are the independent variables, $y=y^1,\ldots,y^f$ are the dependent variables and $\partial^l$ is the $l$-th partial derivative
of $y$ with respect to $t$ (for $l = 1,\ldots,n$). An infinitesimal generator
\begin{equation}\label{7}
X = \zeta^i(t,y){\partial_{t^i}} + \eta^\mu(t,y){\partial_{y^\mu}},
\end{equation}
of the one-parameter Lie group of transformations
\begin{subequations}\label{8}
\begin{align}
(t^*)^i = f^i(t,y;\epsilon),\\
(y^*)^\mu = g^\mu(t,y;\epsilon),
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
is said to be point symmetry of equation (\ref{6}) if and only if
\begin{equation}\label{9}
X^{(n)} \Xi_d(t,y,\partial y,\ldots ,\partial^{n}y)=0,
\end{equation}
where $X^{(n)}$ is the $n^{th}$ prolongation of $X$ \cite{OP86}.
A local group of transformations $Z$ (acting on $M \subset T \times Y = \mathbb{R}^e \times \mathbb{R}^f$) is said to be a symmetry group of $\Xi$ if every element $z \in Z$ transforms solutions of $\Xi$ to other solutions of $\Xi$. On reduction of $\Xi$ via $Z$, every solution of the new system $(\Xi/Z)_d(a,b,\partial b,\ldots,\partial^n b)$ gives rise to a $Z$-invariant solution to $\Xi$. This technique has been used to great effect in Financial Mathematics \cite{COG10, LOS06}.
\section{Symmetry structure of the problem} The PDE (\ref{a}) admits the six parameter symmetry \cite{AKH00}
\begin{eqnarray} \label{e}
G &=& \theta(t) \partial_t + \Bigg( \gamma(t) + \frac{\log(S) \dot{\theta}(t)}{2} + \frac{\log(S) \dot{X}(t) \theta(t)}{2X(t)} \Bigg) S \partial_S + \Bigg( V(S,t) \alpha(t)
\nonumber \\ \noalign{\vskip 0.01cm}
&& \mbox{} + \Bigg( \dot{Z}(t)\log(S)\theta(t) + Z(t) \log(S) \dot{\theta}(t) - \log(S) \dot{\alpha}(t) + \Big[ Y(t) \log^2(S) - X(t)^2 \log^2(S)
\nonumber \\ \noalign{\vskip 0.01cm}
&& \mbox{} - 2X(t)\log(S) \Big]k_1 \Bigg) V(S,t) \Bigg/ \Bigg( Y(t) - X(t) \Bigg) \Bigg) \partial_V,
\end{eqnarray}
subject to the functions $\theta(t), \alpha(t)$ and $\gamma(t)$ satisfying
\begin{align}
\label{b}
& X(t)^2 \ddot{\theta}(t) - 8X(t)k_1 - \dot{X}(t)^2\theta(t) + X(t) \dot{X}(t) \dot{\theta}(t) + X(t) \ddot{X}(t) \theta(t) = 0,\\
\label{c}
& \mbox{} -3X(t)^2\dot{Y}(t)\dot{\theta}(t) - 2X(t)^2\ddot{Y}(t)\theta(t) + 2X(t)^2 \ddot{\gamma}(t) + 3X(t) \dot{X}(t) Y(t) \dot{\theta}(t) + 2X(t)\ddot{X}(t)Y(t) \theta(t)
\nonumber \\ \noalign{\vskip 0.01cm}
& \mbox{} + 3 X(t) \dot{X}(t) \dot{Y}(t) \theta(t) - 2 X(t) \dot{X}(t) \dot{\gamma}(t) - 3\dot{X}(t)^2 Y(t) \theta{t} = 0,\\
\label{d}
& 2X(t)^2 Y(t)\dot{\theta}(t) - 4X(t)^2 Z(t) \dot{\theta}(t) - X(t)^2 \dot{X}(t) \theta(t) + 2X(t)^2\dot{Y}(t) \theta(t) - 4X(t)^2 \dot{Z}(t)\theta(t) - 2X(t)^2\dot{\gamma}
\nonumber \\ \noalign{\vskip 0.01cm}
& \mbox{} + 4X(t)^2 \dot{\alpha}(t) - X(t)^3 \dot{\theta}(t) + 8 X(t)^3 k_1 + \dot{X}(t) Y(t)^2 \theta(t) - X(t) Y(t)^2 \dot{\theta}(t) - 2 X(t) Y(t) \dot{Y}(t) \theta(t)
\nonumber \\ \noalign{\vskip 0.01cm}
& \mbox{} + 2 X(t) Y(t) \dot{\gamma}(t) = 0.
\end{align}
Since the equation is linear, it also admits an infinite-dimensional `solution' symmetry \cite{OP86}. The symmetry structure in (\ref{e}) and the accompanying equations in the system (\ref{b})--(\ref{d}) is applicable to all evolution-type equations of the form (\ref{a}). We will show its applicability by considering an example of exotic options.
\subsection{Solution to the power option problem} We now consider the power option that pays out a continuous yield dividend, $y(t)$, at different time intervals. To derive the PDE modeling this option, we assume that the stock pays a dividend at a continuous rate proportional to the value of the stock. The dividend paid per unit time will thus be $y(t)S$ and the dividend paid in a short time interval will be $y(t)S\text{d}t$. The pricing kernel is characterized by the Brownian motion model
\begin{equation}\label {1}
\frac{\text{d}\psi}{\psi} = -r(t) \text{d}t - \frac{\mu(t) - r(t)}{\sigma(t)} \text{d}W(t),
\end{equation}
and the stochastic process for $S^\beta$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{2}
\text{d}S^{\beta} = \Big[ (\mu(t) - y(t))\beta + \frac{1}{2}\beta (\beta - 1)\Big] S^\beta \text{d}t + \sigma(t) \beta S^\beta \text{d}W(t),
\end{equation}
where $r(t)$ is the stock interest rate, $\sigma(t)$ its volatility, $\mu(t)$ the instantaneous expected return and $W(t)$ is the Weiner process. By It\^{o}'s lemma, the price of the power derivative will be
\begin{equation}\label{3}
\text{d}V = \Bigg( \frac{1}{2} \sigma(t)^2 \beta^2 S^{\beta 2} V_{S^{\beta} S^{\beta}} + V_t + \Big[ (\mu(t) - y(t))\beta + \frac{1}{2}\beta (\beta - 1)\sigma(t)^2 \Big] S^\beta V_{S^\beta} \Bigg) \text{d}t + \sigma(t) \beta S^\beta V_{S^\beta} W(t).
\end{equation}
On solving for $\psi$ and $V$ in equations (\ref{1}) and (\ref{3}) respectively, their product (since it is a martingale the drift term must be zero) gives the PDE
\begin{equation}\label{4}
V_t + \frac{1}{2} \sigma(t)^2 \beta^2 S^{2} V_{SS} + \Big[ (r(t) - y(t))\beta + \frac{1}{2}\beta (\beta - 1)\sigma(t)^2 \Big] S V_{S} - r(t)V = 0,
\end{equation}
where the payoff is given by $V(S,T) = \text{max} \{\Psi(S^\beta - K),0 \}$ at the boundary $t = T$. The option has a payoff $V(S,T) = 0$ when $S^\beta < K$ and a payoff $V(S,T) = S^\beta - K$ when $S^\beta \geq K$. The strike price is $K$ and $\Psi$ determines whether the option is a call or put.
On substituting the representations of $X(t), Y(t)$ and $Z(t)$ of equation (\ref{4}) into the system (\ref{b}) -- (\ref{d}) and solving, we obtain
\begin{align}
\label{14}
& \theta(t) = \frac{1}{\sigma(t)^2} \Bigg[ \theta_2 + \int \sigma(t)^2 \text{d}t \Big( \theta_1 + 2k\beta^2 \int \sigma(t)^2 \text{d}t\Big) \Bigg],\\
\label{15}
& \gamma(t) = \gamma_2 + \int \Bigg[\sigma(t)^2\Bigg(\gamma_1 + \beta \int \frac{\text{d}t}{\sigma(t)^2} \Bigg\{\Bigg[-\frac{3\dot{r}}{2} + \frac{3 r \dot{\sigma}(t)}{\sigma(t)} - \frac{3y(t)\dot{\sigma}(t) }{\sigma(t)} + 3\dot{r}(t)\dot{\sigma}(t)\Bigg] \dot{\theta}(t)
\nonumber \\ \noalign{\vskip 0.01cm}
&\mbox{} + \Bigg[\frac{3\dot{y}(t) \dot{\sigma}(t)}{\sigma(t)} - \frac{4\dot{r}(t) \dot{\sigma}(t)^2}{\sigma(t)^2} + \frac{4{y}(t) \dot{\sigma}(t)^2}{\sigma(t)^2} + \ddot{y}(t) + \frac{2{r}(t) \ddot{\sigma}(t)}{\sigma(t)} - \frac{2\dot{y}(t) \ddot{\sigma}(t)}{\sigma(t)} \Bigg] \theta(t) \Bigg\} \Bigg) \Bigg]\text{d}t,\\
\label{16}
&\alpha(t) = \int \Bigg\{ \Bigg(r(t)\sigma(t)^3 - 2r(t)y(t) + r(t)^2\sigma(t) + y(t)^2 \sigma(t) + y(t) \sigma(t)^3 + \frac{\sigma(t)^5}{4} \Bigg) \frac{\dot{\theta}(t)}{2\sigma(t)^3}
\nonumber \\ \noalign{\vskip 0.01cm}
&\mbox{} + \Bigg( y(t) + \frac{\sigma(t)^2}{2} - r(t)\bigg)\frac{\dot{\gamma}(t)}{\sigma(t)^2 \beta} - \sigma(t)^2 \beta^2 k_1 + \Bigg(\frac{\dot{r}(t) \sigma(t)^3}{2} - r(t)^2 \dot{\sigma}(t) - y(t)^2 \dot{\sigma}(t)
\nonumber \\ \noalign{\vskip 0.01cm}
&\mbox{} + 2r(t)y(t)\dot{\sigma}(t) + r(t)\dot{r}(t)\sigma(t) - r(t)\dot{y}(t)\sigma(t) + y(t) \dot{y}(t) \sigma(t) - y(t) \dot{r}(t) \sigma(t)
\nonumber \\ \noalign{\vskip 0.01cm}
&\mbox{} + \frac{\dot{y}(t) \sigma(t)^3}{2} + \frac{\dot{\sigma(t)} \sigma(t)^4}{4} \Bigg)\theta(t) \Bigg\} \text{d} t + \alpha_1,
\end{align}
where $\theta_1, \theta_2, \gamma_1, \gamma_2$ and $\alpha_1$ are constants of integration.
\subsubsection{Solution to the power option problem with payoff $V(S,T) = 0$} Application of the general symmetry (\ref{e}) to the terminal condition will demand that $\theta(T) = 0$. For this to be true, the parameters $\theta_1, \theta_2$ and $k_1$ must be zero. This requirement reduces the 6-parameter symmetry to a 3-parameter symmetry. This new symmetry has invariants $P$ and $u$ resulting in
\begin{equation}
V = P(u) \exp \Bigg(\frac{\log(S)}{\gamma(t) \beta} \Bigg[\alpha_1 \beta - \frac{\gamma_1 \log(S)}{2\beta} + \gamma_1 \int \Bigg\{r(t)-y(t)-\frac{\sigma(t)^2}{2} \Bigg\}\text{d}t \Bigg] \Bigg),
\end{equation}
where $u = t$. We use these to reduce the power option PDE to an ODE with solution
\begin{equation}
P = C_1 \Bigg( \cosh \Big( {u A_1(t)}\Big/{A_2(t)} \Big) - \sinh \Big( {u A_1(t)}\Big/{A_2(t)} \Big)\Bigg)
\end{equation}
where the $A_i$'s are known functions of time. The solution of the PDE satisfying the terminal condition will thus be
\begin{equation}
V = C_1 \Bigg( \cosh \Big( {u A_1(t)}\Big/{A_2(t)} \Big) - \sinh \Big( {u A_1(t)}\Big/{A_2(t)} \Big)\Bigg) S^{ \frac{1}{\gamma(t) \beta} \Bigg[\alpha_1 \beta - \frac{\gamma_1 \log(S)}{2\beta} + \gamma_1 \int \Bigg\{r(t)-y(t)-\frac{\sigma(t)^2}{2} \Bigg\}\text{d}t \Bigg] }
\end{equation}
where the constant $C_1$ is determined by the requirement that $V(S,T)=0$.
\subsubsection{Solution to the power option problem with payoff $V(S,T) = S^\beta - K$}
For the condition $V(S,T) = S^\beta - K$ at $t = T$, we follow the same steps as for the terminal condition. The general symmetry in equation (\ref{e}) reduces to a one-parameter symmetry with the constants $\theta_1, \gamma_1, \gamma_2, \alpha_1$ and $k_1$ all equal to zero. The function $\theta(t)$ is redefined as
\begin{equation}
\theta^1(t) = \frac{\theta_2}{\sigma(t)^2} \Bigg(1 - \int \sigma(t)^2 \text{d}t \Bigg|_{t=T} \int \sigma(t)^2 \text{d}t \Bigg),
\end{equation}
with obvious modifications for $\gamma^1(t)$ and $\alpha^1(t)$ (see (\ref{15}) and (\ref{16})). The solution will then have the form
\begin{equation}
V = P^1(u) \exp\Bigg( \int \Bigg\{ \frac{\alpha^1(t)}{\theta^1(t)} - \frac{2\log(S)}{2r(t)\beta - \beta \sigma(t)^2 - 2 \beta y(t)} \Bigg[ \frac{\dot{\alpha}^1(t)}{\theta^1(t)} - \frac{r(t) \dot{\theta}^1(t)}{\theta^1(t)} - \dot{r}(t)\Bigg]\Bigg\} \text{d}t \Bigg) ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
u = \int \frac{\gamma^1(t)}{\sigma(t) (\theta^1(t))^2}\text{d}t - \frac{\log(S)}{\sigma(t) \theta^1(t)}.
\end{equation}
These reduce the power option PDE to a second order ODE with solution
\begin{align}
P^1 =& \Bigg[ \cosh \Bigg(2a(t) + ub(t) - \frac{2c(t)}{b(t)}\Bigg) - \sinh \Bigg(2a(t) + ub(t) - \frac{2c(t)}{b(t)}\Bigg) \Bigg] \Bigg[ C_1 H\Bigg(-1+\frac{c(t)^2}{b(t)^3} +\frac{a(t) c(t)}{b(t)^2};
\nonumber \\ \noalign{\vskip 0.01cm}
& \mbox{}\frac{a(t)b(t) + ub(t)^2 -2c(t)}{\sqrt{2b(t)^3}} + C_2\hspace{0.05cm} {}_1F_1 \Bigg(\frac{b(t)^3 +a(t)b(t)c(t) - c(t)^2}{2b(t)^3};\frac{1}{2}; \frac{\Big( a(t)b(t) +ub(t)^2 -2c(t)^2\Big)^2 }{2b(t)^3} \Bigg) \Bigg],
\end{align}
where $H$ and ${}_1F_1$ are the Hermite and Hypergeometric functions respectively. As before $a(t), b(t)$ and $c(t)$ are known functions of time. The solution to the problem with payoff $V(S,T) = S^\beta - K$ will thus be
\begin{align}
V(S,T) =& \exp\Bigg[ \int \frac{\alpha(t)}{\theta(t)} \text{d}t -\frac{u}{2} \Bigg(2a(t) + ub(t) - \frac{2c(t)}{b(t)}\Bigg) \Bigg] \Bigg[ C_1 H\Bigg(-1+\frac{c(t)^2}{b(t)^3} +\frac{a(t) c(t)}{b(t)^2};
\nonumber \\ \noalign{\vskip 0.01cm}
& \mbox{}\frac{a(t)b(t) + ub(t)^2 -2c(t)}{\sqrt{2b(t)^3}}\Bigg) + C_2\hspace{0.05cm} {}_1F_1 \Bigg(\frac{b(t)^3 +a(t)b(t)c(t) - c(t)^2}{2b(t)^3};\frac{1}{2}; \frac{\Big( a(t)b(t) +ub(t)^2 -2c(t)^2\Big)^2 }{2b(t)^3} \Bigg) \Bigg]
\nonumber \\ \noalign{\vskip 0.01cm}
& S^ {\displaystyle 2\int \frac{\dot{\alpha}(t) - r(t)\dot{\theta}(t) - \dot{r}(t)\theta(t) }{\theta\big( 2r(t)\beta - \beta \sigma(t)^2 - 2 \beta y(t) \big)} \text{d}t}.
\end{align}
The constants $C_1, C_2$ are determined from the requirement that $V(S,T) = S^\beta - K$.
\section{Conclusion and remarks}
We have shown that all evolution equations of the form (\ref{a}), regardless of the nature of the coefficients, will have the 6-parameter symmetry structure (\ref{e}) whose solution route will follow the same steps outlined in this paper. As a result, we can find group invariant solutions to a large class of financially relevant DEs.
We introduced a new PDE modelling power options with time dependent parameters and paying out a continuous dividend at different time intervals. Our general result was then contextualized to this equation. New solutions satisfying the boundary conditions were provided for the first time.
We believe that this approach will be useful in Financial Mathematics.
{\bf Acknowledgements:} We thank the University of KwaZulu-Natal and the National Research Foundation for their ongoing support.
\small{
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec1}
The radio frequency (RF) spectrum used in industrial, scientific and medical
radio bands and telecommunication radio bands are crowded with various
wireless communication systems. Recently, optical wireless communication
technology, where information is conveyed through optical radiations in
free space in outdoor and indoor environments, is emerging as a promising
complementary technology to RF communication technology. While communication
using infrared wavelengths has been in existence for quite some time
\cite{chann1},\cite{chann2}, more recent interest centers around
indoor communication using visible light wavelengths
\cite{haas1},\cite{brien}. A major attraction in indoor visible light
communication (VLC) is the potential to simultaneously provide both
energy-efficient lighting as well as high-speed short-range communication
using inexpensive high-luminance light-emitting diodes (LED). Several
other advantages including no RF radiation hazard, abundant VLC spectrum
at no cost, and very high data rates make VLC increasingly popular. For
example, a 3 Gbps single-LED VLC link based on OFDM has been reported
recently \cite{haas2}. Also, multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO)
techniques, which are immensely successful and popular in RF
communications \cite{mimo1},\cite{mimo2}, can be employed in VLC
systems to achieve improved communication efficiencies
\cite{jean},\cite{vlc5},\cite{vlc6}. In particular, it has been
shown that MIMO techniques can provide gains in VLC systems even
under line-of-sight (LOS) conditions which provide only little
channel differences \cite{vlc5}. Our new contribution in this
paper is the investigation of {\em generalized spatial modulation
(GSM)}, an attractive MIMO transmission scheme, in the context of
VLC. Such a study, to our knowledge, has not been reported before.
In the context of VLC systems, MIMO techniques including spatial
multiplexing (SMP), space shift keying (SSK), generalized space shift
keying (GSSK), and spatial modulation (SM) have been investigated in
the literature \cite{vlc5}-\cite{vlc2}. In SMP, there are $N_t$ LEDs
at the transmitter and all of them are activated simultaneously in a
given channel use, such that $N_t$ symbols from a positive real-valued
$|{\mathbb M}|$-ary pulse amplitude modulation (PAM) alphabet ${\mathbb M}$ are sent in
a channel use \cite{vlc5}. Thus, the transmission efficiency in SMP is
$\eta_{smp}=N_t\lfloor \log_2|{\mathbb M}|\rfloor$ bits per channel use
(bpcu). In SSK, there are $N_t$ LEDs, out of which only one will be
activated in a given channel use \cite{vlc4}. The LED to be activated
is chosen based on $\lfloor\log_2N_t\rfloor$ information bits. Only the
index of this active LED will convey information bits, so that the
transmission efficiency is $\eta_{ssk}=\lfloor\log_2N_t\rfloor$ bpcu.
This means that a large number of LEDs is needed to achieve high
transmission efficiencies in SSK. That is, since
$N_t=\lceil2^{\eta_{ssk}}\rceil$, the number of LEDs required in SSK
is exponential in the transmission efficiency $\eta_{ssk}$. On the other
hand, SSK has the advantage of having no interference, since only one
LED will be active at any given time and the remaining LEDs will be OFF.
GSSK is a generalization of SSK, in which $N_a$ out of $N_t$ LEDs will
be activated in a given channel use, and the indices of the active LEDs
will convey information bits \cite{vlc3}-\cite{vlc3b}. Since there are
$N_t \choose N_a$ possibilities of choosing the active LEDs, the
transmission efficiency in GSSK is given by
$\eta_{gssk}=\lfloor\log_2{N_t \choose N_a}\rfloor$ bpcu.
SM is similar to SSK (i.e., one out of $N_t$ LEDs is activated and this
active LED is chosen based on $\lfloor\log_2 N_t\rfloor$ information bits),
except that in SM a symbol from a positive real-valued $|{\mathbb M}|$-ary PAM
alphabet ${\mathbb M}$ is sent on the active LED. So, the transmission efficiency
in SM is $\eta=\lfloor\log_2 N_t\rfloor+\lfloor\log_2 |{\mathbb M}|\rfloor$
bpcu. A comparative study of SMP and SM in VLC systems has shown that, for
the same transmission efficiency, SM outperforms SMP under certain geometric
conditions \cite{vlc5}.
Like the generalization of SSK to GSSK, it is possible to generalize SM.
That is, activate $N_a$ out of $N_t$ LEDs in a given channel use, and,
on each active LED, send a symbol from a positive real-valued $|{\mathbb M}|$-ary
PAM alphabet ${\mathbb M}$. Such a scheme, referred to as {\em generalized spatial
modulation (GSM)}, then has a transmission efficiency of
$\eta_{gsm}=\lfloor\log_2{N_t \choose N_a}\rfloor+N_a\lfloor\log_2 |{\mathbb M}|\rfloor$
bpcu. Note that both SM and SMP become special cases of GSM for $N_a=1$
and $N_a=N_t$, respectively. GSM in the context of RF communications has
been investigated in the literature \cite{gsm1}-\cite{gsm3}. However, GSM
in the context of VLC systems has not been reported so far. Our contribution
in this paper attempts to fill this gap. In particular, we investigate,
through analysis and simulations, the performance of GSM in comparison with
other MIMO schemes including SMP, SSK, GSSK, and SM. Our performance study
reveals favorable results for GSM compared to other MIMO schemes.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Sec. \ref{sec2}, we
present the considered indoor VLC system model. In Sec. \ref{sec3}, we
present the GSM scheme for VLC. In Sec. \ref{sec4}, we derive an upper
bound on the bit error probability of GSM for maximum likelihood
(ML) detection in VLC. In Sec. \ref{sec5}, we present a detailed
performance comparison between GSM and other MIMO schemes in VLC.
Finally, conclusions are presented in Sec. \ref{sec6}.
\section{System model}
\label{sec2}
Consider an indoor VLC system with $N_t$ LEDs (transmitter) and $N_r$
photo detectors (receiver). We assume that the LEDs have a Lambertian
radiation pattern \cite{chann2},\cite{new1}. In a given channel use,
each LED is either OFF or emits light of some positive intensity
$I \in \mathbb M$, where $\mathbb M$ is the set of all possible
intensity levels. An LED which is OFF is considered to send a signal of
intensity zero. Let ${\bf x}$ denote the $N_t\times 1$ transmit signal vector,
where the $i$th element of $\bf x$ is $x_i\in\{{\mathbb M} \cup 0\}$. Let
${\bf H}$ denote the $N_r\times N_t$ optical MIMO channel matrix, given by
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bf H}=
\begin{bmatrix}
h_{11} & h_{12} & h_{13} & \cdots & h_{1N_t} \\
h_{21} & h_{22} & h_{23} & \cdots & h_{2N_t} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots \\
h_{N_r1}& h_{N_r2} & h_{N_r3} & \cdots & h_{N_rN_t}
\end{bmatrix},
\end{eqnarray}
where $h_{ij}$ is the channel gain between $j$th LED and $i$th photo detector,
$j=1,2,\cdots,N_t$ and $i=1,2,\cdots,N_r$. As in \cite{vlc5}, we consider
only the line-of-sight (LOS) paths between the LEDs and the photo detectors,
and assume no time-dispersion (because of negligible path delay differences
between LEDs and photo detectors). From \cite{chann2}, the LOS channel gain
$h_{ij}$ is calculated as (see Fig. \ref{sys} for the definition of various
angles in the model)
\begin{equation}
{h_{ij}} = \frac{n+1}{2\pi}\cos^{n}{\phi_{ij}}\,
\cos{\theta_{ij}}\frac{A}{R_{ij}^2}
\mbox{rect}\Big(\frac{\theta_{ij}}{FOV}\Big),
\label{channel}
\end{equation}
where $\phi_{ij}$ is the angle of emergence with respect to the $j$th
source (LED)
and the normal at the source, $n$ is the mode number of the radiating lobe
given by
\[
n=\frac{-\ln(2)}{\ln\cos{\Phi_{\frac{1}{2}}}},
\]
$\Phi_\frac{1}{2}$ is the half-power semiangle of the LED \cite{new1},
$\theta_{ij}$ is the angle of incidence at the $i$th photo detector,
$A$ is the area of the detector, $R_{ij}$ is the distance between the
$j$th source and the $i$th detector, FOV is the field of view of the
detector, and
\[
\mbox{rect}(x)=
\begin{cases}
1, & |x|\leq 1 \\
0, & |x|>1.
\end{cases}\]
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.2in]{figure1_2.eps}
\caption{Geometric set-up of the considered indoor VLC system.
A dot represents a photo detector and a cross represents an LED.}
\label{sys}
\vspace{-2mm}
\end{figure}
The LEDs and the photo detectors are placed in a room of size
5m$\times$5m$\times$3.5m as shown in Fig. \ref{sys}. The LEDs are
placed at a height of 0.5m below the ceiling and the photo detectors
are placed on a table of height 0.8m. Let $d_{tx}$ denote the distance
between the LEDs and $d_{rx}$ denote the distance between the photo
detectors (see Fig. \ref{place}). We choose $d_{tx}$ as 0.6m and $d_{rx}$
as 0.1m. For example, when $N_t=N_r=4$, the placement of LEDs and photo
detectors is depicted in Figs. \ref{placement1},\ref{placement2}.
When $N_t=16$, the placement of LEDs is depicted in Fig. \ref{placement3}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\subfigure[Transmitter, $N_t=4$]{
\includegraphics[height=1in]{figure2_1.eps}
\label{placement1}
}
\subfigure[Receiver, $N_r=4$]{
\includegraphics[height=1in]{figure2_2.eps}
\label{placement2}
}
\subfigure[\hspace{-1mm}Transmitter, $N_t$=16]{
\includegraphics[height=1in]{figure2_3.eps}
\label{placement3}
}
\caption{Placement of LEDs and photo detectors.}
\label{place}
\end{figure}
Assuming perfect synchronization, the $N_r\times 1$ received signal vector
at the receiver is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bf y} = r{\bf H}{\bf x}+{\bf n},
\label{sysmodel}
\end{eqnarray}
where
${\bf x}$ is an $N_t$-dimensional vector with exactly $N_a$ non-zero elements such
that each element in ${\bf x}$ belongs to $\{{\mathbb M} \cup 0\}$,
$r$ is the responsivity of the detector \cite{new2} and ${\bf n}$ is
the noise vector of dimension $N_r\times 1$. Each element in the noise
vector ${\bf n}$ is the sum of received thermal noise and ambient shot light
noise, which can be modeled as i.i.d. real AWGN with zero mean and variance
$\sigma^2$ \cite{chann1}. The average received signal-to-noise ratio (SNR)
is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
{\overline{\gamma}}&=&\frac{r^2P_r^2}{\sigma^2},
\end{eqnarray}
where
$P_r^2 = \frac{1}{N_r}\sum\limits_{i=1}^{N_r}{\mathbb E} [{|{\bf H}_i{\bf x}|}^2]$,
and ${\bf H}_i$ is the $i$th row of ${\bf H}$.
\section{GSM in VLC systems}
\label{sec3}
In GSM, information bits are conveyed not only through modulation symbols
sent on active LEDs, but also through indices of the active LEDs. In each
channel use, the transmitter selects $N_a$ out of $N_t$ LEDs to activate.
This selection is done based on $\lfloor\log_2{N_t \choose N_{a}}\rfloor$
information bits. Each active LED emits an $M$-ary intensity modulation
symbol $I \in {\mathbb M}$, where ${\mathbb M}$ is the set of intensity levels given by
\cite{vlc5}
\begin{equation}
{I_m}=\frac{2I_pm}{M+1}, \quad m = 1,2,\cdots,M,
\label{intensities}
\end{equation}
where $M\triangleq |{\mathbb M}|$ and $I_p$ is the mean optical power emitted.
Therefore, the total number
of bits conveyed in a channel use in GSM is given by
\begin{equation}
\eta_{gsm}=\left\lfloor\log_2{N_t \choose N_{a}}\right\rfloor+N_{a}\left\lfloor\log_2M\right\rfloor \quad \mbox{bpcu}.
\label{eta}
\end{equation}
Let ${\mathbb S}_{N_t,{\mathbb M}}^{N_{a}}$ denote the GSM signal set, which is the set of all possible
GSM signal vectors that can be transmitted. Out of the $N_t\choose N_{a}$
possible LED activation patterns\footnote{LED activation pattern is a
$N_a$-tuple of the indices of the active LEDs in any given channel use.},
only $2^{\lfloor \log_2{N_t\choose N_{a}}\rfloor}$ activation patterns are
needed for signaling.
{\em Example 1:} Let $N_t=4$ and $N_a=2$. In this configuration, the number
of bits that can be conveyed through the LED activation pattern is
$\lfloor\log_2{4 \choose 2}\rfloor$ = 2 bits. Let the number of intensity
levels be $M = 2$, where $I_1=\frac{2}{3}$ and $I_2=\frac{4}{3}$.
This means that one bit on each of the active LED is sent through intensity
modulation. Therefore, the overall transmission efficiency is 4 bpcu.
In each channel use, four bits from the incoming bit stream are transmitted.
Of the four transmitted bits, the first two correspond to the LED activation
pattern and the next two bits correspond to the intensity levels of the
active LEDs. This GSM scheme is illustrated in Fig. \ref{GSM}, where the
first two bits `01' choose the active LEDs pair $(1,3)$ and the second two
bits `10' choose the intensity levels $(I_2,I_1)$, where LED 1 emits
intensity $I_2$, LED 3 emits intensity $I_1$, and the other LEDs remain
inactive (OFF). In this example, we require only 4 activation patterns out
of ${4\choose 2}=6$ possible activation patterns. So the GSM signal set for
this example can be chosen as follows:
{\small
\begin{eqnarray}
\hspace{-0mm}
{\mathbb S}_{4,2}^2
\hspace{-3mm}&=&\hspace{-3mm}\left\{
\begin{bmatrix} \frac{2}{3} \\[0.5em] \frac{2}{3} \\[0.5em] 0 \\ 0\end{bmatrix},
\begin{bmatrix} \frac{2}{3} \\[0.5em] \frac{4}{3} \\[0.5em] 0 \\ 0\end{bmatrix},
\begin{bmatrix} \frac{4}{3} \\[0.5em] \frac{2}{3} \\[0.5em] 0 \\ 0\end{bmatrix},
\begin{bmatrix} \frac{4}{3} \\[0.5em] \frac{4}{3} \\[0.5em] 0 \\ 0\end{bmatrix},
\begin{bmatrix} \frac{2}{3} \\[0.5em] 0 \\ \frac{2}{3} \\[0.5em] 0\end{bmatrix},
\begin{bmatrix} \frac{2}{3} \\[0.5em] 0 \\ \frac{4}{3} \\[0.5em] 0\end{bmatrix},
\begin{bmatrix} \frac{4}{3} \\[0.5em] 0 \\ \frac{2}{3} \\[0.5em] 0\end{bmatrix},
\begin{bmatrix} \frac{4}{3} \\[0.5em] 0 \\ \frac{4}{3} \\[0.5em] 0\end{bmatrix}, \right.
\nonumber \\ & & \left. \hspace{-1mm}
\begin{bmatrix} 0 \\[0.5em] \frac{2}{3} \\ 0\\ \frac{2}{3}\\[0.5em]\end{bmatrix},
\begin{bmatrix} 0 \\[0.5em] \frac{2}{3} \\ 0\\ \frac{4}{3}\\[0.5em]\end{bmatrix},
\begin{bmatrix} 0 \\[0.5em] \frac{4}{3} \\ 0\\ \frac{2}{3}\\[0.5em]\end{bmatrix},
\begin{bmatrix} 0 \\[0.5em] \frac{4}{3} \\ 0\\ \frac{4}{3}\\[0.5em]\end{bmatrix},
\begin{bmatrix} 0\\ 0 \\[0.5em] \frac{2}{3} \\[0.5em] \frac{2}{3}\end{bmatrix},
\begin{bmatrix} 0\\ 0 \\[0.5em] \frac{2}{3} \\[0.5em] \frac{4}{3}\end{bmatrix},
\begin{bmatrix} 0\\ 0 \\[0.5em] \frac{4}{3} \\[0.5em] \frac{2}{3}\end{bmatrix},
\begin{bmatrix} 0\\ 0 \\[0.5em] \frac{4}{3} \\[0.5em] \frac{4}{3}\end{bmatrix}
\right \}. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.9in]{figure3.eps}
\caption{GSM transmitter for VLC system with $N_t=4, N_a=2, M=2$.}
\label{GSM}
\vspace{-2mm}
\end{figure}
{\em Example 2:} Let $N_t=7$ and $N_a=2$. To achieve a transmission
efficiency of 8 bpcu, we need four intensity levels $I_m=\frac{2I_pm}{5}$,
$m = 1,2,3,4$. In this case, we need only 16 activation patterns out of
${7 \choose 2}=21$ possible activation patterns. The choice of these
activation patterns will determine the performance of the GSM system,
since choosing a particular activation pattern can alter the minimum
Euclidean distance between any two GSM signal vectors ${\bf x}_1$ and
${\bf x}_2$ for a given ${\bf H}$, which is given by
\begin{equation}
d_{min,{\bf H}} \triangleq\min_{{{\bf x} _1} ,{{\bf x} _2}\in {\mathbb S}_{N_t,{\mathbb M}}^{N_{a}} } \ \|{\bf H}({{\bf x} _2}-{{\bf x} _1})\|^2 .
\label{dmin}
\end{equation}
Similarly, the average Euclidean distance between any two
vectors ${\bf x}_1$ and ${\bf x}_2$ for a given ${\bf H}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
d_{avg,{\bf H}}=\frac{1}{{|{\mathbb S}_{N_t,{\mathbb M}}^{N_{a}}| \choose 2}}\sum_{{{\bf x} _1} ,{{\bf x} _2}\in {\mathbb S}_{N_t,{\mathbb M}}^{N_{a}} }\big \|{\bf H}({{\bf x} _2}-{{\bf x} _1})\big \|^2 .
\label{davg}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection*{Optimum placement of LEDs in a square grid}
\label{opt_place}
Since $d_{min,{\bf H}}$ in (\ref{dmin}) and $d_{avg,{\bf H}}$ in (\ref{davg})
influence the link performance, we use them as the metrics based on which
the optimum placement of LEDs is chosen. Specifically, we choose the
placement of the LEDs at the transmitter such that the $d_{min,{\bf H}}$ and
$d_{avg,{\bf H}}$ of the placement are maximized over all possible placements,
as follows. We first choose the placement(s) for which the $d_{min,{\bf H}}$
is maximum. For placement of LEDs in a $p\times q$ grid, we enumerate
all possible LED placements in the grid and compute the $d_{min,{\bf H}}$ in
(\ref{dmin}) for all these placements and choose the one with the
maximum $d_{min,{\bf H}}$. If there are multiple placements for which
$d_{min,{\bf H}}$ is maximum, we then compute $d_{avg,{\bf H}}$ as per
(\ref{davg}) for these placements and
choose the one with the maximum
$d_{avg,{\bf H}}$. For example, for the system parameters specified in Table
\ref{tab1} and a required transmission efficiency of 8 bpcu (using
$N_t=4, N_a=2, M=8$), the best placement of $N_t=4$ LEDs in a $4\times 4$
grid that maximizes $d_{min,{\bf H}}$ and $d_{avg,{\bf H}}$ is shown in Fig.
\ref{placements}(a). Likewise, the best LED placements for systems with
($N_t=6, N_a=2, M=2$, 5 bpcu),
($N_t=7, N_a=2, M=4$, 8 bpcu),
($N_t=7, N_a=3, M=2$, 8 bpcu), and
($N_t=12, N_a=2, M=2$, 8 bpcu) in
a $4\times 4$ grid are as shown in Figs. \ref{placements}(b),(c),(d),(e),
respectively.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|l||l|l|}
\hline
& Length $(X)$ & 5m \\ \cline{2-3}
Room & Width ($Y$) & 5m \\ \cline{2-3}
& Height ($Z$) & 3.5m \\ \hline \hline
& Height from the floor & 3m \\ \cline{2-3}
& Elevation & $-90\degree$ \\ \cline{2-3}
Transmitter & Azimuth & $0\degree$ \\ \cline{2-3}
& $\Phi_{1/2}$ & $60\degree$ \\ \cline{2-3}
& Mode number, $n$ & 1 \\ \cline{2-3}
& $d_{tx}$ & 0.6m \\ \hline \hline
& Height from the floor & 0.8m\\ \cline{2-3}
& Elevation & $90\degree$ \\ \cline{2-3}
Receiver & Azimuth & $0\degree$ \\ \cline{2-3}
& Responsivity, $r$ & 0.75 Ampere/Watt \\ \cline{2-3}
& FOV & $85\degree$ \\ \cline{2-3}
& $d_{rx}$ & 0.1m \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{2mm}
\caption{\label{tab1} System parameters in the considered indoor VLC system.}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.75in]{figure6_3.eps}
\caption{Optimum placement of LEDs for GSM in a $4\times 4$ grid. $\times$
indicates the presence of an LED and $\circ$ indicates the absence of LED.}
\label{placements}
\vspace{-2mm}
\end{figure}
\section{Performance analysis of GSM in VLC}
\label{sec4}
In this section, we derive an upper bound on the bit error rate (BER)
of ML detection for GSM in indoor VLC systems.
The ML detection rule for GSM in the VLC system model described in the
previous section is given by
\begin{equation}
\hat{{\bf x}} =\mathop{\text{argmin}}_{{\bf x} \in {\mathbb S}_{N_t,{\mathbb M}}^{N_{a}}} \ \|{\bf y}-r{\bf H}{\bf x}\|^2.
\label{hatx}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Upper bound on BER}
\label{subsec4a}
Consider the system model in (\ref{sysmodel}). Normalizing the elements
of the noise vector to unit variance, the received vector in (\ref{sysmodel})
becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bf y} = \frac{r}{\sigma}{\bf H}{\bf x} +{\bf n},
\label{rec}
\end{eqnarray}
and the ML detection rule in (\ref{hatx}) can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\hat{{\bf x}} =\mathop{\text{argmin}}_{{\bf x} \in {\mathbb S}_{N_t,{\mathbb M}}^{N_{a}}}\ \big(\frac{r}{\sigma}\|{\bf H}{\bf x}\|^2-2{\bf y} ^T{\bf H}{\bf x}\big).
\label{xhat}
\end{equation}
Assuming that the channel matrix ${\bf H}$ is known at the receiver, the
pairwise error probability (PEP) -- probability that the receiver decides
in favor of the signal vector ${\bf x} _2$ when ${\bf x} _1$ was transmitted --
can be written as
\vspace{-3mm}
{\small
\begin{eqnarray}
\hspace{-6mm}PEP_{gsm} &\hspace{-3mm}=&\hspace{-2mm}PEP({{\bf x} _1} \rightarrow {{\bf x}_2}|{\bf H}) \nonumber\\
&\hspace{-3mm}=&\hspace{-2mm}P\bigg ({\bf y} ^T{\bf H}({{\bf x} _2}-{{\bf x} _1})> \frac{r}{2\sigma }\big (\|{\bf H}{{\bf x} _2}\|^2 - \|{\bf H}{{\bf x} _1}\|^2\big )\bigg) \nonumber \\
&\hspace{-3mm}=&\hspace{-2mm}P\bigg (\frac{2\sigma}{r}{\bf n}^T{\bf H}({\bf x}_2 -{\bf x}_1)>\|{\bf H}({\bf x}_2 -{\bf x}_1 )\|^2\bigg).
\label{PEP1}
\end{eqnarray}
}
\vspace{-2mm}
\hspace{-5mm}
Define $z\triangleq\frac{2\sigma}{r}{\bf n}^T{\bf H}({\bf x}_2 -{\bf x}_1)$. We can see
that $z$ is a Gaussian r.v. with mean ${\mathbb E} (z)=0$ and variance
$\mbox{Var}(z)=\frac{4\sigma^2}{r^2}\|{\bf H}({{\bf x} _2}-{{\bf x} _1})\|^2$.
Therefore, (\ref{PEP1}) can be written as
\begin{equation}
PEP_{gsm}=Q\bigg (\frac{r}{2\sigma}\|{\bf H}({{\bf x} _2}-{{\bf x} _1})\|\bigg).
\label{PEPQ}
\end{equation}
Define $\mathcal{A}\triangleq|{\mathbb S}_{N_t,{\mathbb M}}^{N_{a}}|$. An upper bound on the BER for ML
detection can be obtained using union bound as
{\small
\begin{eqnarray}
BER_{gsm} &\hspace{-2mm}\leq&\hspace{-2mm}
\frac{1}{\mathcal{A}\eta_{gsm}}\sum_{i=1}^{\mathcal{A}}\sum_{j=1,i\neq j}^{\mathcal{A}} d_{H}({{\bf x} _i},{{\bf x} _j}) PEP({{\bf x} _i}\rightarrow {{\bf x} _j}|{\bf H}) \nonumber \\
&\hspace{-25mm}=&\hspace{-13mm}\frac{1}{\mathcal{A}\eta_{gsm}}\sum_{i=1}^{\mathcal{A}}\sum_{j=1,i\neq j}^{\mathcal{A}}\hspace{-1mm} d_{H}({{\bf x} _i},{{\bf x} _j}) Q\bigg (\frac{r}{2\sigma}\|{\bf H}({{\bf x}_j}-{{\bf x}_i})\|\bigg),
\label{BER1}
\end{eqnarray}
}
\hspace{-3.5mm}
where ${d_{H}({{\bf x} _i},{{\bf x} _j})}$ is the Hamming distance between the
bit mappings corresponding to the signal vectors ${\bf x} _i$ and ${\bf x} _j$.
Similar BER upper bounds for other MIMO modulation schemes like SMP and SM
have been derived in \cite{vlc5},\cite{vlc6}. We will see in the numerical
results section next (Sec. \ref{subsec4b}) that the BER upper bound for GSM
in (\ref{BER1}) is tight at moderate to high SNRs.
\subsection{Numerical results}
\label{subsec4b}
In this section, we present numerical results which illustrate the
tightness of the analytical bound in comparison with the simulated BER
under different system parameter settings. The VLC system parameters
considered are listed in Table \ref{tab1}. We fix the number of photo
detectors at the receiver to be $N_r=4$ throughout.
\subsubsection{Comparison of upper bound and simulated BER}
\label{subsubsec4b1}
In Fig. \ref{ubs}, we plot the simulated BER along with the upper bound
in (\ref{BER1}) for GSM with ML detection in VLC systems with $i)$ $N_t=6$,
$N_a=2$, $M=2$, $\eta=5$ bpcu, and $ii)$ $N_t=7$, $N_a=2$, $M=4$,
$\eta=8$ bpcu. The placement of LEDs for these two configurations is
done over a $4\times4$ grid as depicted in Figs. \ref{placements}(b),(c),
respectively. From the BER plots in Fig. \ref{ubs}, it can be seen that
the derived upper bound on BER is very tight at moderate to high SNRs,
thus validating the analysis.
\subsubsection{Comparison of different GSM configurations for fixed $\eta$}
\label{subsubsec4b2}
Here, we compare the BER performance of four different GSM configurations,
all having the same transmission efficiency of 8 bpcu. These configurations
are: System-1 with $N_t=4, N_a=2, M=8$,
System-2 with $N_t=7, N_a=2, M=4$,
System-3 with $N_t=7, N_a=3, M=2$, and
System-4 with $N_t=12, N_a=2, M=2$.
The placement of LEDs for these configurations is done over a $4\times4$
grid as depicted in Figs. \ref{placements}(a),(c),(d),(e), respectively.
The simulated BER as well as the analytical upper bound on the BER for
these four configurations are plotted in Fig. \ref{diffNt}. From Fig.
\ref{diffNt}, it can be seen that System-$2$ configuration achieves the
best BER performance among all the four systems considered, and System-3
achieves the next best performance. The performance of System-1 and
System-4 are quite poor, particularly at high SNRs. The reason for this
relative performance behavior can be attributed to the fact that System-2
has the largest $d_{min,{\bf H}}$ and $d_{avg,{\bf H}}$ values, and that Systems-1
and System-4 have lower $d_{min,{\bf H}}$ and $d_{avg,{\bf H}}$ values, which are
illustrated
in Table \ref{tab2}. Also, note that System-2 and System-3 have equal
number of LEDs. But System-3 sees more interference due to higher number
of active LEDs, and this results in the poor performance of System-3
compared to that of System-2, despite System-3 having a lower-order
modulation alphabet ($M$). In System-4, the average distance between
the active LEDs is smaller, and, hence, the channel correlation is higher.
This results in the poor performance of System-4. System-1 has the
poorest performance because of the modulation order $M$ is the highest
compared to other systems, and it has the smallest $d_{min,{\bf H}}$ and
$d_{avg,{\bf H}}$ values. The plots in Fig. \ref{diffNt} also show that the
bound is very tight at moderate to high SNRs.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{gsm_upperb_1.eps}
\caption{Comparison of analytical upper bound and simulated BER
for GSM with ML detection in VLC systems with $i)$ $N_t=6, N_a=2, M=2$,
$\eta=5$ bpcu, and $ii)$ $N_t=7, N_a=2, M=4$, $\eta=8$ bpcu. $N_r=4$.}
\vspace{-2mm}
\label{ubs}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
System & GSM configuration & $d_{min,{\bf H}}$ & $d_{avg,{\bf H}}$\\\hline\hline
{\scriptsize 1} & {\scriptsize $N_t=4, N_a=2, M=8$} & {\scriptsize $4.623\times10^{-17}$ \hspace{-2mm}} & {\scriptsize $4.520\times10^{-11}$ \hspace{-2mm}} \\ \hline
{\scriptsize 2} & {\scriptsize $N_t=7, N_a=2, M=4$} & {\scriptsize $1.977\times10^{-14}$ \hspace{-2mm}} & {\scriptsize $6.601\times10^{-11}$ \hspace{-2mm}} \\ \hline
{\scriptsize 3} & {\scriptsize $N_t=7, N_a=3, M=2$} & {\scriptsize $1.541\times10^{-14}$ \hspace{-2mm}} & {\scriptsize $6.003\times10^{-11}$ \hspace{-2mm}} \\ \hline
{\scriptsize 4} & {\scriptsize $N_t=12, N_a=2, M=2$} & {\scriptsize $1.346\times10^{-16}$ \hspace{-2mm}} & {\scriptsize $4.842\times10^{-11}$ \hspace{-2mm}} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{2mm}
\caption{\label{tab2} Values of $d_{min,{\bf H}}$, $d_{avg,{\bf H}}$ for different
GSM configurations with $\eta=8$ bpcu.}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{gsm_8bpcu_06m.eps}
\caption{Comparison of the BER performance of different configurations of
GSM with $\eta=8$ bpcu. $N_r=4$.}
\label{diffNt}
\vspace{-2mm}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Performance of GSM for varying $d_{tx}$}
Here, we present the BER performance of GSM in VLC as a function of the
spacing between the LEDs ($d_{tx}$) by fixing other system
parameters.
Figure \ref{dtx} presents the BER performance of GSM as a
function of $d_{tx}$ in VLC with $N_t=4, N_a=2, M=8, \eta=8$ bpcu,
for different values of SNR = 75 dB, 60 dB, 40 dB. It can be observed
from Fig. \ref{dtx} that there is an optimum $d_{tx}$ spacing which
achieves the best BER performance; below and above this optimum $d_{tx}$
spacing, the BER performance gets worse. The optimum $d_{tx}$ is found to
be 1m in Fig. \ref{dtx}. This optimum spacing can be explained as follows.
On the one hand, the channel gains get weaker as $d_{tx}$ increases. This
reduces the signal level received at the receiver, which is a source of
performance degradation. On the other hand, the channel correlation also
gets weaker as $d_{tx}$ is increased. This reduced channel correlation is
a source of performance improvement. These opposing effects of weak channel
gains and weak channel correlations for increasing $d_{tx}$ leads to an
optimum spacing.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{new_fig8a.eps}
\caption{BER performance of GSM as a function of $d_{tx}$ in VLC with
$N_t=4, N_a=2, M=8, \eta=8$ bpcu, $N_r=4$, for different values of
SNR = 75 dB, 60 dB, 40 dB.}
\label{dtx}
\vspace{-2mm}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Performance of GSM for varying $\Phi_{1/2}$}
\label{subsubsec4b4}
Here, we present the effect of varying the half-power semiangle
($\Phi_{1/2}$) on the BER performance of GSM in VLC. In Fig. \ref{Phi},
we present the BER as a function of $\Phi_{1/2}$ in a VLC system
$N_t=4, N_a=2, M=16, \eta=10$ bpcu, and $FOV=45\degree$. BER versus
$\Phi_{1/2}$ plots for SNR = 45 dB, 60 dB are shown. It can
be observed that the BER performance is good for small half-power
semiangles, and it degrades as the half-power semiangle is increased.
This is because, fixing all
other system parameters as such and decreasing $\Phi_{1/2}$ increases
the mode number, and hence the channel gain. This increased channel gain
for decreasing $\Phi_{1/2}$ is one reason for improved BER at small
$\Phi_{1/2}$. Another reason is that the channel correlation decreases
as $\Phi_{1/2}$ decreases. This decreased channel correlation also
leads to improved performance at small $\Phi_{1/2}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{new_fig9c.eps}
\caption{BER performance of GSM as a function of $\Phi_{1/2}$ in VLC
with $N_t=4, N_a=2, M=16, \eta=10$ bpcu, $N_r=4$, $FOV=45\degree$.}
\label{Phi}
\vspace{-2mm}
\end{figure}
\section{Performance comparison of GSM with other MIMO schemes in VLC}
\label{sec5}
In this section, we compare the performance of GSM with those of other
MIMO schemes including SMP, SSK, GSSK, and SM, for the same transmission
efficiency. In all cases, optimum placement of LEDs in a $4\times 4$ grid
is done based on maximizing $d_{min,{\bf H}}$ and $d_{avg,{\bf H}}$, as described
in Sec. \ref{opt_place}.
In Fig. \ref{4bpcu}, we present the BER performance of SMP, SSK, GSSK, SM,
and GSM, all having a transmission efficiency of $\eta=4$ bpcu. A GSM
system with $N_t=6, N_a=2, M=2$ which uses only 4 activation patterns
chosen out of ${6\choose 2}=15$ activation patterns and gives 4 bpcu is
considered. The optimum placement of LEDs for this GSM system is as shown
in Fig. \ref{new_place}(a). The other MIMO schemes with 4 bpcu transmission
efficiency considered for comparison are:
$i)$ SMP: $N_t=4, N_a=4, M=2$, LEDs placement as in Fig. \ref{placements}(a),
$ii)$ SSK: $N_t=16, N_a=1, M=1$, LEDs placement as in Fig. \ref{place}(c),
i.e., one LED on each of the grid point,
$iii)$ GSSK: $N_t=7, N_a=2, M=1$, LEDs placement as in Fig. \ref{new_place}(b),
and $iv)$ SM: $N_t=4, N_a=1, M=4$, LEDs placement as in \ref{placements}(a).
From Fig. \ref{4bpcu}, it can be seen that SM outperforms SMP, which is
due to spatial interference in SMP. It is also observed that SM performs
better than SSK and GSSK. This is because SSK has more LEDs and hence the
$d_{min,{\bf H}}$ and $d_{avg,{\bf H}}$ in SSK are smaller than those in SM. Also,
in GSSK,
2 LEDs are activated simultaneously leading to spatial interference, and
this makes GSSK to perform poorer than SM. Both SSK and GSSK perform better
than SMP, due to the dominance of spatial interference in SMP. It is further
observed that GSM performs almost the same as SM, with marginally inferior
performance at low SNRs (because of the effect of spatial interference in
GSM) and marginally better performance at high SNRs (because of better
$d_{min,{\bf H}}$ and $d_{avg,{\bf H}}$ in GSM).
The performance advantage of GSM over SM at high SNRs is substantial at
8 bpcu transmission efficiency (about 10 dB advantage at $10^{-5}$ BER),
which is illustrated in Fig. \ref{8bpcu}. Figure \ref{8bpcu} compares
the performance of the following systems, all having 8 bpcu efficiency:
$i)$ SMP: {\small $N_t=4, N_a=4, M=4$}, LEDs placement as in
\ref{placements}(a),
$ii)$ GSSK: {\small $N_t=13, N_a=3, M=1$}, LEDs placement as in
\ref{new_place}(c),
$iii)$ SM: {\small $N_t=16, N_a=1, M=16$}, LEDs placement as in
\ref{place}(c), and
$iv)$ GSM: {\small $N_t=7, N_a=2, M=4$}, LEDs placement as in
\ref{placements}(c).
From Fig. \ref{8bpcu}, it is observed that GSM achieves the best
performance among the considered schemes at moderate to high SNRs
(better by about 10 dB compared to SM, and by about 25 dB compared to
GSSK and SMP at $10^{-5}$ BER). The reason for this is as explained
in the performance comparison in Fig. \ref{4bpcu}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.4in]{figure7.eps}
\caption{Optimum placement of LEDs in a $4\times 4$ grid. $\times$ indicates
the presence of an LED and $\circ$ indicates of absence of LED.}
\label{new_place}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.55in]{4bpcu.eps}
\caption{Comparison of the BER performance of SMP, SSK, GSSK, SM and GSM
in VLC at $\eta=4$ bpcu. $N_r=4$.}
\label{4bpcu}
\vspace{-2mm}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.55in]{8bpcu.eps}
\caption{Comparison of the BER performance of SMP, GSSK, SM, and GSM in
VLC at $\eta=8$ bpcu. $N_r=4$.}
\label{8bpcu}
\vspace{-2mm}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{10bpcu_1.eps}
\caption{Comparison of the BER performance of SM and GSM in VLC at
$\eta=10$ bpcu, $\Phi_{1/2}=15\degree$, $FOV=45\degree$, $N_r=4$.}
\label{10bpcu}
\vspace{-2mm}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{10bpcu}, we compare the BER performance of SM and GSM in VLC,
both having the same $\eta=10$ bpcu, $\Phi_{1/2}=15\degree$, and
$FOV=45\degree$. The SM and GSM system parameters are: $i)$ SM:
{\small $N_t=4, N_a=1, M=256$}, and $ii)$ GSM:
{\small $N_t=4, N_a=2, M=16$}. The placement
of LEDs in both cases is as in Fig. \ref{placements}(a). It is observed
that GSM significantly outperforms SM (by
about 25 dB at $10^{-5}$ BER). This performance advantage of
GSM over SM can be attributed to the following reasons. The channel matrix
becomes less correlated for $\Phi_{1/2}=15\degree$, which results in less
spatial interference in GSM. Despite the presence of multiple active LEDs
($N_a=2$) and hence spatial interference in GSM, to achieve 10 bpcu
transmission efficiency, GSM requires a much smaller-sized modulation
alphabet $(M=16)$ compared to that required in SM $(M=256)$. The better
power efficiency in a smaller-sized modulation alphabet compared to a
larger-sized alphabet dominates compared to the degrading effect of
spatial interference due to $N_a=2$, making GSM to outperform SM.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec6}
We investigated the performance of GSM, an attractive MIMO transmission
scheme, in the context of indoor wireless VLC. More than one among the
available LEDs are activated simultaneously in a channel use, and the
indices of the active LEDs also conveyed information bits in addition
to the information bits conveyed by the intensity modulation alphabet.
To our knowledge, such a study of GSM in VLC has not been reported before.
We derived an analytical upper bound on the BER of GSM with ML
detection in VLC. The derived bound was shown to be very tight at
moderate to high SNRs. The channel gains and channel correlations
influenced the GSM performance such that the best BER is achieved at
an optimum LED spacing. Also, the GSM performance in VLC improved
as the half-power semi-angle of the LEDs is decreased.
We compared the BER performance of GSM with those of other MIMO
schemes including SMP, SSK, GSSK and SM. Analysis and simulation
results revealed favorable performance for GSM compared to other
MIMO schemes.
|
\section{Introduction and generalities.}
\subsection{Introduction.}
Blumberg, Gepner, and Tabuada studied the algebraic K-theory of spectra by defining the algebraic K-theory of stable $\infty$-categories, taking values in spectra. Barwick in \cite{barwick14} showed that there is an alternative definition of algebraic K-theory, sufficiently generalizing the ordinary algebraic K-theory of exact categories, which took values in complete Segal spaces.
In this paper, we prove that a slight variant of Barwick's construction (which we will also call `Barwick's construction') takes values in stable $\infty$-categories. Our goal in this paper is to make precise the following maxim: there is a variant of Barwick's Q-construction, called $\cJ$-theory, which is an inherently stable algebraic invariant of $\infty$-categories, that ''dimensionwise'' takes values in stable $\infty$-categories.
We will first show that the above maxim must be true in the context of stable $\infty$-categories. We then study the $\cJ$-theory of an $\infty$-category of module objects in a symmetric monoidal stable $\infty$-category. Using the results, we show that there is an analogue of the derived Morita theory of (flat) rings for $\cJ$-theory.
$\co^\otimes$ is used to denote a coherent $\infty$-operad unless mentioned otherwise.
If $\co^\otimes$ is a coherent $\infty$-operad and $A$ is an $\co$-algebra object of $\cc^\otimes$, then $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)^\otimes$ is the $\infty$-operad of $\co$-modules over $A$ and $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)$ is the underlying $\infty$-category of $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)^\otimes$.
We assume the axiom of choice. A ``category'' is not always an $\infty$-category (however, we identify a category $\cc$ with the nerve $\mathrm{N}(\cc)$).
\section{Foundational aspects of $\cJ$-theory.}
Let $\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)$ denote the twisted arrow $\infty$-category of $\Delta^n$. One can use $\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)$ to extend the definition of an ambigressive pullback/pushout to that of a semi-ambigressive functor.
Let $\cc$ be an exact $\infty$-category. A functor $\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)\to\cc$ (resp. $\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)^\mathrm{op}\to\cc$) is said to be semi-ambigressive if it takes pushout and pullback squares in $\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)$ (resp. $\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)^\mathrm{op}$) to ambigressive pushouts and ambigressive pullbacks, respectively. We denote by $\overline{\mathrm{Fun}(\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n),\cc)}$ the subcategory of the $\infty$-category $\mathrm{Fun}(\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n),\cc)$ of functors from $\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)$ to $\cc$ spanned by the semi-ambigressive functors. Let $\cJ(\cc)_n$ denote $\overline{\mathrm{Fun}(\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)^\mathrm{op},\cc)}$.
Since the maxim in the introduction mentioned that $\cJ$-theory is stable in each dimension, we will be focusing on $\cJ(\cc)_n$ instead of the bisimplicial set $\cJ(\cc)_\bullet$. We begin by noting an obvious lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{important}
Let $\cc$ be a stable $\infty$-category. Then $\cJ(\cc)_n$ and $\overline{\mathrm{Fun}(\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n),\cc)}$ are $\infty$-categories for all $n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We will prove the statement for $\overline{\mathrm{Fun}(\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n),\cc)}$; the statement for $\cJ(\cc)_n$ is entirely analogous because $\mathrm{Cat}^\mathrm{Ex}_\infty$ is closed under the op-involution. A semi-ambigressive functor $\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)\to\cc$ is, for $\cc$ a stable $\infty$-category equipped with the canonical $t$-structure, a functor which preserves finite limits, i.e., a left exact functor $\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)\to\cc$.
\end{proof}
This is more general than the ordinary Barwick-Quillen Q-construction, which uses \textit{ambigressive functors}, not semi-ambigressive ones. However, Lemma \ref{important} shows that using semi-ambigressive functors is advantageous in that it allows higher categorical objects to be taken to higher categorical objects themselves. This will be manifest in Theorem \ref{stable}.
\subsection{$\cJ$-theory and stable $\infty$-categories.}
Our main result is the following.
\begin{theorem}[{Stability Theorem}]\label{stable}
Let $\cc$ be a stable $\infty$-category. Then $\cJ(\cc)_n$ is a stable $\infty$-category for all $n$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\cc$ be a stable $\infty$-category. The $\infty$-category $\cJ(\cc)_n\simeq\overline{\mathrm{Fun}(\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)^{op},\cc)}$ is equivalent to $\overline{\mathrm{Fun}(\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n),\cc^{op})}$. Fix a simplicial set $\mathbf{K}$ with only finitely many nondegenerate simplices, and an arbitrary map $p:\mathbf{K}\to\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)$. Let $X_n$ be the subcategory of $\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)$ such that the map $p|_{X_n}$ is the initial object in the $\infty$-category of maps $p|_{\co}$ for subcategories $\co$ of $\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)$, so that the colimit of $p:\mathbf{K}\to\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)$ factors as $\overline{p}:\mathbf{K}^\vartriangleleft\to X_n\hookrightarrow\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n)$, and let $\cd$ be the subcategory of $\cc^{op}$ such that the map $p|_{\cd}$ is the initial object in the $\infty$-category of maps $p|_{\cc^\prime}$ for subcategories $\cc^\prime$ of $\cc^{op}$, so that the colimit of $p:\mathbf{K}\to\cc^{op}$ factors as $\overline{p}:\mathbf{K}^\vartriangleleft\to \cd\hookrightarrow\cc^{op}$. Then $\mathrm{Fun}^\mathrm{finlim}(X_n,\cd)\simeq\overline{\mathrm{Fun}(\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n),\cc^{op})}$. Now, $\cd$ must be stable by construction, so it suffices to prove that $\mathrm{Fun}^\mathrm{finlim}(X_n,\cd)$ is a stable subcategory of $\mathrm{Fun}(X_n,\cd)$. This is clearly true since $\mathrm{Fun}^\mathrm{finlim}(X_n,\cd)$ is closed under cofibers and translations (by pointwise evaluation).
\end{proof}
It is important to recognize why, instead of using \textit{ambigressive} functors, as defined by Barwick, we are using semi-ambigressive functors. A mild variant of the proof of Theorem \ref{stable} can be used to show that when using ambigressive functors, each Kan complex $\mathrm{Fun}^{ambi}(\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n )^\mathrm{op},\cc)$ of ambigressive functors from $\widetilde{{\mathcal O}}(\Delta^n )^\mathrm{op}$ to $\cc$ is also a stable $\infty$-category. Since this is a Kan complex with a zero object, it is contractible. This illustrates the need for working with semi-ambigressive functors.
In the following sections, we will prove some important properties on the multiplicative structure of $\cJ$-theory on modules. In particular, we will prove that it preserves module structure; this is an analogue of the main result of \cite{elmenmandell}, and is an example of the fact that our modified definition of Barwick's construction is related to ordinary K-theory. As a consequence, we prove that $\cJ$-theory is a homotopy coherent version of derived Morita theory for flat rings.
\section{$\cJ$-theory and multiplicative structures on objects of $\infty$-categories.}
\subsection{The $\cJ$-theory of $\infty$-categories of modules.}\label{algmodules}
One essential property of the $\cJ$-theory of (bi)permutative categories is the following statement proved in \cite{elmenmandell}: if $\cd$ is a bipermutative category and $\cc$ is a $\cd$-module ($\cc$ is then a permutative category), then $K(\cc)$ is a $K(\cd)$-module. Using the theory of $\infty$-operads developed by Lurie in \cite{higheralgebra}, we will prove the following generalization of this result.
\begin{theorem}[``Multiplicativity'' Theorem]\label{maincalc}
Let $\cc$ be a symmetric monoidal stable $\infty$-category. Then there is an equivalence of $\infty$-categories $\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n\simeq{\mathbf{Mod}^\co_{A}(\cJ(\cc)_n)}$. Here we have abused notation by writing $A$ for its image under the functor $\cJ(\bullet)_n$.
\end{theorem}
We will prove this theorem in this section. We will first begin with a few remarks about Theorem \ref{maincalc}.
First, Theorem \ref{stable} provides some evidence for Theorem \ref{maincalc}. To see this, recall that the $\infty$-category $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)$ is stable if $\cc$ is itself a stable $\infty$-category. Theorem \ref{stable} proved the stability of $\cJ(\cc)_n$; therefore ${\mathbf{Mod}^\co_{A}(\cJ(\cc)_n)}$ is stable. If $\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n$ was not stable, then Theorem \ref{maincalc} would be inconsistent with Theorem \ref{stable} (if $\cc\simeq\cd$ are $\infty$-categories and $\cc$ is stable, then $\cd$ must be stable). However, since $\cc$ is stable, $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)$ is as well, and therefore $\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n$ is stable.
Second, Theorem \ref{maincalc} in some sense complements the results of \cite{barwickmult}. This is because in \cite{barwickmult}, $\cJ$-theory is shown to be multiplicative for $\co$-algebra structures on Waldhausen $\infty$-categories. Theorem \ref{maincalc} proves that $\cJ$-theory is multiplicative for $\infty$-categories which are categories of modules over an algebra over an $\infty$-operad.
Third, although Theorem \ref{maincalc} is significant on its own (for the above inexhaustive list of reasons), when combined with the results of \cite{barwickmult}, it makes formal, in a very aesthetically pleasing fashion, one of the main philosophies of $\cJ$-theory: if $\cc$ and $\cd$ are stable $\infty$-categories such that $\mathcal Q}\def\cR{\mathcal R}\def\cS{\mathcal S}\def\cT{\mathcal T(\cc)_n\simeq\mathcal Q}\def\cR{\mathcal R}\def\cS{\mathcal S}\def\cT{\mathcal T(\cd)_n$ for all $n$, then $\cc$ and $\cd$ contain essentially the same algebraic information. In other words, $\cJ$-theory is a purely algebraic invariant, i.e., it only detects algebraic structures without ``obstruction'' from other structures.
Let $\cc^\otimes$ be a symmetric monoidal stable $\infty$-category, and let $\co^\otimes$ be a coherent $\infty$-operad. Let $A$ be an $\co$-algebra object of $\cc^\otimes$. Recall that $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)$ is the underlying $\infty$-category of the $\infty$-operad $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)^\otimes$ of $\co$-modules over $A$. Let $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)^n$ denote the $n$th iterate $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cdots{\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)}\cdots)$ (we have abused notation slightly by using $A$ to denote the same object in $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)$ and $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))$). Induction on \cite[Corollary 3.4.1.9]{higheralgebra} yields the following result.
\begin{lemma}
With the above notation, there is an equivalence of $\infty$-categories between $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)^n$ and $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)$.
\end{lemma}
The following lemma of module objects is used in the proof of Theorem \ref{maincalc}.
\begin{lemma}\label{necessary}
Suppose $\cc$ is a symmetric monoidal stable $\infty$-category and let $\cd$ be a stable $\infty$-category. Then any functor $f:\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n\to\cd$ can be split into a composition $\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n\to \cJ(\cc)_n\to\cd$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
There are two possible cases. $f$ can be the restriction of a map $f^\prime:\cJ(\cc)_n\to\cd$. In this case $f$ is a composition $\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n\hookrightarrow \cJ(\cc)_n\xrightarrow{f^\prime}\cd$. Otherwise, construct the map $f^\prime:\cJ(\cc)_n\to\cd$ as follows. Take any object $\sigma$ of $\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n\subseteq\cJ(\cc)_n$ to $f(\sigma)$ and any object $\sigma^\prime$ of $\cJ(\cc)_n$ not in $\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n$ to some $f^\prime(\sigma)$, $1$-simplices $\sigma\to \sigma^\prime$ of $\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n\subseteq\cJ(\cc)_n$ to $f(\sigma)\to f(\sigma^\prime)$ and other $1$-simplices $\sigma\to \sigma^\prime$ via
\begin{equation*}
f^\prime(\sigma\to\sigma^\prime) = \begin{cases}
f(\sigma)\to f^\prime(\sigma^\prime) & \text{if }\sigma\in \cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n,\sigma^\prime\in \cJ(\cc)_n\\
f^\prime(\sigma)\to f(\sigma^\prime) & \text{if }\sigma\in \cJ(\cc)_n,\sigma^\prime\in \cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n\\
f^\prime(\sigma)\to f^\prime(\sigma^\prime) & \text{else.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
The $1$-simplices $f(\sigma)\to f^\prime(\sigma^\prime)$ and $f^\prime(\sigma)\to f(\sigma^\prime)$ are the compositions $f(\sigma)\to f^\prime(\sigma)\to f^\prime(\sigma^\prime)$ and $f^\prime(\sigma)\to f^\prime(\sigma^\prime)\to f(\sigma^\prime)$, which always exist since for every pair of objects $x$ and $y$ of a stable $\infty$-category (in this case $\cd$), there is always a map from $x$ to $y$ given by $x\to 0\to y$ where $0$ is the zero object.
\end{proof}
This lemma does not necessarily work if $\cd$ is not pointed, since otherwise the maps $f(\sigma)\to f^\prime(\sigma)$ and $f^\prime(\sigma^\prime)\to f(\sigma^\prime)$ need not exist. We can now provide the proof of the multiplicativity theorem.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{maincalc}.]
By contradiction. Assume there is no map ${\mathbf{Mod}^\co_{A}(\cJ(\cc)_n)}\to\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n$ that is an equivalence. There are two possible cases. Suppose $\co^\otimes$ is the trivial $\infty$-operad. Then the contradiction is obvious.
Now suppose that $\co^\otimes$ is a nontrivial $\infty$-operad. Let $\alpha:{\mathbf{Mod}^\co_{A}(\cJ(\cc)_n)}\to \cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n$ be a map of $\infty$-categories. This induces a map $\beta:{\mathbf{Mod}^\co_{A}(\cJ(\cc)_n)}\to \mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n)$. Any map of $\infty$-categories $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)\to\cc$ induces a map $\gamma:\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n)\to{\mathbf{Mod}^\co_{A}(\cJ(\cc)_n)}$. If $A$ is a trivial $\co$-algebra, then the contradiction is obvious. Hence assume that $A$ is a nontrivial $\co$-algebra. Then $\gamma$ is never an equivalence, and there is a natural map of $\infty$-categories from $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n)$ to $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n)$ given by the composition $\beta\circ\gamma$.
By Lemma \ref{necessary} we realize that any map from $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n)$ to itself arises via such a composition. Since $\alpha$ is never an equivalence, the map ${\mathbf{Mod}^\co_{A}(\cJ(\cc)_n)}\xrightarrow{\beta}\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n)$ is never an equivalence. Since $\gamma$ is also not an equivalence, one would therefore expect that there is no map $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n)^\otimes\to\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n)^\otimes$ that is an equivalence. This is a contradiction. Since we have covered all possible cases, there is a map ${\mathbf{Mod}^\co_{A}(\cJ(\cc)_n)}\to \cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n$ that is an equivalence of $\infty$-categories.
\end{proof}
One can see how this generalizes the main results of \cite{elmenmandell} - both say that $\cJ$-theory preserves the structure of modules, but Theorem \ref{maincalc} says that this holds true in a much more general setting. We will devote the rest of this paper to studying the consequences of Theorem \ref{maincalc}.
\subsection{$\cJ$-theory and the derived Morita theory of flat rings.}
In classical representation theory, derived Morita theory compares rings through their derived categories. Many rings are derived Morita equivalent but not isomorphic. In addition, Morita equivalences preserve important properties of rings. It is therefore important and interesting to compare the derived categories of rings:
\begin{theorem}\label{classderivedmorita}
Let $R$ and $S$ be rings and let $\mathbf{X}(R)$ denote the derived category of $R$. The following conditions are equivalent.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\mathbf{X}(R)$ is triangulated equivalent to $\mathbf{X}(S)$.
\item We can find a tilting complex $T$ in $\mathbf{X}(S)$ such that $\mathbf{X}(S)(T,T)$ is equivalent to $R$.
\end{enumerate}
The following condition implies the above two conditions.
\begin{enumerate}
\item There is a $R$-$S$-bimodule such that the derived tensor product gives an equivalence between $\mathbf{X}(R)$ and $\mathbf{X}(S)$.
\end{enumerate}
All three conditions are equivalent if $R$ or $S$ is flat as an abelian group.
\end{theorem}
The defining property of the derived category of a ring $R$ is that it is a triangulated category that arises as the homotopy category of the stable $\infty$-category of modules over $R$. Let us now consider a (seemingly) different object: the homotopy category of the $\cJ$-theory of $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)$ for a symmetric monoidal stable $\infty$-category $\cc^\otimes$. Theorem \ref{stable} implies that this is a triangulated category and Theorem \ref{maincalc} implies that it is the homotopy category of a stable $\infty$-category of modules.
Fix a symmetric monoidal stable $\infty$-category $\cc^\otimes$ and a coherent $\infty$-operad $\co^\otimes$. Fix also a $\co$-algebra object $A$ of $\cc^\otimes$. In order to emphasize the analogy with the ordinary derived category, we will write $\mathbf{X}(A)$ for the homotopy category of $\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n$ and call it the derived category of $A$, suppressing $n$ altogether. This is a triangulated category, and by Theorem \ref{maincalc} it is also the homotopy category of a stable $\infty$-category of modules. The similarities between the derived category of a ring and the $\cJ$-theory of $\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc)$ suggests an analog of Theorem \ref{classderivedmorita} for $\cJ$-theory. In fact, the following result holds true.
\begin{theorem}\label{derivedmorita}
Let $F:\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n\to \cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^{\co^\prime}_{A^\prime}(\cc^\prime))_n$ be a functor between symmetric monoidal stable $\infty$-categories which commutes with the shift functor. Then the following statements are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $F$ is an equivalence of $\infty$-categories.
\item $\mathrm{h}F$ is a triangulated equivalence between $\mathbf{X}(A)$ and $\mathbf{X}(A^\prime)$ that preserves weak equivalences.
\item Denote by $\Omega$ the largest of distinguished triangles in $\mathrm{h}\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n$ satisfying the following condition:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\Gamma_\alpha$ and $\Gamma_\beta$ are in $\Omega$ then $\Gamma_\beta$ cannot be obtained from $\Gamma_\alpha$ (or vice versa) by application of the shift functor or changing the signs of maps.
\end{enumerate}
Then $\mathrm{h}F$ is an equivalence of ordinary categories, which commutes with the shift functor, between $\mathbf{X}(A)$ and $\mathbf{X}(A^\prime)$ which takes $\Omega$ to another collection of distinguished triangles in $\mathrm{h}\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^{\co^\prime}_{A^\prime}(\cc^\prime))_n$.
\end{enumerate}
Then $\mathrm{h}F$ is an equivalence which is an exact functor (in the ordinary sense of the word).
\end{theorem}
Our goal in this section is to prove this result.
Note that in the case when $\co^\otimes$ and ${\co^\otimes}^\prime$ are both simply the trivial $\infty$-operad, $\mathbf{E}_0^\otimes$, Theorem \ref{derivedmorita} can be interpreted as a derived Morita context for $\cJ$-theory. In this sense $\cJ$-theory is a (slightly restrictive) homotopy coherent version of derived Morita theory. More precisely, $\cJ$-theory is a homotopical generalization of the derived Morita context for flat rings.
To proceed towards the proof of Theorem \ref{derivedmorita} we will define the structure of a relative category on $\mathbf{X}(A)$.
Let $X\in\mathbf{X}(A)$. Another object $Y\in\mathbf{X}(A)$ is said to be \textit{weakly equivalent} to $X$ if $Y$ is the free $\mathbf{X}(A)$-object on $X$ with respect to the suspension functor $\mathbf{X}(A)\to\mathbf{X}(A)$.
The collection of weak equivalences is a \textit{set}. We will now state a series of lemmas that we will use in our proof of Theorem \ref{derivedmorita}. We will assume that the set of weak equivalences is nonempty (since otherwise all statements in this section will then be trivial and therefore uninteresting). In particular, the collection of weak equivalences in $\mathbf{X}(A)$ and $\mathbf{X}(A^\prime)$ is required to be a set for the proof of Theorem \ref{derivedmorita} to hold.
\begin{lemma}\label{satrel}
The above set of weak equivalences makes $\mathbf{X}(A)$ into a relative category.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The subcategory of $\mathbf{X}(A)$ spanned by the set of weak equivalences is a wide subcategory of $\mathbf{X}(A)$, so the proof is completed.
\end{proof}
In this section, we will use a weaker notion of triangulated equivalence.
\begin{definition}
Let $\cc$ and $\cd$ be triangulated categories. A functor $\cc\to\cd$ is a triangulated equivalence if it takes distinguished triangles to distinguished triangles
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}\label{triangequiv}
Suppose $\cc$ and $\cd$ are stable $\infty$-categories. Suppose also that there is a functor $F:\cc\to\cd$ that is an equivalence of $\infty$-categories. Then $\mathrm{h}F$ is a triangulated equivalence.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Any map of stable $\infty$-categories induces a map of triangulated categories on the level of homotopy categories. Since any equivalence of $\infty$-categories is stable we realize that the induced functor on the homotopy categories is also exact.
\end{proof}
The following lemma states that distinguished triangles are stable under weak equivalences.
\begin{lemma}\label{dist1}
Let $X\to Y\to Z\to \Sigma X$ be a distinguished triangle in $\mathbf{X}(A)$ and suppose that there exist objects $\widehat{X},\widehat{Y}$ and $\widehat{Z}$ are (respectively) weakly equivalent to $X,Y$ and $Z$. Then there is a triangle $\widehat{X}\to \widehat{Y}\to \widehat{Z}\to \Sigma\widehat{X}$ which is a distinguished triangle which is \textit{unique up to unique isomorphism}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If $\widehat{X}$ is weakly equivalent to $X$, then it is unique up to unique isomorphism. We may canonically choose $\widehat{X}$ to be $X[-1]$, and therefore it suffices to show that the triangle $X[-1]\to Y[-1]\to Z[-1]\to X$ is distinguished. Consider the distinguished triangle $X\to Y\to Z\to \Sigma X$. Then we may construct the induced distinguished triangle $X[-1]\to Y[-1]\to Z[-1]\to X$ after reversing all signs of all the maps. This is isomorphic to the triangle $\widehat{X}\to \widehat{Y}\to \widehat{Z}\to\Sigma\widehat{X}$, and the proof is completed.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{dist2}
Let $X\to Y\to Z\to \Sigma X$ be a distinguished triangle in $\mathbf{X}(A)$ and suppose that there exist objects $\widehat{X},\widehat{Y}$ and $\widehat{Z}$ such that $X,Y$ and $Z$ (respectively) are weakly equivalent to these objects. The induced (distinguished) triangle $\widehat{X}\to \widehat{Y}\to \widehat{Z}\to \Sigma\widehat{X}$ determines the distinguished triangle $X\to Y\to Z\to \Sigma X$ up to weak equivalence.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{derivedmorita}]
The equivalence of the first two statements follows from Lemma \ref{triangequiv}. The third statement is implied by either (and hence both) of these statements. It remains to prove that the third statement implies one of the first two. To prove the equivalence of all three statements, we will first show that we can encode the information of all the distinguished triangles in $\mathbf{X}(A)$ in $\Omega$. Then we will show that it is possible to recover all distinguished triangles in $\mathbf{X}(A^\prime)$ from the map $\mathrm{h}F$ and the set $\Omega$. By hypothesis, $\Omega$ the largest possible set of distinguished triangles in $\mathrm{h}\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^\co_A(\cc))_n$ such that if $\Gamma_\alpha$ and $\Gamma_\beta$ are in $\Omega$ then $\Gamma_\beta$ cannot be obtained from $\Gamma_\alpha$ (or vice versa) by application of the shift functor or changing the signs of maps. Therefore all distinguished triangles in $\mathbf{X}(A)$ can be functorially recovered from the triangles in $\Omega$ by applying Corollary \ref{dist2} and Lemma \ref{dist1} $\beta$ times for some infinite cardinal $\beta$. This completes the first part of the proof.
Let $X\to Y\to Z\to \Sigma X$ be an arbitrary distinguished triangle, denoted $\Gamma_\gamma$, in $\Omega$. The map $\mathrm{h}F$ takes $\Gamma_\gamma$ to a distinguished triangle in $\mathbf{X}(A^\prime)$. If $\mathrm{h}F(\Omega)$ admits a bijection to the set of distinguished triangles in $\mathbf{X}(A^\prime)$, then the proof is completed. Otherwise suppose that $\mathbf{X}(A^\prime)$ has $\kappa$ distinguished triangles for some cardinal $\kappa$ and $\Omega$ has $\gamma$ distinguished triangles, and choose an infinite cardinal $\alpha>\kappa-\gamma$. Applying Corollary \ref{dist2} and Lemma \ref{dist1} $\alpha$ times to the distinguished triangles in $\mathrm{h}F(\Omega)$ in $\mathbf{X}(A^\prime)$ yields a transfinite sequence of distinguished triangles in $\mathbf{X}(A^\prime)$ indexed by the ordinals $\beta\leq\alpha$. This contains the set of distinguished triangles in $\mathbf{X}(A^\prime)$. Since $\alpha>\kappa-\gamma$, we may functorially recover each of the distinguished triangles in $\mathbf{X}(A^\prime)$ from $\Omega$, thereby completing the second part of the proof. $\mathrm{h}F$ commutes with the shift functor, so it preserves weak equivalences, and the proof is completed.
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusions and open problems.}
\subsection{Conclusions.}
We have seen that $\cJ$-theory is an inherently stable invariant. More precisely, the $\cJ$-theory of a stable $(\infty,1)$-category is a stable $(\infty,1)$-category. In addition, $\cJ$-theory enjoys many of the important properties which ordinary K-theory satisfies. It is a homotopy coherent version of derived Morita theory.
\subsection{Open problems.}
The following problems remain unsolved:
\begin{itemize}
\item What is $\cJ(\mathrm{Sp})_n$? Using Theorem \ref{maincalc}, we suspect that this problem will be very hard to solve since the computation of $K(\mathbb{S})$ is itself very hard.
\item Suppose $A$ is a $\mathbf{E}_n$-algebra object of a symmetric monoidal stable $\infty$-category $\cc^\otimes$. Then $\mathbf{Mod}^{\mathbf{E}_n}_A(\cc)$ is a $\mathbf{E}_{n-1}$-monoidal stable $\infty$-category. Is the $\cJ$-theory $\cJ(\mathbf{Mod}^{\mathbf{E}_n}_A(\cc))_n$ also $\mathbf{E}_{n-1}$-monoidal? Extrapolating from \cite{barwickmult} suggests that it is $\mathbf{E}_{n-2}$-monoidal
\item Is it possible to choose $\Omega$ to be a smaller set of distinguished triangles in the proof of Theorem \ref{derivedmorita}?
\item Theorem \ref{derivedmorita} depicts $\cJ$-theory as a homotopy coherent generalization of derived Morita theory when one of the two rings in question is flat. Is there a more general homotopy coherent generalization of derived Morita theory? If so, how does it relate to $\cJ$-theory?
\end{itemize}
|
\section{Introduction}
The entropy of a quantum system is a basic thermodynamic observable. In conformal field theory in $d$ spacetime dimensions, in finite spatial volume $V$, dimensional analysis constrains the growth of the entropy $\mathcal{S}$ with energy $E$ to take the form
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{S}\sim V^{1/d}E^{(d-1)/d}~. \label{entropy}
\end{equation}
In particular, the entropy grows slower than linearly with energy. By contrast, in quantum field theory in infinite spatial volume, the thermodynamics is much more subtle. Spatially large stable states, in general have a growth in energy which is faster than \eqref{entropy}, and few universal results are known (see, for example, \cite{Galakhov:2013oja}).
Motivated by these general thermodynamic considerations, in this work we study a non-relativistic supersymmetric quantum mechanics problem known as the Kronecker model. This model occurs universally in particle counting problems in four-dimensional $\mathcal{N}=2$ field theories and supergravities where it arrises as the low-energy non-relativistic effective theory of BPS dyons or black holes \cite{ Douglas:2000ah, Douglas:2000qw, Fiol:2000wx, Fiol:2000pd, Denef:2002ru, Denef:2007vg, Alim:2011kw, Manschot:2012rx, Cecotti:2012sf, Galakhov:2013oja, Chuang:2013wt, Cordova:2013bza}. In this context, each ground state of the quantum mechanics is reinterpreted as a stable four-dimensional single-particle state. The growth of the ground state degeneracy for large charges thus probes the infinite volume thermodynamics of the field theory.
The Kronecker model of interest describes a multi-particle system composed of two distinct species of (super)particles interacting by long range electromagnetic forces. The strength of these interactions is invariantly characterized by the integral Dirac pairing of the electromagnetic charges
\begin{equation}
\langle \gamma_{1}, \gamma_{2}\rangle =k>0~.
\end{equation}
We investigate the spectrum of $M$ particles of type one and $N$ particles of type two. This system and its interactions are encoded in the Kronecker quiver illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:kronecker}.\footnote{An explicit expression for the Hamiltonian of this system may be found, for instance, in \cite {Denef:2002ru}.}
\begin{figure}[here!]
\centering
\subfloat{
\xy 0;<1pt,0pt>:<0pt,-1pt>::
(-300,0) *+{M}*\cir<10pt>{} ="1",
(-240,0) *+{N}*\cir<10pt>{} ="2",
(-270, -10) *+{k} ="b",
\ar @{->} "1"; "2"
\endxy}
\caption{The Kronecker quiver with $k$ arrows. This supersymmetric quantum mechanics describes $M$ superparticles each with charge $\gamma_{1}$ and $N$ superparticles each with charge $\gamma_{2}$ with Dirac pairing $\langle \gamma_{1}, \gamma_{2}\rangle =k.$}\label{fig:kronecker}
\end{figure}
We focus on the ground state degeneracy of these models. We denote this degeneracy as $\Omega(M,N,k).$ These ground states are supersymmetric and their degeneracies have been studied from a variety of perspectives, including quantum groups \cite{2003InMat.152..349R}, wall-crossing formulas \cite{Kontsevich:2008fj, Gross, Reineke}, spectral networks \cite{Galakhov:2013oja, Galakhov:2014xba}, equivariant cohomology \cite{Weist:2009, Weist:2012}, and supersymmetric localization \cite{Hwang:2014uwa, Cordova:2014oxa, Hori:2014tda, Cordova:2015qka}.
Our aim is to understand the growth in the degeneracy $\Omega(M,N,k)$ for large ranks $M$, and $N.$ We study this limit with fixed $k$ and with fixed limiting ratio $N/M\rightarrow r.$ Known results, from the special case where $r=1,$ indicate that these degeneracies grow exponentially \cite{Weist:2009, Galakhov:2013oja, Kim:2015oxa}. Based on this evidence, it was conjectured in \cite{Weist:2009} that there exists a \emph{slope function} $S(r,k)$ governing the asymptotics of the degeneracy at general $r,$
\begin{equation}
\lim_{M\rightarrow \infty}\frac{1}{M}\log\Big(\Omega(M+m,Mr+n,k)\Big)\equiv S(r,k)~.
\end{equation}
In particular, this function is claimed to be independent of the offset $(m,n)$ and depends only on the asymptotic ratio $r$ and number of arrows $k$ appearing in the quiver.
As we motivate in \S \ref{sec:kron}, it is useful to express the slope function $S(r,k)$ in terms of an auxiliary function $G(r,k)$ as
\begin{equation}
S(r,k)=\Bigg(\sqrt{\frac{kr-r^{2}-1}{k-2}}\Bigg)\Bigg( (k-1)^{2}\log((k-1)^{2})-(k^{2}-2k)\log(k^{2}-2k)\Bigg)G(r,k)~. \label{gdefintro}
\end{equation}
The known exact results from the case $r=1$ are then summarized by $G(1,k)=1.$\footnote{ In \cite{weistthesis, Weist:2009} it was further conjectured that $G(r,k)=1$ for all $r$. We find, by direct calculation, that this further conjecture is false. }
Our main new results presented in \S \ref{sec:explicit} are explicit calculations of the slope function $S(r,k)$ (or equivalently the function $G(r,k)$) in the special case where the ratio $r$ is a general non-negative integer. In particular in all such examples, we verify that the degeneracies indeed grow exponentially, and we find that the function $G(r,k)$ is not constant. These calculations are possible thanks to a new formula \cite{Cordova:2015qka} which provides an explicit expression for all degeneracies of the form $\Omega(M,Mr+1,k)$ for integer $r,$ and hence enables us to explore the large rank regime of these models. We also provide evidence that the slope is independent of the offset using wall-crossing formulas in \S \ref{sec:wall}.
The quantity $G(r,k)$ appearing in \eqref{gdefintro} is an interesting function of the ratio $r.$ As we review in \S \ref{sec:const}, dualities in the Kronecker models enable us to change $r$ without changing the ground state degeneracies. This implies the following modular identities
\begin{equation}
G(r,k)=G(1/r,k)= G(k-1/r,k)~.
\end{equation}
These modular constraints, combined with our exact calculations at integral $r,$ indicate that the slope demonstrates intricate oscillatory behavior for large and small values of the ratio.\footnote{In \cite{weistthesis} a uniqueness theorem $G(r,k)=1$ was proven under certain continuity assumptions on $G(r,k).$ The oscillatory behavior we observe violates these continuity assumptions and hence invalidates the uniqueness theorem. See \S \ref{sec:solve} for discussion. } See Figure \ref{fig:g} for an illustration of this behavior.
In \S \ref{sec:alg} we explore the number theoretic properties of the slope function. We find that, for all cases that we have studied, $\exp(S(r,k))$ is an algebraic number, i.e. it solves an algebraic equation with rational coefficients. Even for small $r$ and $k$, the resulting equations are striking in their complexity, with unexpected coefficients. For example, when $(r,k)=(2,4)$ we find that $\exp(S(2,4))$ is the positive solution to
\begin{equation}
x^{2}-\frac{53793390359}{1088391168}x-\frac{823543}{12230590464}=0~.
\end{equation}
It would be interesting to understand a physical or geometric origin of these equations directly, perhaps by relating them to identities obeyed by generating functions of threshold bound states \cite{Kontsevich:2008fj, Gross, Reineke, Galakhov:2013oja, Galakhov:2014xba, Tom}, or to enumerative Calabi-Yau geometry.
Finally, before delving into the details, we briefly return to our motivating physical question and take stock of the properties of the ground states when they are interpreted as stable particles of four-dimensional field theories. In that context the ranks $M$ and $N$ are linearly related to electric and magnetic charges $Q$, and hence (via BPS bounds) to particle masses $m$ (or equivalently energies $E$). Thus, we have the scaling relations
\begin{equation}
M\sim N \sim Q \sim m \sim E~.
\end{equation}
The general properties of the states in question are then as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item The physical radius $R$ of the states grows linearly with the ranks $M$ and $N$ \cite{Galakhov:2013oja}, or equivalently linearly in mass $m$
\begin{equation}
R\sim m~.
\end{equation}
\item The particles lie on Regge trajectories \cite{Cordova:2015vma}. In other words, the states of largest angular momentum $J$ at fixed mass $m$ obey a relation
\begin{equation}
J\sim m^{2}~.
\end{equation}
\item There is an exponential degeneracy of particle states with entropy growth linear in mass (so that \eqref{entropy} is violated)
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{S}\sim m \sim \sqrt{J}~.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
Taken as a whole, these features suggest the existence of a dual string model for these bound states, where the Regge behavior and exponential degeneracy are manifest. In that context the slope function $S(r,k),$ which plays a primary role in our analysis, would then be reinterpreted in terms of the central charge of the dual world sheet string theory. It would be satisfying to determine this string model explicitly, and we leave this as a potential avenue for future investigation.
\section{Kronecker Models and Their Indices}
\label{sec:kron}
In this section, we review the Kronecker models and their degeneracies $\Omega(M,N,k)$. In \S \ref{sec:conjecture} we state a conjecture concerning the behavior of these degeneracies for large ranks.
We begin with the Kronecker quiver illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:kronecker}. This system is a gauged $\mathcal{N}=4$ quantum mechanics. At each node, there are vector multiplets with unitary gauge groups of ranks $M$ and $N,$ respectively. The arrows of the quiver are bifundametal chiral multiplet matter fields. See, for instance \cite {Denef:2002ru}, for the explicit Hamiltonian of this system. The quantity of interest, $\Omega(M,N,k),$ is the Witten index of this system.
In general, the ground states of the Kronecker model occur at threshold and are challenging to explicitly determine. However, in the special case where $M$ and $N$ are coprime, the system is gapped and the index $\Omega(M,N,k)$ admits a simple geometric interpretation.
To describe this correspondence, we first introduce the classical Higgs branch moduli space $\mathcal{M}^k_{M,N}$. This moduli space is parameterized by the chiral multiplet fields $\Phi_{i}$ ($i=1,\cdots, k$) which have constant expectation values. Thus, they specify linear maps
\begin{equation}
\Phi_{i}: \mathbb{C}^{M}\rightarrow \mathbb{C}^{N}~.
\end{equation}
On the maps $\Phi_{i}$ we enforce the D-term equations
\begin{equation}
\sum_{i=1}^{k}\Phi_{i}^{\dagger}\circ\Phi_{i}=\zeta I_{M}~,\hspace{.5in}\sum_{i=1}^{k}\Phi_{i}\circ\Phi_{i}^{\dagger}=\frac{M\zeta}{N} I_{N}~, \label{dterm}
\end{equation}
where $\zeta>0$ is the Fayet-Iliopoulos parameter,\footnote{When $\zeta<0$ all moduli spaces are empty, demonstrating wall-crossing. See \S \ref{sec:wall} for discussion.} and $I_{L}$ is the $L\times L$ identity matrix. To obtain the desired moduli space, we now quotient by the gauge group $U(M)\times U(N)$ acting on the $\Phi_{i}$ via the bifundamental representation
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}^k_{M,N} \equiv \left\{\Phi_{i}~\Bigg\vert \sum_{i=1}^{k}\Phi_{i}^{\dagger}\circ\Phi_{i}=\zeta I_{M}~,\hspace{.25in}\sum_{i=1}^{k}\Phi_{i}\circ\Phi_{i}^{\dagger}=\frac{M\zeta}{N} I_{N}\right\}/U(M)\times U(N)~.
\end{equation}
When $M$ and $N$ are coprime, these moduli spaces are smooth, compact, K\"{a}her manifolds. In this case, the complex dimension of the moduli space may be easily computed by subtracting the dimension of the gauge groups from the dimension of the space of chiral fields\footnote{The offset by one is due to the fact that an overall $u(1)$ in the gauge group does not act on the bifundamental chiral multiplets.}
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{dim}\left(\mathcal{M}^k_{M,N} \right)=kMN-M^{2}-N^{2}+1~. \label{dimform}
\end{equation}
As usual in supersymmetric quantum mechanics, the ground states are in one-to-one correspondence with the cohomology of the moduli space $\mathcal{M}^k_{M,N}$, and the index $\Omega(M,N,k)$ is the Euler characteristic. In this particular case, we can say more due to a vanishing theorem constraining the Hodge decomposition of the cohomology \cite{2003InMat.152..349R}
\begin{equation}
h^{p,q}\left(\mathcal{M}^k_{M,N}\right)=0~, \hspace{.5in} \mathrm{if}~~p\neq q~. \label{vanish}
\end{equation}
The index $\Omega(M,N,k)$ is then
\begin{equation}
\Omega(M,N,k)=\chi(\mathcal{M}^k_{M,N})= \sum_{p\geq0} h^{p,p}\left(\mathcal{M}^k_{M,N}\right)~.
\end{equation}
Thus, as a consequence of the vanishing theorem \eqref{vanish}, all ground states of the model are bosons, and the index $\Omega(M,N,k)$ computes the absolute degeneracy of the ground states.
\subsection{Indices as a Function of $k$}
\label{sec:kvar}
The ground state degeneracies show significant dependence on the number of arrows $k$ in the quiver. Qualitatively, there are three distinct cases $k=1,$ $k=2,$ and $k>2,$ with increasing $k$ demonstrating increasing complexity.
One way to understand this phenomenon is to examine the moduli space when $M=N$. In that case, generically, (i.e. on an open set in the moduli space) at least one of the maps $\Phi_{i}$ is invertible. We may then remove some of the gauge redundancy by fixing one such map to the identity matrix. After doing so, we must study $k-1$ linear maps modulo conjugation. For $k=1$ this problem is trivial. For $k=2,$ this problem is solved by the Jordan decomposition theorem. For $k>2$ this is a notoriously wild representation theory problem with no known exact solution.
Returning to the case of general ranks $M$ and $N$, we now summarize the qualitative possibilities for the large rank behavior of the degeneracies $\Omega(M,N,k)$ as a function of $k$. These behaviors are illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:rays}.\footnote{For all $k$ the degeneracies $\Omega(1,0,k)$ and $\Omega(0,1,k)$ are one and we do not discuss them further.}
\begin{itemize}
\item When $k=1,$ there is a single non-trivial degeneracy at $M=N=1$. Thus, in this case there is no growth in the degeneracies for large ranks. Physically, this model describes the BPS particles in the Argyles-Douglas conformal field theory \cite{Argyres:1995jj, Gaiotto:2009hg, Alim:2011ae}.
\item When $k=2,$ there are infinitely many non-trivial degeneracies, with allowed values $M=N\pm1$ and $M=N=1$. In the former case the degeneracy is one, in the latter it is two. Thus, again in this case there is no growth in the degeneracies for large ranks. Physically, this model describes the BPS particles in the pure $su(2)$ Seiberg-Witten theory \cite{Seiberg:1994rs, Fiol:2000pd}.
\item When $k>2,$ there are infinitely many non-zero degeneracies. Physically, this model occurs, for instance, as a subsector of $su(n)$ super Yang-Mills with $n>2$ \cite{Galakhov:2013oja}. In general, there is no known closed form expression for the degeneracies, however previously known exact results from the case $N=M$ and $N=M+1$ indicate that the degeneracies grow exponentially for large ranks \cite{Weist:2009, Galakhov:2013oja, Kim:2015oxa}.
In this case, it is instructive to regard the degeneracies as a function of the limiting ratio $ N/M\rightarrow r$. In terms of $r,$ the dimension of moduli space \eqref{dimform} reads
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{dim}\left(\mathcal{M}^k_{M,N} \right)=kMN-M^{2}-N^{2}+1=M^{2}\big(kr-r^{2}-1\big)+\mathcal{O}(1/M)~.
\end{equation}
The degeneracies can only be non-trivial if the above is non-negative. For large $M,$ and fixed $r,$ this bounds the ratio $r$ between the two values $r_{\pm}$ given below
\begin{equation}
r_{\pm} \equiv \frac{k\pm \sqrt{k^{2}-4}}{2}~.
\end{equation}
Inside the cone $r_{-}\leq r \leq r_{+},$ the occupied ratios are dense.
Finally, we note the following inequalities which hold for $k>2$.
\begin{equation}
0 <r_{-}<1<k-1<r_{+}<k~.
\end{equation}
Thus, the interval $[r_{-}, r_{+}]$ contains $k-1$ integral values of $r$. In \S \ref{sec:explicit}, we determine that the degeneracies also grow exponentially at these integral values of $r$.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\subfloat[$k=1$]{
\includegraphics[width=.3\textwidth]{k1.pdf}
}
\hspace{.1in}
\subfloat[$k=2$]{
\includegraphics[width=.3\textwidth]{k2.pdf}
}
\hspace{.1in}
\subfloat[$k>2$]{
\includegraphics[width=.3\textwidth]{k3.pdf}
}
\end{center}
\caption{ Occupied dimension vectors (i.e. pairs $(M,N)$) as a function of $k$. In (a), the case $k=1:$ there is a single non-trivial dimension vector $(M,N)=(1,1)$. In (b), the case $k=2:$ there are infinitely many occupied dimension vectors which accumulate at $r=1$. In (c), the case $k>2:$ there are infinitely many occupied dimension vectors which accumulate along the irrational slopes $r=r_{\pm}.$ Inside the cone bounded by $r_{\pm}$ (shown in gray) the occupied dimension vectors are dense and the degeneracies grow exponentially. }\label{fig:rays}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Conjectured Asymptotics of $\Omega(M,N,k)$}
\label{sec:conjecture}
We now state a conjecture concerning the growth of the degeneracies $\Omega(M,N,k)$ for large ranks. This conjecture was first articulated in \cite{weistthesis, Weist:2009}, and subsequently refined by \cite{Galakhov:2013oja}.
\textbf{Conjecture:} For fixed $r, m, n,$ and $k>2,$ the degeneracies grow as follows
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{M}\log\Bigg(\Omega(M+m,Mr+n,k)\Bigg)\underset{M\gg1}{\longrightarrow} S(r,k)+E(r,k,m,n)\frac{\log(M)}{M}+\cdots ~, \label{slopedef}
\end{equation}
where the terms $\cdots$ tend to zero faster than $\log(M)/M$ as $M$ tends to infinity.
Let us expand upon several aspects of this conjecture.
\begin{itemize}
\item The leading asymptotics is controlled by the slope function $S(r,k)$ which is independent of the offset $(m,n)$. Evidence for this independence can be given using explicit calculations from wall-crossing formulas and is presented in \S \ref{sec:wall}.
\item By contrast, the first correction to the leading growth, controlled by the function $E(r,k,m,n),$ depends on the offset $(m,n).$ This claim follows from known exact results for the degeneracies $\Omega(M,M+1,k)$ \cite{Weist:2009} and $\Omega(M,M,k)$ \cite{Reineke, Galakhov:2013oja}. In these cases one finds
\begin{equation}
E(1,k,0,1)=-\frac{5}{2}~,\hspace{.5in}E(1,k,0,0)=-2~. \label{eexamp}
\end{equation}
\item The slope function $S(r,k)$ is assumed to be continuous on the interval $ r_{-}\leq r \leq r_{+}.$ Since the moduli spaces become empty at $r_{\pm}$ we have
\begin{equation}
S(r_{-},k)=S(r_{+},k)=0~.
\end{equation}
For $r$ outside the interval $[r_{-},r_{+}],$ the slope function is not defined.
\item The leading growth implied by the conjecture is \emph{slower} than for generic quiver models. In a generic quiver with node ranks $Q_{i}$ one expects that under scaling $Q_{i}\rightarrow \Lambda Q_{i},$ with $\Lambda\gg1$ the index $\Omega$ scales as $\log(\Omega)\propto \Lambda^{2}.$ Indeed, this is expected in quiver models that describe BPS black holes \cite{Denef:2007vg}. By contrast, the Kronecker model, which occurs in quantum field theory, has $\log(\Omega)\propto \Lambda.$
\end{itemize}
The slope function $S(r,k)$ is the primary quantity of interest in this work. Assuming the validity of the conjecture, we constrain its functional form in \S \ref{sec:const}. In \S \ref{sec:explicit} we present calculations of the slope at integral values of $r$.
\subsection{Constraints on the Slope Function}
\label{sec:const}
There are a number of a priori restrictions that may be put on the slope function $S(r,k)$ using dualities and known exact results. We survey these constraints in this section.
\paragraph{Value at $r=1$}\mbox{}\\
The first piece of information about the slope, is that it is known exactly at the special value $r=1$. Indeed, from \cite{Weist:2009}, we have the closed form expression
\begin{equation}
\Omega(M,M+1,k)= {k\over (M+1) \left[(k-1)M +k\right] }{ (k-1)^2 M +k(k-1) \choose M}~.
\end{equation}
This exact result is unusual. For the majority of indices $\Omega(M,N,k)$ there is no simple known closed form expression. Given this expression for finite $M,$ we may easily obtain its asymptotics for large $M$ using the Stirling approximation. We find
\begin{equation}
S(1,k)= (k-1)^{2}\log((k-1)^{2})-(k^{2}-2k)\log(k^{2}-2k)~. \label{value}
\end{equation}
\paragraph{Reflection Symmetry}\mbox{}\\
We may constrain the slope function $S(r,k)$ using symmetries of the quiver quantum mechanics. One simple symmetry is that our choice of which fields we refer to as chiral and which fields refer to as antichiral is arbitrary. Exchanging these notions changes the fields $\Phi_{i}$ to $\Phi_{i}^{\dagger},$ and hence reverses the direction of the arrows as shown in Figure \ref{fig:chiral}.
\begin{figure}[here!]
\centering
\subfloat[]{
\xy 0;<1pt,0pt>:<0pt,-1pt>::
(-300,0) *+{M}*\cir<10pt>{} ="1",
(-240,0) *+{N}*\cir<10pt>{} ="2",
(-270, -10) *+{k} ="b",
\ar @{->} "1"; "2"
\endxy}
\hspace{1in}
\subfloat[]{
\xy 0;<1pt,0pt>:<0pt,-1pt>::
(-300,0) *+{M}*\cir<10pt>{} ="1",
(-240,0) *+{N}*\cir<10pt>{} ="2",
(-270, -10) *+{k} ="b",
\ar @{->} "2"; "1"
\endxy}
\caption{The reflection symmetry. In (a) the original model. In (b) the quiver obtained after changing the definition of chiral and antichiral fields. This operation replaces $\Phi_{i}$ with $\Phi_{i}^{\dagger}$ and hence reverses the arrows. }\label{fig:chiral}
\end{figure}
It is clear that the net result of this operation is to exchange the roles of $M$ and $N$ in the definition of the index. Thus, we have the symmetry
\begin{equation}
\Omega(M,N,k)=\Omega(N,M,k)~.
\end{equation}
We may translate this into a constraint on the slope function by using the definition \eqref{slopedef}. We obtain
\begin{equation}
S(r,k)= r S(1/r,k)~.\label{refs}
\end{equation}
\paragraph{Mutation Symmetry}\mbox{}\\
A less trivial symmetry of the slope function follows from the application of quiver mutation (Seiberg dualities) \cite{MR0332887,MR0393065}. Applying this operation enables us to change the ranks of the gauge groups in a $k$ dependent way as illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:mutation}.
\begin{figure}[here!]
\centering
\subfloat[]{
\xy 0;<1pt,0pt>:<0pt,-1pt>::
(-300,0) *+{\scalebox{.8}{$M$}}*\cir<18pt>{} ="1",
(-200,0) *+{\scalebox{.8}{$N$}}*\cir<18pt>{} ="2",
(-250, -10) *+{k} ="b",
\ar @{->} "1"; "2"
\endxy}
\hspace{1in}
\subfloat[]{
\xy 0;<1pt,0pt>:<0pt,-1pt>::
(-300,0) *+{\scalebox{.8}{$N$}}*\cir<18pt>{} ="1",
(-200,0) *+{\scalebox{.7}{$kN-M$}}*\cir<18pt>{} ="2",
(-250, -10) *+{k} ="b",
\ar @{->} "1"; "2"
\endxy}
\caption{The mutation symmetry. In (a) the original model. In (b) the quiver obtained after a mutation. }\label{fig:mutation}
\end{figure}
The result of the mutation symmetry is thus to exchange $(M,N)\rightarrow (N,kN-M)$. Correspondingly, we have symmetry
\begin{equation}
\Omega(M,N,k)=\Omega(N,kN-M,k)~.
\end{equation}
The resulting symmetry of the slope is
\begin{equation}
S(r,k)=rS(k-1/r,k)~.\label{muts}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Solving the Constraints}
\label{sec:solve}
The totality of these constraints on the slope motivates us to introduce a function $G(r,k)$ and express the slope function as follows
\begin{equation}
S(r,k)=\Bigg(\sqrt{\frac{kr-r^{2}-1}{k-2}}\Bigg)\Bigg( (k-1)^{2}\log((k-1)^{2})-(k^{2}-2k)\log(k^{2}-2k)\Bigg)G(r,k)~. \label{gdef}
\end{equation}
To understand the significance of this formula, first note that the factor in the square root satisfies the algebraic identities
\begin{equation}
\sqrt{kr-r^{2}-1} =r\sqrt{\frac{k}{r}-\frac{1}{r^{2}}-1}=r\sqrt{k\left(k-\frac{1}{r}\right)-\left(k-\frac{1}{r}\right)^{2}-1} ~.
\end{equation}
Therefore, the complete list of constraints on the function $S(r,k)$ translates into the following constraints on the quantity $G(r,k).$
\begin{itemize}
\item From the special value of the slope, \eqref{value}, we have
\begin{equation}
G(1,k)=1~.
\end{equation}
\item From the reflection symmetry, \eqref{refs}, we have
\begin{equation}
G(r,k)=G(1/r,k)~.
\end{equation}
\item From the mutation symmetry, \eqref{muts}, we have
\begin{equation}
G(r,k)=G(k-1/r,k)~.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
Thus, assuming that the conjecture \eqref{slopedef} is true, it remains to find the function $G(r,k)$ which determines the value of the slope away from the special case $r=1$. In \S \ref{sec:explicit} we provide direct calculations illustrating that the function $G(r,k)$ is not constant.
In the remainder of this section, we continue to study its features by exploring the above constraints.
The functional identities obeyed by $G(r,k)$ may be viewed as fractional linear transformation acting on the variable $r.$ Specifically, given any $GL(2,\mathbb{Z})$ matrix, $X,$ define its action on $r$ in the standard way as
\begin{equation}
X\cdot r= \frac{ar+b}{cr+d}~, \hspace{.5in}X=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a & b \\c&d \end{array}\right)~.
\end{equation}
The reflection and mutation symmetries are defined by the two $GL(2,\mathbb{Z})$ matrices
\begin{equation}
A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{array}\right)~, \hspace{.5in}B=\left(\begin{array}{cc}k & -1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{array}\right)~. \label{ABdef}
\end{equation}
Our constraints on the function $G(r,k)$ may thus be rephrased by saying that $G(r,k)$ is a modular function for the subgroup of $GL(2,\mathbb{Z})$ generated by \eqref{ABdef}.
To understand the implications of the modular invariance of the function $G(r,k)$ it is useful to change coordinates from $r$ to a variable where the modular constraints are manifest. An appropriate coordinate may be deduced by diagonalizing the mutation matrix $B$ above. Upon defining $\theta$ as
\begin{equation}
\theta \equiv \frac{2\pi}{\log\left(r_{+}/r_{-}\right)}\log\left(\frac{r-r_{-}}{r_{+}-r}\right)~, \label{thetadef}
\end{equation}
we find that the transformations act simply as
\begin{equation}
(B\circ A)\cdot \theta =-\theta ~, \hspace{.5in}B \cdot \theta= \theta +2\pi~.
\end{equation}
Therefore, the constraints on the function $G(r,k)$ may be solved by expressing $G(r,k)$ in terms of the variable $\theta$ and demanding that it is even and periodic
\begin{equation}
G(\theta,k)=G(-\theta,k)=G(\theta+2\pi,k)~.
\end{equation}
Let us comment further on the coordinate transformation \eqref{thetadef}. This transformation maps the segment $[r_{-},r_{+}]$ to the full real line $(-\infty,\infty).$ In particular the $r$ values $r_{\pm}$ map to the $\theta$ values $\pm \infty$. The fact (demonstrated in \S \ref{sec:explicit}) that $G(\theta,k)$ is not constant, implies that $G(\theta,k)$ undergoes infinitely many oscillations as $|\theta|$ increases. Viewed in the original $r$ coordinate, these are oscillations with increasing frequency as $r$ approaches $r_{\pm}$.
As a consequence of these considerations, we see that any non-constant $G(r,k)$ has the feature that its limit as $r\rightarrow r_{\pm}$ does not exist. Hence $G(r,k)$ is not continuous at the edges $r_{\pm}$ of the interval $[r_{-},r_{+}]$ where the slope is defined. This lack of continuity of $G(r,k)$ does not affect the claim that the full slope function $S(r,k)$ is continuous. Indeed, from \eqref{gdef} we see that the square root factor vanishes at $r_{\pm}$ so for continuity of the full slope it is sufficient that
\begin{equation}
\lim_{r\rightarrow r_{\pm}}G(r,k)\sqrt{kr-r^{2}-1}=0~. \label{conteq}
\end{equation}
In fact, we will see that $G(r,k)$ oscillates in a bounded range, so that the above is obeyed.
\section{Explicit Calculations of the Slope}
\label{sec:explicit}
In this section we provide new explicit calculations of the slope function $S(r,k).$ These calculations are possible due to new expressions for the degeneracies $\Omega(M,N,k)$ in the special case where $N=Mr+1$ for integral $r$. To describe these results it is convenient to first introduce a generating function
\begin{equation}
F(k,r,x) =(k-r) \sum_{\ell=1}^\infty {(-1)^{\ell-1}\over \ell} {k\ell \choose r\ell } x^\ell~, \label{fdef}
\end{equation}
and let $[x^j]\{ q(x) \}$ denote the coefficient of $x^{j}$ in a power series $q(x)$. Then the result of \cite{Cordova:2015qka} is
\begin{equation}
\Omega(M,Mr+1,k)= {1\over (Mr+1)^2}[x^M] \left\{\exp\Big[\, (Mr+1) F(k,r,x)\, \Big] \right\} ~. \label{result}
\end{equation}
In this section we use this expression to compute the slope $S(r,k)$ for the integral points $r=1,\cdots, k-1.$ In \S \ref{sec:saddle} we describe the saddle point technique for extracting the slope $S(r,k)$ from \eqref{result}. In \S \ref{sec:limit}, we describe results for the slope function in limits where $k$ is also taken to be large.
\subsection{Saddle Point Approximation}\label{sec:saddle}
We begin by noting that \eqref{result} is equivalent to an expression for the degeneracy $\Omega(M,Mr+1,k)$ as a contour integral around $x=0$:\footnote{Generally, the function $\exp \left[ (Mr+1) F(k,r,x)\right]$ has a branch cut on the complex plane away from the origin. We choose the radius $R$ of the contour integral to be sufficiently small to avoid crossing the branch cut.}
\begin{align}\label{contour1}
\Omega(M,Mr+1,k)={1\over (Mr+1)^2}\oint_{x=0} {dx \over (2\pi i) x^{M+1} } \exp \Big[ \, (Mr+1) F(k,r,x) \, \Big]~.
\end{align}
Let us define the angular coordinate $\phi$ by $x=R e^{i\phi}$, where $R$ is the radius of the contour. In terms of $R$ and $\phi$, \eqref{contour1} can be expressed as
\begin{align}\label{contour2}
\Omega(M,Mr+1,k)={1\over (Mr+1)^2} {1\over R^M}\int_{0}^{2\pi} {d\phi\over 2\pi}
\exp \Big[ - i M\phi + (Mr+1) F(k,r,R e^{i\phi}) \Big]~.
\end{align}
When $M$ is very large, this integral is well approximated by the saddle point method.
We now find the saddle point of \eqref{contour2} on the complex $\phi$ plane. Denote the saddle point by $\phi_s\in \mathbb{C}$ and define
\begin{align}
x_s \equiv R \, e^{i\phi_s}~.
\end{align}
The saddle point equation is given by
\begin{align}\label{saddle}
{M\over Mr+1} = x_s \left.{d\over dx} F(k,r,x) \right\vert_{x=x_s}~.
\end{align}
Given the explicit power series expansion for $F(k,r,x)$, the saddle point equation can be solved to arbitrary numerical precision for any given $k$ and $r$. We make the following claim
\begin{align*}
\textbf{Claim:}~~&\text{The solution $x=x_s$ to \eqref{saddle} has a well-defined limit as $M\rightarrow \infty$} \\
& \text{for all $k>2$ and all integral $r$ with $1\leq r\leq k-1$.}
\end{align*}
This claim is justified by extensive numerical evidence.
Assuming this claim, we can rewrite the saddle point equation \eqref{saddle} as
\begin{align}\label{saddle2}
{1\over r} = x_s \left.{d\over dx} F(k,r,x) \right\vert_{x=x_s} ~.
\end{align}
The index can be approximated by evaluating the integrand in \eqref{contour2} at $x_s$ in the large $M$ limit:
\begin{align}
\, \log \Omega(M,Mr+1,k) \simeq
M\Big[- \log (x_s) + r F(k,r,x_s) \,\Big]+\mathcal{O}(\log (M)) \, ~,
\end{align}
We have therefore obtain the exponential growth of the index $\Omega(M,Mr+1,k)$ in the large $M$ limit. Moreover, the slope function $S(r,k)$ is determined to be
\begin{align}\label{slopefunction}
S(r,k ) = - \log (x_s) + r F(k,r,x_s)~,~~1\le r\le k-1,~~r\in \mathbb{N}~.
\end{align}
with $x_s$ defined as the solution to \eqref{saddle2}.
We can also give an exact expression for the function $G(r,k)$ defined in \eqref{gdef} for these values of $r$ simply by taking ratios,
\begin{align}\label{Gfunction}
\begin{split}
G(r,k) &= \sqrt{k-2\over kr -r^2-1}{ - \log (x_s) + r F(k,r,x_s) \over (k-1)^2 \log \left[ (k-1)^2\right] -(k^2-2k)\log (k^2-2k) }~,\\
&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1\le r\le k-1,~~r\in \mathbb{N}~.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Given the explicit form of the function $F(k,r,x)$ \eqref{fdef}, the saddle point equations \eqref{saddle2}-\eqref{Gfunction} may be solved to arbitrary numerical precision. Using the symmetries of the slope function discussed in \S \ref{sec:solve} we may then extrapolate these results to larger and smaller non-integral values of $r.$ Interpolating between these data points (assuming continuity of $S(r,k)$) then provides a plausible picture of the slope for all $r$ in the interval $[r_{-},r_{+}].$ We present such plots in Figures \ref{fig:s} and \ref{fig:g} below. Note that $G(r,k)$ oscillates and $S(r,k)$ goes to zero as $r\rightarrow r_{\pm}$ as anticipated in \eqref{conteq}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\raisebox{6.5pt}{\includegraphics[width=.36\textwidth]{Sr}}
~~~
\includegraphics[width=.6\textwidth]{St}
\caption{The slope function $S(r,k)$ in the case $k=15$. On the left the independent variable is $r,$ on the right the independent variable is $\theta.$ The marked points denote the values of the slope computed using the saddle point method. These points may be transferred to $r<1$ and $r>k-1$ (outside the red dashed lines) using the symmetries of the slope function. The blue curve is the resulting interpolating function. }\label{fig:s}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\raisebox{5pt}{\includegraphics[width=.38\textwidth]{Gr}}
~~~
\includegraphics[width=.6\textwidth]{Gt}
\caption{The slope function $G(r,k)$ in the case $k=15$. On the left the independent variable is $r,$ on the right the independent variable is $\theta.$ The marked points denote the values of the slope computed using the saddle point method. These points may be transferred to $r<1$ and $r>k-1$ (outside the red dashed lines) using the symmetries of the slope function. The blue curve is the resulting interpolating function. Note that $G(r,k)$ undergoes infinitely many oscillations for $r_{-}<r<1$ and $k-1<r<r_{+}$.}\label{fig:g}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{The Subleading Term}
The explicit expression \eqref{result} and the saddle point analysis also enables us to study the subleading $\log (M)$ term in $\log \Omega(M,Mr+1,k)$. This term receives two contributions: one from the $1/(Mr+1)^2$ term in \eqref{contour2}, and the other from the ``one-loop" correction from the integrating out the $\delta\phi^2$ term when expanding around the saddle point $\phi=\phi_s+\delta\phi$. Together they give
\begin{align}
\, \log \Omega(M,Mr+1,k) \simeq
M\Big[- \log (x_s) + r F(k,r,x_s) \,\Big]- {5\over2} \log( M) + \mathcal{O}(1)\, ~.
\end{align}
This determines the function $E(r,k,m,n)$ appearing in \eqref{slopedef} for this particular value of the offset $(m,n)=(0,1)$:
\begin{align}
E(r,k,0,1) = - {5\over2}~,~~1\le r\le k-1,~~r\in \mathbb{N}~,
\end{align}
which generalizes the result \eqref{eexamp} of \cite{Galakhov:2013oja} to general integral $r$.
\subsubsection{Symmetry of the Slope Function}
Finally, we can also use saddle point analysis to check some of the symmetries of the slope function $S(r,k)$ that we argued for on general grounds in \S \ref{sec:const}. Since our saddle point analysis is only valid for integral values of $r$, the only symmetry we can check is the composition of the mutation and the reflection symmetry:
\begin{align}\label{slopesym}
S(r,k) = S( k-r,k)~, \longleftrightarrow S(\theta,k)=S(-\theta,k)~.
\end{align}
To illustrate this result, we first note from \eqref{fdef} that
\begin{align}
F(k,k-r,x) = {r\over k-r} F(k,r,x)~.
\end{align}
In other words, the combination $r\, F(k,r,x)$ is invariant under the symmetry \eqref{slopesym} $r\rightarrow k-r$. Since both the saddle point equation \eqref{saddle2} and \eqref{slopefunction} depend on $F(k,r,x)$ only through the combination $r\,F(k,r,x)$, it follows that the slope function $S(r,k)$ given in \eqref{slopefunction} indeed enjoys the symmetry \eqref{slopesym}. This reflection symmetry is manifest in Figures \ref{fig:s} and \ref{fig:g}.
\subsection{Limits of the Slope Function}\label{sec:limit}
In this subsection we further take limits on $k$ and $r$ to explore the behavior of $S(r,k)$ in different regimes of parameters. We emphasize that, in all such calculations, we first take the large $M$ limit, and then take further limits on $k$ and $r$.
\subsubsection{Large $k$ with Fixed $r$}
We begin with the limit:
\begin{align}
k\rightarrow \infty,~~~r=\text{fixed}~.
\end{align}
Using the Stirling approximation, $n! \simeq n^n e^{-n} \sqrt{2\pi n}$, we can rewrite the saddle point equation \eqref{saddle2} as
\begin{align}\label{largeksaddle}
{1\over r} \simeq k\sqrt{k\over 2\pi r (k-r)}\sum_{\ell=1}^\infty {(-1)^{\ell -1}\over \sqrt{\ell}} \left[ { k^k \over r^r (k-r)^{k-r} }x_s\right]^\ell~.
\end{align}
To solve the saddle point equation in this limit, we truncate the righthand side to the first term $\ell=1$. The saddle point $x_s$ in the large $k$ limit is then given by
\begin{align}
x_s \simeq k^{-{3\over2}}\sqrt{2\pi (k-r)\over r} { r^r (k-r)^{k-r}\over k^k }~.
\end{align}
As a consistency check on our truncation to the $\ell=1$ term in the saddle point equation \eqref{largeksaddle}, we note that the $\ell$-th order term on the righthand side of \eqref{largeksaddle} evaluated at the saddle is
\begin{align}
k\sqrt{k\over 2\pi r (k-r)} {(-1)^{\ell -1}\over \sqrt{\ell}} \left[k^{-{3\over2}} \sqrt{2\pi (k-r)\over r}\right]^\ell \sim k^{1-\ell}~.
\end{align}
Hence the terms with $\ell>1$ are suppressed and our truncation to $\ell=1$ is self-consistent in the large $k$ limit.
Given the explicit expression for the saddle point $x_s$ at large $k$, we can now solve for the slope function $S(r,k)$ \eqref{slopefunction} we obtain,
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
S(r,k)\xrightarrow{k\gg 1}
(r+1)\log k + \left[ r- \log\left(\sqrt{2\pi} r^{r-{1\over2}}\right)+1\right] +\mathcal{O}\left({1\over k}\right)~.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Note that in the large $k$ limit the dominant contribution comes from $-\log (x_s)$ in \eqref{slopefunction}. From this we also obtain the large $k$ limit of the function $G(r,k)$ \eqref{Gfunction},
\begin{align}
\lim_{k\rightarrow \infty}G(r,k) = {r+1\over 2\sqrt{r} }~.
\end{align}
These results may be phrased simply in terms of the original degeneracy $\Omega(M,N,k)$ as
\begin{equation}
\lim_{k\rightarrow \infty} \lim_{\substack{M, N\rightarrow \infty \\ N/M=r \ \text{fixed}}} \Omega(M,N,k) \approx k^{M+N}~.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Large $k$ and $r$ with Fixed $r/k$}
As another accessible limit, consider the case where
\begin{align}
k,r\rightarrow \infty,~~~q:= {r\over k} =\text{fixed}~.
\end{align}
The constraint $1 \le r \le k-1$ becomes in this limit
\begin{align}
0 \le q\le1~.
\end{align}
Again using the Stirling approximation, the saddle point equation \eqref{saddle} can be written as
\begin{align}\label{kr}
{1\over kq} \simeq \sqrt{k} \sqrt{1-q\over 2\pi q} \sum_{\ell=1} {(-1)^{\ell-1}\over\sqrt{\ell}}
\left[
{k^k \over (qk)^{qk} \left[ (1-q)k\right]^{(1-q)k} }x
\right]^\ell.
\end{align}
Upon truncating \eqref{kr} to the first term $\ell=1$, we obtain the saddle point
\begin{align}
x_s \simeq k^{-{3\over 2}} \sqrt{ 2\pi \over q(1-q)} { (qk)^{qk} \left[ (1-q)k\right]^{(1-q)k}\over k^k}~.
\end{align}
As a consistency check on our truncation to the $\ell=1$ term, we note that the $\ell$-th term on the righthand side of \eqref{kr} scales like $k^{ {1\over 2} - {3\ell\over 2}}$, which is negligible compared with the lefthand side when $\ell>1$.
Given the explicit expression for the saddle point $x_s$ at large $k$ and $r$ limit, we can then solve for the slope function $S(r,k)$
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
S(r,k) \underset{q\equiv r/k=\text{fixed}}{\xrightarrow{k,r\rightarrow \infty}}
-\Big[\, q\log (q)+ (1-q) \log(1-q) \,\Big] \,k +{3\over 2}\log k + \mathcal{O}(1)~.
\end{split}
\end{align}
In contrast to the large $k$ limit with $r$ fixed, the slope now scales linearly with $k$.
Meanwhile, the function $G(r,k)$ given by \eqref{Gfunction} behaves as
\begin{align}
\lim_{\substack{k,r\rightarrow \infty \\ q\equiv r/k=\text{fixed}}} G(r,k)
= - { q\log (q)+ (1-q) \log(1-q) \over 2\sqrt{q(1-q) } }\, {\sqrt{k}\over \log k} +\cdots~.
\end{align}
Thus, in this limit, $G(r,k)$ as a function of the ratio $q$ is symmetric under $q\rightarrow 1-q$ and has a maximum at $q=1/2$. Note also that in this limit $G(r,k)$ grows in absolute value as $\sqrt{k}/\log(k).$ A plot of $G(r,k)$ in this regime of parameters is shown in Figure \ref{fig:Ginfinity}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{Ginfinity}
\caption{The function $G(r,k)$ as a function of $q=r/k$ in the limit $k,r\rightarrow\infty$ with $q$ fixed. }\label{fig:Ginfinity}
\end{figure}
\section{Slopes from Wall-Crossing Data}
\label{sec:wall}
In this section, we describe the information that can be learned about the slope function $S(r,k)$ using data about the degeneracies obtained from the wall-crossing formula. Our main goal is to provide evidence for an aspect of the conjecture stated in \S \ref{sec:conjecture}. Namely, we wish to show that the slope function $S(r,k)$ defined as
\begin{equation}
\lim_{M\rightarrow \infty}\frac{1}{M}\log\Big(\Omega(M+m,Mr+n,k)\Big )= S(r,k)~,
\end{equation}
is indeed independent of the offset $(m,n)$. Similar analysis has been preformed in \cite{Galakhov:2013oja}.
For general $(m,n),$ there is no known closed form expression for the indices which feature in the above. Thus, it is presently impossible to conclusively prove or disprove the claim that $S(r,k)$ is independent of the offset $(m,n)$. Instead, we can obtain evidence for this idea through explicit calculations of the degeneracies using wall-crossing.
The wall-crossing formula of \cite{Kontsevich:2008fj} enables us to find the change in $\Omega(M,N,k)$ as the Fayet-Iliopoulos parameters $\zeta$ are varied. In the Kronecker model, the wall-crossing formula is straightforward to use. If we change the sign of the FI parameter $\zeta$ of \eqref{dterm}, then all moduli spaces are empty. Thus, in this simple chamber, the only values of $(M,N)$ with non-vanishing degeneracies are $(1,0)$ or $(0,1),$ corresponding to a single particle of type one, or a single particle of type two. We therefore use this simple chamber ($\zeta<0$) as a seed, and use wall-crossing to determine the indices in the chamber of interest ($\zeta>0$) where the exponential growth in degeneracies occurs.
The wall-crossing calculation makes of functions $K_{M,N}$ defined as power series in formal variables $\Big[x,y\Big]$ as
\begin{equation}
K_{M,N}\Big[ x,y \Big]= \Big[\, x(1-(-1)^{kMN}x^{M}y^{N})^{kN}, y(1-(-1)^{kMN}x^{M}y^{N})^{-kM}\,\Big]~.
\end{equation}
Additionally, we define a sign function $\sigma$ that detects the parity of the dimension of $\mathcal{M}^{k}_{M,N}$
\begin{equation}
\sigma(M,N,k)=\begin{cases}+1~, & kMN-M^{2}-N^{2}+1 \equiv 0 \ (\mathrm{mod} \ 2)~,\\
-1~, & kMN-M^{2}-N^{2}+1\equiv 1 \ (\mathrm{mod} \ 2)~.\end{cases} \label{signfunc}
\end{equation}
The content of the wall-crossing formula is that a certain function of $[x,y]$ built from compositions of the $K_{M,N}$ does not depend on the chamber. In the Kronecker model this reads
\begin{equation}
\prod_{M,N \geq 0}^{\rightarrow}K_{M,N}^{\sigma(M,N,k)\Omega(M,N,k)} = K_{0,1} \circ K_{1,0}~. \label{wallcrossing}
\end{equation}
In the above, the product of operators $K_{M,N}\Big[ x,y \Big]$ is defined to be composition of functions, and the order of composition is that of decreasing $M/N.$\footnote{If $M_{1}/N_{1}=M_{1}/N_{2}$ then $K_{M_{1},N_{1}}\circ K_{M_{2},N_{2}}=K_{M_{2},N_{2}}\circ K_{M_{1},N_{1}}.$ The need for this sign $\sigma$ due to the fact that we have defined $\Omega$ to coincide with the Euler characteristic.}
To use \eqref{wallcrossing}, observe that $K_{M,N}$ differs from the identity first at order $x^{M}y^{N}.$ Therefore, fixing an integer $Q,$ we may solve \eqref{wallcrossing} to order $Q$ by truncating the infinite composition to a finite composition where only those $K_{M,N}$ are retained with $M+N\leq Q$. Next we evaluate the composition as a polynomial by only retaining terms differing from the identity up to total order $Q$. Matching to the right-hand side, we can then solve for all $\Omega(M,N,k)$ with $M+N\leq Q$.
This procedure is time consuming to carry out for large $Q$, and does not directly enable us to analytically determine a closed form expression for the slope function. However, it does enable us to provide evidence for the claim that the slope is independent of the offset.
To do so, first define for each $(r,k),$ and each offset $(m,n),$ the following normalized sequence $S^{(m,n)}_{M}(r,k)$
\begin{equation}
S^{(m,n)}_{M}(r,k)\equiv \frac{\log \big[\Omega(M+1+m,(M+1)r+n,k)\big]-\log \big[\Omega(M+m,Mr+n,k)\big]}{S(r,k)}~. \label{sequencedef}
\end{equation}
For large $M,$ these sequences approximate a normalized version of the slope function. Independence of the offset $(m,n)$ implies that the limit is unity
\begin{equation}
\lim_{M\rightarrow \infty}S^{(m,n)}_{M}(r,k)=1~. \label{limitconj}
\end{equation}
We have studied these sequences using wall-crossing data (recorded in Appendix \ref{sec:walldata}). Data collected thus far supports the result \eqref{limitconj}. We illustrate examples in Figure \ref{fig:wall}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfloat[]{
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{r1wall.pdf}
}~~~~~
\subfloat[]{
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{r2wall.pdf}
}
\caption{ Examples of the normalized slope sequence $S_{M}^{(m,n)}(r,k)$ of \eqref{sequencedef} for various offsets at $k=4.$ (a) The case $r=1.$ (b) The case $r=2$. In both examples the convergence of the various curves suggests that asymptotic slope is independent of the offset.
}
\label{fig:wall}
\end{figure}
\section{Algebraic Asymptotics}
\label{sec:alg}
In this section we explore the number theoretic properties of the slope function $S(r,k).$ Curiously, we observe that the exponential of the slope is an \emph{algebraic} number (i.e. solves a polynomial equation with integral coefficients) in all examples we have studied. This leads us to conjecture the following:
\textbf{Conjecture:} For any rational $r$ with $r_{-}\leq r \leq r_{+}$, and any $k>2,$ the quantity $~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~$$\exp(S(r,k))$ is algebraic.
Before describing our method for verifying this conjecture at special values of $r$ and $k$, let us first describe what may be its physical content. It has been observed in \cite{Kontsevich:2008fj, Gross, Reineke, Galakhov:2013oja, Galakhov:2014xba, Tom} that certain generating functions of threshold bound states obey algebraic equations.
For an explicit example, consider the degeneracies $\Omega(M,M,k).$ These ranks are not coprime and hence the quiver quantum mechanics is not gapped. The ground states, counted by $\Omega(M,Mr,k)$ are thus at threshold. We may assemble these degeneracies into a formal multiplicative generating function as
\begin{equation}
P_{k}(z)\equiv \prod_{\ell=1}^{\infty}\Big(1-(-1)^{\ell k}z^{\ell}\Big)^{\frac{\ell}{k} \sigma(\ell,\ell,k)\Omega(\ell,\ell,k)}~,
\end{equation}
where $\sigma$ is the sign function introduced in \eqref{signfunc}. Then, remarkably, one finds that this generating function obeys the algebraic equation
\begin{equation}
P_{k}(z)=1+zP_{k}(z)^{(k-1)^{2}}~.
\end{equation}
Algebraic equations, such as the above, suggest a combinatorial interpretation of threshold bound states. Moreover, if such algebraic equations are a feature at general ratio $r$ (not just $r=1$) then they also provide evidence that $\exp(S(r,k))$ is indeed algebraic for general rational ratio.
In practice since we do not have access to such equations, our method for demonstrating that $\exp(S(r,k))$ is algebraic is less direct. We carry out this analysis at integer $r$ where the saddle point approximation method of \S \ref{sec:explicit} can be applied. Using this method we may evaluate the slope $S(r,k)$ to extremely high precision, say $p$ decimal digits. With the aid of computer software,\footnote{Specifically, we use the ``RootApproximant" function in Mathematica.} we then ``guess" simple algebraic equations obeyed by the slope $S(r,k)$ to the given precision $p$. We then test the validity of the resulting equations by evaluating their roots to precision $q > p$ and comparing against the numerical saddle value of the slope at the same higher precision $q$. Agreement for large $q$ strongly suggests that we have hit upon the correct algebraic equation.
We have carried out this algorithm for $r$ and $k$ sufficiently small. In practice in these examples the precision $p$ used to determine the equation is of the order of $3000$ decimal digits, and the precision $q$ used to test the equation is of the order of $10000$ decimal digits, thus giving overwhelming evidence that the equations to follow are correct. Remarkably, even for small values of these parameters, the resulting algebraic equations have large unfamiliar coefficients. We present examples of these polynomials below in the special case $r=2$ and increasing $k$. In each case, $\exp(S(r,k))$ is the unique positive root of the given polynomial. The complexity of these results demands explanation.
\begin{align*}
&\bullet r=2,~~k=3:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\
&256-27x~.\\
&\bullet r=2,~~k=4:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\
& 600362847 + 440675453820928\, x
- 8916100448256 \,x^2 ~. \\
&\bullet r=2,~~k=5:\\
&-591413771772821360012500490693032929265968209672451145145917265965744128+1544\\
&52605112448522226515494740065379723981012919983800320000000000000000000000000 \,x-\\
&316522677763135004318093459039662462828346178866922855377197265625000000000000000\\
&000000000 \,x^2+2350988701644575015937473074444491355637331113544175043017503412556\\
&834518909454345703125 \,x^3~.\\
&\bullet r=2,~~k=6:\\
&-2050773823560610053645205609172376035486179836520607547294916966189367296000000\\
&00000000000000+20352745636594082793019947349596049624338559361382715379523490900\\
&5427691102560816224960099284771703619584 \,x-64247493083782190701390594106712115785\\
&844636100938458366932530627926893892348597995911202127555619214492164722524160 \,x^2+\\
&2282730363469670449799005123371655224008190247224909338299547930732677173150041355\\
&90642802687246850771579138342847 \,x^3~.
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
&\bullet r=2,~~k=7:\\
&-63221044749875358413745022419037852999211460218912354859182278723793194763608955\\
&69083158515272883214826719259981544144401779857393246859297454316875384045119131604\\
&09730106129249387945348177411325214212521132649260658490824379019540346646977013733\\
&70364308357238769531250000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000\\
&00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000+7689317001436808688465\\
&94496835357146564963658043009477662494651518387460225724968177988381514455526109803\\
&65480372933812665981956065023979490740085467402846935868178202385437133043353873557\\
&88224259870421298440415508596182706423035926152139981309326189119185155267175834498\\
&11677098750806180760264396667480468750000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000\\
&00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000\,x-11512622292097404993525570606\\
&31695997866311286244092918011731114409309096075272174764599912523483510094042695705\\
&33344879143879922000131490824383736952944636806713017012973184881908620479323776481\\
&32622103415724647423659250178192846527701864758976555597044399924916019009630666772\\
&76609369404201484050924563447725224030193658109055832028388977050781250000000000000\\
&000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000\,x^2-672232996605797709\\
&29375864747083052183628238733887917868657258005534772442463791434241140103111792486\\
&89686734542268517271729316048108628676198322579421957110454083577542901318435903470\\
&04907611409361306027920753596289157940321358616659221758088517262450417157546236820\\
&86392307057226733351528461327765206528690166061528491609355927358936857161005426154\\
&07200727390691671962634623969726562500000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000\\
&00\,x^3-1828221095436353717463174614437247330976158382656049872238375633162292868733\\
&74813398644462779979827289360372387537870206749333879123017694494738796239408112733\\
&28449200979037008209913975189192955946180380633322654605933402448500061893467638415\\
&60004136598159867314017545571506612004026822799245375407831045735371095310392708232\\
&81344476562979634640782750717162415439593036061033323032854282308841815501351114416\\
&935677549582015625000000000000000000000000\,x^4+3611743405663572269901520771342393081\\
&615670418917668079657497497275379573689559782204857676561201426730734937864394846343\\
&145339533029221076753457687358806578957577220325123249847686068331444194396137836564\\
&851492258428166002257460998695324872671642584396813257801785611761203007758151123590\\
&846908325491660994943573867336626008249075660058584580343705511632800783660690250144\\
&68919793348940488399910890856318533605156447765637099923292983683865980527\,x^5~.
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
&\bullet r=2,~~k=8:\\
&-134359730992479741191539993021929240046707667243497260643608787066715685367224215\\
&737491611861837195833912916531295635207043101279109779464815792637735429160556081519\\
&781114488924354896071277498237553895626003602035163408030213775466890051884123979696\\
&892709068011402492330515480180433120829469951332425922338464907568322814768180251121\\
&52099609375-19360186351791045607549692954791951034992333280696911015169254722289053\\
&416284152526969102804765216978173499947700613776564480381020890372855544690651548265\\
&350440982743487680974528623114682454006214636514290830628924900453497304463562988472\\
&932081326581749238397927098301302152693352812062249144023151201693661661149265920000\\
&00000000000000000000000000000000000000000\,x-390316836654442678880830852748722871104\\
&342297141395464092338948279193236467065515866006754339081081230806552823618308925531\\
&062223061761394054417454859984429984530932997048108945642228333995340784233250345698\\
&236959509392506612879339512935989532924749377691029889790544558044773087305348204694\\
&968964402868306643966285330077585929060732569657251503013888000000000000000000000000\\
&000000\,x^2-1338957446769462324846303613619702797004750523035431458567179745765247566\\
&922671272624431292110245643326920094689892022102994901665786151216134233511274384197\\
&715005574803455795078830652501165515811832186248315634633782854587714488314168401954\\
&387419524934074760236295165494672383541915533427083824532101970644590493756309459429\\
&19986755048024228629588619715052355469949170735393164754944000000000000000\,x^3+162266\\
&7490347886753074861154430756407401826887961441735670196897840250173241848861777074876\\
&0912315207854109864386948761540569773284583982440580996741594147768641355272296624733\\
&2282632689165951791212346126162750936571776991055102255221295651635756525040838400078\\
&4931078753754990486512243476577338512702326541842225781394069607390183337578732342853\\
&96141178600267268748937574131999338755502611890176\,x^4~.
\end{align*}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank Tom Mainiero, Andrew Neitzke, Thorsten Weist, and Xi Yin for discussions. The work of CC is support by a Junior Fellowship at the Harvard Society of Fellows. The work of SHS is supported by the Kao Fellowship at Harvard University.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{s:intro}
Let $X=(X_t,{\mathbb P}_x)$ be a Hunt process in an open set $D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$, $d\ge 2$.
Let $\partial_M D$ and $\partial_m D$ be the Martin and minimal Martin boundary
of $D$ with respect to $X$ respectively.
For any $z\in\partial_M D$,
we denote by $M^D(x,z)$ the Martin kernel of $D$ at $z$ with respect to $X$.
The family of all excessive functions for $X$ will be denoted by ${\mathcal S}$. For a function
$v:D\to [0,\infty]$
and a set $E\subset D$, the reduced function of $v$ on $E$ is
defined by $R^E_v=\inf\{s\in {\mathcal S}:\, s\ge v \textrm{ on }E\}$ and its lower
semi-continuous regularization is denoted by $\widehat{R}^E_v$. A set $E\subset D$ is
said to be \emph{minimally thin} in $D$ at $z\in \partial_m D$ with respect to $X$
if $\widehat{R}^E_{M^D(\cdot, z)}\neq M^D(\cdot, z)$, cf.~\cite{Fol}.
A probabilistic interpretation of minimal thinness is given in
terms of the process $X$ conditioned to die at $z\in \partial_m D$:
For any $z\in \partial_m D$, let $X^z=(X^z_t, {\mathbb P}^z_x)$ denote
the $M^D(\cdot, z)$-process, Doob's $h$-transform
of $X$ with $h(\cdot)=M^D(\cdot, z)$. The lifetime of $X^z$
will be denoted by $\zeta$. It is known (see \cite{KW}) that
$\lim_{t\uparrow\zeta}X^z_t=z$, ${\mathbb P}^z_x$-a.\/s. For $E\subset D$,
let $T_E:=\inf\{t>0: X^z_t\in E\}$. It is proved in \cite[Satz 2.6]{Fol}
that a set $E\subset D$ is minimally thin at $z\in \partial_m D$ with respect to $X$
if and only if there exists $x\in D$ such that ${\mathbb P}^z_x(T_E<\zeta)\neq 1$.
This shows that minimal thinness is a concept describing smallness
of a set at a boundary point.
The history of minimal thinness
goes back to Lelong-Ferrand \cite{LF} who introduced this concept
in case of the half-space in the setting of classical potential theory.
Minimal thinness for general open sets
was developed in Na\"{i}m \cite{Nai}, while probabilistic
interpretation (in terms of Brownian motion) was given by
Doob (see e.g.~\cite{Doo}). Various versions of Wiener-type
criteria for minimal thinness were developed over the years
culminating in the work of Aikawa \cite{A} who, by using
the powerful concept of quasi-additivity of capacity,
established a criterion for minimal thinness for subsets of
NTA domains. For a good exposition of these results and
methods cf.~\cite[Part II, 7]{AE}. In case of a
$C^{1,1}$ domain $D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$, the finite part of the minimal Martin boundary
$\partial_m D$ coincides with the Euclidean boundary $\partial D$,
and Aikawa's criterion reads as follows: Let $E$ be a Borel subset
of $D$. If $E$ is minimally thin at $z\in \partial D$, then
\begin{equation}\label{e:aikawa-criterion}
\int_{E\cap B(z, 1)}|x-z|^{-d}\, dx <\infty\, .
\end{equation}
Conversely, if $E$ is the union of a subfamily of Whitney
cubes of $D$ and \eqref{e:aikawa-criterion} holds, then $E$
is minimally thin in $D$ at $z$.
Note that all works listed above pertain to
the classical potential theory related to Brownian motion. For more general
Hunt processes, although the general theory of minimal thinness was
developed by F\"ollmer already in 1969, see \cite{Fol}, until recently
no concrete criteria for minimal thinness were known. The first paper
addressing this question was \cite{KSV6} which dealt with
minimal thinness of subsets of the half-space for a large class of
subordinate Brownian motions. Quite general results
for a large class of symmetric L\'evy processes in $\kappa$-fat open
sets were obtained in \cite{KSV11}. The special case of a
$C^{1,1}$ open set $D$ was given in \cite[Corollary 1.5]{KSV11}.
We present here a slightly simplified version of the main result of \cite{KSV11}. Assume that $X$
is an isotropic L\'evy process in ${\mathbb R}^d$, $d\ge 2$, with
characteristic exponent $\Psi(x)=\Psi(|x|)$ satisfying the
following weak scaling condition: There exist constants
$0<\delta_1 \le \delta_2<1$ and $a_1,a_2>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{e:wsc}
a_1 \lambda^{2\delta_1}\Psi(t)\le \Psi(\lambda t)\le a_2
\lambda^{2\delta_2}\Psi(t)\, ,\qquad \lambda\ge 1, t\ge 1\, .
\end{equation}
We note that many subordinate Brownian motions, particularly all isotropic stable processes, satisfy the above
condition. Let $X^D$ be the process $X$ killed upon exiting
a $C^{1,1}$ open set $D$. If a Borel set $E\subset D$ is
minimally thin in $D$ at $z\in \partial D$ with respect
to $X^D$, then \eqref{e:aikawa-criterion} holds true.
The converse is also true provided $E$ is the union of
a subfamily of Whitney cubes of $D$. Thus one obtains the
same Aikawa-type criterion for minimal thinness regardless
of the particular isotropic L\'evy process $X$ as long as $X$
satisfies the weak scaling condition \eqref{e:wsc}. This is a
somewhat surprising result. An explanation for this hinges on
sharp two-sided estimates for the Green function of $X^D$ which
imply that the singularity of the Martin kernel $M^D(x,z)$
near $z\in \partial D$ is of the order $|x-z|^{-d}$ for all such processes.
The purpose of this paper is to exhibit a large class of
(non-L\'evy) Markov processes
for which the Aikawa-type criterion for minimal thinness
depends on the particular process and is different from
\eqref{e:aikawa-criterion}. This class consists of subordinate
killed Brownian motions via subordinators having Laplace exponents
satisfying a certain weak scaling condition. Let us now precisely
formulate the setting and results.
Let $W=(W_t, {\mathbb P}_x)$ be a Brownian motion in ${\mathbb R}^d$, $d\ge 2$,
with transition density
$$
p(t,x,y)=(4\pi t)^{-\frac{d}{2}}\exp\left(-\frac{|x-y|^2}{4t}\right)\,
,\qquad t>0,\ x,y\in {\mathbb R}^d\, .
$$
Let $S=(S_t)_{t\ge 0}$ be an independent subordinator with Laplace
exponent $\phi:(0,\infty)\to (0,\infty)$, i.e.,
${\mathbb E}[e^{-\lambda S_t}]=e^{-t\phi(\lambda)}$, $t\ge 0$, $\lambda>0$.
The process $X=(X_t, {\mathbb P}_x)$ defined by $X_t=W_{S_t}$, $t\ge 0$,
is called a subordinate Brownian motion. It is an isotropic L\'evy
process with characteristic exponent $\Psi(x)=\phi(|x|^2)$.
Let $D$ be an open subset of ${\mathbb R}^d$, and let $X^D$ be the process
$X$ killed upon exiting $D$. This process is known as a killed
subordinate Brownian motion. By reversing the order of subordination
and killing one obtains a different process. Assume from now on that
$D$ is a domain (i.e.,~connected open set) in ${\mathbb R}^d$, and
let $W^D=(W^D_t, {\mathbb P}_x)$ be the Brownian motion $W$ killed upon
exiting $D$. The process $Y^D=(Y^D_t,{\mathbb P}_x)$ defined by
$Y^D_t=W^D_{S_t}$, $t\ge 0$, is called a subordinate killed
Brownian motion.
It is a Hunt process and its infinitesimal generator is given by
$-\phi(-\Delta_{|D})$ where $\Delta_{|D}$ is the Dirichlet Laplacian.
Recall that the Laplace exponent of a subordinator is a Bernstein function,
i.e.,~it has the representation
$$
\phi(\lambda)=b\lambda +\int_{(0,\infty)}(1-e^{-\lambda x})\, \mu(dx)\, ,
$$
with $b\ge 0$ and $\mu$ a measure on $(0,\infty)$ satisfying
$\int_{(0,\infty)}(1\wedge x)\, \mu(dx)<\infty$, which is called the L\'evy measure of $S$.
The potential measure of the subordinator $S$ is defined by
$
U(A)=\int_0^\infty{\mathbb P}(S_t\in A)\,dt.
$
A Bernstein function $\phi$ is called a complete Bernstein function
if its L\'evy measure has a completely monotone density.
A Bernstein function $\phi$ is called a special Bernstein function if the
function $\lambda\mapsto \lambda/\phi(\lambda)$ is also a Bernstein function.
The function $\lambda\mapsto \lambda/\phi(\lambda)$ is called the conjugate
Bernstein function of $\phi$. It is well known that any complete Bernstein function
is a special Bernstein function. For this and other properties of
complete and special Bernstein functions, see \cite{SSV}.
In this the paper we will impose following assumptions:
\begin{itemize}
\item[{\bf (A1)}]
the potential measure of $S$ has a decreasing density $u$;
\item[{\bf(A2)}]
the L\' evy measure of $S$ is infinite and has a decreasing density $\mu$;
\item[{\bf(A3)}] there exist constants $\sigma>0$, $\lambda_0>0$ and
$\delta \in (0, 1]$
such that
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\phi'(\lambda t)}{\phi'(\lambda)}\leq\sigma\, t^{-\delta}\ \text{ for all }\ t\geq 1\ \text{ and }\
\lambda\geq\lambda_0\, .
\end{equation*}
\end{itemize}
Depending on whether our domain $D$ is bounded or unbounded, we will consider the following two sets of conditions.
\begin{itemize}
\item[{\bf(A4)}]
If $D$ is bounded and $d = 2$, we assume that there are $
\sigma_0>0$ and
$\delta_0 \in (0,2)$
such that
\begin{equation*}\label{e:new23}
\frac{\phi'(\lambda t)}{\phi'(\lambda)}\geq
\sigma_0\,t^{-
\delta_0}\ \text{ for all
}\ t\geq 1\ \text{ and }\ \lambda\geq\lambda_0.
\end{equation*}
\item[{\bf(A5)}] If $D$ is bounded and $d = 2$, we assume that
\begin{equation*}
\int_{0}^{1}\frac{d \lambda}{\phi(\lambda)}<\infty.
\end{equation*}
\end{itemize}
\begin{itemize}
\item[{\bf(A6)}]
If $D$ is unbounded then we assume that $d \ge 3$ and that there are
$\beta, \sigma_1 >0$ such that
\begin{align}\label{e:mas}
\frac{u(\lambda t)}{u(\lambda)} \ge \sigma_1 t^{-\beta }
\quad \text{ for all } t\ge 1 \text{ and } \lambda>0\, .
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
Assumptions {\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A5)} were introduced and used in \cite{KM} and \cite{KM2}. It is easy to check that
if $\phi$ is a complete Bernstein function satisfying condition {\bf (H1)}: there exist $a_1, a_2>0$ and
$\delta_1, \delta_2\in (0,1)$ satisfying
$$
a_1 \lambda^{\delta_1}\phi(t)\le \phi(\lambda t)\le a_2 \lambda^{\delta_2}\phi(t)\, ,\qquad \lambda \ge 1, t\ge 1\, ,
$$
then {\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A4)} are automatically satisfied.
One of the reasons for adopting the more general setup above is to cover the case
of geometric stable and iterated geometric stable subordinators.
Suppose that $\alpha\in (0, 2)$ for $d \ge 2$ and that $\alpha\in (0, 2]$ for $d \ge 3$.
A geometric $(\alpha/2)$-stable subordinator is a subordinator
with Laplace exponent $\phi(\lambda)=\log(1+\lambda^{\alpha/2})$.
Let $\phi_1(\lambda):=\log(1+\lambda^{\alpha/2})$, and for $n\ge 2$,
$\phi_n(\lambda):=\phi_1(\phi_{n-1}(\lambda))$. A subordinator with
Laplace exponent $\phi_n$ is called an iterated geometric subordinator.
It is easy to check that the functions $\phi$ and $\phi_n$ satisfy
{\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A6)},
but they do not satisfy {\bf (H1)}.
Assumption {\bf (A1)} implies that $\phi$ is a special Bernstein
function, see, for instance, \cite[Theorem 5.1]{SV}.
Moreover, {\bf (A3)} implies $b=0$, {\bf (A2)} implies that $\mu((0, \infty))=\infty$, and
{\bf (A5)} is equivalent to the transience of $X$.
In case $d\ge3$, $X$ is always transient.
Condition {\bf (A6)} is only assumed when $D$ is unbounded and can be restated as
\begin{equation}\label{e:mas2}
\frac{u(R)}{u(r)}\ge \sigma_1 \left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^{-\beta}\, ,\qquad 0<r\le R<\infty\, .
\end{equation}
Under {\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A3)}, the inequality in \eqref{e:mas2} is valid with $\beta=2-\delta$ whenever $0<r\le R\le 1$, (see \eqref{e:upper-estimate-u} and \eqref{e:lower-estimate-u} below).
So {\bf (A6)} is mainly a condition about the behavior of $u$ near
infinity. It follows easily from \cite{KSV8} that if $\phi$ is a complete Bernstein function satisfying,
in addition to {\bf (H1)}, also condition {\bf (H2)}: there exist $a_3, a_4>0$ and
$\delta_3, \delta_4\in (0,1)$ satisfying
$$
a_3 \lambda^{\delta_3}\phi(t)\le \phi(\lambda t)\le a_4 \lambda^{\delta_4}\phi(t)\, ,
\qquad \lambda \le 1, t\le 1\, ,
$$
then {\bf (A6)} is satisfied, see \cite[Corollary 2.4]{KSV8}.
There are plenty of examples of complete Bernstein functions which
satisfy {\bf (A6)} but not {\bf (H2)}. For any $m>0$ and $\alpha\in (0, 2)$, the function
$\phi(\lambda):=(\lambda+m^{2/\alpha})^{\alpha/2}-m$, the Laplace exponent of a
relativistic stable subordinator,
is such an example.
Recall that an open set $D$ in $\bR^d$ is said to be a (uniform) $C^{1,1}$
open set if there exist a localization radius $R>0$ and
a constant $\Lambda>0$ such that for every $z\in\partial D$, there exist
a $C^{1,1}$-function $\psi=\psi_z: \bR^{d-1}\to \bR$ satisfying
$\psi (0)= 0$, $\nabla \psi (0)=(0, \dots, 0)$, $\| \nabla \psi
\|_\infty \leq \Lambda$, $| \nabla \psi (x)-\nabla \psi (w)|
\leq \Lambda |x-w|$, and an orthonormal coordinate system
$CS_z$ with its origin at $z$ such that
$$
B(z, R)\cap D=\{ y= (\widetilde y, \, y_d) \mbox{ in } CS_z:
|y|< R, y_d > \psi (\widetilde y) \}.
$$
The pair $(R, \Lambda)$ is called the characteristics
of the $C^{1,1}$ open set $D$.
Recall that an open set $D$ is said to satisfy the interior and exterior balls conditions with radius
$R_1$ if for every $z\in \partial D$, there exist $x\in D$ and $y\in \overline{D}^c$ such that
${\rm dist}(x, \partial D)=R_1$, ${\rm dist}(y, \partial D)=R_1$,
$B(x, R_1)\subset D$ and $B(y, R_1)\subset \overline{D}^c$.
It is known, see \cite[Definition 2.1 and Lemma 2.2]{AKSZ}, that an open set
$D$ is a $C^{1,1}$ open set if and only if it satisfies the interior and exterior ball conditions.
By taking $R$ smaller if necessary, we will always assume a $C^{1,1}$ open set
with characteristics $(R, \Lambda)$ also satisfies the interior and exterior balls conditions with the same radius $R$.
We can now state the main result of
this paper. By $\delta(x)$ we denote the distance of the point
$x\in D$ to the boundary $\partial D$.
\begin{thm}\label{t:main}
Assume that $\phi$ is a Bernstein function satisfying
{\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A6)}.
Let $D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$ be either a bounded $C^{1,1}$ domain, or
a $C^{1,1}$ domain with compact complement or
a domain above the graph of a bounded $C^{1,1}$ function.
\noindent
(1)
If $E$ is minimally thin in $D$ at $z\in\partial D$ with
respect to $Y^D$,
then
\begin{equation}\label{e:main}
\int_{E\cap B(z, 1)} \frac{\delta(x)^2\phi(\delta(x)^{-2})
\phi'(|x-z|^{-2})}{|x-z|^{d+4}\phi(|x-z|^{-2})^2}\, dx < \infty\, .
\end{equation}
\noindent
(2)
Conversely, if $E$ is the union of a subfamily of Whitney
cubes of $D$ and \eqref{e:main} holds true, then $E$ is
minimally thin in $D$ at $z\in\partial D$ with respect to $Y^D$.
\end{thm}
Since minimal thinness is defined for points in the minimal Martin boundary, the first step in proving this theorem is the identification of the finite part of the (minimal) Martin boundary of $D$
with its Euclidean boundary. In case of a bounded Lipschitz domain,
special subordinator $S$, and $d\ge 3$, this was accomplished in \cite[Theorem 4.3]{SV06}
(see also \cite[Theorem 5.84]{SV}). The method employed in
\cite{SV06, SV} heavily depended on the fact that the semigroup of the killed Brownian
motion $W^D$ in a bounded Lipschitz domain $D$ is intrinsically ultracontractive
which implies that all excessive functions with respect to $W^D$ are purely excessive.
In fact, \cite{SV06} proves that there is 1-1 correspondence between the cone of excessive
(respectively non-negative harmonic) functions of $W^D$ and the cone of excessive
(respectively non-negative harmonic) functions of $Y^D$, thus
allowing an easy transfer of many results valid for $W^D$ to results for $Y^D$.
In case of an unbounded domain, the semigroup of $W^D$ is no longer intrinsically ultracontractive and the method from \cite{SV06} cannot be used to identify the finite part of the (minimal) Martin boundary of $D$ with its Euclidean boundary.
In the case of killed subordinate Brownian motions, one of the main
tools used in identifying the (minimal) Martin boundary of a (possibly)
unbounded open set is the boundary Harnack principle.
In the
present case of subordinate killed Brownian motions, the
boundary Harnack principle is not yet available. As a substitute for the
boundary Harnack principle, we first establish sharp two-sided estimates
on the Green functions of subordinate killed Brownian motions in any $C^{1,1}$ domain
with compact complement or any domain above the graph of a bounded $C^{1,1}$ function.
This is done in Section \ref{s:gfmke}, see Theorems \ref{t:gfe} and \ref{t:gfe:nn}.
In Section \ref{s:mke}, by using some ideas from \cite{SV06}, we then show that the Martin kernel $M^D_Y(\cdot, \cdot)$
can be extended from $D\times D$ to $D\times \overline{D}$, cf.~Proposition \ref{p:extension-M}.
By using sharp two-sided estimates of the Green function, we subsequently establish in
Theorems \ref{t:mke} and \ref{t:mke2} sharp two-sided estimates
for the Martin kernel $M^D_Y(x,z)$, $x\in D$, $z\in \partial D$.
The remaining part of the section is devoted to proving that the finite part of the (minimal)
Martin boundary of $D$ can be identified with its Euclidean boundary in case
$D$ is either a bounded $C^{1,1}$ domain,
a $C^{1,1}$ domain with compact complement or a domain above the graph of a bounded $C^{1,1}$ function.
We note that in case of a bounded $C^{1,1}$ domain
(and under the assumptions {\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A5)})
this gives an alternative proof of some of the results form \cite{SV06}. Results of Sections \ref{s:gfmke} and \ref{s:mke} might be of independent interest.
Having identified the finite part of the (minimal) Martin boundary with the Euclidean boundary,
we can follow the method developed by Aikawa, cf.~\cite{A} and \cite[Part II, 7]{AE}, which
was also used in \cite{KSV11}, to prove Theorem \ref{t:main}.
One of the main ingredients of this method is the quasi-additivity of
the capacity related to the process $Y^D$, see Proposition
\ref{p:quasi-additivity}. This depends on the construction of a measure
comparable to the capacity which relies on an appropriate Hardy's inequality.
The first result on minimal thinness is a criterion given in Proposition
\ref{p:minthin-criterion-1} stating that a subset $E$ of $D$ is minimally
thin at $z\in \partial D$ (with respect to $Y^D$) if and only if
$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}R^{E_n}_{M^D_Y(\cdot, z)}(x_0)<\infty$; here
$E_n=E\cap \{x\in D:\, 2^{-n-1}\le |x-z|<2^{-n}\}$ and $x_0\in D$
a fixed point. The proof of this general result depends
on an inequality relating the Green function and the Martin kernel of $Y^D$,
cf. Corollary \ref{c:U-M}. The inequality itself hinges on
sharp two-sided estimates of the Green function of $Y^D$ (cf. Theorems \ref{t:gfe} and \ref{t:gfe:nn})
and sharp two-sided
estimates of the Martin kernel (cf. Theorems \ref{t:mke} and \ref{t:mke2}).
With the quasi-additivity of capacity and the criterion for
minimal thinness from Proposition \ref{p:minthin-criterion-1} in hand,
it is rather straightforward to complete the proof of Theorem \ref{t:main}.
As an application of Theorem \ref{t:main}, we derive an analogue to a
criterion in the classical setting for minimal thinness in the half-space $\H$ of
a set below the graph of a Lipschitz function
$f:{\mathbb R}^{d-1}\to [0,\infty)$. In the classical case and
the case of killed subordinate Brownian motions in the half-space studied in \cite{KSV11}, the
criterion states that the set $A=\{(\widetilde{x}, x_d)\in
\H:\, 0<x_d\le f(\widetilde{x})\}$ is minimally
thin at 0 if and only
if $\int_{\{|\widetilde{x}|<1\}}f(\widetilde{x})|\widetilde{x}|^{-d}\, d\widetilde{x} <\infty$.
For the subordinate killed Brownian motion $Y^D$ the criterion
depends on the underlying Bernstein function $\phi$ and says
that $A$ is minimally thin at 0 if and only if
$$
\int_{\{|\widetilde{x}|<1\}}\frac{f(\widetilde{x})^3\phi(
f(\widetilde{x})^{-2})\phi'(|\widetilde{x}|^{-2})}{|\widetilde{x}|^{d+4}\phi(|\widetilde{x}|^{-2})^2}\, d\widetilde{x} <\infty\, ,
$$
see Proposition \ref{p:dahlberg2} and Remark \ref{r:dahlberg2-2} for the precise statement.
Finally, we give some examples. We first look at
three processes related to the stable process:
(1) $X^D$ -- the isotropic $\alpha$-stable process killed upon
exiting $D$, (2) $Y^D$ -- the subordinate killed Brownian motion
in $D$ with $(\alpha/2)$-stable subordinator, and
(3) $Z^D$ -- the censored $\alpha$-stable process in $D$.
Following \cite{MV} we briefly indicate how to prove criteria
for minimal thinness for the censored process, and then
compare minimal thinness of a given set with respect to
these processes and the index of stability $\alpha$.
Roughly, minimal thinness for $Z^D$ implies minimal
thinness for $X^D$ which in turn implies minimal
thinness for $Y^D$, see Corollary \ref{c:comparison}
for the precise statement. We also show that the converse does not hold.
At the end of Section \ref{s:stable}, we give some examples
related to subordinate killed Brownian motions
via geometric stable subordinators.
Organization of the paper: In the next section we give some
preliminaries on Bernstein functions satisfying conditions {\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A5)} and on the subordinate killed Brownian motion $Y^D$
and its relation to the killed subordinate Brownian motion.
In Section \ref{s:gfmke} we prove sharp two-sided estimates
for the Green function and the jumping kernel of $Y^D$.
In Section \ref{s:mke}
we identify the finite part of the (minimal) Martin boundary with
the Euclidean boundary
and give
sharp two-sided estimates
on the Martin kernel of $Y^D$.
We continue in Section \ref{s:quasi} with the proof of the
quasi-additivity of the capacity.
Results about minimal thinness
are proved in Section \ref{s:mtf}. The paper concludes with
criteria for minimal thinness with respect to processes related to the stable case,
and with respect to subordinate killed Brownian motions via
geometric stable subordinators.
In this paper, we use the letter $c$, with
or without subscripts, to denote a constant, whose value may change from one
appearance to another. The notation $c(\cdot, \dots, \cdot)$ specifies the dependence of
the constant. The dependence of the constants on the domain $D$
(including the dimension $d$) and
the Bernstein function $\phi$ will not be explicitly mentioned.
For any two positive functions $f$ and $g$,
$f\asymp g$ means that there is a positive constant $c\geq 1$
so that $c^{-1}\, g \leq f \leq c\, g$ on their common domain of
definition.
We will use ``$:=$" to denote a
definition, which is read as ``is defined to be".
For $a, b\in \bR$,
$a\wedge b:=\min \{a, b\}$ and $a\vee b:=\max\{a, b\}$.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{s:preliminaries}
In this section we first collect several properties of Bernstein
functions and then collect some results on the subordinate killed Brownian motion $Y^D$ and its relation to the killed subordinate Brownian motion $X^D$.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:properties-of-bf}
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] For every Bernstein function $\phi$,
\begin{equation}\label{e:wlsc-substitute}
1 \wedge \lambda\le \frac{\phi(\lambda t)}{\phi(t)} \le 1 \vee \lambda\, ,\quad \textrm{for all }t>0, \lambda>0\, .
\end{equation}
\item[(b)]
If $\phi$ is a special Bernstein function, then
$\lambda \mapsto \lambda^2\phi'(\lambda)$ and $\lambda\mapsto
\lambda^2\frac{\phi'(\lambda)}{\phi(\lambda)^2}$ are increasing functions.
Furthermore, for any $\gamma>2$, $\lim_{\lambda\to 0} \lambda^\gamma\frac{\phi'(\lambda)}{\phi(\lambda)^2}=0$.
\item[(c)]
If $\phi$ is a special Bernstein function, then for
every $d\ge 2$, $\gamma\ge 2$, $\lambda>0$, $b\in (0,1]$ and $a\in [1,\infty)$ it holds that
\begin{equation}\label{e:phi-prime}
\frac{b}{a^{d+\gamma+1} \lambda^{d+\gamma}}\frac{\phi'(\lambda^{-2})}{\phi(\lambda^{-2})^2}\le \frac1{t^{d+\gamma}}\frac{\phi'(t^{-2})}{\phi(t^{-2})^2} \le \frac{a}{b^{d+\gamma+1} \lambda^{d+\gamma}}\frac{\phi'(\lambda^{-2})}{\phi(\lambda^{-2})^2}\, ,\quad\textrm{for all }t\in [b\lambda, a\lambda]\, .
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
Part (a) is well known, part (b) is proved in \cite[Lemma 4.1]{KM}, and part (c) can be proved in the same way as \cite[Corollary 2.2]{KM2} where the proof is given for $\gamma=2$. We will frequently use all three properties of the lemma, often without explicitly mentioning it.
Let $W$ be a Brownian motion in ${\mathbb R}^d$, $D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$ a domain, and $W^D$ a Brownian motion killed upon exiting $D$. We denote by $p^D(t,x,y)$, $t>0$, $x,y\in D$, the transition densities of $W^D$, and by $(P_t^D)_{t\ge 0}$ the corresponding semigroup.
Let $S$ be a subordinator independent of the Brownian motion $W$.
Let $Y^D_t=W^D_{S_t}$ be the
corresponding subordinate killed Brownian motion in $D$.
The process $Y^D$ is a symmetric Hunt process, cf. \cite{SV08}. We will use
$({\mathcal E}^D, {\mathcal D}({\mathcal E}^D))$ to denote the Dirichlet form associated with $Y^D$.
The killing measure of ${\mathcal E}^D$
has a density $\kappa_D$ given by the formula
\begin{equation}\label{e:killing-function-Y}
\kappa_D(x)=\int_{(0,\infty)}(1-P^D_t 1(x))\, \mu(dt)\, ,\quad x\in D\, .
\end{equation}
It follows from the general theory of Dirichlet forms that for every $v\in {\mathcal D}({\mathcal E}^D)$ it holds that
\begin{equation}\label{e:dirichlet-form-Y}
{\mathcal E}^D(v,v)\ge \int_D v(x)^2 \kappa_D(x)\, dx\, .
\end{equation}
Let $(R^D_t)_{t\ge 0}$ be the transition semigroup of $Y^D$.
We will need to compare this semigroup with the semigroup of the killed
subordinate Brownian motion. Recall that $X_t=W_{S_t}$ is the
subordinate Brownian motion and $(X^D_t)_{t\ge 0}$
is the subprocess of $X$ killed upon exiting $D$.
Let $(Q^D_t)_{t\ge 0}$ denote the transition semigroup of $X^D$.
It is well known, cf.~\cite[Proposition 3.1]{SV08}, that
$(R^D_t)_{t\ge 0}$ is subordinate to $(Q^D_t)_{t\ge 0}$ in
the sense that
\begin{align}
\label{e:subord}
R^D_t f(x)\le Q^D_t f(x) \quad \text{ for all Borel }
f:D\to [0,\infty) \text{ all } t\ge 0 \text{ and all } x\in D.
\end{align}
Let $j_X(x)$ denote the density of the L\'evy measure of the process $X$. Then
$$
j_X(x)=\int_{(0,\infty)}p(t,x,0)\, \mu(dt)=\int_{(0,\infty)}(4\pi t)^{-\frac{d}{2}}
\exp\left(-\frac{|x|^2}{4t}\right)\, \mu(dt)\, .
$$
Clearly, $j_X$ is a continuous function of $x$ on ${\mathbb R}^d \setminus \{0\}$ and radial
(that is, $j_X(x)=j_X(|x|)$).
Let $\kappa_D^X$ denote the killing function of $X^D$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{e:kappa-X}
\kappa_D^X(x)=\int_{D^c}j_X(x-y)\, dy\, , \quad x\in D\, ,
\end{equation}
and $\kappa_D^X$ is a continuous function of $x\in D$.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:transition-densities}
For any open set $D \subset {\mathbb R}^d$,
\begin{equation}\label{e:killing-functions}
\kappa_D^X(x)\le \kappa_D(x)\, ,\quad
\text{for almost all }x\in D\, .
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\noindent{\bf Proof.}
Using \eqref{e:subord},
the Lemma follows from the argument of \cite[Proposition 3.2]{SV03}. {\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
Assume $\phi$ is a Bernstein function satisfying
{\bf (A1)} so that the potential measure of $S$ has a decreasing density $u(t)$. Then the Green function of the subordinate killed Brownian motion $Y^D$, denoted by $U^D(x,y)$, $x,y \in D$, is given by the formula
\begin{equation}\label{e:green-function-skbm}
U^D(x,y)=\int_0^{\infty}p^D(t,x,y)u(t)\, dt=\int_0^{\infty}r^D(t,x,y)\, dt\, , \quad x,y \in D\, .
\end{equation}
Similarly, the Green function of $X$, denoted by $G_X(x,y)$, $x,y\in {\mathbb R}^d$, is given by
\begin{equation}\label{e:green-function-sbm}
G_X(x,y)=\int_0^{\infty}p(t,x,y)u(t)\, dt\, , \quad x,y \in {\mathbb R}^d\, .
\end{equation}
Since $p^D(t,x,y)\le p(t,x,y)$ for all $x,y\in D$, we see from \eqref{e:green-function-skbm} and \eqref{e:green-function-sbm} that
\begin{equation}\label{e:U-less-GX}
U^D(x,y)\le G_X(x,y) \, ,\quad \textrm{for all }x,y\in D\, .
\end{equation}
Assume now that $\phi$ is a Bernstein function satisfying
{\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A5)} and let $S$ be a subordinator with Laplace exponent $\phi$.
The potential density $u(t)$ of $S$ satisfies the following two estimates:
\begin{align}
u(t)\le (1-2e^{-1})^{-1}\frac{\phi'(t^{-1})}{t^2\phi(t^{-1})^2}\, ,\quad t>0\, ,\label{e:upper-estimate-u}
\end{align}
and, for every $M>0$ there exists $c_1=c_1(M)>0$ such that
\begin{align}
u(t)\ge c_{1} \frac{\phi'(t^{-1})}{t^2\phi(t^{-1})^2}\, ,\quad 0<t\le
M\, .\label{e:lower-estimate-u}
\end{align}
For the upper estimate see \cite[Lemma A.1]{KM},
and for the lower \cite[Proposition 3.4]{KM}
The density $\mu(t)$ of the L\'evy measure of $S$ satisfies the following two estimates:
\begin{align}
\mu(t)\le (1-2e^{-1})^{-1}t^{-2}\phi'(t^{-1})\, ,\quad t>0\, ,
\label{e:upper-estimate-mu}
\end{align}
and, for every $M>0$ there exists $c_2=c_2(M)>0$ such that
\begin{align}
\mu(t)\ge c_2 t^{-2}\phi'(t^{-1})\, ,\quad 0<t\le
M\, .\label{e:lower-estimate-mu}
\end{align}
For the upper estimate see \cite[Lemma A.1]{KM},
and for the lower \cite[Proposition 3.3]{KM}.
Recall that $G_X(x,y)$ denotes the Green function of the subordinate
Brownian motion $X_t=W_{S_t}$. When $d \ge 3$ we have that there exists $c_3>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{e:free-gfe}
G_X(x,y)\le c_3 \frac{\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})}
{|x-y|^{d+2}\phi(|x-y|^{-2})^2}\, ,\quad x,y\in {\mathbb R}^d\, .
\end{equation}
This can be proved by following the proof of \cite[Lemma 3.2(b)]{KSV8} using \eqref{e:upper-estimate-u}
and \cite[Lemma 4.1]{KM}.
Moreover, by
\cite[Proposition 4.5]{KM} we have the following two-sided inequality:
For every $d \ge 2$ and $M>0$,
there exists $c_4=c_4(M)>1$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{e:free-gfe-reverse}
c_4^{-1}
\frac{\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})}
{|x-y|^{d+2}\phi(|x-y|^{-2})^2} \le G_X(x,y)\le c_4
\frac{\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})}
{|x-y|^{d+2}\phi(|x-y|^{-2})^2}\, ,
\quad |x-y|\le M\, .
\end{equation}
The L\'evy density of $X$ also has the following two-sided estimates by \cite[Proposition 4.2]{KM}:
For every $M>0$ there exists $c_5=c_5(M)>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{e:levy-density-estimate}
c_5^{-1}r^{-d-2}\phi'(r^{-2})\le j_X(r)\le c_5 r^{-d-2}\phi'(r^{-2})\, ,\quad r\in (0, M]\, .
\end{equation}
Thus, by using Lemma \ref{l:properties-of-bf}(a) and (c), for every $M>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{e:doubling-condition}
j_X(r)\le c j_X(2r)\, ,\quad r\in (0, M]\, .
\end{equation}
\section{Kernel estimates on subordinate killed Brownian motion}\label{s:gfmke}
In this section we assume that
$D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$ is either a bounded $C^{1,1}$ domain, or
a $C^{1,1}$ domain with compact complement or a
domain above the graph of a bounded $C^{1,1}$
function. We assume that the $C^{1, 1}$ characteristics
of $D$ is $(R, \Lambda)$.
Recall that $(P^D_t)_{t\ge 0}$ denotes the transition semigroup of the killed Brownian motion $W^D$ and $p^D(t,x,y)$, $t>0$, $x,y\in D$, is the corresponding transition density.
It is known that $p^D(t,x,y)$ satisfies the following short-time
estimates (cf.~\cite{Zh, Zh2, Son}):
For any $T>0$, there exist positive constants
$c_1, c_2, c_3, c_4$
such that for any $t\in (0, T]$ and any $x,y\in D$,
\begin{equation}\label{e:upper-bound-for-p2}
p^D(t,x,y)\le c_1\left(\frac{\delta_D(x)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta_D(y)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\, t^{-d/2}\exp\left(-\frac{c_2 |x-y|^2}{t}\right)\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:lower-bound-for-p}
p^D(t,x,y)\ge c_3\left(\frac{\delta_D(x)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta_D(y)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\, t^{-d/2}\exp\left(-\frac{c_4 |x-y|^2}{t}\right)\, .
\end{equation}
Thus, by the semigroup property and \eqref{e:upper-bound-for-p2}, we get
there exist positive constants $c_5, c_6, c_7, c_8$ such that
for every $t>3$
\begin{align*}
&p^D(t,x,y)
=\int_D \int_D p^D(1,x,z) p^D(t-2,z,w)p^D(1,w,y) dzdw\\
&\le c_5\left(\delta(x)\wedge 1 \right)\left(\delta(y)\wedge 1 \right)\\
&\quad \times
\int_D \int_D
\,\exp\left(-c_6|x-z|^2\right)
\, (t-2)^{-d/2}\exp\left(-\frac{c_6|z-w|^2}{t-2}\right)
\,\exp\left(-{c_6 |w-y|^2}\right) dzdw\\
&\le c_5\left(\delta(x)\wedge 1 \right)\left(\delta(y)\wedge 1 \right)\\
&\quad \times
\int_{{\mathbb R}^d} \int_{{\mathbb R}^d}
\,\exp\left(-c_6|x-z|^2\right)
\, (t-2)^{-d/2}\exp\left(-\frac{c_6|z-w|^2}{t-2}\right)
\,\exp\left(-{c_6 |w-y|^2}\right) dzdw\\
&\le c_7
\left(\delta(x)\wedge 1 \right)\left(\delta(y)\wedge 1 \right)
t^{-d/2}\exp\left(-\frac{c_8|x-y|^2}{t}\right).
\end{align*}
Combining this with \eqref{e:upper-bound-for-p2}, we have that
there exist positive constant $c_9, c_{10}$
such that for all $t>0$ and any $x,y\in D$,
\begin{equation}\label{e:upper-bound-for-p}
p^D(t,x,y)\le c_9 \left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t} \wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\, t^{-d/2}\exp\left(-\frac{ c_{10} |x-y|^2}{t}\right)\, .
\end{equation}
We will use the following bound several times: By the change of variables
$s=c|x-y|^2/t$, for every $c>0$ and $a \in {\mathbb R}$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e:UD-lower-2}
&&\int_0^{|x-y|^2}
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
t^{-a/2}\exp\left(
-\frac{c |x-y|^2}{t}\right) \, dt \nonumber\\
&=& \int_{ c}^{\infty}
\left(\frac{\sqrt{s/c}\, \delta(x)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\sqrt{s/c}\, \delta(y)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{c|x-y|^2}{s}\right)^{-a/2}e^{-s}
\frac{c|x-y|^2}{s^2}\, ds\nonumber\\
&\ge& c^{1-(a/2)} \left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)
|x-y|^{-a+2} \int_{ c}^{\infty} s^{a/2-2}
e^{-s}\, ds.
\end{eqnarray}
Our first goal is to obtain sharp two-sided estimates on $U^D$.
Under stronger assumptions on the Laplace exponent $\phi$ such
estimates were given in \cite[Theorem 5.91]{SV} for bounded $D$.
In the remainder of this section
$\phi$ is a Bernstein function satisfying {\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A5)}.
We first consider the case $|x-y| \le M$.
\begin{thm}\label{t:gfe}
For every
$M>0$,
there exists a constant $c=c(M)\ge 1$ such that
for all $x,y \in D$ with $|x-y|\le M$,
\begin{eqnarray}
&&c^{-1}\left(\frac{\delta(x)\delta(y)}{|x-y|^2}\wedge 1
\right)\frac{\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})}
{|x-y|^{d+2}\phi(|x-y|^{-2})^2}\nonumber\\
&& \le U^D(x,y)
\le c \left(\frac{\delta(x)\delta(y)}{|x-y|^2}\wedge
1\right)\frac{\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})}
{|x-y|^{d+2}\phi(|x-y|^{-2})^2}\, .\label{e:gfe}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{thm}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} {\it Upper bound}:
It follows from \eqref{e:U-less-GX} and \eqref{e:free-gfe-reverse} that there exists a constant $c_1>0$ such that for
all $x,y \in D$ with $ |x-y|\le M$,
\begin{equation}\label{e:upper-UD-1}
U^D(x,y)\le G_X(x,y)\le c_1 \frac{\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})}
{|x-y|^{d+2}\phi(|x-y|^{-2})^2}\, .
\end{equation}
Let $c_2$ be the constant $c_{10}$ in \eqref{e:upper-bound-for-p}.
Since $t \to \frac{\phi'(t^{-1})}{\phi(t^{-1})^2}$ is
increasing, using \eqref{e:upper-estimate-u} we have that for $r>0$,
\begin{align}\label{e:uewq11}
I_1(r)&:=\int_0^{r^2}t^{-d/2-1}\exp{\left(-\tfrac{c_2r^2}{t}\right)}
u(t)\,dt\leq c_3\int_0^{r^2}
t^{-d/2-1}\exp{\left(-\tfrac{c_2r^2}{t}\right)}
t^{-2}\frac{\phi'(t^{-1})}{\phi(t^{-1})^2}\,dt\nonumber\\&\leq
c_3\frac{\phi'(r^{-2})}{\phi(r^{-2})^2}\int_0^{r^2}t^{-\frac{d}{2}-
3}\exp{\left(-\tfrac{c_2r^2}{t}\right)}\,dt
=c_4r^{-d-4}\frac{\phi'(r^{-2})}{\phi(r^{-2})^2}\int_{{c_2}}^\infty
t^{\frac{d}{2}+1}e^{-t}\,dt\,.
\end{align}
On the other hand, since $u$ is decreasing, using \eqref{e:upper-estimate-u}
we have that for $r>0$,
\begin{align}\label{e:uewq21}
I_2(r)&:=\int_{r^2}^\infty
t^{-d/2-1}u(t)\,dt \leq u(r^2)
\int_{r^2}^\infty t^{-d/2-1} dt\nonumber\\
&\leq c_5 r^{-4} \frac{\phi'(r^{-2})}{\phi(r^{-2})^2} \int_{r^2}^\infty t^{-d/2-1} dt\le c_6
r^{-d-4}\frac{\phi'(r^{-2})}{\phi(r^{-2})^2}\, .
\end{align}
It follows from \cite[Lemma 4.4]{KM} that
\begin{align}\label{e:uewq3}
L:=\int_{(2M)^2}^\infty
t^{-d/2}u(t)\,dt <\infty.
\end{align}
Thus from \eqref{e:green-function-skbm}, \eqref{e:upper-bound-for-p} and \eqref{e:uewq11}--\eqref{e:uewq3},
we have that, for $|x-y|\le M$,
\begin{align*}
&U^D(x,y)\,=\,\int_0^{\infty}p^D(t,x,y)u(t)\, dt\\
\le&
\int_0^{|x-y|^2}p^D(t,x,y)u(t)\, dt +\int_{|x-y|^2}^{(2M)^2}p^D(t,x,y)u(t)\, dt+\int_{(2M)^2}^\infty p^D(t,x,y)u(t)\, dt\\
\le& c_7
\int_0^{|x-y|^2}t^{-d/2-1}\delta(x)\delta(y)\exp
\left(-\frac{c_2|x-y|^2}{t}\right)u(t)\, dt \\
&
+c_7
\int_{|x-y|^2}^{(2M)^2} t^{-d/2-1}\delta(x)\delta(y)
u(t)\, dt
+c_7
\int_{(2M)^2}^{\infty} t^{-d/2}\delta(x)\delta(y)u(t)\, dt
\nonumber \\
\le &c_7 \delta(x)\delta(y) \big(I_1(|x-y|)+ I_2(|x-y|)+L\big) \le c_8\frac{\delta(x)\delta(y)}{|x-y|^2}\,
\frac{\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})}
{|x-y|^{d+2}\phi(|x-y|^{-2})^2}\, .
\end{align*}
In the last inequality above we use the fact that
$r\to r^{-d-4}\frac{\phi'(r^{-2})}{\phi(r^{-2})^2}$ is a decreasing function and is thus bounded from below
by a positive constant on $(0, M^2]$.
Together with \eqref{e:upper-UD-1} this gives the upper bound
in \eqref{e:gfe}.
\noindent
{\it Lower bound}:
Since $u$ is decreasing and $|x-y| \le M$, by \eqref{e:lower-bound-for-p} and
\eqref{e:lower-estimate-u},
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e:UD-lower-1}
&&U^D(x,y)\ge c_{9}\int_0^{|x-y|^2}
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
t^{-d/2}\exp\left(
-\frac{c_{10} |x-y|^2}{t}\right) u(t)\, dt \nonumber\\
&&\ge c_{9}u(|x-y|^2)\int_0^{|x-y|^2}
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
t^{-d/2}\exp\left(
-\frac{c_{10} |x-y|^2}{t}\right) \, dt\nonumber\\
&&\ge c_{11}\frac{\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})}
{|x-y|^{4}\phi(|x-y|^{-2})^2} \int_0^{|x-y|^2}
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
t^{-d/2}\exp\left(
-\frac{c_{10} |x-y|^2}{t}\right) \, dt.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
By combining this with \eqref{e:UD-lower-2}
we arrive at
\begin{align*}
U^D(x,y)&\ge c_{12}
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)
\frac{\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})}
{|x-y|^{d+2}\phi(|x-y|^{-2})^2}\nonumber\\
&\asymp
\left(\frac{\delta(x)\delta(y)}{|x-y|^2}\wedge 1\right)
\frac{\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})}
{|x-y|^{d+2}\phi(|x-y|^{-2})^2}\, .
\end{align*}
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
We now assume $d \ge 3$ and consider our two types of unbounded $C^{1,1}$ domains and give different estimates for $U^D$.
If $D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$ is a
domain above the graph of a bounded $C^{1,1}$
function, then it follows from \cite{Zh, Son}
that there exist positive constants $c_1, c_2, c_3$ and $c_4$
such that for any $t\in (0, \infty)$ and any $x,y\in D$,
\begin{equation}\label{e:upper-bound-for-pp2}
p^D(t,x,y)\le c_1\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\, t^{-d/2}\exp\left(-\frac{c_2 |x-y|^2}{t}\right)\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:lower-bound-for-pp2}
p^D(t,x,y)\ge c_3\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\, t^{-d/2}\exp\left(-\frac{c_4 |x-y|^2}{t}\right)\, .
\end{equation}
Clearly for $a>2$,
\begin{align}
\label{e:compu2-1}
\int_{|x-y|^2}^\infty \left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\, t^{-a/2} dt
\le \frac{2}{a-2}
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)\frac{1}
{|x-y|^{a-2}}\, .
\end{align}
By the change of variables
$s=|x-y|^2/t$ and the inequality
$$
\left(\frac{\sqrt{s}\delta(x)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)
\le \sqrt{s}\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right),
\qquad s\ge 1,
$$
it is easy to see that for $a \in {\mathbb R}$ and $b>0$,
there exist a constant $c=c(a, b)>0$ such that
\begin{align}
\label{e:compu2-2}
\int_0^{|x-y|^2} \left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}} \wedge 1 \right)
\, t^{-a/2}\exp\left(-\frac{b |x-y|^2}{t}\right) dt \nonumber
\\
\le c
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)\frac{1}
{|x-y|^{a-2}}\, .
\end{align}
If $D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$ is a
$C^{1,1}$ domain with compact complement, then it follows from \cite{Zh2} that
there exist positive constants $c_5, c_6, c_7$ and $c_8$
such that for any $t\in (0, \infty)$ and any $x,y\in D$,
\begin{equation}\label{e:upper-bound-for-pp3}
p^D(t,x,y)\le c_5\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t} \wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t} \wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\, t^{-d/2}\exp\left(-\frac{c_6 |x-y|^2}{t}\right)\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:lower-bound-for-pp3}
p^D(t,x,y)\ge c_7\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t} \wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t} \wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\, t^{-d/2}\exp\left(-\frac{c_8 |x-y|^2}{t}\right)\, .
\end{equation}
Clearly
for $a>2$,
\begin{align}
&\int_{|x-y|^2}^\infty \left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\, t^{-a/2} dt\nonumber\\
& \le \frac{2}{a-2}
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|x-y|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)\frac{1}
{|x-y|^{a-2}}\, . \label{e:compu3-1}
\end{align}
By the change of variables
$s=|x-y|^2/t$ and the inequalities
$$
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right) \le \left(\frac{\delta(x)}{(|x-y|/\sqrt{s})\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\le
\sqrt{s}\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right), \quad s\ge 1 ,
$$
it is easy to see that for $a \in {\mathbb R}$ and $b>0$, there exists a constant $c=c(a, b)>0$ such that
\begin{align}
\int_0^{|x-y|^2} \left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\, t^{-a/2}\exp\left(-\frac{b |x-y|^2}{t}\right) dt \nonumber\\ \le c
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|x-y|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)\frac{1}
{|x-y|^{a-2}} \label{e:compu3-2}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\label{e:compl3}
\int_0^{|x-y|^2} \left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\, t^{-a/2}\exp\left(-\frac{b |x-y|^2}{t}\right) dt \nonumber \\
\ge c^{-1}
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|x-y|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)\frac{1}
{|x-y|^{a-2}}\, .
\end{align}
\begin{thm}\label{t:gfe:nn}
Suppose that $d \ge 3$ and that $\phi$ is a
Bernstein function satisfying {\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A3)} and {\bf (A6)}.
(1) Let $D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$ be a
domain above the graph of a bounded $C^{1,1}$
function.
There exists a constant $c_1\ge 1$ such that for all $x,y \in D$,
\begin{align*}
&c_1^{-1}\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)\frac{u(|x-y|^2)}
{|x-y|^{d-2}} \le U^D(x,y)\nonumber\\
&\qquad \le c_1 \left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|x-y|} \wedge 1 \right)\frac{u(|x-y|^2)}
{|x-y|^{d-2}}\, .
\end{align*}
(2) Let $D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$ be a
$C^{1,1}$ domain with compact complement. There exists a constant $c_1\ge 1$ such that
for all $x,y \in D$,
\begin{align*}
&c_1^{-1}\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|x-y|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)\frac{u(|x-y|^2)}
{|x-y|^{d-2}} \le U^D(x,y) \nonumber\\
&\qquad \le c_1 \left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|x-y|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)\frac{u(|x-y|^2)}
{|x-y|^{d-2}}\, .
\end{align*}
\end{thm}
\noindent{\bf Proof.}
We give the proof of (2) first.
\noindent
{\it Upper bound}:
Using \eqref{e:mas} and the fact $u$ is decreasing, we have
from \eqref{e:upper-bound-for-pp3} that
\begin{align*}
&U^D(x,y)\,=\,\int_0^{\infty}p^D(t,x,y)u(t)\, dt\\
\le& c_1
\int_0^{\infty}\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)t^{-d/2}\exp
\left(-\frac{c_2|x-y|^2}{t}\right)u(t)\, dt
\nonumber \\
\le& c_3 |x-y|^{2\beta} u(|x-y|^2)
\int_0^{|x-y|^2}\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)t^{-\beta-d/2}\exp
\left(-c_2\frac{|x-y|^2}{t}\right)\, dt \\
&
+c_1 u(|x-y|^2)
\int_{|x-y|^2}^{\infty} \left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)t^{-d/2}\, dt.
\end{align*}
Together with \eqref{e:compu3-1}--\eqref{e:compu3-2} we obtain the upper bound.
\noindent
{\it Lower bound}:
Since $u$ is decreasing, by
\eqref{e:lower-bound-for-pp3}
\begin{align}\label{e:UD-lower-111}
U^D(x,y)\ge &c_4\int_0^{|x-y|^2}
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
t^{-d/2}\exp\left(
-\frac{c_5 |x-y|^2}{t}\right) u(t)\, dt \nonumber\\
\ge &c_4u(|x-y|^2)\int_0^{|x-y|^2}
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{\sqrt{t}\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
t^{-d/2}\exp\left(
-\frac{c_5 |x-y|^2}{t}\right) \, dt\, .
\end{align}
Combining \eqref{e:UD-lower-111} and \eqref{e:compl3}
we arrive at
\begin{align*}
U^D(x,y)&\ge c_6
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-y|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|x-y|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\frac{u(|x-y|^2)}
{|x-y|^{d-2}}\, . \end{align*}
Using \eqref{e:UD-lower-2} and \eqref{e:upper-bound-for-pp2}--\eqref{e:compu2-2},
instead of \eqref{e:upper-bound-for-pp3}--\eqref{e:UD-lower-111},
the proof of (1) is similar to (2).
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
\begin{prop}\label{p:U-continuous}
The Green function $U^D$ is jointly continuous in the extended sense, hence jointly lower
semi-continuous, on $D\times D$.
\end{prop}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} Let $x,y\in D$, $x\neq y$, and set $\eta=|x-y|/2$. Let $(x_n,y_n)_{n\ge 1}$ be a sequence in $D\times D$ converging to $(x,y)$ and assume that $|x_n-y_n|\ge \eta$. For every $t>0$, $\lim_{n\to \infty}p^D(t,x_n,y_n)=p^D(t,x,y)$. Moreover
$$
p^D(t,x_n,y_n)\le (4\pi t)^{-d/2}\exp\left(-\frac{|x_n-y_n|^2}{4t}\right)\le (4\pi t)^{-d/2}\exp\left(-\frac{\eta^2}{4t}\right)\, .
$$
Since the process $X$ is transient, we have that
$$
\int_0^{\infty}(4\pi t)^{-d/2}\exp\left(-\frac{\eta^2}{4t}\right)u(t)\, dt<\infty\, .
$$
Now it follows from the bounded convergence theorem that
$$
\lim_{n\to \infty}U^D(x_n,y_n)=\lim_{n\to \infty}\int_0^{\infty}p^D(t,x_n,y_n)u(t)\, dt=\int_0^{\infty}p^D(t,x,y)u(t)\, dt =U^D(x,y)\, .
$$
On the other hand,
from Theorem \ref{t:gfe} we get that
$$
\lim_{(x_n,y_n)\to (x,x)}U^D(x_n,y_n)=+\infty =U^D(x,x)\, .
$$
Thus
$U^D$ is jointly continuous in the extended sense, and therefore jointly lower semi-continuous. {\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
We now recall a result from analysis (see \cite[Theorem 1, p. 167]{Stein}):
Any open set $D\subset{\mathbb R}^d$ is the union of a family $\{Q_j\}_{j \in {\mathbb N}}$
of closed cubes, with sides all parallel to the axes, satisfying
the following properties:
(i) $\mathrm{int}(Q_j) \cap\, \mathrm{int} (Q_k)=\emptyset$, $j\neq k$;
(ii) for any $j$, $\mathrm{diam}(Q_j)\le \mathrm{dist}(Q_j,
\partial D)\le 4 \mathrm{diam}(Q_j)$, where $\mathrm{dist}
(Q_j, \partial D)$ denotes the Euclidean distance between
$Q_j$ and $\partial D$. The family $\{Q_j\}_{j \in {\mathbb N}}$ above
is called a Whitney decomposition of $D$ and the $Q_j$'s are
called Whitney cubes (of $D$). We will use $x_j$ to denote
the center of the cube $Q_j$. For each cube $Q_j$ let $Q_j^*$
denote the interior of the double of $Q_j$.
\begin{corollary}\label{c:whitney-green}
(i) For every $M>0$ there exists a constant $c_1=c_1(M)\ge 1$ such that for all
Whitney cubes $Q_j$ whose diameter is less than $M$,
\begin{align}\label{e:whitney-green}
c_1^{-1} U^D(x',y)\le U^D(x,y) \le c_1 U^D(x',y)\, ,
\end{align}
for all $x,x'\in Q_j$ and all $y\in D \setminus Q_j^*$ with ${\rm dist}(y, Q_j)<M$.
\noindent
(ii) For every $M>0$ there exists a constant $c_2=c_2(M) >0 $ such that for all cubes
$Q_j$ whose diameter is less than $M$ and all $x,x'\in Q_j$, it holds that
\begin{align}\label{e:whitney-green-2}
U^D(x,x')\ge c_2 G_X(x,x')\, .
\end{align}
\end{corollary}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} (i) From the geometry of Whitney cubes it is easy to see
that there exists a constant $c\ge 1$ such that for every cube
$Q_j$ it holds that
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &c^{-1}\delta(x)\le \delta(x_j)\le c \delta(x)\, ,\quad
\text{for all }x\in Q_j\, ,\\
& &c^{-1}|x-y|\le |x_j-y|\le c|x-y|\, ,\quad \text{for all }
x\in Q_j \text{ and all }y\in D\setminus Q_j^*\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
Together with Theorem \ref{t:gfe} and Lemma \ref{l:properties-of-bf}(c),
these estimates imply that
$$
U^D(x,y)\asymp U^D(x_j,y)\, ,\quad \text{for all }x\in Q_j
\text{ and all }y\in D\setminus Q_j^*\text{ with dist}(y, Q_j)<M\, ,
$$
with a constant independent of $Q_j$. This clearly implies
the statement of the corollary.
\noindent (ii) If $x,x'\in Q_j$, then $|x-x'|\le \mathrm{diam }
(Q_j)\le \mathrm{dist}(Q_j,\partial D)\le \delta(x)\wedge \delta(x') \wedge (4M)$.
Thus it follows from \eqref{e:gfe} and \eqref{e:free-gfe-reverse} that
$$
U^D(x,x')\,\ge\,c_1\,
\frac{\phi'(|x-x'|^{-2})}
{|x-x'|^{d+2}\phi(|x-x'|^{-2})^2}\,\ge\,
c_2\,G_X(x,x')\, .
$$
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
Let $J^D(x,y)$ be the jumping density of $Y^D$ defined by
$$J^D(x,y) =\int_0^{\infty}p^D(t,x,y)\mu(t)\, dt.$$
Clearly $J^D(x,y) \le j_X(|x-y|)$, $x, y \in D$.
Using \eqref{e:upper-estimate-mu}, \eqref{e:lower-estimate-mu}, \eqref{e:levy-density-estimate} and
the fact that $t^2\phi'(t)$ is increasing (see Lemma \ref{l:properties-of-bf}(b)),
the proof of the next proposition is very similar to that of Theorem
\ref{t:gfe}.
\begin{prop}
\label{p:J^D(z,y)}
For every $M>0$,
there exists a constant $c=c(M)\ge 1$ such that such that for all $x,y \in D$ with $|x-y|\le M$,
$$
c^{-1}\left(\frac{\delta(x)\delta(y)}{|x-y|^2}\wedge 1
\right)\frac{\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})}
{|x-y|^{d+2}} \le J^D(x,y)
\le c \left(\frac{\delta(x)\delta(y)}{|x-y|^2}\wedge
1\right)\frac{\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})}
{|x-y|^{d+2}}\, .
$$
\end{prop}
For any open subset $B$ of $D$, let
$U^{D,B}(x,y)$ be the Green function of $Y^D$ killed upon exiting $B$.
We define the Poisson kernel
\begin{equation}\label{PK}
K^{D,B}(x,y)\,:= \int_{B}
U^{D,B}(x,z) J^D(z,y) dz, \qquad (x,y) \in
B \times (D \setminus \overline{B}).
\end{equation}
Using the L\'{e}vy system for $Y^D$, we know that for every
open subset $B$ of $D$ and every $f \ge 0$ on $D \setminus \overline{B}$ and $x \in B$,
\begin{equation}\label{newls}
{\mathbb E}_x\left[f(Y^D_{\tau_B});\,Y^D_{\tau_B-} \not= Y^D_{\tau_B} \right]
=\int_{D \setminus \overline{B}} K^{D,B}(x,y)f(y)dy.
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}
\label{l:KSV7prop4.7}
For every $M>0$, there exists $c=c(M)>0$ such that for
any ball $B(x_0, r)\subset D$ of radius $r\in (0, 1]$, we have
for all $(x, y)\in B(x_0, r)\times (D \setminus \overline{B(x_0, r)})$ with $|x-y|\le M$,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e:KSV7-4.7}
K^{D, B(x_0, r)}(x, y)\,\le \,c \,\delta(y)\frac{\phi'((|y-x_0|-r)^{-2})}
{(|y-x_0|-r)^{d+3}} \phi(r^{-2})^{-1}.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{lemma}
\noindent{\bf Proof.}
Let $B=B(x_0, r)$.
Since $U^{D,B}(x,y) \le G_X(x,y)$,
\eqref{PK} and Proposition \ref{p:J^D(z,y)} imply that for every $(x,y) \in
B \times (D \setminus \overline{B})$ with $|x-y|\le M$,
\begin{align}
\label{e:KBE}
K^{D,B}(x,y)
&\le \int_{B}G_X(x,z) J^D(z,y) dz\nonumber \\
&\le c_1(M) \int_{B}
G_X(x,z)\left(\frac{\delta(z)\delta(y)}{|z-y|^2}\wedge
1\right)\frac{\phi'(|z-y|^{-2})}
{|z-y|^{d+2}} dz \nonumber\\
&\le c_1(M) \delta(y)\int_{B}
G_X(x,z)\frac{\phi'(|z-y|^{-2})}
{|z-y|^{d+3}} dz.
\end{align}
Since $|z-y| \ge |y-x_0|-r$ and $t \to {t^{-d-3}}\phi'(t^{-2})$ is decreasing (see Lemma \ref{l:properties-of-bf}(b)),
\begin{align}\label{e:KBE1}
\int_{B} G_X(x,z)\frac{\phi'(|z-y|^{-2})}{|z-y|^{d+3}} dz
&\le \frac{\phi'((|y-x_0|-r)^{-2})}
{(|y-x_0|-r)^{d+3}} \int_{B} G_X(x,z)dz\nonumber\\
&\le \frac{\phi'((|y-x_0|-r)^{-2})}
{(|y-x_0|-r)^{d+3}}\int_{B(0, 2r)} G_X(0, z)dz.
\end{align}
By \eqref{e:free-gfe-reverse}, we have
\begin{align}
\int_{B(0, 2r)} G_X(0, z)dz &\le
c_2 \int_{B(0, 2r)} |z|^{-d-2}\frac{\phi'(|z|^{-2})}
{\phi(|z|^{-2})^2} dz=c_2 \int_0^{2r} r^{-3}
\frac{\phi'(r^{-2})}
{\phi(r^{-2})^2} dr\nonumber\\
& \le 2^{-1}c_3\phi(2^{-1} r^{-2})^{-1} \le 2c_4\phi(r^{-2})^{-1}.\label{e:KBE2}
\end{align}
Combining \eqref{e:KBE}--\eqref{e:KBE2}, we have proved the proposition.
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
\section{Martin boundary and Martin kernel estimates}\label{s:mke}
In this section
we assume that
$D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$ is either a bounded $C^{1,1}$ domain, or
a $C^{1,1}$ domain with compact complement or
a domain above the graph of a bounded $C^{1,1}$
function. We assume that the $C^{1,1}$ characteristics
of $D$ is $(R, \Lambda)$.
Denote by $\widetilde{Y}^D$ the subordinate killed Brownian motion via
a subordinator with Laplace exponent $\lambda/\phi(\lambda)$.
Let $\widetilde \mu(dt)$ be the L\'evy measure of the
(possibly killed) subordinator with
Laplace exponent $\lambda/\phi(\lambda)$, the conjugate Bernstein function of $\phi(\lambda)$.
Since
$\mu((0, \infty))=\infty$, we also have $\widetilde \mu((0, \infty))=\infty$,
$$
\frac{\lambda}{\phi(\lambda)}=u(\infty)+\int_0^\infty (1-e^{-\lambda t}) \widetilde \mu(dt)
$$
and
\begin{align}
\label{e:umu}
u(t)=\widetilde
\mu((t, \infty))
+u(\infty).
\end{align}
(See \cite[Corollary 5.5]{SV} and the paragraph after it.)
Denote by $( \widetilde R^D_t)_{t\ge 0}$ the transition semigroup of $\widetilde Y^D$ and
by $\widetilde U^D$ the potential operator of $\widetilde Y^D$.
For any function $f$ which is excessive for $W^D$
we define an operator $\widetilde V^D$ by
$$
\widetilde V^D f(x)=u(\infty) f(x)+ \int_{(0,\infty)}(f(x)-P^D_t f(x))\,
\widetilde \mu(dt)\, ,\quad x\in D\, .
$$
Let $G^D( x, y)=\int_0^\infty p^D(t,x,y)dt$ be the Green function of $W^D$.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:VGD0}
For any $x,y \in D$, we have
$$U^D(x,y) =\widetilde V^D (G^D( \cdot, y))(x).$$
\end{lemma}
\noindent{\bf Proof.}
By the semigroup property, for every $s>0$,
\begin{align*}
&G^D( x, y)
=\int_0^\infty p^D(t,x,y)dt =\int_0^s p^D(t,x,y)dt+ \int_0^\infty p^D(t+s,x,y)dt\\
&=\int_0^s p^D(t,x,y)dt+ P^D_s\int_0^\infty p^D(t,\cdot,y) (x)dt=
\int_0^s p^D(t,x,y)dt+P_s^DG^D (\cdot,y)(x).
\end{align*}
Thus
\begin{align}
\label{e:uvg1}
\int_{(0,\infty)}(G^D( x, y)-P_s^DG^D (\cdot,y)(x))\widetilde \mu(ds)
=\int_{(0,\infty)}\int_0^s p^D(t,x,y)dt\widetilde \mu(ds).
\end{align}
Using \eqref{e:umu}
we see that
\begin{align*}
\widetilde V^D (G^D( \cdot, y))(x)&=
u(\infty) G^D( x, y) +
\int_{(0,\infty)}\int_0^s p^D(t,x,y)dt\widetilde \mu(ds)\\
&=u(\infty) G^D( x, y) +
\int_{0}^\infty\widetilde \mu((t, \infty)) p^D(t,x,y)dt \\
&=u(\infty) G^D( x, y) +
\int_{0}^\infty (u(t) -u(\infty) ) p^D(t,x,y)dt =U^D(x,y).
\end{align*}
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
Note that according to the pointwise version of the Bochner subordination formula one can regard $-\widetilde V$ as the generator of $\widetilde{Y}^D$. This provides an intuitive explanation of Lemma \eqref{l:VGD0}, namely $V^D U^D (\cdot, y)=V^D \widetilde{V}^D G^D(\cdot, y)=-\Delta G^D (\cdot, y)=-\delta_y$.
Fix a point $x_0\in D$ and define the Martin kernel with respect to $Y^D$ based at $x_0$ by
\begin{align}\label{e:mk}
M^D_Y(x, y):=\frac{U^D(x, y)}{U^D(x_0, y)}, \qquad x, y\in D,~y\neq x_0.
\end{align}
We will establish some relation between the Martin kernel for $Y^D$ and the Martin kernel for $W^D$.
Define the Martin kernel with respect to $W^D$ based at $x_0$ by
\begin{align}\label{e:mkW}
M^D(x, y):=\frac{G^D(x, y)}{G^D(x_0, y)}, \qquad x, y\in D,~y\neq x_0.
\end{align}
Since $D$ is a $C^{1,1}$ domain, for each $z\in \partial D$ there exists the limit
$$
M^D(x,z):=\lim_{y\to z} M^D(x,y)\, .
$$
In the next lemma, we extend \cite[Lemma 5.82]{SV} by including our two types of unbounded $C^{1,1}$ domains and the case $d=2$ for bounded $C^{1,1}$ domains.
\begin{lemma}\label{t5.1}
If
$(y_j)_{j\ge 1}$
is a sequence of points in $D$ such
that $\lim_{j \to \infty} y_j=z\in \partial D$,
then for each $t>0$ and
each $x\in D$,
$$
\lim_{j\to \infty} P^D_t \left(\frac{G^D(\cdot,y_j)}{G^D(x_0, y_j)}\right)(x)
= P^D_t(M^D(\cdot,z))(x)\, .
$$
\end{lemma}
\noindent{\bf Proof.}
Recall that the $C^{1, 1}$ characteristics of $D$ is $(R, \Lambda)$.
Fix $x \in D$ and let $R_1:=(R\wedge |x_0-z| \wedge |x-z|)/4$.
We assume all $y_j$ are in $B(z, R_1/2) \cap D$.
For any $r\in (0, R_1]$, there exists a ball $B(A_r(z), r/2) \subset D\cap B(z, r)$.
It is well known (see \cite[page 140]{A1} and \cite[Theorem 7.1]{JK}) that
there exist $c_1, \beta>0$ such that for any $r\in (0, R_1]$
and any $(y, w) \in D \cap B(z, r) \times (D\setminus B(z, 2r))$,
\begin{equation}\label{e:martin-estimate-boundary}
|M^D(w, y)-M^D(w, z)|\le c_1 M^D(w, A_r(z))\left(\frac{|y-z|}{r}\right)^\beta\, .
\end{equation}
Let $g(w)=|w|^{-d+2}$ be the Newtonian kernel when
$d\ge 3$ and be the logarithmic kernel $g(x)=\left(\log\frac{1}{|x|}\right)\vee 1$ when $d=2$.
Using the estimate of $p^D(t,x,y)$ in \eqref{e:upper-bound-for-p2} and the Green function estimates of Brownian motion, we have the following estimates:
for every $t>0$ there exists a constant $c_2=c_2(t, \delta(x), R_1)>0$ such that
\begin{align}
\label{pDMWD1}
p^D(t,x,y) M^D(y, z)\le c_2 g(y-z) \quad \forall y \in B(z, R_1) \cap D,
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\label{pDMWD2}
p^D(t,x,y)M^D(y, y_j)\le c_2 g(y-y_j) \quad \forall y \in B(y_j, R_1) \cap D.
\end{align}
In fact, since
$$\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|y-y_j|}\wedge \frac{\delta(y)}{\delta(y_j)} \right) \le 2,$$
for $d \ge3$,
\begin{align*}
&p^D(t,x,y)M^D(y, y_j) \le c_3(t) \delta(x) \delta(y) \frac{G^D(y, y_j)}{\delta(y_j)}\\
&\le c_4(t, \delta(x)) \frac{\delta(y)}{\delta(y_j)} \left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|y-y_j|}\wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(y_j)}{|y-y_j|}\wedge 1 \right) |y-y_j|^{-d+2}\\
&\le c_4(t, \delta(x)) \frac{\delta(y)}{\delta(y_j)} \left(\frac{\delta(y_j)}{|y-y_j|}\wedge 1 \right) |y-y_j|^{-d+2}\\
&\le c_4(t, \delta(x))\left(\frac{\delta(y)}{|y-y_j|}\wedge \frac{\delta(y)}{\delta(y_j)} \right) |y-y_j|^{-d+2}
\le 2 c_4(t, \delta(x)) |y-y_j|^{-d+2}.
\end{align*}
This proves \eqref{pDMWD2} for $d\ge 3$, and by letting $y_j \to z$, we get \eqref{pDMWD1} for $d\ge 3$.
The proofs of \eqref{pDMWD1} and \eqref{pDMWD2} for $d=2$ are similar.
The inequalities \eqref{pDMWD1} and \eqref{pDMWD2} imply that for every $r \le R_1$ and sufficiently large $j$,
\begin{equation}\label{e:bm3g2}
\int_{D \cap B(z, r)} p^D(t,x,y)(M^D(y, y_j)+M^D(y, z))dy \le
2c_2 \int_{B(0, 2r)} g(y) dy.
\end{equation}
Given $\varepsilon>0$, choose $0<r_1\le R_1$ small such that
$ \int_{B(0, 2r_1)} g(y) dy< \varepsilon/(4c_2)$.
For $y\in D \setminus B(z, r_1)$, by
\eqref{e:martin-estimate-boundary} we get that
\begin{align}\label{e:sdafe1}
|M^D(y, y_j)-M^D(y, z)|&\le c_2M^D(y, A_{r_1}(z))\left(\frac{|y_j-z|}{r_1}\right)^\beta.
\end{align}
Therefore, using the fact that $y \to M^D(y, z)$ is excessive for $W^D$, for every large $j$
\begin{align*}
&|P^D_t \left(\frac{G^D(\cdot,y_j)}{G^D(x_0, y_j)}\right)(x)- P^D_t(M^D(\cdot,z))(x)|\\
\le&
\int_{D \cap B(z, r_1)} p^D(t,x,y)(M^D(y, y_j)+M^D(y, z))dy +
\int_{D \setminus B(z, r_1)} p^D(t,x,y)|M^D(y, y_j)-M^D(y, z)|dy \\
\le & \varepsilon/2+ c_2\left(\frac{|y_j-z|}{r_1}\right)^\beta \int_{D}
P_t^DM^D(\cdot, A_{r_1}(z))(y)dy \le
\varepsilon/2+ c_2\left(\frac{|y_j-z|}{r_1}\right)^\beta M^D(x, A_{r_1}(z)) \le
\varepsilon.
\end{align*}
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
Using the previous lemma, the proof of the next lemma is the same as that of
\cite[Theorem 5.83(b)]{SV}. So we omit the proof.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:VGD}
If
$(y_j)_{j \ge 1}$ is a sequence of points in $D$ converging to $z\in \partial D$,
then for every $x\in D$,
$$
\lim_{j\to \infty} \widetilde V^D \left(\frac{G^D(\cdot, y_j)}{G^D(x_0, y_j)}\right)(x)=
\lim_{j\to \infty} \frac{\widetilde V^D(G^D(\cdot, y_j))(x)}{G^D(x_0, y_j)}
=\widetilde V^D(M^D(\cdot, z))(x)\, .
$$
\end{lemma}
Let us define the function $H^D_Y(x,z):=
\widetilde V^D (M^D(\cdot, z))(x)$ on $D\times \partial D$.
Let $(y_j)$ be a sequence of points in $D$ converging
to $z\in \partial D$, then
from Lemma \ref{l:VGD} we get that
\begin{equation}\label{e5.1}
H^D_Y(x,z)=\lim_{j\to \infty} \frac{\widetilde V^D(G^D(\cdot, y_j))(x)}{G^D(x_0, y_j)}=\lim_{j\to \infty} \frac{U^D(x,y_j)}{G^D(x_0, y_j)}\, ,
\end{equation}
where the last equality follows from Lemma \ref{l:VGD0}.
In particular, there exists the limit
\begin{align}\label{e5.2}
\lim_{j\to \infty} \frac{U^D(x_0,y_j)}{G^D(x_0, y_j)}
= H^D_Y(x_0, z)\, .
\end{align}
Now we define a function $\overline M^D_Y$ on $D\times \partial D$ by
\begin{align}\label{e5.3}
\overline M^D_Y(x, z):=\frac{H^D_Y(x, z)}{H^D_Y(x_0, z)},
\quad x\in D, z\in \partial D.
\end{align}
From the definition above and (\ref{e5.1})--\eqref{e5.2}, we can easily see that
\begin{align}\label{e5.4}
\lim_{D\ni y\to z}\frac{U^D(x,y)}{U^D(x_0, y)}
=\overline M^D_Y(x, z), \quad x\in D, z\in \partial D.
\end{align}
Thus we have proved the following result.
\begin{prop}\label{p:extension-M}
The function $M^D_Y(\cdot, \cdot)$ can be extended from $D \times D$ to
$D \times \overline{D}$
so that for each $z\in \partial D$ we have that
$$
\overline M^D_Y(x,z)=\lim_{y\to z}M^D_Y(x,y)=\lim_{y\to z}\frac{U^D(x,y)}{U^D(x_0,y)}\, .
$$
\end{prop}
The following two types of sharp two-sided estimates for $\overline M^D_Y(x,z)$ now
follow easily from Theorems \ref{t:gfe} and \ref{t:gfe:nn}.
\begin{thm}\label{t:mke}
Assume that $\phi$ is a Bernstein function satisfying
{\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A5)}. Let $D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$
be a bounded $C^{1,1}$ domain, or
a $C^{1,1}$ domain with compact complement or
domain above the graph of a bounded $C^{1,1}$
function.
For every $M>0$ and $z\in \partial D$, there
exists a constant $c=c(M, z)\ge 1$ such that for all $x\in D$ with $|x-z|\le M$,
\begin{align}\label{e:mke}
c^{-1}\frac{\delta(x)\phi'(|x-z|^{-2})}{|x-z|^{d+4}\phi(|x-z|^{-2})^2}\le
\overline M^D_Y(x,z)\le c \frac{\delta(x)\phi'(|x-z|^{-2})}{|x-z|^{d+4}\phi(|x-z|^{-2})^2}\, .
\end{align}
\end{thm}
Note that the constant $c$ in Theorem \ref{t:mke} will in general depend on
$z\in \partial D$. This is inconsequential, because the
point $z$ will always be fixed.
\begin{thm}\label{t:mke2}
Assume that $\phi$ is a Bernstein function satisfying
{\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A3)} and {\bf (A6)}.
(1) Let $D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$ be a
domain above the graph of a bounded $C^{1,1}$
function.
There exists a constant $c_1\ge 1$ such that for all $x \in D$ and $z \in \partial D$,
\begin{align}\label{e:mke2}
c_1^{-1}{\delta(x)}
\frac{u(|x-z|^2)|x_0-z|^{d}}
{u(|x_0-z|^2)|x-z|^{d}}\le
\overline M^D_Y(x,z)\le c_1{\delta(x)}
\frac{u(|x-z|^2)|x_0-z|^{d}}
{u(|x_0-z|^2)|x-z|^{d}}\, .
\end{align}
(2) Let $D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$ be a
$C^{1,1}$ domain with compact complement.
There exists a constant $c_2\ge 1$ such that
for all $x \in D$ and $z \in \partial D$,
\begin{align}\label{M:mke4}
&c_2^{-1}\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-z|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left( \frac{|x_0-z|\wedge 1}{|x-z|\wedge 1} \right) \frac{u(|x-z|^2)|x_0-z|^{d-2}}
{u(|x_0-z|^2)|x-z|^{d-2}} \le
\overline M^D_Y(x,z) \nonumber\\
&\qquad \le c_2 \left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-z|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left( \frac{|x_0-z|\wedge 1}{|x-z|\wedge 1} \right) \frac{u(|x-z|^2)|x_0-z|^{d-2}}
{u(|x_0-z|^2)|x-z|^{d-2}} \, .
\end{align}
\end{thm}
\begin{remark}\label{r:mke2} {\rm
(1) Theorem \ref{t:mke} in particular implies that $\overline M^D_Y(\cdot , z_1)$ differs
from $\overline M^D_Y(\cdot, z_2)$ if $z_1$ and $z_2$ are two different points on $\partial D$.
(2) From Theorem \ref{t:mke2}, we have $\lim_{D\ni x\to \infty} \overline M^D_Y(x,z)=0$ for any $z\in \partial D$.
In fact, for $|x-z|\ge |z-x_0|$ we have
${u(|x-z|)}\le {u(|x_0-z|)} $.
It is clear that
$$
\limsup_{D\ni x\to \infty} \left({\delta(x)}
\frac{|x_0-z|^{2}}
{|x-z|^{2}}+\frac{|x_0-z|\wedge 1}{|x-z|\wedge 1}\right) \le \limsup_{D\ni x\to \infty} \left(
\frac{|x_0-z|^2}
{|x-z|}+\frac{|x_0-z|\wedge 1}{|x-z|\wedge 1}\right)<\infty \, .
$$
Thus, in both cases,
\begin{align}\label{M:mke5}
\limsup_{D\ni x\to \infty} \overline M^D_Y(x,z)\le c \limsup_{D\ni x\to \infty}
\frac{u(|x-z|^2)|x_0-z|^{d-2}}
{u(|x_0-z|^2)|x-z|^{d-2}}\le c \limsup_{D\ni x\to \infty} \frac{|x_0-z|^{d-2}}
{|x-z|^{d-2}}=0.
\end{align}
}
\end{remark}
Using the continuity of $U^D$ in the extended sense (Proposition \ref{p:U-continuous})
and the upper bound
in \eqref{e:free-gfe-reverse}, one can check that $Y^D$ satisfies Hypothesis (B) in \cite{KW}.
Therefore, $D$ has a Martin boundary $\partial_M D$ with respect to $Y^D$ satisfying the following properties:
\begin{description}
\item{\bf (M1)} $D\cup \partial_M D$ is
a compact metric space (with the metric denoted by $d$);
\item{\bf (M2)} $D$ is open and dense in $D\cup \partial_M D$, and its relative topology coincides with its original topology;
\item{\bf (M3)} $M^D_Y(x ,\, \cdot\,)$ can be uniquely extended to $\partial_M D$ in such a way that
\begin{description}
\item{(a)}
$ M^D_Y(x, y) $ converges to $M^D_Y(x, w)$ as $y\to w \in \partial_M D$ in the Martin topology;
\item{(b)} for each $ w \in D\cup \partial_M D$ the function $x \to M^D_Y(x, w)$ is excessive with respect to $Y^D$;
\item{(c)} the function $(x,w) \to M^D_Y(x, w)$ is jointly continuous on $D\times ((D\setminus\{x_0\})\cup \partial_M D)$ in the Martin topology and
\item{(d)} $M^D_Y(\cdot,w_1)\not=M^D_Y(\cdot, w_2)$ if $w_1 \not= w_2$ and $w_1, w_2 \in \partial_M D$.
\end{description}
\end{description}
Recall that a positive harmonic function $f$ for $Y^{D}$ is
minimal if, whenever $h$ is a positive harmonic function for
$Y^{D}$ with $h\le f$ on $D$, one must have $f=ch$ for some
constant $c$. A point $z\in \partial_M D$ is called a minimal
Martin boundary point
if $M^D_Y(\cdot, z)$ is a minimal harmonic function for $Y^D$.
The minimal Martin boundary of $Y^D$ is denoted by $\partial_m D$.
We will say that a point $w\in \partial_M D$ is a finite Martin
boundary point if there exists a bounded sequence
$(y_n)_{n\ge 1}\subset D$ converging to $w$ in the Martin topology.
Recall that a point $w$ on the Martin boundary $\partial_MD$ of $D$ is said to be associated
with $z\in \partial D$ if there is a sequence $(y_n)_{n\ge 1}\subset D$ converging to $w$
in the Martin topology and to $z$ in the Euclidean topology. The set of Martin
boundary points associated with $z$ is denoted by $\partial_M^zD$.
By using Proposition \ref{p:extension-M}, the proof of next lemma is same as that of \cite[Lemma 3.6]{KSV10}. Thus we omit it.
\begin{prop}\label{p:infinite-mb}
For any $z\in \partial D$, $\partial_M^zD$ consists of exactly one
point $w$ and $M^D_Y(\cdot, w)=\overline M^D_Y(\cdot, z)$.
\end{prop}
Because of the proposition above, we will also use $z$ to denote the point on the
Martin boundary $\partial_M^zD$ associated with $z\in \partial D $.
Note that it follows from the proof of \cite[Lemmas 3.6]{KSV10} that if $(y_n)_{n\ge 1}$
converges to $z\in \partial D$ in the Euclidean topology, then it also converges to $z$ in the Martin topology.
In the remainder of this section, we fix $z\in \partial D$.
The proof of the next result is same as that of \cite[Lemma 3.8]{KSV10}.
Thus we omit the proof.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:mk-integrability}
For every bounded open $O\subset \overline{O}\subset D$ and every
$x\in D$, $M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_O}, z)$ is ${\mathbb P}_x$-integrable.
\end{lemma}
Using the results above, we can get the following result.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:mk-harmonic}
Suppose that $\phi$ is a Bernstein function satisfying
{\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A6)}.
For any $x\in D$ and $r \in (0, R\wedge(\delta(x)/2)]$,
$$
M^D_Y(x, z)={\mathbb E}_x[M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z)]\, .
$$
\end{lemma}
\noindent{\bf Proof.}
Recall that $D$ satisfies the interior and exterior balls conditions with radius
$R$. Thus,
for all $r\in(0,R]$,
there is a ball $B(A_r(z) , r/2) \subset D\cap B(z,r)$.
Fix $x\in D$ and a positive $r<R\wedge \frac{\delta(x)}2$. Let
$$
\eta_m:=2^{-2m}r \quad \mbox{and }\ z_m=A_{\eta_m}(z),
\quad m=0, 1, \dots.
$$
Note that
$$
B(z_m, \eta_{m+1})\subset D\cap B(z, 2^{-1}\eta_m)\subset D\cap B(z,\eta_m)\subset
D\cap B(z, r)\subset D\setminus B(x, r)
$$
for all $m\ge 0$. Thus by the harmonicity of $M^D_Y(\cdot, z_m)$, we have
$$
M^D_Y(x, z_m)={\mathbb E}_x\left[M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m)\right].
$$
Choose $m_0=m_0 \ge 2$
such that $\eta_{m_0} <\delta(x_0)/4$.
To prove the lemma, it suffices to show that
$\{M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m): m\ge m_0\}$ is ${\mathbb P}_x$-uniformly
integrable. Fix an arbitrary $\varepsilon>0$.
We first note that if $D$ is unbounded,
by Theorem \ref{t:gfe:nn}
there exists $L \ge 2r\vee 2$ such that for every $m \ge m_0$ and $w\in D\setminus B(z, L)$,
\begin{align*}
&\frac{U^D(w, z_m)}
{U^D(x_0, z_m)} \le
\frac{c}{\delta(z_m)}
\left(\frac{\delta(z_m)}{|w-z_m|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\frac{\delta(w)}{|w-z_m|\wedge 1} \wedge 1 \right)\frac{u(|w-z_m|^2)}
{|w-z_m|^{d-2}}\\
&\le
\frac{c}{\delta(z_m)}
\left(\delta(z_m) \wedge 1 \right)
\left(\delta(w) \wedge 1 \right)\frac{u(|w-z_m|^2)}
{|w-z_m|^{d-2}}\le
c\frac{u(|w-z_m|^2)}
{|w-z_m|^{d-2}}\\
&\le
c \frac{\phi'(|w-z_m|^{-2})}
{|w-z_m|^{d+2}\phi(|w-z_m|^{-2})^2} \le
c \frac{\phi'((L/2)^{-2})}
{(L/2)^{d+2}\phi((L/2)^{-2})^2}
\le \frac{\varepsilon}{4}.
\end{align*}
In the above inequalities, we have used Lemma \ref{l:properties-of-bf}(b).
If $D$ is a bounded domain we simply take
$L=2\mathrm{diam}(D)$ so that $D\setminus B(z, L)= \emptyset$.
Thus
\begin{align}\label{e:KSV15.8-1}
&{\mathbb E}_x\left[M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m);
Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}\in D\setminus B(z, L)\right] \le \frac{\varepsilon}{4}\, .
\end{align}
By Theorem \ref{t:gfe},
there exist $m_1 \ge m_0$ and $c_1=c_1(L)>0$
such that for every $w\in (D \cap B(z, L)) \setminus B(z, \eta_m)$ and $y\in D\cap B(z, \eta_{m+1})$,
$$
M^D_Y(w, z_m)\le c_1M^D_Y(w, y), \qquad m\ge m_1.
$$
Letting $y\to z$ we get
\begin{align}\label{e:KSV15.8}
M^D_Y(w, z_m)\le c_1M^D_Y(w, z), \qquad m\ge m_1, w\in (D \cap B(z, L)) \setminus B(z, \eta_m).
\end{align}
Since $M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z)$ is ${\mathbb P}_x$-integrable by
Lemma \ref{l:mk-integrability}, there is an $N_0=N_0(\varepsilon)>1$ such that
\begin{align}\label{e:KSV15.9}
{\mathbb E}_x\left[M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z); M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z)>N_0/c_1\right]<\frac{\epsilon}{2c_1}.
\end{align}
By \eqref{e:KSV15.8-1}, \eqref{e:KSV15.8} and \eqref{e:KSV15.9},
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&{\mathbb E}_x\left[M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m); M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m)>N_0 \mbox{ and }
Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}\in D\setminus B(z, \eta_m)\right]\\
&\le&{\mathbb E}_x\left[M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m); M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m)>N_0 \mbox{ and }
Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}\in (D \cap B(z, L)) \setminus B(z, \eta_m)\right]\\
&&+{\mathbb E}_x\left[M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m);
Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}\in D\setminus B(z, L)\right]\\
&\le &c_1{\mathbb E}_x\left[M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z); c_1M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z)>N_0\right] + \frac{\varepsilon}{4}
<c_1\frac{\epsilon}{2c_1}+ \frac{\varepsilon}{4}=\frac{3\epsilon}{4}.
\end{eqnarray*}
By \eqref{e:KSV7-4.7}, we have for $m\ge m_1$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&{\mathbb E}_x\left[M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m);Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}\in D\cap B(z, \eta_m)\right]\\
&& =\int_{D\cap B(z, \eta_m)}M^D_Y(w, z_m)K^{D, B(x, r)}(x, w)dw\\
&&\le c_2 \phi(r^{-2})^{-1}\int_{D\cap B(z, \eta_m)}M^D_Y(w, z_m)
\delta(w)\frac{\phi'((|w-x|-r)^{-2})}
{(|w-x|-r)^{d+3}} dw.
\end{eqnarray*}
Since $|w-x|\ge |x-z|-|z-w|\ge \delta(x)-\eta_m\ge
\frac{7}4r$, applying Lemma \ref{l:properties-of-bf}(a)--(c), we get that
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\mathbb E}_x\left[M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m);Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}\in D\cap
B(z, \eta_m)\right]\nonumber\\
&&\le c_3 r^{-d-3}\phi'(((3r/4)^{-2})\phi((3r/4)^{-2})^{-1}
\int_{D\cap B(z, \eta_m)}M^D_Y(w, z_m)\delta(w)dw\nonumber\\
&&\le c_4r^{-d-3}\phi'(r^{-2})\phi(r^{-2})^{-1}U^D(x_0, z_m)^{-1}\int_{D\cap B(z, \eta_m)}U^D(w, z_m)\delta(w)dw.
\label{e:KSV15.10}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that, by Theorem \ref{t:gfe} ,
\begin{align}\label{e:KSV15.11}
U^D(x_0, z_m)^{-1}\le \frac{c_5}{\eta_{m}}
\end{align}
and by \eqref{e:free-gfe-reverse}
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\int_{D\cap B(z, \eta_m)}\delta(w)U^D(w, z_m)dw \le
\int_{D\cap B(z, \eta_m)}\delta(w)G_X(w, z_m)dw
\nonumber\\
&\le& c_6 \eta_m \int_{D\cap B(z, \eta_m)}
\frac{\phi'(|w-z_m|^{-2})}
{|w-z_m|^{d+2}\phi(|w-z_m|^{-2})^2}dw\nonumber\\
&\le&
c_6 \eta_m\int_{B(z_m, 2\eta_m)}
\frac{\phi'(|w-z_m|^{-2})}
{|w-z_m|^{d+2}\phi(|w-z_m|^{-2})^2}dw\nonumber\\
&=& c_6\eta_m \int_{B(0, 2\eta_m)}\frac{\phi'(|w|^{-2})}
{|w|^{d+2}\phi(|w|^{-2})^2}dw
= c_7\eta_m\int_0^{2\eta_m}\frac{\phi'(r^{-2})}
{r^3\phi(r^{-2})^2}dr
\nonumber\\
&=&c_7\eta_m\int_0^{2\eta_m}\frac{d}{dr}\left(\frac{1}{\phi(r^{-2})}\right)dr
\le c_8 \eta_m \phi((2\eta_m)^{-2})^{-1}.\label{e:KSV15.12}
\end{eqnarray}
It follows from \eqref{e:KSV15.10}--\eqref{e:KSV15.12} that
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&{\mathbb E}_x\left[M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m);Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}\in D\cap B(z, \eta_m)\right]\\
&&\le c_9r^{-d-3}\phi'(r^{-2}) \phi(r^{-2})^{-1}\frac{1}
{\phi((2\eta_m)^{-2})} \le \frac{c(r)}
{\phi((2\eta_m)^{-2})} .
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus there exists $m_2 \ge m_1$ such that for all $m\ge m_2$,
$$
{\mathbb E}_x\left[M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m);Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}\in D\cap B(z, \eta_m)\right]\le \frac{\epsilon}4.
$$
Consequently, for all $m\ge m_2$,
$$
{\mathbb E}_x\left[M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m);M^D(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m)>N\right]\le \epsilon,
$$
which implies that $\{M^D_Y(Y^D_{\tau_{B(x, r)}}, z_m): m\ge m_0\}$ is ${\mathbb P}_x$-uniformly
integrable.
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
Using this, we can easily get the following
\begin{thm}\label{t:mk-harmonic}
Suppose that $\phi$ is a Bernstein function satisfying
{\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A6)}.
The function $M^D(\cdot, z)$ is harmonic in $D$ with respect to $Y^D$.
\end{thm}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} The proof is the same as that of \cite[Theorem 3.10]{KSV10}. {\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
\begin{thm}\label{t:m}
Suppose that $\phi$ is a Bernstein function satisfying
{\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A6)}.
Every point $z$ on $\partial D$ is a minimal Martin boundary
point.
\end{thm}
\noindent{\bf Proof.}
Fix $z \in \partial D$ and let $h$ be a positive harmonic function for $Y^D$
such that $h\le M^D_Y(\cdot, z)$. By
the Martin representation in \cite{KW},
there is a finite measure on $\partial_M D$ such that
$$
h(x)=\int_{\partial_M D}M^D_Y(x,w)\, \mu(dw)=\int_{\partial_M D\setminus\{z\}}M^D_Y(x,w)\, \mu(dw)+
M^D_Y(x, z)\mu(\{z\})\, .
$$
In particular, $\mu(\partial_M D)=h(x_0)\le
M^D_Y(x_0, z)=1$ (because of the normalization at $x_0$). Hence, $\mu$ is a sub-probability measure.
For $\epsilon >0$, put
$K_{\epsilon}:=\left\{w\in \partial_M D: d(w, z) \ge \epsilon\right\}$.
Then $K_{\epsilon}$ is a compact subset of $\partial_M D$.
Define
\begin{align}\label{d:definition-u}
u(x):=\int_{ K_{\epsilon} }M^D_Y(x,w)\, \mu(dw).
\end{align}
Then $u$ is a positive harmonic function with respect to $Y^{D}$
satisfying
\begin{align}\label{e:newm1}
u(x)\le h(x)-\mu(\{z\})M^D_Y(x,
z)\le \big(1-\mu(\{z\})\big)M^D_Y(x, z)\, .
\end{align}
By (M3)(c), our estimates in
Theorems \ref{t:mke} and \ref{t:mke2}
and the fact $\lim_{D\ni x\to \infty} M^D_Y(x,z)=0$ (cf.~Remark \ref{r:mke2})
we see from \eqref{d:definition-u} and \eqref{e:newm1} that
$u$ is bounded, $\lim_{D\ni x\to w}u(x)=0$ for every $w\in \partial D$ and
$\lim_{D\ni x\to \infty}u(x)=0$.
Therefore by the harmonicity of $u$, $u\equiv 0$ in $D$.
We see from \eqref{d:definition-u} that $\nu=\mu_{| K_{\epsilon}}=0$. Since
$\epsilon >0$ was arbitrary and $\partial_M D\setminus\{z\}=\cup_{\epsilon >0} K_{\epsilon}$,
we see that $\mu_{|\partial_M D\setminus\{z\}}=0$. Hence $h=\mu(\{z\})
M^D_Y(\cdot, z)$ showing that $
M^D_Y(\cdot, z)$ is minimal.
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
Combining Remark \ref{r:mke2}(1) and Theorem \ref{t:m}, we conclude that
\begin{thm}\label{mbid}
Suppose that $\phi$ is a Bernstein function satisfying
{\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A6)}.
The finite part of the minimal Martin boundary of $D$ and the finite
part of the Martin boundary of $D$ both coincide with the Euclidean boundary $\partial D$ of $D$.
\end{thm}
We conclude this section with following inequality, which will be used in Section \ref{s:mtf}.
\begin{corollary}\label{c:U-M}
Fix $z \in \partial D$ and assume that
$x_0\in D\cap B(z, R)$ satisfies $R/4<\delta(x_0)<R$ and $M^D_Y$
is the Martin kernel of $D$ based on $x_0$. Then
there exists $c=c(z)>0$ such that for all $x,y\in B(z, R/4)$ with
$\frac34 |x-z|\le |x-y|$,
\begin{align}\label{e:U-M}
\frac{U^D(x,y)}{M^D_Y(x,z)}\,\le \,c\, U^D(x_0,y)\, .
\end{align}
\end{corollary}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} It follows from Theorem \ref{t:gfe} and Theorem \ref{t:mke} that
\begin{eqnarray*}
U^D(x,y)&\asymp & \delta(x)\delta(y)|x-y|^{-d-4}\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})\phi(|x-y|^{-2})^{-2}\, ,\\
M^D_Y(x,z)& \asymp & \delta(x) |x-z|^{-d-4}\phi'(|x-z|^{-2})\phi(|x-z|^{-2})^{-2}\, ,\\
U^D(x_0,y)&\asymp & \delta(y)|x_0-y|^{-d-4}\phi'(|x_0-y|^{-2})\phi(|x_0-y|^{-2})^{-2}
\,\asymp \, \delta(y)\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
Since $|x_0-y|\ge R/4$ and $r\mapsto r^{-d-4}\phi'(r^{-2})\phi(r^{-2})^{-2}$ is decreasing,
we can estimate $U^D(x_0,y)
\ge c_1 \delta(y)$.
Using the monotonicity of $r\mapsto r^{-d-4}\phi'(r^{-2})\phi(r^{-2})^{-2}$, we get
$$
\frac{\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})}{|x-y|^{d+4}\phi(|x-y|^{-2})^{2}}\le c
\, \frac{\phi'(((3|x-z|)/4)^{-2})}{((3|x-z|)/4)^{d+4}
\phi(((3|x-z|)/4)^{-2})^{2}}\, .
$$
Applying Lemma \ref{l:properties-of-bf}(c)
we get that
${U^D(x,y)}/{M^D_Y(x,z)}\le c_1 \delta(y)$.
This
completes the proof. {\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
\section{Quasi-additivity of capacity}\label{s:quasi}
Throughout this section we assume that $\phi$ is a
Bernstein function satisfying {\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A5)}.
Let $\mathrm{Cap}$ denote the capacity with respect to the
subordinate Brownian motion $X$ and $\mathrm{Cap}_D$ the capacity
with respect to the subordinate killed Brownian motion $Y^D$.
The goal of this section is to prove that $\mathrm{Cap}_D$ is
quasi-additive with respect to Whitney decompositions of $D$.
We start with the following inequality: There exist
positive constants $c_1<c_2$ such that
\begin{align}\label{e:capacity-estimate}
c_1 r^d \phi(r^{-2})\le \mathrm{Cap}(\overline{B(0,r)})
\le c_2 r^d \phi(r^{-2})\, ,\quad \text{for every }r\in (0,1]\, .
\end{align}
Using
\eqref{e:free-gfe-reverse}, the proof of \eqref{e:capacity-estimate} is the same as that of \cite[Proposition 5.2]{KSV11}. Thus we omit the proof.
For any open set $D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$, let ${\mathcal S}(D)$ denote the
collection of all excessive functions with respect to $Y^D$ and
let ${\mathcal S}^c(D)$ be the family of positive functions in ${\mathcal S}(D)$
which are continuous in the extended sense.
For any $v\in {\mathcal S}(D)$ and $E\subset D$, the reduced function of $v$
relative to $E$ in $D$ is defined by
\begin{align}\label{e:RE}
R^E_v(x)=\inf\{w(x): w\in {\mathcal S}(D) \mbox{ and } w\ge v
\mbox{ on } E\}, \qquad x\in {\mathbb R}^d.
\end{align}
The lower semi-continuous regularization $\widehat R^E_v$ of
$R^E_v$ is called the balayage of $v$ relative to $E$ in $D$.
Note that the killed Brownian motion $W^D$ is a strongly Feller process.
Thus it follows by \cite[Proposition V.3.3]{BH} that
the semigroup of $Y^D$ also has strong Feller property.
So it follows easily
from \cite[Proposition V.2.2]{BH} that the cone of excessive
functions ${\mathcal S}(D)$ is a balayage space in the sense of \cite{BH}.
In the remainder of this section we assume that
$D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$ is either a bounded $C^{1,1}$ domain, or
a $C^{1,1}$ domain with compact complement or a
domain above the graph of a bounded $C^{1,1}$ function.
Given $v\in {\mathcal S}^c(D)$, define a kernel $k_v:D\times D\to [0,\infty]$ by
\begin{align}\label{e:ku}
k_v(x,y):=\frac{U^D(x,y)}{v(x)v(y)}\, ,\qquad x,y\in D\,.
\end{align}
We will later consider $v(y)=U^D(y,x_0)\wedge 1$.
Note that $k_v(x,y)$ is jointly lower semi-continuous on $D \times D$
by the joint lower semi-continuity of $U^D$, cf.~Proposition \ref{p:U-continuous}, and the assumptions
that $v$ is positive and continuous in the extended sense.
For a measure $\lambda$ on $D$ let $\lambda_v(dy):=\lambda(dy)/v(y)$. Then
$$
k_v\lambda (x):=\int_D k_v(x,y)\, \lambda(dy)=\int_D \frac{U^D(x,y)}{v(x)v(y)}\,
\lambda(dy)=\frac{1}{v(x)}\int_D U^D(x,y)\, \frac{\lambda(dy)}{v(y)}
=\frac{1}{v(x)}U^D \lambda_v(dy)\, .
$$
We define a capacity with respect to the kernel $k_v$ as follows:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sC_v(E):=\inf\{\|\lambda\|: k_v\lambda \ge 1 \textrm{ on }E\}\, ,
\qquad E\subset D\, ,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\|\lambda \|$ denotes the total mass of the measure
$\lambda$ on $D$. The following dual representation of the
capacity of compact sets can be found in \cite[Th\'eor\`eme 1.1]{Fug}:
\begin{align}\label{e:fuglede-equality}
\sC_v(K)=\sup\{\mu(K):\, \mu(D\setminus K)=0, k_v\mu \le 1\ \textrm{on }D\}\, .
\end{align}
For a compact set $K\subset D$, consider the balayage $\widehat{R}_v^K$.
Being a potential, $\widehat{R}_v^K=U^D \lambda^{K, v}$ for a measure
$\lambda^{K, v}$ supported in $K$.
Recall that $({\mathcal E}^D, {\mathcal D}({\mathcal E}^D))$ is the Dirichlet form associated with $Y^D$.
Define the Green energy of $K$ (with respect to $v$) by
$$
\gamma_v(K):=\int_D \int_D U^D(x,y) \lambda^{K, v}(dx)\, \lambda^{K, v}(dy) =
\int_D U^D \lambda^{K, v}(x)\, \lambda^{K, v}(dx)={\mathcal E}^D(U^D \lambda^{K, v},U^D \lambda^{K, v})\, .
$$
As usual, this definition of energy is extended first to open and then
to Borel subsets of $D$. By following the proof of \cite[Proposition 5.3]{KSV11}
we see that for all Borel subsets $E\subset D$ it holds that
\begin{align}\label{e:gamma=c}
\gamma_v(E)=\sC_v(E)\, .
\end{align}
Note that in case $v\equiv 1$, $\gamma_1(E)=\sC_1(E)=\mathrm{Cap}_D(E)$.
Let $\{Q_j\}_{j\ge 1}$ be a Whitney decomposition of $D$.
Recall that $x_j$ is the center of $Q_j$ and $Q_j^*$ the
interior of the double of $Q_j$. Then $\{Q_j, Q_j^*\}$ is
a quasi-disjoint decomposition of $D$ in the sense of \cite[pp.~146-147]{AE}.
\begin{defn}\label{kernelHI}
A kernel $k:D\times D\to [0,+\infty]$ is said to satisfy the
local Harnack property with localization constant $r_1>0$
with respect to $\{Q_j, Q_j^*\}$ if
\begin{align}\label{e:hpk}
k(x,y)\asymp k(x',y)\, , \textrm{ for all }x,x'\in Q_j \textrm{ and all }y\in D\setminus Q_j^*\, ,
\end{align}
for all cubes $Q_j$ of diameter less than $r_1$.
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}\label{d:sihi}
A function $v:D\to (0,\infty)$ is said to satisfy the local scale invariant
Harnack inequality with localization constant $r_1>0$
with respect to $\{Q_j\}$
if there exists $c>0$ such that
\begin{align}\label{e:u-scale-inv-har}
\sup_{Q_j}v\le c \inf_{Q_j}v\, ,\quad \textrm{for all } Q_j \text{ with }\mathrm{diam}(Q_j)<r_1\, .
\end{align}
\end{defn}
\begin{lemma}\label{l:sihi-khp}
If $v\in {\mathcal S}^c(D)$ satisfies the local scale invariant Harnack inequality
with localization constant $r_1>0$ with respect to $\{Q_j\}$,
then the kernel $k_v$ satisfies the local Harnack property
with localization constant $r_1>0$ with respect to $\{Q_j, Q_j^*\}$.
\end{lemma}
\noindent{\bf Proof.}
This is an immediate consequence of Corollary \ref{c:whitney-green}(i).
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
Typical examples of positive continuous excessive functions $v$
that satisfy the scale invariant Harnack inequality
are functions $v\equiv 1$ and $v=U^D(\cdot,x_0)\wedge c$ with $x_0\in D$ and $c>0$ fixed.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:cap-comparability}
For every $M>0$, there exists a constant $c=c(M)\in (0,1)$ such that
\begin{align}\label{e:cap-comparability}
c\, \mathrm{Cap}_D(Q_j)\le \mathrm{Cap}(Q_j)\le \mathrm{Cap}_D(Q_j)
\end{align}for all Whitney cubes whose diameter is less than $M$.
\end{lemma}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} By
\eqref{e:fuglede-equality} and \eqref{e:gamma=c} we have that
for every compact set $K\subset D$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathrm{Cap}_D(K)=\sup\{\mu(K):\, \mathrm{supp}(\mu)\subset K, U^D\mu
\le 1 \text{ on }D\}\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
If $\mathrm{supp}(\mu)\subset K$ and $G_X\mu\le 1$ on ${\mathbb R}^d$,
then clearly $U^D \mu\le 1$ on $D$.
This implies that $\mathrm{Cap}(K)\le \mathrm{Cap}_D(K)$ for all compact subset $K\subset D$,
in particular for each Whitney cube $Q_j$.
Let $\mu$ be the capacitary measure of $Q_j$ (with respect to $Y^D$), i.e., $\mu(Q_j)=\mathrm{Cap}_D(Q_j)$ and $U^D\mu \le 1$.
Then by Corollary \ref{c:whitney-green}(ii) for every $x\in Q_j$ we have
$$
1\ge U^D \mu(x)=\int_{Q_j}U^D(x,y)\, \mu(dy)\ge \int_{Q_j}c G_X(x,y)\, \mu(dy)=G_X(c\mu)(x)\, .
$$
By the maximum principle it follows that $G_X(c\mu)\le 1$ everywhere on ${\mathbb R}^d$. Hence,
$\mathrm{Cap}(Q_j)\ge (c\mu)(Q_j)=c\, \mathrm{Cap}_D(Q_j)$.
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
\begin{lemma}\label{l:comp-gamma-cap}
Suppose that $v\in {\mathcal S}^c(D)$ is a function satisfying the local scale invariant
Harnack inequality with localization constant $r_1>0$ with respect to $Y^D$.
Then for every $Q_j$ of diameter less than $r_1$ and every
$E\subset Q_j$ it holds that
\begin{align}\label{e:comp-gamma-cap}
\gamma_v(E)\asymp v(x_j)^2 \mathrm{Cap}_D(E)\, .
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} The proof is same as the proof of \cite[Lemma 5.8(i)]{KSV11}. {\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
\begin{defn}\label{d:comp_measure}
Let $\{Q_j\}$ be a Whitney decomposition of $D$ and $v\in {\mathcal S}^c(D)$. A Borel measure $\sigma$ on $D$
is locally comparable to the capacity $\sC_v$ with respect to $\{Q_j\}$ at $z \in \partial D$
if there exists $r, c>0$ such that
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &\sigma(Q_j)\asymp \sC_v(Q_j),\quad \textrm{for all }Q_j \textrm{ with } Q_j \cap B(z, r)
\not= \emptyset\, ,\\
& &\sigma(E)\le c\, \sC_v(E),\quad \textrm{for all Borel }E \subset D \cap B(z, 2 r).
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{defn}
Recall that
$({\mathcal E}^D, {\mathcal D}({\mathcal E}^D))$ is the Dirichlet form associated with $Y^D$.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:hardy} (Local Hardy's inequality)
There exist constants $c>0$ and
$r >0$ such that
for every $v\in {\mathcal D}({\mathcal E}^D)$ and $z \in \partial D$,
\begin{align}\label{e:hardy}
{\mathcal E}^D(v,v)\ge c \int_{D \cap B(z, r)} v(x)^2 \phi(\delta(x)^{-2})\, dx\, .
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\noindent{\bf Proof.}
Since $D$ is a $C^{1,1}$ domain, there exist $b_1>1$, $R_1>0$ and a cone $C$ whose vertex is at the origin, such that
for every $z \in \partial D$ and $x\in D \cap B(z, b_1R_1/2)$, there exists $\widehat C$, which is a rotation of $C$, such that
\begin{align}
\label{e:he11}
(\widehat C+x) \cap \{b_1\delta (x)< |x-y|<R_1\}\subset D^c.
\end{align}
Choose $r \in (0, b_1R_1/2)$ small that $\phi((b_1r)^{-2}) \ge 2 \phi(R_1^{-2})$.
Fix $v\in {\mathcal D}({\mathcal E}^D)$ and $z \in \partial D$.
By \eqref{e:dirichlet-form-Y} and \eqref{e:killing-functions},
$$
{\mathcal E}^D(v,v) \ge \int_{D \cap B(z, r)} v(x)^2 \kappa_D(x)\, dx \ge \int_{D \cap B(z, r)} v(x)^2 \kappa_D^X(x)\, dx \, .
$$
Let $x\in D \cap B(z, r)$.
By \eqref{e:kappa-X}, \eqref{e:he11}, and the lower bound in
\eqref{e:levy-density-estimate},
\begin{eqnarray*}
\kappa_D^X(x)&= & \int_{D^c}j(x-y)\,
dy \ge \int_{(\widehat C+x) \cap \{b_1\delta (x)< |x-y|<R_1\}}j(x-y)dy\\
& \ge& c_1 \int_{(\widehat C+x) \cap \{b_1\delta (x)< |x-y|<R_1\}} |x-y|^{-d-2}\phi'(|x-y|^{-2})
\, dy\\
&\ge & c_2 \int_{b_1 \delta(x)}^{R_1} -\frac{d}{ds}(\phi(s^{-2})) ds
=c_2 (\phi((b_1\delta(x))^{-2})-\phi(R_1^{-2}))\\
&=&2^{-1}c_2 \phi((b_1\delta(x))^{-2}) \ge c_3 \phi(\delta(x)^{-2}) \, .
\end{eqnarray*}
In the second to last inequality we used
$\phi((b_1\delta(x))^{-2}) \ge \phi((b_1r)^{-2}) \ge 2 \phi(R_1^{-2})$
and, in the last inequality we used \eqref{e:wlsc-substitute}.
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
For $v\in {\mathcal S}^c(D)$, define
$$
\sigma_v(E):=\int_E v(x)^2 \phi(\delta(x)^{-2})\, dx\, ,\qquad E\subset D\, .
$$
\begin{prop}\label{p:comparable-measure}
Let $v\in {\mathcal S}^c(D)$ satisfy the local scale invariant
Harnack inequality with localization constant $r_1>0$ with
respect to the Whitney decomposition $\{Q_j\}$. Then $\sigma_v$ is
locally comparable to the capacity $\sC_v$ with respect to $\{Q_j\}$ for every $z \in D$.
\end{prop}
\noindent{\bf Proof.}
Fix $z\in\partial D$ and let $\widetilde r=(r_1 \wedge r_2)/2$ where $r_2$ is the constant $r$ in Lemma \ref{l:hardy}.
Since $v$ satisfies the local scale invariant
Harnack inequality with localization constant $r_1$,
we have $v\asymp v(x_j)$ on any $Q_j$ of diameter less than $r_1$.
By Lemma \ref{l:comp-gamma-cap},
$\gamma_v(Q_j)\asymp v(x_j)^2 \mathrm{Cap}_D(Q_j)$
for any $Q_j$ of diameter less than $\widetilde r$.
On the other hand,
by Lemma \ref{l:cap-comparability} and \eqref{e:capacity-estimate},
$$
\sigma_v(Q_j)=\int_{Q_j}v(x)^2 \phi(\delta(x)^{-2})\, dx\asymp
v(x_j)^2 \phi\big((\mathrm{diam}(Q_j)\big)^{-2}|Q_j|\asymp \mathrm{Cap}(D)
\asymp\mathrm{Cap}_D(Q_j)
$$
for all $Q_j$ with $Q_j\cap B(z,\widetilde r)\neq \emptyset$.
Thus $\gamma_v(Q_j)\asymp \mathrm{Cap}_D(Q_j)$.
Using local Hardy's inequality, Lemma \ref{l:hardy}, for any
Borel subset $E\subset D$ and compact $K\subset E\cap B(z, 2 \widetilde r)$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\gamma_v(E)&\ge & \gamma_v(K)={\mathcal E}^D(U^D \lambda^{K, v}, U^D \lambda^{K, v})
\ge c_1 \int_K (U^D\lambda^{K, v})(x)^2 \phi(\delta(x)^{-2})\, dx \\
&=& c_1
\int_K v(x)^2 \phi(\delta(x)^{-2})\, dx =
c_1 \sigma_v(K)\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
This proves that $\gamma_v(E)\ge c_1 \sigma_v(E)$. {\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
Now we can repeat the argument in the proof of \cite[Theorem 7.1.3]{AE}
and conclude that $\gamma_v=\sC_v$ is quasi-additive with respect to $\{Q_j\}$.
\begin{prop}\label{p:quasi-additivity}
For any Whitney decomposition $\{Q_j\}$ of $D$ and any $v\in {\mathcal S}^c(D)$
satisfying the local scale invariant Harnack inequality with respect to
$\{Q_j\}$, the Green energy $\gamma_v$ is locally quasi-additive with respect to $\{Q_j\}$ for every $z \in \partial D$:
There exist $r, c>0$ such that for every $z \in \partial D$,
$$
c^{-1} \sum_{j\ge 1} \gamma_v(E\cap Q_j) \le \gamma_v(E)\le c \sum_{j\ge 1} \gamma_v(E\cap Q_j)\, \quad
\textrm{for all Borel }E\subset D \cap B(z, r).
$$
\end{prop}
\section{Minimal thinness}\label{s:mtf}
Throughout this section, we assume that $\phi$ is a Bernstein function satisfying
{\bf (A1)}--{\bf (A6)} and that
$D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$ is either a bounded $C^{1,1}$ domain, or
a $C^{1,1}$ domain with compact complement or
a domain above the graph of a bounded $C^{1,1}$
function. We assume that the $C^{1,1}$ characteristics
of $D$ is $(R, \Lambda)$.
We start this section by recalling the definition of minimal
thinness of a set at a minimal Martin boundary point with
respect to the subordinate killed Brownian motion $Y^D$.
\begin{defn}\label{def:cMthin}
Let $D$ be an open set in ${\mathbb R}^d$. A set $E\subset D$ is said
to be minimally thin in $D$ at $z\in \partial_m D$ with
respect to $Y^D$ if $\widehat R^E_{M_Y^D(\cdot, z)}\neq M_Y^D(\cdot, z)$.
\end{defn}
For any $z\in \partial_m D$, let $Y^{D, z}=(Y^{D, z}_t, {\mathbb P}^z_x)$
denote the $M^D_Y(\cdot, z)$-process, Doob's $h$-transform
of $Y^D$ with $h(\cdot)=M^D_Y(\cdot, z)$. The lifetime of $Y^{D, z}$
will be denoted by $\zeta$. It is known (see \cite{KW}) that
$\lim_{t\uparrow\zeta}Y^{D, z}_t=z$, ${\mathbb P}^z_x$-a.s.
For $E\subset D$, let $T_E:= \inf\{t>0: Y^{D, z}_t\in E\}$.
It is proved in \cite[Satz 2.6]{Fol} that a set $E\subset D$
is minimally thin at $z\in \partial_m D$ if and only if
there exists $x\in D$ such that ${\mathbb P}^z_x(T_E<\zeta)\neq 1$.
We assume now that $z$ is a fixed point in $\partial D$ and the base point
$x_0$ of the Martin kernel $M^D_Y$
(cf.~\eqref{e:mk}) satisfies $x_0\in D\cap B(z, R)$ and $R/4<\delta(x_0)<R$.
The following criterion for minimal thinness has been proved
for a large class of symmetric L\'evy processes in \cite[Proposition 6.4]{KSV11}.
The proof is quite general and it works whenever (1) the cone of
excessive functions of the underlying process forms a balayage space,
and (2) the inequality in Corollary \ref{c:U-M} relating the
Green function and the Martin kernel of the processes is valid.
In particular, the proof works in the present setting.
For $E\subset D$, define
$$
E_n=E\cap \{x\in D:\, 2^{-n-1}\le |x-z|<2^{-n}\}\, ,\quad n\ge 1\, .
$$
\begin{prop}\label{p:minthin-criterion-1}
A set $E \subset D$ is minimally thin in $D$ at $z$ with respect
to $Y^D$ if and only if
$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}R^{E_n}_{M^D_Y(\cdot, z)}(x_0)<\infty$.
\end{prop}
Let us fix $z\in \partial D$. Define $v(x)=U^D(x,x_0) \wedge 1$ so
that $v\in {\mathcal S}^c(D)$. By Theorems \ref{t:gfe} and \ref{t:mke}
we see that for $x$ close to $z$,
$$
\frac{M^D_Y(x,z)}{v(x)}\asymp \frac{\phi'(|x-z|^{-2})}{|x-z|^{d+4}\phi(|x-z|^{-2})^2}
$$
with a constant depending on $z$ and $x_0$, but not on $x$.
By using Lemma \ref{l:properties-of-bf}(b),
we see that there exists a constant $c_1>0$ such that for large $n$,
$$
c_1^{-1} \frac{2^{n(d+4)}\phi'(2^{2n})}{\phi(2^{2n})^2}
\, v(x)\le M^D_Y(x,z)
\le c_1 \frac{2^{(n+1)(d+4)}\phi'(2^{2(n+1)})}{\phi(2^{2(n+1)})^2}\,
v(x)\, ,\quad x\in E_n\, .
$$
This implies that
$$
c_1^{-1} \frac{2^{n(d+4)}\phi'(2^{2n})}{\phi(2^{2n})^2}\, R^{E_n}_v
\le R^{E_n}_{M^D_Y(\cdot,z)}\le c_1 \frac{2^{(n+1)(d+4)}\phi'(2^{2(n+1)})}{\phi(2^{2(n+1)})^2}\, R^{E_n}_v\, .
$$
In particular,
\begin{align}\label{e:equivalence-1}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}R^{E_n}_{M^D_Y(\cdot, z)}(x_0)<\infty
\qquad \text{if and only if} \qquad \sum_{n=1}
\frac{2^{n(d+4)}\phi'(2^{2n})}{\phi(2^{2n})^2}\, R^{E_n}_v(x_0)<\infty\, .
\end{align}
Since $\widehat{R}^{E_n}_{v}$ is a potential, there
is a measure $\lambda_n$ (supported by $\overline{E}_n$) charging no polar sets
such that
$\widehat{R}^{E_n}_{v}=U^D \lambda_n$. Also, $\widehat{R}^{E_n}_{v}=
v=U^D(\cdot, x_0)$ on $\overline{E}_n$ (except for a polar set,
and at least for large $n$), hence
\begin{eqnarray*}
\widehat{R}^{E_n}_{v}(x_0)&=& U^D \lambda_n(x_0)=
\int_{\overline{E}_n}U^D(x_0,y)\, \lambda_n(dy)
=\int_{\overline{E}_n} v(y)\, \lambda_n(dy)\\
&=&\int_{\overline{E}_n}\widehat{R}^{E_n}_{v}(y)\,
\lambda_n(dy)=\int_D \int_D U^D(x,y)\,
\lambda_n(dy)\, \lambda_n(dx)= \gamma_{v}(E_n)\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
We conclude from \eqref{e:equivalence-1} that
\begin{align}\label{e:equivalence-2}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}R^{E_n}_{M^D_Y(\cdot, z)}(x_0)<\infty
\qquad \text{if and only if} \qquad \sum_{n=1}
\frac{2^{n(d+4)}\phi'(2^{2n})}{\phi(2^{2n})^2}\, \gamma_v(E_n)<\infty\, .
\end{align}
Thus we have proved the following Wiener-type criterion for minimal thinness.
\begin{corollary}\label{c:minthin-criterion-1}
$E \subset D$ is minimally thin in $D$ at $z$ with respect to $Y^D$ if and only if
$$
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{2^{n(d+4)}\phi'(2^{2n})}{\phi(2^{2n})^2}\, \gamma_{v}(E_n)<\infty.
$$
\end{corollary}
Now we state a version of Aikawa's criterion for minimal thinness.
\begin{prop}\label{p:aikawa-thinness}
Let $z\in \partial D$ and $E\subset D$,
let $\{Q_j\}$ be a Whitney decomposition of $D$ and let $x_j$ denote
the center of $Q_j$. The following are equivalent:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] $E$ is minimally thin at $z$ with respect to $Y^D$;
\item[(b)]
\begin{align*}
\sum_{j: Q_j\cap B(z,1)\neq \emptyset}
\frac{v^2(x_j)\phi'(\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)^{-2})}{\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)^{d+4}\phi(\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)^{-2})^2}
\, \mathrm{Cap}_D(E\cap Q_j)<\infty\, ;
\end{align*}
\item[(c)]
\begin{equation}\label{e:aikawa-thinness-1}
\sum_{j: Q_j\cap B(z,1)\neq \emptyset}
\frac{\mathrm{dist}^2(Q_j, \partial D)\phi'(
\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)^{-2})}{\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)^{d+4}\phi(
\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)^{-2})^2}\,
\mathrm{Cap}_D(E\cap Q_j)<\infty\, .
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\end{prop}
\noindent{\bf Proof.}
By using Proposition \ref{p:quasi-additivity}, the proof is analogous to the proofs of
\cite[Proposition 6.6 and Corollary 6.7]{KSV11},
cf.~also \cite[Proposition 4.4]{MV}, therefore we omit the proof. {\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
\noindent
{\bf Proof of Theorem \ref{t:main}:} Assume that $E$ is
minimally thin at $z\in \partial D$. By Proposition
\ref{p:aikawa-thinness}, the series \eqref{e:aikawa-thinness-1}
converges. By Proposition \ref{p:comparable-measure}, the measure
$$
\sigma(A):=\int_A \phi(\delta(x)^{-2})\, dx\, ,\quad A\subset D\, ,
$$
is comparable to the capacity $\mathrm{Cap}_D$ with respect to the
Whitney decomposition $\{Q_j\}$. Therefore
$$
\mathrm{Cap}_D(E\cap Q_j)\ge c_1 \sigma(E\cap Q_j)=c_1 \int_E
{\bf 1}_{Q_j}(x)\phi(\delta(x)^{-2})\, dx\, .
$$
For $x\in Q_j$ we have that $\mathrm{dist}^2(Q_j,\partial D)
\asymp\delta(x)$ and $\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)\asymp |x-z| $. Therefore,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\infty&>&\sum_{j: Q_j\cap B(z,1)\neq \emptyset}
\frac{\mathrm{dist}^2(Q_j, \partial D)\phi'(\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)^{-2})}{\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)^{d+4}\phi(
\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)^{-2})^2}\, \mathrm{Cap}_D(E\cap Q_j)\\
&\ge &c_2 \sum_{j: Q_j\cap B(z,1)\neq \emptyset}\int_E \frac{\delta(x)^2\phi'(|x-z|^{-2})
}{|x-z|^{d+4}
\phi(|x-z|^{-2})^2}\, {\bf 1}_{Q_j}(x)\phi(\delta(x)^{-2})\, dx\\
&=& c_2 \int_{E\cap B(z,1)}
\frac{\delta(x)^2\phi(\delta(x)^{-2})\phi'(|x-z|^{-2})}{|x-z|^{d+4} \phi(|x-z|^{-2})^2}\, dx \, .
\end{eqnarray*}
Conversely, assume that $E$ is a union of a subfamily of Whitney cubes of $D$.
Then $E\cap Q_j$ is either empty or equal to $Q_j$. Since
$\mathrm{Cap}_D(Q_j)\asymp \sigma(Q_j)=\int_{Q_j}
\phi(\delta(x)^{-2})\, dx$, we can reverse the first
inequality in the display above to conclude that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{\sum_{j: Q_j\cap B(z,1)\neq \emptyset}
\frac{\mathrm{dist}^2(Q_j, \partial D)\phi'(
\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)^{-2})}{\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)^{d+4}\phi(
\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)^{-2})^2}\, \mathrm{Cap}_D(E\cap Q_j)}\\
&\le & c_3 \int_{E\cap B(z,1)}
\frac{\delta(x)^2\phi(\delta(x)^{-2})\phi'(|x-z|^{-2})}{|x-z|^{d+4}
\phi(|x-z|^{-2})^2}\, dx \, .
\end{eqnarray*}
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
Theorem \ref{t:main} will be now applied to study
minimal thinness of a set below the graph of a Lipschitz function.
We start by recalling Burdzy's result, cf.~\cite{Bur, Gar}:
Let $f:{\mathbb R}^{d-1}\to [0,\infty)$ be a Lipschitz function.
The set $A=\{x=(\widetilde{x},x_d) \in \H:\, 0<x_d\le f(\widetilde{x})\}$ is
minimally thin in $\H$ with respect to Brownian motion at $z=0$ if and only if
\begin{align}\label{c:criterion2f}
\int_{\{|\widetilde{x}|<1\}}f(\widetilde{x})|\widetilde{x}|^{-d}\, d\widetilde{x} <\infty\, .
\end{align}
It is shown recently in \cite{KSV6} that the same criterion
for minimal thinness is true for the subordinate Brownian motions
studied there. By using Theorem \ref{t:main} one can follow the
proof of \cite[Theorem 4.4]{KSV6} and show the Burdzy-type
criterion for minimal thinness in Proposition \ref{p:dahlberg2}.
In the proof we will need the following simple observation: For any $T>0$, we have for $t\in (0,T]$,
\begin{align}\label{e:integral}
\int_0^t r^2 \phi(r^{-2})\, dr \asymp t^3 \phi(t^{-2}),
\end{align}
Indeed, since $r^2\phi(r^{-2})\le t^2\phi(t^{-2})$ for all $0<r\le t$, it follows that $\int_0^t r^2 \phi(r^{-2})\, dr \le t^3 \phi(t^{-2})$. On the other hand, since $\phi$ is increasing, $\int_0^t r^2 \phi(r^{-2})\, dr \ge \phi(t^{-2})\int_0^t r^2 \, dr= \frac{t^3}{3} \phi(t^{-2})$.
\begin{prop}\label{p:dahlberg2}
Assume that $d\ge 3$ and that $f:{\mathbb R}^{d-1}\to [0,\infty)$ is a Lipschitz function.
Suppose $D=\{x=(\widetilde{x},x_d)\in {\mathbb R}^d:\, x_d> h(\widetilde{x})\}$ is the domain above the graph of a bounded $C^{1,1}$ function $h$. Then the set
$$
A:=\{x=(\widetilde{x},x_d)\in {\mathbb R}^d:\, h(\widetilde{x}) <x_d\le f(\widetilde{x})+ h(\widetilde{x})\}
$$
is minimally thin in $D$ at $0$ with respect to $Y^D$ if and only if
\begin{align}\label{c:criterion2}
\int_{\{|\widetilde{x}|<1\}}\frac{f(\widetilde{x})^3\phi(f(\widetilde{x})^{-2})\phi'(|\widetilde{x}|^{-2})}
{|\widetilde{x}|^{d+4}\phi(|\widetilde{x}|^{-2})^2}\, d\widetilde{x} <\infty\, .
\end{align}
\end{prop}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} Without loss of generality we may assume that $f(\widetilde{0})=0$.
We first note that by the Lipschitz continuity of $f$, it follows
that $|\widetilde{x}|\le |x|\le c_1|\widetilde{x}|$ for $x=(\widetilde{x},x_d)\in A$.
Hence by Fubini's theorem we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e:main2-1}
\lefteqn{\int_A \frac{x_d^2 \phi(x_d^{-2})\phi'(|x|^{-2})}{|x|^{d+4}
\phi(|x|^{-2})^2}\, dx = \int_{|\widetilde{x}|< 1}d\widetilde{x} \int {\bf 1}_A(\widetilde{x}, x_d) \frac{x_d^2 \phi(x_d^{-2})\phi'(|x|^{-2})}{|x|^{d+4}
\phi(|x|^{-2})^2}\, dx_d}\nonumber \\
&\asymp& \int_{|\widetilde{x}|<1} \frac{\phi'(\widetilde{x})}{|\widetilde{x}|^{d+4}
\phi(|\widetilde{x}|^{-2})^2}\, d\widetilde{x}\int_0^{f(\widetilde{x})} x_d^2 \phi(x_d^{-2})\, dx_d\nonumber\\
& \asymp&\int_{|\widetilde{x}|<1}\frac{f(\widetilde{x})^3\phi(f(\widetilde{x})^{-2})\phi'(|\widetilde{x}|^{-2})}
{|\widetilde{x}|^{d+2}\phi(|\widetilde{x}|^{-2})^2}\, d\widetilde{x},
\end{eqnarray}
where the last asymptotic relation follows from \eqref{e:integral}
with $T=\sup_{|\widetilde{x}|\le 1}f(\widetilde{x})$.
It follows from Theorem \ref{t:main} that if $A$ is minimally
thin in $D$ at $0$, then \eqref{c:criterion2} holds true.
For the converse,
let $\{Q_j\}$ be a Whitney decomposition of $D$ and define
$E= \cup_{Q_j\cap A\neq \emptyset}Q_j $;
clearly $A\subset E$.
Let $Q_j^*$ be the interior of the double of $Q_j$ and
note that $\{Q_j^*\}$ has bounded multiplicity, say $N$.
Moreover, if $Q_j\cap A\neq \emptyset$,
then by the Lipschitz continuity of $f$ we have $|Q_j^*\cap A|\asymp |Q_j|$.
Moreover,
for $x \in Q_j^*$ we have
$|x| \asymp \text{dist}(0, Q_j).$
Therefore
\begin{align}\label{e:main2-2}
&\int_A \frac{x_d^2 \phi(x_d^{-2})\phi'(|x|^{-2})}{|x|^{d+4}
\phi(|x|^{-2})^2}\, dx \le
\int_{E }\frac{x_d^2 \phi(x_d^{-2})\phi'(|x|^{-2})}{|x|^{d+4}
\phi(|x|^{-2})^2}\, dx\nonumber\\
&=\sum_{Q_j\cap A\neq \emptyset} \int_{Q_j }\frac{x_d^2 \phi(x_d^{-2})\phi'(|x|^{-2})}{|x|^{d+4}
\phi(|x|^{-2})^2}\, dx \nonumber\\
&\le c_2\sum_{Q_j\cap A\neq \emptyset} |Q_j^*\cap A|
\frac{\mathrm{dist}^2(Q_j^*,D)\phi(\mathrm{dist}^{-2}(Q_j^*,D))\phi'(\mathrm{dist}^{-2}(0,Q_j))}
{\mathrm{dist}^{d+4}(0,Q_j)\phi(\mathrm{dist}^{-2}(0,Q_j))^2}
\nonumber \\
& \le c_3\sum_{Q_j\cap A\neq \emptyset} \int_{Q_j^*\cap A}
\frac{x_d^2 \phi(x_d^{-2})\phi'(|x|^{-2})}{|x|^{d+4}
\phi(|x|^{-2})^2}\, dx
\le c_3N \int_A \frac{x_d^2 \phi(x_d^{-2})\phi'(|x|^{-2})}{|x|^{d+4}
\phi(|x|^{-2})^2}\, dx\, .
\end{align}
If \eqref{c:criterion2} holds, then \eqref{e:main2-1} and
\eqref{e:main2-2} imply that $$\int_{E }\frac{x_d^2 \phi(x_d^{-2})\phi'(|x|^{-2})}{|x|^{d+4}
\phi(|x|^{-2})^2}\, dx <\infty.$$ Hence, by Theorem \ref{t:main}, $E$ is minimally thin,
and thus $A$ is also minimally thin.
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
\begin{remark}\label{r:dahlberg2-2}{\rm
In case $d\ge 2$ and a \emph{bounded} $C^{1,1}$ domain,
we can get an analog of Proposition \ref{p:dahlberg2}.
Let $z \in \partial D$ and choose a coordinate system
$CS$ with its origin at $z$
such that
$$
B(z, R)\cap D=\{ y= (\widetilde y, \, y_d) \mbox{ in } CS:
|y|< R, y_d > h (\widetilde y) \},
$$
where $h$ is a $C^{1,1}$-function $h: \bR^{d-1}\to \bR$
satisfying
$h (\widetilde 0)= 0$.
Let $f:{\mathbb R}^{d-1} \to [0,\infty)$ be a Lipschitz function and
$$
A:=\{x=(\widetilde{x},x_d) \in D:\, |x|< R, h(\widetilde{x}) <x_d\le f(\widetilde{x})+ h(\widetilde{x})\}.
$$
Then the set
is minimally thin in $D$ at $z \in \partial D$ with respect to $Y^D$ if and only if \eqref{c:criterion2} holds true.
}
\end{remark}
\section{Examples}\label{s:stable}
In this section we assume $D$ is either a bounded $C^{1,1}$ domain in ${\mathbb R}^d$ or a half-space.
We first compare criteria for minimal thinness for three processes in $D$
related to the isotropic $\alpha$-stable process. The first process
is the killed isotropic $\alpha$-stable process $X^D$, $0<\alpha<2$,
that is a killed subordinate Brownian motion $X_t=W_{S_t}$
where $(S_t)_{t\ge 0}$ is an $(\alpha/2)$-stable subordinator.
The corresponding Laplace exponent is the function
$\phi(\lambda)=\lambda^{\alpha/2}$. The second process
is the subordinate killed Brownian motion $Y^D_t=W^D_{S_t}$
with the same $(\alpha/2)$-stable subordinator. The third
process is the censored $\alpha$-stable process $Z^D$.
The process $Z^D$ is a symmetric Markov process with
Dirichlet form given by
$$
{\mathcal C}(v,v)=\int_{D}\int_{D} (v(y)-v(x))^2 j(y-x)\, dy\, dx\, ,
$$
where $j(x)$ is the density of the L\'evy measure of the isotropic
$\alpha$-stable process. The censored stable process was introduced
and studied in \cite{BBC}. When $\alpha\in (1,2)$, $Z^D$ is transient
and converges to the boundary of $D$ at its lifetime.
Hardy's inequality for the Dirichlet form of $Z^D$ was obtained in \cite{CS, D}.
Let $G^D_Z$ be the Green function of $Z^D$.
If $D$ is a bounded $C^{1,1}$ domain,
sharp two-sided estimates on $G^D_Z$ were obtained in \cite{CK02}.
If $D$ is a half-space, say the upper half-space, then it follows from
\cite{BBC} that the censored $\alpha$-stable process in $D$ satisfies the following
scaling property: for any $c>0$, if $(Z^D_t)_{t\ge 0}$ is a censored $\alpha$-stable
process in $D$ starting from $x\in D$, then $(cZ^D_{t/c^{\alpha}})_{t\ge 0}$ is a
censored $\alpha$-stable process in $D$ starting from $cx$. Thus the transition density
$p^D_Z(t, x, y)$ of $Z^D$ satisfies the following relation:
$$
p^D_Z(t, x, y)=t^{-d/\alpha}p^D_Z(1, t^{-1/\alpha}x, t^{-1/\alpha}y), \qquad t>0, x, y\in D.
$$
Now using the short-time heat kernel estimates in \cite{CKS1} we immediately arrive
at the following global estimates:
$$
p^D_Z(t, x, y)\asymp t^{-\frac{d}{\alpha}}\left(1\wedge\frac{t^{1/\alpha}}{|x-y|}\right)^{d+\alpha}
\left(1\wedge\frac{\delta_D(x)}{t^{1/\alpha}}\right)^{\alpha-1}\left(1\wedge\frac{\delta_D(x)}{t^{1/\alpha}}\right)^{\alpha-1},
\qquad \mbox{on } (0, \infty)\times D\times D.
$$
Using the above estimates, one can easily get sharp two-sided estimates on $G_D$ from which one can easily show that
$$\lim_{x \ni D \to \infty} \frac{G^D_Z(x,y)}{G^D_Z(z,y)}=0.$$
Sharp two-sided estimates on $G^D_Z$
give sharp two-sided estimates on the Martin kernel of $Z^D$.
The arguments in \cite{CK02} imply that
the finite part of the minimal Martin boundary of $D$ with respect to $Z^D$ and the finite
part of the Martin boundary of $D$ with respect to $Z^D$ both coincide with
the Euclidean boundary $\partial D$ of $D$.
Based on these results,
one can follow the proof of \cite[Proposition 4.4]{MV} (which is an
analog of Proposition \ref{p:aikawa-thinness}) line by line and see
that the same results also hold when $D$ is a half-space.
Therefore the following holds.
\begin{prop}\label{p:aikawa-thinness-censored}
Let $\alpha\in (1,2)$ and $d \ge 2$.
Let $D$ be either a bounded $C^{1,1}$ domain in ${\mathbb R}^d$ or a half-space,
$z\in \partial D$, $E\subset D$, and let $x_j$ denote the center of $Q_j$.
Let $x_0\in D$ be fixed, $\mathrm{Cap}^D$ be the capacity with respect to $Z^D$
and $v(x)=G^D_Z(x, x_0)\wedge 1$.
The following are equivalent:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] $E$ is minimally thin at $z$;
\item[(b)]
\begin{align}\label{e:aikawa-thinness-2-censored}
\sum_{j: Q_j\cap B(z,1)\neq \emptyset}
\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)^{-d-\alpha+2} v(x_j)^2 \mathrm{Cap}^D(E\cap Q_j)<\infty\, ;
\end{align}
\item[(c)]
\begin{align}\label{e:aikawa-thinness-censored}
\sum_{j: Q_j\cap B(z,1)\neq \emptyset}
\frac{\mathrm{dist}(Q_j,\partial D)^{2(\alpha-1)}}{\mathrm{dist}(z,Q_j)^{d+\alpha-2}} \, \mathrm{Cap}^{D}(E\cap Q_j)<\infty\, .
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
\end{prop}
It is shown in \cite{MV} that the measure
$\sigma(A):=\int_A \delta(x)^{-\alpha}dx$ is comparable to
$\mathrm{Cap}^D$ with respect to the Whitney decomposition.
Further, it follows from \cite[Theorem 1.1]{CK02} that
$v(x_j)\asymp \mathrm{dist}(Q_j, \partial D)\asymp
\delta(x)^{2(\alpha-1)}$ for all $x\in Q_j$. With
this in hand one can use the argument in the proof of
Theorem \ref{t:main} to prove the following criterion
for minimal thinness with respect to the censored $\alpha$-stable process.
\begin{thm}\label{t:main-censored}
Assume that $\alpha\in (1,2)$.
Let $D$ be either a bounded $C^{1,1}$ domain in ${\mathbb R}^d$ or a half-space, $d\ge 2$, and
let $E$ be a Borel subset of $D$.
\noindent
(1)
If $E$ is minimally thin in $D$ at $z\in\partial D$ with respect to $Z^D$, then
$$
\int_{E\cap B(z, 1)}
\frac{\delta(x)^{\alpha-2}}{|x-z|^{d+\alpha-2}}\, dx < \infty\, .
$$
\noindent
(2)
Conversely, if $E$ is the union of a subfamily of Whitney cubes of $D$ and is
not minimally thin in $D$ at $z\in\partial D$ with respect to $Y^D$, then
$$
\int_{E\cap B(z, 1)}
\frac{\delta(x)^{\alpha-2}}{|x-z|^{d+\alpha-2}}\, dx = \infty\, .
$$
\end{thm}
Note that for $X^D$ the integral in the criterion for minimal thinness is
$$
\int_{E\cap B(z, 1)}
\frac{1}{|x-z|^d}\, dx\, ,
$$
while for $Y^D$ the corresponding integral becomes
$$
\int_{E\cap B(z, 1)}
\frac{\delta(x)^{2-\alpha}}{|x-z|^{d+2-\alpha}}\, dx\, .
$$
\begin{corollary}\label{c:comparison}
Let $D$ be either a bounded $C^{1,1}$ domain in ${\mathbb R}^d$ with $d \ge 2$ or a half-space with $d \ge 3$.
Let $E$ be the union of a subfamily of Whitney cubes of $D$
and $z\in \partial D$.
\noindent
(i) Let $1<\alpha <2$. If $E$ is minimally thin at $z$ with
respect to $Z^D$, then it is minimally thin at $z$ with respect to $X^D$.
\noindent
(ii) Let $0< \alpha <2$. If $E$ is minimally thin at $z$ with
respect to $X^D$, then it is minimally thin at $z$ with respect to $Y^D$.
\noindent
(iii) Let $1<\alpha_1 \le \alpha_2<2$. If $E$ is minimally thin at
$z$ with respect to the $\alpha_1$-stable censored process, then
it is minimally thin at $z$ with respect to the $\alpha_2$-stable
censored process.
\noindent
(iv) Let $0<\alpha_1 \le \alpha_2<2$. If $E$ is minimally thin at $z$
with respect to $Y^D$ with index $\alpha_2$, then it is minimally thin
at $z$ with respect to $Y^D$ with index $\alpha_1$.
\end{corollary}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} All statements follow easily from criteria in Theorems
\ref{t:main} and \ref{t:main-censored} together with the
observation that since $\delta(x)\le |x-z|$,
$$
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-z|}\right)^{2-\alpha}\le 1 \le
\left(\frac{\delta(x)}{|x-z|}\right)^{\alpha-2}\, .
$$
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
A criterion for minimal thinness of a set below the graph of
a Lipschitz function with respect to the censored stable
process is given in the following result which can be
proved in the same way as Proposition \ref{p:dahlberg2}.
\begin{prop}\label{p:dahlberg2-censored}
Let $\alpha\in (1,2)$. Assume that $f:{\mathbb R}^{d-1}\to [0,\infty)$
is a Lipschitz function. Suppose that $D=\{x=(\widetilde{x},x_d)\in {\mathbb R}^d:\, 0<x_d \}$.
Then the set
$$
A:=\{x=(\widetilde{x},x_d)\in D:\, 0<x_d\le f(\widetilde{x})\}
$$
is minimally thin in $D$ at $0$ with respect to $Z^D$ if and only if
\begin{align}\label{c:criterion2-Z}
\int_{\{|\widetilde{x}|<1\}}\frac{f(\widetilde{x})^{\alpha-1}}{|\widetilde{x}|^{d+\alpha-2}}d\widetilde{x} <\infty\, .
\end{align}
\end{prop}
In case of $X^D$, the criterion reads
\begin{align}\label{c:criterion2-X}
\int_{\{|\widetilde{x}|<1\}}\frac{f(\widetilde{x})}{|\widetilde{x}|^{d}}d\widetilde{x} <\infty\, ,
\end{align}
while for $Y^D$ with $d \ge 3$, \eqref{c:criterion2} becomes
\begin{align}\label{c:criterion2-Y}
\int_{\{|\widetilde{x}|<1\}}\frac{f(\widetilde{x})^{3-\alpha}}{|\widetilde{x}|^{d+2-\alpha}}d\widetilde{x} <\infty\, .
\end{align}
\begin{example}\label{ex:log}{\rm
Let $d \ge 3$ and $D=\{x=(\widetilde{x},x_d)\in {\mathbb R}^d:\, 0<x_d \}$,
$f:{\mathbb R}^{d-1}\to [0,\infty)$ a Lipschitz function
and put $A:=\{x=(\widetilde{x},x_d)\in D:\, 0<x_d\le f(\widetilde{x})\}$.
\noindent
(1) If $f(\widetilde{x})=|\widetilde{x}|^{\gamma}$ with $\gamma\ge 1$, then an
easy calculation shows that all three integrals in
\eqref{c:criterion2-Z}-\eqref{c:criterion2-Y} are finite
if and only if $\gamma>1$. Thus, for all three processes,
$A$ is minimally thin at $z=0$ if and only if $\gamma>1$.
\noindent
(2) Let $f(\widetilde{x})=|\widetilde{x}|\big(\log(1/|\widetilde{x}|)\big)^{-\beta}$,
$\beta\ge 0$. Then $f$ is Lipschitz. By use of
\eqref{c:criterion2-Z}-\eqref{c:criterion2-Y} it follows
easily that $A$ is minimally thin at $z=0$
\begin{align*}
& \text{with respect to }Z^D \text{ if and only if } \beta>\frac{1}{\alpha-1}\, ,\\
& \text{with respect to }X^D \text{ if and only if } \beta>1\, ,\\
& \text{with respect to }Y^D \text{ if and only if } \beta>\frac{1}{3-\alpha}\, .
\end{align*}
Since $1<1/(3-\alpha)$ for $\alpha\in (0,2)$ and $1<1/(\alpha-1)$
for $\alpha\in (1,2)$ this is in accordance with Corollary \ref{c:comparison}.
By choosing $\beta$ and $\alpha$ appropriately, we conclude that none of
the converse in Corollary \ref{c:comparison} holds true.
}
\end{example}
We conclude this paper with an example about minimal thinness with respect to
subordinate killed Brownian motion in the half-space via geometric stable
subordinators.
We define $L_1(\lambda)=\log\lambda$, and for $n\ge 2$ and $\lambda>0$ large enough,
$L_n(\lambda)=L_1(L_{n-1}(\lambda))$.
Applying Proposition \ref{p:dahlberg2}, we can easily check the following.
\begin{example}\label{ex:log2}{\rm
Let $d \ge 3$ and
$\alpha\in (0, 1]$.
Suppose that $D=\{x=(\widetilde{x},x_d)\in {\mathbb R}^d:\, 0<x_d \}$ and $Y^D$ is the
subordinate killed Brownian motion in $D$ via a subordinator with Laplace
exponent $\log(1+\lambda^{\alpha})$.
Assume that $f:{\mathbb R}^{d-1}\to [0,\infty)$ a Lipschitz function
and define $A:=\{x=(\widetilde{x},x_d)\in D:\, 0<x_d\le f(\widetilde{x})\}$.
\noindent
(1) Let $f(\widetilde{x})=|\widetilde{x}|\big(
L_1(1/|\widetilde{x}|)\big)^{-\beta}$ with
$\beta\ge 0$. Then $A$ is minimally thin at $z=0$ with respect to $Y^D$ if and only if $\beta> 0$.
\noindent
(2) Let $n\ge 2$ and $f(\widetilde{x})=|\widetilde{x}|(L_2(1/|\widetilde{x}|)\cdots L_n(1/|\widetilde{x}|)\big)^{-1/3}
\big(L_{n+1}(1/|\widetilde{x}|)\big)^{-\beta}$ with
$\beta\ge 0$. Then $A$ is minimally thin at $z=0$ with respect to $Y^D$ if and only if $\beta> 1/3$.
}
\end{example}
\bigskip
\noindent
{\bf Acknowledgements:} We are grateful to the referee for the insightful comments
on the first version of this paper.
\vspace{.1in}
\begin{singlespace}
\small
|
\section{Basic notions and motivation}
\begin{defn}\label{defn2}
For \emph{finite} \sq s (blocks) $A=[a_1,a_2,\dots, a_n],\ B=[b_1,b_2,\dots, b_n]$ (of the same length $n$), consisting of complex numbers, we define
$$
\corr(A,B)=\Bigl(\frac1n\sum_{i=1}^na_i\overline{b_i}\Bigr)-\Bigl(\frac1n\sum_{i=1}^na_i\Bigr)\cdot\Bigl(\frac1n\sum_{i=1}^n\overline{b_i}\Bigr).
$$
Two complex-valued bounded \emph{infinite} \sq s $x, y$ are declared \emph{uncorrelated}, \emph{weakly correlated}, or \emph{strongly correlated}, if
\begin{align*}
\lim_n\corr(x_{[1,n]},y_{[1,n]})&=0, \\
\limsup_n|\corr(x_{[1,n]},y_{[1,n]})|&>0, \\
\liminf_n|\corr(x_{[1,n]},y_{[1,n]})|&>0,
\end{align*}
respectively. (We are using the following notation: $x_{[1,n]}$ is the block $[x_1,x_2,\dots,x_n]$.)
\end{defn}
Notice that if at least one sequence has zero mean, then the correlation uses only the first average
(of the products).
\medskip
Although most of our results apply to sequences in the complex space $\ell^\infty$, for simplicity of the forthcoming arguments we will restrict our attention to the space $K^\N$ of sequences taking values in a finite subset $K$ of the unit disc. This will allow us to use a range of measure-theoretic and \tl\ tools applicable for subshifts. We will call $K$ the \emph{alphabet}, and $\N$ denotes the set of positive integers (so that the enumeration of our \sq s always starts with the index 1).
\medskip
The famous \emph{Sarnak Conjecture} (see \cite{Sar}) asserts that the \emph{M\"obius function $\mmu$} is uncorrelated to any \emph{deterministic \sq\ $x$} where $\mmu$ is the ``signed characteristic function'' of square-free numbers:
$$
\mmu(n)=\begin{cases}
\phantom{-}1&\text{if $n=1$,}\\
\phantom{-}0& \text{if $n$ has a repeated prime factor,}\\
\phantom{-}(-1)^r&\text{if $n$ is a product of $r$ distinct primes},
\end{cases}
$$
and a deterministic \sq\ is any \sq\ $x$ of the form
$$
x_n = f(T^na),
$$
where $f$ is a continuous complex-valued function defined on a \tl\ \ds\ \xt\ (i.e., $T:X\to X$ is a
continuous transformation of a compact metric space $X$) of \tl\ entropy zero and $a\in X$ (equivalently, the shift orbit-closure of $x$ has \tl\ entropy zero). Observe that the set of square-free numbers has positive density in $\N$, so the conjecture is not trivial. An up-to-date exposition of classes of systems for which the conjecture holds, as well as some new results, can be found in \cite{Lem}.
While Sarnak Conjecture is still far from being solved, our research is motivated by a similar problem (attributed to Boshernitzan), stated below. A \sq\ $x$ is \emph{strictly ergodic} if it is of the form
$$
x_n = f(T^na),
$$
where $f$ is a continuous complex-valued function defined on a strictly ergodic \tl\ \ds\ \xt\ and $a\in X$
(equivalently, the shift orbit-closure of $x$ is a strictly ergodic dynamical system).
\begin{que}\label{que1}
Is the M\"obius function uncorrelated to any strictly ergodic \sq ?
\end{que}
We have tried to understand what kind of question this is and what it means for a \sq\ to be uncorrelated to any strictly ergodic \sq. As it turns out, the condition defines an interesting, nontrivial class of \sq s.
\medskip
Let us now recall the notion of a generic point. By \emph{\im s} we will always mean $T$-invariant Borel probability measures on $X$.
\begin{defn}\label{generating}
A point $x$ in a \tl\ \ds\ \xt\ is \emph{generic} for an \im\ $\mu$ if
$$
\lim_n\frac1n\sum_{i=1}^n f(T^i x) = \int f\,d\mu,
$$
for every continuous (real or complex) function $f$ on $X$.
\end{defn}
We recall the well-known fact that generic points always exist for ergodic measures, in which case they
form a set of full measure. Moreover, if a \tl\ \ds\ is uniquely ergodic then all of its points are generic for the unique \im. It is also well known that in the full shift over a finite alphabet every shift-\im\ has a generic point. An important simplification which arises for symbolic systems is that for genericity of a point it suffices to verify the convergence for the countable family of characteristic functions of cylinder sets. Moreover, each point $x$ is now a \sq\ and the ergodic average of length $n$ for the characteristic function of a cylinder associated to a block $B$ corresponds to the \emph{frequency} with which $B$ appears in the initial block $x_{[1,n+|B|-1]}$. Thus $x$ is generic for a shift-\im\ $\mu$ if
and only if the following holds, for every positive integer $m$ and every block $B\in K^m$:
\begin{equation}
\mu(B) = \lim_n \tfrac1n\#\{i\in\{1,2,\dots,n\}: x_{[i,i+m-1]}=B\}
\end{equation}
(by writing $\mu(B)$ we identify blocks with their associated cylinder sets in $K^\N$).
We will need a similar notion of semi-generating a measure along a sub\sq:
\begin{defn}\label{semigen}
We say that a \sq\ $x\in K^\N$ \emph{semi-generates} a shift-\im\ $\mu$ \emph{along a sub\sq} $(n_k)$ if the following holds, for every positive integer $m$ and every block $B\in K^m$:
\begin{equation}\label{gen}
\mu(B) = \lim_k \tfrac1{n_k}\#\{i\in\{1,2,\dots,n_k\}: x_{[i,i+m-1]}=B\}.
\end{equation}
\end{defn}
By the weak-star compactness of the space of probability measures, given a point $x\in K^\N$, every sub\sq\ $(n_k)$ contains a sub-sub\sq\ along which $x$ semi-generates an \im. Now, given two points, $x$ and $y$, we can treat the pair $(x,y)$ as an element of $(K\times K)^\N$ (which is also a symbolic space), hence every sub\sq\ $(n_k)$ contains a sub-sub\sq\ $(n_{k_l})$ along which the pair $(x,y)$ semi-generates an \im\ $\xi$ on $(K\times K)^\N$. It is elementary to see, that along every such sub-sub\sq\ $(n_{k_l})$ all the limits involved in the definition of correlations, i.e.,
$$
\lim_l \frac1{n_{k_l}}\sum_{i=1}^{n_{k_l}}x_i\overline{y_i}, \ \ \ \ \lim_l \frac1{n_{k_l}}\sum_{i=1}^{n_{k_l}}x_i, \ \ \ \ \lim_l \frac1{n_{k_l}}\sum_{i=1}^{n_{k_l}}\overline{y_i},
$$
exist and equal the respective integrals
$$
\int x_1\overline{y_1}\,d\xi, \ \ \ \int x_1\,d\mu, \ \ \ \int \overline{y_1}\,d\nu,
$$
where $\mu$ and $\nu$ are the marginal measures of $\xi$ (i.e., $\xi$ is a \emph{joining} of $\mu$ and $\nu$).
Of course, the most convenient situation occurs when the points $x$ and $y$ are generic for some
\im s. In this case the entire sequences $\frac1n\sum_{i=1}^n x_i$ and $\frac1n\sum_{i=1}^n\overline{y_i}$ (but not $\frac1n\sum_{i=1}^n x_i\overline{y_i}$) converge, which simplifies many arguments. Because we are interested in studying correlation with strictly ergodic \sq s (and every element of a strictly ergodic system is generic), we can immediately assume that our \sq\ $y$ is generic. It is thus reasonable to first look at \sq s $x$ which are also generic (we will extend our results to general elements $x$ in the last but one section). In this manner we are led to the following question:
\begin{que}\label{que2}
When is a \sq\ $x\in K^\N$, generic for a shift-\im, weakly (strongly) correlated to a strictly ergodic \sq?
\end{que}
\medskip
The first (but already rich in consequences) reduction of the problem relies on an observation made long ago by B. Weiss (\cite{weiss}).
\begin{thm}\label{thm1} If $x\in K^\N$ is generic for an \emph{ergodic} measure then it is a ${\bar d}$-limit of a sequence of strictly ergodic points, where $\bar d$ is the Besicovitch distance
$$
\bar d(x,y) = \limsup_n \frac1n\sum_{i=1}^{n}|x_i - y_i|.
$$
\end{thm}
It is easy to see that if $y$ is a \sq\ strongly or weakly correlated to $x$, then the same holds for
$y$ and any $x'$ sufficiently close to $x$ in $\bar d$. This remark, together with the fact that every strictly ergodic point is generic for an ergodic measure immediately imply that
\begin{thm}\label{thm2}
A \sq\ $x\in K^\N$ is weakly (strongly) correlated to a strictly ergodic point if and only if it is weakly (strongly) correlated to a point generic for an ergodic measure.
\end{thm}
This theorem allows us to formulate question \ref{que2} in a simplified, yet equivalent, version:
\begin{que}\label{que3}
When is a \sq\ $x\in K^\N$, generic for an \im\ $\mu$, strongly (weakly) correlated to a \sq\ generic for an ergodic measure?
\end{que}
Notice that if $\mu$ is ergodic then every point generic for $\mu$ is correlated to a point generic for an ergodic measure (namely to itself). An exception occurs when $\mu$ is a pointmass concentrated at a fixpoint. Such measure is ergodic, yet any of its generic points is uncorrelated to any sequence (even to itself). In either case, our question trivializes if $\mu$ is ergodic. As we shall see, in the nonergodic case, the answer depends exclusively on the properties of the \im, not on the choice of the generic point $x$. More precisely, the answer depends on the \emph{ergodic decomposition} of $\mu$, leading to a discovery of some new features of nonergodic \im s.
\medskip
We conclude this section with a remark concerning the M\"obius function $\mmu$. We can now connect Boshernitzan's question with another celebrated conjecture, the Chowla Conjecture. Leaving aside its precise formulation (see \cite{Cho}), its validity would imply that $\mmu$ were generic for a specific ergodic measure. In view of Theorem \ref{thm2}, this would also imply the negative answer to Question~\ref{que1}: the M\"obius function (as being generic for an ergodic measure not concentrated at a fixpoint) would be strongly correlated to some strictly ergodic \sq.
\section{Correlation of measures}\label{sectwo}
Following the discussion of the preceding section, we introduce the correlation of measures.
\begin{defn}\label{defn3}
The \emph{correlation} between two shift-\im s $\mu$ and $\nu$ on $K^\N$ is the number
$$
\corr(\mu,\nu)=\sup_{\xi}\left|\int x_1\overline{y_1} \,d\xi - \int x_1\,d\mu \cdot \int \overline{y_1}\,d\nu\right|,
$$
where $(x,y)\mapsto x_1$ and $(x,y)\mapsto y_1$ are the ``first symbol value'' functions on the Cartesian square of the shift space $K^\N$, and $\xi$ ranges over all joinings of $\mu$ with $\nu$.
The measures are \emph{uncorrelated} if $\corr(\mu,\nu)=0$. Otherwise we say that the measures are \emph{correlated} and any joining for which the above difference is nonzero will be referred to as a
\emph{correlating joining}.
\end{defn}
We can now formulate a question concerning \im s, completely analogous to Question \ref{que2} posed for \sq s generic for \im s. We will say that a measure is \emph{strictly ergodic} if its \tl\ support (viewed as a subshift) is strictly ergodic.
\begin{que}\label{que4}
When is a shift-\im\ $\mu$ supported by $K^\N$, uncorrelated to any strictly ergodic measure?
\end{que}
In order to simplify this question we first prove an analog of Theorem~\ref{thm2}, which
allows to drop the adjective ``strictly'' from the formulation.
\begin{thm}\label{thm2a}
A shift-\im\ $\mu$ on $K^\N$ is correlated to a strictly ergodic measure if and only if it is correlated to an ergodic measure.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof} Since every strictly ergodic measure is ergodic, one implication is trivial.
Suppose $\mu$ is correlated to an ergodic measure $\nu$. Let $\xi$ be a correlating joining of $\mu$ and $\nu$. Let $(x,y)$ be generic for $\xi$ (such a pair exists in the full shift over $K\times K$). Then $x$ is generic for $\mu$, $y$ is generic for $\nu$, and these points are strongly correlated.
Indeed all the limits of averages in the definition of strong correlation of the \sq s $x$ and $y$ are equal to the respective integrals in the definition of correlation of the measures $\mu$ and $\nu$ with help of the joining $\xi$. Now, by Theorem \ref{thm1}, $y$ can be replaced by a strictly ergodic element $y'$ (which is generic for a strictly ergodic measure $\nu'$), so that $x$ and $y'$ are strongly correlated. Along some sub\sq\ the pair $(x,y')$ semi-generates an \im\ $\xi'$ on $(K\times K)^\N$, and since $x$ and $y'$ are generic for $\mu$ and $\nu'$, the marginals of $\xi'$ are $\mu$ and $\nu'$, i.e., $\xi'$ is a joining of $\mu$ and $\nu'$. Now we need to reverse the preceding argument: all the integrals in the definition of correlation of $\mu$ and $\nu'$ with help of the joining $\xi'$ are equal to the respective limits (along a subsequence) in the definition of correlation between $x$ and $y'$. Since these points are generic and strongly correlated, the limits indicate correlation regardless of the subsequence. So, $\xi'$ is a correlating joining of $\mu$ and $\nu'$.
\end{proof}
Question \ref{que4} takes now a simplified, equivalent form:
\begin{que}\label{que7}
When is a shift-\im\ $\mu$ supported by $K^\N$, uncorrelated to any ergodic measure?
\end{que}
Uncorrelation is a ``weak form'' of \emph{disjointness} (in the sense of Furstenberg), which is the condition that all expressions $\int f(x)g(y) \,d\xi - \int f(x)\,d\mu\cdot\int g(y)\,d\nu$ equal zero, when evaluated for \emph{all} bounded measurable functions $f$ and $g$ of one variable. If $\mu$ and $\nu$ are disjoint then they are obviously uncorrelated. This raises two further natural questions:
\begin{que}\label{que5}
Are there \im s disjoint from all ergodic measures?
\end{que}
\begin{que}\label{que6}
Does the reversed implication hold: does uncorrelation to any strictly ergodic measure imply disjointness from all (strictly) ergodic measures?
\end{que}
Question \ref{que5} is answered positively by a relatively simple example (provided in the last section).
As far as Question \ref{que6} is concerned, it is rather hard to expect that uncorrelation for just one specific function (the ``first symbol value'') should imply disjointness. On the other hand, in the case of symbolic systems, this particular function corresponds in fact to a generating partition, and in many proofs in ergodic theory it suffices to consider a generating partition. It turns out that the answer to this question is negative (which makes uncorrelation to any ergodic measure a new property). However, the appropriate example, that we provide in the last section, is far from trivial; in order to verify the desired property we needed to establish new criteria for ergodicity of certain types of cocycle extensions. Our example has inspired us to introduce the notion of conditional disjointness. This
idea and its applicability to studying uncorrelation to any ergodic measure are presented in the Appendix at the end of the paper.
Since uncorrelation is essentially weaker than disjointness, another question arises:
\begin{que}\label{que8}
Is the property of being uncorrelated to any ergodic measure an isomorphism invariant?
\end{que}
Again, the answer turns out negative. This property is not even invariant under topological conjugacy. That is, after transforming the shift space via an injective sliding block code (in this manner the shift space is modeled inside another symbolic space), a measure uncorrelated to any ergodic measures may lose this property. It is so, because the ``first symbol value'' function $x_1$ may dramatically change in the sense of information content. This is illustrated in another example provided in the final section. So, the property must be regarded as one of the shift-\im\ in a particular symbolic representation.
\smallskip
We continue with further criteria for correlation with an ergodic measure. Note that the following one \emph{is} an isomorphism invariant:
\begin{thm}\label{thm4}
If the ergodic decomposition of $\mu$ has an atom, which is not the Dirac measure at a fixpoint of the shift transformation, then $\mu$ is correlated to an ergodic measure.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof} Let $\nu$ be the ergodic measure which is the atom of the ergodic decomposition of $\mu$. That is,
$$
\mu = p\nu + (1-p)\mu',
$$ where $p\in (0,1]$ and $\mu'$ is some \im. Then $\mu$ admits the following joining with $\nu$:
$$
\xi = p\nu_\Delta + (1-p)(\mu'\times\nu),
$$
where $\nu_\Delta$ is the \emph{identity joining} of $\nu$ with itself, supported by the diagonal, and
$\mu'\times\nu$ denotes the product measure. It is now elementary to verify the correlation between $\mu$ and $\nu$ using $\xi$:
\begin{multline*}
\int x_1\overline{y_1}\,d\xi - \int x_1\,d\mu\int\overline{y_1}\,d\nu = \\
p\int x_1\overline{y_1}\,d\nu_\Delta + (1-p)\int x_1\overline{y_1}\,d(\mu'\times\nu) -
\left(p\int x_1\,d\nu + (1-p)\int x_1\,d\mu'\right) \int \overline{y_1}\,d\nu =\\
p\int |x_1|^2\,d\nu +(1-p)\int x_1\,d\mu'\int\overline{y_1}\,d\nu - p\left|\int x_1\,d\nu\right|^2 - (1-p)\int x_1\,d\mu'\int\overline{y_1}\,d\nu =\\
p\left(\int |x_1|^2\,d\nu - \left|\int x_1\,d\nu\right|^2 \right)\ge 0,
\end{multline*}
with equality holding only when $x_1$ is constant $\nu$-almost surely, that is when $\nu$ is concentrated
at a fixpoint of the shift transformation.
\end{proof}
The theorem allows to determine, in particular, that an \im\ being a convex combination of finitely
many ergodic components, at least one of which is not a pointmass, is correlated to some (strictly) ergodic measure.
\medskip
The main result of this section shows that Questions \ref{que2} and \ref{que7} are in fact equivalent. Note that correlation of measures has no weak or strong form.
\begin{thm}\label{thm5}
Suppose that $x\in K^\N$ is generic for an \im\ $\mu$. The following conditions are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $x$ is weakly correlated to a point generic for an ergodic measure,
\item $x$ is strongly correlated to a point generic for an ergodic measure,
\item $\mu$ is correlated to an ergodic measure.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $x$, which is generic for $\mu$, is weakly correlated to some $y$ generic for an ergodic measure $\nu$. This means that there exists a subsequence $(n_k)$ such that the limit $\lim_k\corr(x_{[1,n_k]},y_{[1,n_k]})$ exists and is different from zero. There is a sub-sub\sq\
$(n_{k_l})$ along which the pair $(x,y)$ semi-generates an \im\ $\xi$ on $(K\times K)^\N$. Exactly as in
the proof of Theorem \ref{thm2a} (the argument involving $y'$, $\nu'$ and $\xi'$), $\xi$ is a correlating joining of $\mu$ and $\nu$.
Now, suppose that a point $x$ is generic for an \im\ $\mu$ which is correlated to an ergodic measure $\nu$.
Let $\xi$ be a correlating joining of $\mu$ and $\nu$. We need to refer to the following fact, whose proof occupies the next section.
\begin{thm}\label{lem1}
Let $\xi$ be a joining of two shift-\im s $\mu$ and $\nu$ supported by $K^\N$, and let $x\in K^\N$ be a point generic for $\mu$. Then there exists a point $y\in K^\N$ such that the pair $(x,y)$ is generic for $\xi$ (in particular, $y$ is generic for $\nu$).
\end{thm}
It is obvious that by applying the above theorem to our situation we obtain a point $y$ generic for the ergodic measure $\nu$ and such that $x$ and $y$ are strongly correlated. This ends the proof of Theorem \ref{thm5}.
\end{proof}
\section{Generic points for joinings}
This section is devoted to proving Theorem \ref{lem1}. To avoid ambiguity, we will distinguish between \emph{free blocks} of length $m$, i.e., the elements of $K^m$ (there are precisely $\#K^m$ free blocks) and \emph{blocks} of length $m$, i.e., subblocks of length $m$ of a longer block $B$ or of a symbolic element $x$. There are precisely $|B|-m+1$ blocks of length $m$ in $B$. Each block is an \emph{occurrence} of a free block. Every free block $B\in K^n$ determines, for every $m\le n$, what we call the \emph{empirical measure} $\mu_B$ on the finite space $K^m$ of free blocks of length $m$, by the formula
$$
\mu_B(D) = \tfrac1n\#\{i\in[1,n-m+1]: B_{[i,i+m-1]}=D\}.
$$
(for the ease of computations, we divide by $n$ rather than by the more commonly used denominator $n-m+1$, as a result we obtain a sub-probabilistic vector).
\begin{defn} For (probabilistic or sub-probabilistic) measures on $K^{m}$ we define the distance
$$
d^{(m)}(\mu, \nu) = \sum_{D\in K^m}|\mu(D) - \nu(D)|.
$$
A block $B$ is said to be $(m,\epsilon)$-generic for an invariant (probability) measure $\mu$ on~$K^\N$
if $d^{(m)}(\mu_B,\mu)<\epsilon$.
\end{defn}
The sub-probabilistic normalization of the empirical measures causes that any block $(m,\epsilon)$-generic for a probability measure has length at least $\frac m\epsilon$.
Notice that a point $x$ is generic for a measure $\mu$ if and only if, for every positive integer $m$ and $\epsilon>0$, the blocks $x_{[1,n]}$ are eventually (i.e., for large $n$) $(m,\epsilon)$-generic for $\mu$.
\smallskip
We will need two technical lemmas.
\begin{lem}\label{gener}
Assume that $B\in K^n$ and $B_{[1,l]}$ are both $(m,\epsilon)$-generic for $\mu$, where $l<n(1-\sqrt\epsilon)$. Then $B_{[l+1,n]}$ is $(m,3\sqrt\epsilon)$-generic for $\mu$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We have
$$
\sum_{D\in K^m}\left|\#\{i\in[1,n-m+1]:B_{[i,i+m-1]}=D\}-\mu(D)\right| = nd^{(m)}(\mu_B,\mu) < n\epsilon
$$
and the same for $l$ in place of $n$. Thus, subtracting sidewise, we obtain
\begin{multline*}
\sum_{D\in K^m}\left|\#\{i\in[l-m+2,n-m+1]:B_{[i,i+m-1]}=D\}-(n-l)\mu(D)\right|<\\(n+l)\epsilon,
\end{multline*}
The above calculation misses $m-1$ blocks of length $m$ appearing on the left end of $B_{[l+1,n]}$. Adding this number to the right hand side and dividing both sides by $n-l$ we obtain
$$
\sum_{D\in K^m}\left|\mu_{B_{[l+1,n]}}(D)-\mu(D)\right|<\\\frac{n+l}{n-l}\epsilon + \frac{m-1}{n-l}\le \frac {3\epsilon n}{n-l}
$$
(we have also used the inequality $m<\epsilon n$, which holds since $B$ is $(m,\epsilon)$-generic).
Applying the inequality $n-l>n\sqrt\epsilon$ we finish the proof.
\end{proof}
The easy proofs of the following facts are left to the reader. All blocks addressed below are longer than $m$, the empirical measures are defined on $K^m$, and the distance between them is $d^{(m)}$.
\begin{lem}\label{generq} {\color{white}.}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Let $B\in K^n$. Then the empirical measures determined by $B$ and $B_{[l+1,n-k]}$
are at most $2\frac{l+k}n$ apart.
\item Suppose the empirical measures determined by two blocks $B$ and $C$ of the same length are less than $\epsilon$ apart, and the same holds for a pair $B',C'$. Then the empirical measures determined by the concatenations $BC$ and $B'C'$ are less than $2\epsilon$ apart, assuming that the joint length of the concatenation exceeds $\frac m\epsilon$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
We pass to the main proof of this section.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{lem1}]
Let us start by taking a pair $(x',y')$, generic for the joining $\xi$ (such a pair exists in $(K\times K)^\N$). Clearly, the points $x'$ and $y'$ are generic for the projections $\mu$ and $\nu$, respectively. We will think of $(x',y')$ as of a sequence consisting of two rows, $x'$ in the first row, $y'$ in the second.
Choose a decreasing to zero \sq\ of positive numbers $\epsilon_m$ ($m\ge 1$). By the Rokhlin Lemma applied to the system with the measure $\mu$ we have: for each $m$ there exists a Rokhlin tower of height $m$, with remainder of measure less than $\epsilon_m$. By a standard argument, the bases of the towers (and hence the remainders) can be chosen closed-and-open (we will say \emph{clopen}). By lifting to the product space we also have Rokhlin towers for the measure $\xi$.
Throughout the following three paragraphs we fix one value of the parameter $m$. For each point in the product system (i.e., \sq\ in $(K\times K)^\N$), we mark the times of the visits in the base of the Rokhlin tower by an additional symbol (star) and the visits in the remainder of the tower by another additional symbol, say, a dagger. Because we chose the bases clopen, adding the stars and daggers is a topological conjugacy of $(K\times K)^\N$ with a subsystem of $(\K\times\K)^\N$, where $\K = K\times\{\star,\dagger,\emptyset\}$. In particular, generic points are preserved. We can think of $\xi$ as a measure supported by $(\K\times\K)^\N$ (and $\mu$ as a measure supported by $\K^\N$), we will call this the \emph{marked representation}. Every point generic for $\mu$ (including $x$ and $x'$) has, in this representation, the structure of a concatenation of blocks of the length $m$ starting with the star (we will call these blocks \emph{$m$-blocks}), separated by strings, of various lengths, of symbols marked by the dagger (the \sq\ may start with a prefix of length at most $m-1$, without any markers). The daggers occur with density less than $\epsilon_m$, the stars have density between $\frac{1-\epsilon_m}m$ and $\frac1m$, every free $m$-block occurs with the density equal to its measure. We let $l_m$ be such that for every $n\ge l_m$ the block $(x',y')_{[1,n]}$ is $(m,\epsilon_m)$-generic for $\xi$ (in particular, the block $x'_{[1,n]}$ is $(m,\epsilon_m)$-generic for $\mu$) and also the block $x_{[1,n]}$ is $(m,\epsilon_m)$-generic for $\mu$. We can inductively arrange that $l_{m+1}$ is larger than $\frac{l_m}{\epsilon_m}$. This proportion and Lemma \ref{generq} (1) imply that for $n\ge l_{m+1}$ the blocks $(x',y')_{[l_m+1,n]}$ and $x_{[l_m+1,n]}$ are $(m,3\epsilon_m)$-generic for $\xi$ and $\mu$, respectively.
\smallskip
We will now describe the inductive $m$th step of our construction, in which we define the second row $y$ in the pair $(x,y)$ between the positions $l_m+1$ and $l_{m+1}$ (we let $y_{[1,l_1]}$ be defined arbitrarily).
Given a free $m$-block $A$ over the alphabet $K$, we locate all its occurrences in both $x_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ and $x'_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ (sitting completely inside). Next we define $y$ at the positions corresponding to the occurrences of $A$ in $x$ proceeding from left to right and rewriting consecutive symbols of $y'$ from the positions corresponding to the occurrences of $A$ in $x'_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$, maintaining the order. We continue until we exhaust the available positions in either $x_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ or $x'_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ (or both). We perform this procedure separately, for every free $m$-block $A$. Note that since the $m$-blocks always occur separately (without overlapping), there will be no collision at any position of $y$. As a result, nearly all two-row $m$-blocks occurring in $(x',y')_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ will be copied in $(x,y)_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$; there is a 1-1 correspondence between nearly all $m$-blocks here and here. The correspondence is defined except on a small percentage of the $m$-blocks here and here, mainly occurring near the right end (for each free $m$-block $A$ the number of occurrences in $x'_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ may be slightly larger or slightly smaller than in $x_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ -- in either case the \emph{excessive} $m$-blocks on one side have to be excluded from the 1-1 correspondence). Precisely, since both first-row blocks are $(m,3\epsilon_m)$-generic for $\mu$, this percentage does not exceed $6\epsilon_m$. In the end, there may remain some unfilled positions in $y_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$; we fill them arbitrarily. This concludes the definition of~$y$.
\smallskip
In order to verify that the above defined pair $(x,y)$ is generic for $\xi$ we will compare, for every positive integer $m_0$, the empirical measures on $(K\times K)^{m_0}$ determined by the initial blocks $(x,y)_{[1,n]}$ and $(x',y')_{[1,n]}$. Since the latter tend to $\xi$ with increasing $n$, it suffices to prove that the distance between the above two empirical measures tends to zero. So, we fix an $m_0$ and $n$ larger than $l_{m_0+1}$. We let $m\ge m_0$ be the largest index such that $n \ge l_{m+1}$. Note that $m$ implicitly depends on $n$ and tends to infinity as $n$ grows, so that all expressions of order $\epsilon_m$, $\sqrt{\epsilon_m}$ or $\frac1m$ tend to zero with $n$. To avoid notorious repetitions of the phrase ``blocks of length $m_0$ over $K\times K$'' (as opposed to other blocks referred to in the argument) we will call them shortly the \emph{words}. From now on \emph{empirical measures} are always defined on so understood free words.
\smallskip
We begin by proving that the empirical measures determined by $(x,y)_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ and $(x',y')_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ are close. We classify the words contained in $(x,y)_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ in four groups:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(I)] words not inside any $m$-block; these can be recognized by either having a star \emph{not} at position 1, or a dagger anywhere (we mean the stars and daggers created in step $m$),
\item[(II)] words contained inside any of the two possible $m$-blocks appearing at either end of and only partly contained in $(x,y)_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$,
\item[(III)] words contained within an $m$-block sitting inside $(x,y)_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$, but being the ``excessive'' $m$-block (excluded from the aforementioned 1-1 correspondence),
\item[(IV)] words contained within an $m$-block sitting inside $(x,y)_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ and included in the 1-1 correspondence.
\end{enumerate}
By the $(m,3\epsilon_m)$-genericity and thus also $(1,3\epsilon_m)$-genericity of $x_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ for $\mu$, the first group constitutes a small percentage of all considered words (smaller than $m_0(3\epsilon_m+\frac1m+\epsilon_m)$). The same genericity implies small proportion between $m$ and the length of $x_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$, hence smallness of the second group. We already know that among all $m$-blocks contained in $(x,y)_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ only
a small percentage (at most $6\epsilon_m$) is excluded from the 1-1 correspondence. This implies that the third group is small, as well. We have shown that the last group dominates (constitutes a percentage converging to 1 with growing $n$) of all words in $(x,y)_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$. The 1-1 correspondence between
the $m$-blocks induces, in an obvious way, a 1-1 correspondence between words in group (IV) and words in the
analogous group (IV) regarded for $(x',y')_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ (which, by a symmetric argument, dominates among all words in $(x',y')_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$). This clearly implies that the empirical measures determined by $(x',y')_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ and $(x,y)_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ are close, as desired.
\smallskip
Now consider two cases:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)] $n-l_{m+1}\le n\sqrt{\epsilon_m}$, \ and
\item[(b)] the opposite.
\end{enumerate}
In case (a), $(x,y)_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ is obtained from $(x,y)_{[1,n]}$ by truncating at most
$n(\epsilon_m+\sqrt{\epsilon_m})$ terms at the ends, and the same holds for $(x',y')$. Thus, Lemma~\ref{generq}~(1) (applied twice) and the closeness of the empirical measures of $(x,y)_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ and $(x',y')_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ imply closeness of the empirical measures of $(x,y)_{[1,n]}$ and $(x',y')_{[1,n]}$, which concludes this case.
\smallskip
In case (b), we will argue that also the empirical measures determined by the blocks $(x,y)_{[l_{m+1}+1,n]}$ and $(x',y')_{[l_{m+1}+1,n]}$ are close. Observe that the closeness of the empirical measures determined by
$(x,y)_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ and $(x',y')_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ was deduced using exclusively the fact
that the blocks $x_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ and $x'_{[l_m+1,l_{m+1}]}$ were $(m,3\epsilon_m)$-generic for $\mu$.
Now we are in a very similar situation: since $l_{m+1}<n(1-\sqrt{\epsilon_m})$, we can use Lemma~\ref{gener} to conclude that the blocks $x_{[l_{m+1}+1,n]}$ and $x'_{[l_{m+1}+1,n]}$ are both $(m+1,3\sqrt{\epsilon_{m+1}})$-generic for $\mu$.
Because the algorithm of defining $y_{[l_{m+1}+1,l_{m+2}]}$ proceeds from left to right, we can stop it when we reach the coordinate $n$ and we will have the 1-1 correspondence already defined between majority of $(m\!+\!1)$-blocks in $(x,y)_{[l_{m+1}+1,n]}$ and $(x',y')_{[l_{m+1}+1,n]}$. From here the closeness of the empirical measures determined by $(x,y)_{[l_{m+1}+1,n]}$ and $(x',y')_{[l_{m+1}+1,n]}$ (with $\sqrt{\epsilon_{m+1}}$ replacing $\epsilon_m$ in the estimates) follows as in the preceding argument.
Now Lemma \ref{generq}~(2) yields closeness of the empirical measures of $(x,y)_{[l_m+1,n]}$ and
$(x',y')_{[l_m+1,n]}$ (viewed as appropriate concatenations) and one more application of (1) extends this to $(x,y)_{[1,n]}$ and $(x',y')_{[1,n]}$. The proof in case (b) is complete.
\end{proof}
\section{General \sq s}
A general \sq\ over the alphabet $K$ is typically not generic for any \im\ but it is semi-generic for a
range of \im s. As we will show, in such case we can decide about its uncorrelation versus weak correlation to a (strictly) ergodic \sq\ by examining all the measures semi-generated by $x$. We cannot expect strong correlation results in this case. The main theorem of this section requires a lemma similar to Theorem \ref{lem1}.
\begin{lem}\label{semgengen}
Let $x\in K^\N$ be semi-generic, along a subsequence $(n_k)$, for an \im\ $\mu$, and let $\xi$ be a
joining of $\mu$ with a strictly ergodic measure $\nu$. Then there exists a point $y$ generic for
$\nu$ and such that the pair $(x,y)$ semi-generates $\xi$ along a sub-sub\sq\ of $(n_k)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} We will only outline the proof, focusing on the details which are different than in the proof of Theorem \ref{lem1}.
We pick a pair $(x',y')$ generic for $\xi$. Since $\nu$ is strictly ergodic, we can assume that $y'$
is strictly ergodic, which implies that it is \emph{uniformly generic}, i.e., for every integer $m$
and $\epsilon>0$ there exists an $n$ such every block of length at least $n$, occurring in $y'$, is $(m,\epsilon)$-generic for $\nu$.
As in the other proof, we fix a decreasing to zero \sq\ $\epsilon_m$ and, for each $m$, we create the
marked representation with the $m$-blocks. We select the lengths $l_m$ from the sub\sq\ $(n_k)$ so that
the blocks $x_{[1,l_m]}$ and $(x',y')_{[1,l_m]}$ are $(m,\epsilon_m)$-generic for $\mu$ and $\xi$ respectively. As before, we arrange that $l_{m+1}$ is larger than $\frac{l_m}{\epsilon_m}$, but we do
not care about genericity of initial blocks of other lengths $n$. The inductive step of defining $y$ is identical as before. The verification that $(x,y)$ semi-generates $\xi$ along $(l_m)$ (which is a sub-sub\sq\ of $(n_k)$) is simplified; since we do not care about other lengths $n$ we do not need to consider the two cases (a) and (b), or invoke Lemma \ref{gener}.
We need, however, an additional argument to prove that $y$ is generic for $\nu$ (it is obvious that $y$ semi-generates $\nu$ along $(l_m)$). But this fact follows easily from the assumption that $y'$ is uniformly generic for $\nu$ and that $y$ is built as a concatenation (with insertions of density zero) of longer and longer blocks occurring in $y'$.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{genseq}
A \sq\ $x\in K^\N$ is weakly correlated to a \sq\ generic for an ergodic measure if and only if $x$
is semi-generic for at least one measure correlated to an ergodic measure.
\end{thm}
Rephrasing the theorem, $x$ is uncorrelated to any \sq\ generic for an ergodic (equivalently, strictly ergodic) measure if and only if all of the \im s semi-generated by $x$ have the property of being uncorrelated to any ergodic measure.
\begin{proof} If $x$ is weakly correlated to a point $y$ generic for an ergodic measure $\nu$ then there is a sub\sq\ $(n_k)$ such that the limit $\lim_k\corr(x_{[1,n_k]},y_{[1,n_k]})$ exists and is different from zero. Choosing a sub-sub\sq\ we can assume that the pair $(x,y)$ semi-generates an \im\ $\xi$ on the product space. Clearly, the second marginal of $\xi$ is $\nu$, while the first marginal is an \im\ $\mu$ for which $x$ is semi-generic and which is correlated with $\nu$ (via the joining $\xi$).
Now suppose that $x$ semi-generates an \im\ $\mu$ which is correlated to an ergodic measure $\nu$ via a joining $\xi$. By Theorem \ref{thm2a}, we can assume that $\nu$ is strictly ergodic. Now, Lemma \ref{semgengen} allows to couple $x$ with a point $y$ generic for $\nu$ so that
$(x,y)$ semi-generates $\xi$. It is clear that $x$ and $y$ are weakly correlated.
\end{proof}
\section{Examples}
\begin{exam}
This is an example of an \im\ on $K^\N$, disjoint from (hence uncorrelated to) any ergodic measure.
Consider the mapping $T(t,s)=(t,s+t)$ on the two-dimensional torus, equipped with the product Lebesgue measure $dt\times ds$. Ignoring a set of measure zero, the space decomposes to invariant circles, where on each circle we have a different irrational (hence ergodic) rotation. Suppose that an ergodic measure $\nu$ is not disjoint with $dt\times ds$; it follows that the set $A$ of such parameters $x$ that $\nu$ is not disjoint with the irrational rotation by the angle $x$, has positive Lebesgue measure in the base. The fact that $\nu$ is not disjoint with an irrational rotation is equivalent to $\nu$ having an eigenvalue rationally dependent with the rotation angle. Since the ergodic measure $\nu$ possesses at most countably many different eigenvalues, it follows that the set $A$ is at most countable, hence of measure zero, implying disjointness. Now, we take any (measurable) finite partition of the 2-torus which partitions nontrivially every ergodic circle, and label its members by elements of a finite subset $K$ of the unit disc. This produces a symbolic factor $\mu$ of $dt\times ds$ on $K^\N$ disjoint from all ergodic measures (as a factor of such, nontrivial on each ergodic component).
\end{exam}
\begin{exam}\label{example}
There exists a shift-\im\ on $K^\N$ uncorrelated to any ergodic measure, yet not disjoint with an irrational rotation (in fact being an extension of such a rotation).
Consider the direct product of the identity on the circle $S_1=[0,1)$ ($0=1$) with an irrational
rotation (by $\alpha$) on $S_1$ (represented as $(\cdot +\alpha)$ mod 1).
Let $A\subset S_1\times S_1$ be the triangle $A=\{(t,s): t\in[0,1),\ 0\le s< t\}$ and let
$$
\varphi(t,s) = e^{\pi i\mathbf 1_A(t,s)}
$$
(i.e., $\varphi$ equals $-1$ on $A$ and $1$ otherwise). Consider the $\Z_2$-extension ($\Z_2$ written multiplicatively, as $\{-1,1\}$) corresponding to the cocycle $\varphi$:
$$
T_\varphi(t,s,\kappa) = (t,s+\alpha, \kappa\cdot\varphi(t,s)),
$$
where $(t,s,\kappa)\in X=S^2_1\times\Z_2$.
This mapping preserves the measure $\mu$ which is the product of the Lebesgue measure on $S_1^2$
and the Haar measure on $\Z_2$: $d\mu=dt\times ds\times d\kappa$, and the corresponding measure-preserving system $(X,T_\varphi,\mu)$ is clearly an extension of the irrational rotation by $\alpha$, which appears on the second coordinate. Thus, this measure-preserving system is \emph{not disjoint} from the ergodic system represented by the rotation. It is easy to see that the above $\Z_2$-extension has a symbolic representation over two symbols $\{-1,1\}$ obtained by replacing each point by its $\Z_2$-forward itinerary
$$
(t,s,\kappa) \mapsto (x_n)_{n\ge 1},
$$
where
$$
x_n = \kappa \prod_{i=0}^{n-2} \varphi(t,s+i\alpha),
$$
where the product of zero terms (occurring for $n=1$) equals, by convention, 1. In this representation, $\mu$ becomes a shift-invariant measure supported by $K^\N$, where $K = \{-1,1\}$ is a finite subset of the unit disc,
and hence fits in the framework of Section \ref{sectwo}. Notice that the ``first symbol value''
function in this symbolic representation coincides simply with $\kappa$ in the skew product representation.
\smallskip
We will argue that so defined $\mu$ is uncorrelated to any ergodic measure supported by any complex-valued subshift. In what follows, we will switch freely between the symbolic and skew product representation of $\mu$, depending on our needs.
Clearly, $\mu$ is not ergodic, its ergodic components are measures $\mu_t$ supported by the cocycle extensions of the circle rotation with fixed parameter $t$, and the ``section cocycle'' $\varphi_t$ (equal $-1$ on the arc $[0,t)$ and $1$ otherwise). Of course, not all such cocycle extensions are ergodic (meaning that the measure $ds\times d\kappa$ need not be ergodic), but as we will explain in the next section, the set of parameters $t$ for which this happens has measure zero (see the statement \eqref{state}), so in the ergodic decomposition of $\mu$ such parameters may be ignored.
Let $\nu$ be an ergodic measure on a complex-valued subshift. Since $\mu$ has zero mean (the integral of $x_1$ is zero), in order to prove that $\nu$ is uncorrelated to $\mu$ we need to show that $\int y_1 x_1 \, d\xi = 0$ (the complex conjugate can be skipped because $x_1$ is real) for any joining $\xi$ of $\nu$ and $\mu$. Let $\xi = \int \xi_t\,dt$ be the disintegration of $\xi$ with respect to $dt$, so that $\xi_t$ is a joining of $\nu$ with $\mu_t$.
We have $\int y_1 x_1 \, d\xi = \int (\int y_1 x_1 \, d\xi_t)\,dt$ hence it suffices to show that the inner integral vanishes for almost every $t$. We will do it by proving the following claim:
\begin{itemize}
\item There exists a set $E\subset S_1^2$ of full product Lebesgue measure, such that whenever a \sq\ $(t_j)_{j\ge 1}$ satisfies, for every $j\neq j'$, the condition $(t_j,t_{j'})\in E$, then the sequence $\int y_1 x_1 \, d\xi_{t_j}$ tends to zero with $j$.
\end{itemize}
At first we argue why is this claim sufficient. Suppose that $\int y_1 x_1 \, d\xi_t\neq 0$ on a positive measure set of parameters $t$. Then, for some $\epsilon>0$ the inequality $|\int y_1 x_1 \, d\xi_t|\ge \epsilon$ also holds on a positive measure set $F$ of parameters $t$. There exists $t_1\in F$ such that the $t_1$-section of $E$ has full measure. Then there exists $t_2\in F$ belonging also to the aforementioned $t_1$-section of $E$ and such that the $t_2$-section of $E$ has full measure. Inductively, once $t_1,\dots,t_j$ are selected, we pick $t_{j+1}\in F$ belonging to all the $t_{j'}$-sections of $E$ for ${j'}\le j$ (and having a full measure section of $E$ itself). Such \sq\ $(t_j)$ satisfies the condition that all distinct pairs are in $E$, while the corresponding \sq\ of integrals does not tend to zero, so the claim does not hold.
In order to prove the claim, assume temporarily that the required set $E$ exists and fix a \sq\ $(t_j)$ as described above (with all distinct pairs in $E$). From now on, we will abbreviate the indexes $t_j$ by $j$ (and write $\mu_j$, $\xi_j$, $\varphi_j$ instead of $\mu_{t_j}$, $\xi_{t_j}$, $\varphi_{t_j}$, respectively). Consider a countable joining $\zeta$ of the measures $\nu,\mu_1,\mu_2,\mu_3,\dots,$ such that for every $j\ge 1$ the projection of $\zeta$ jointly on the zero'th and $j$th coordinate equals $\xi_j$ (there exists such a joining: all joinings $\xi_j$ have the common factor $\nu$, hence we can take $\zeta$ to be their relatively independent joining over the common factor).
On the product space supporting $\zeta$ we have the function $y_1$ (depending only on the zero'th coordinate) and the functions $x_1^{(1)}, x_1^{(2)}, x_1^{(3)},\dots$, where $x_1^{(j)}$ depends only on the $j$th coordinate and represents the first symbol value on the support of $\mu_j$. All these functions are measurable and bounded, so they belong to $L^2(\zeta)$. The integrals $\int y_1 x_1 \, d\xi_j$ can be written as $\int y_1 x_1^{(j)}\, d\zeta$, i.e., they become the inner products $\langle y_1, x_1^{(j)}\rangle$ in $L^2(\zeta)$. If we knew that the functions $x_1^{(j)}$ were pairwise orthogonal (they are obviously normalized), then the above inner products would be the Fourier coefficients of the projection of $y_1$ onto the subspace spanned by the functions $x_1^{(j)}$ and thus they would form a \sq\ belonging to $\ell^2$, in particular they would converge to zero, as needed.
For orthogonality of $x_1^{(j)}$ and $x_1^{(j')}$ (for $j\neq j'$) we need to check that the integral $\int x_1^{(j)} x_1^{(j')}\, d\zeta$ equals zero. This integral equals $\int x_1^{(j)} x_1^{(j')}\, d\zeta_{j,j'}$, where $\zeta_{j,j'}$ is the projection of $\zeta$ onto jointly the $j$th and $j'$th coordinates. Clearly $\zeta_{j,j'}$ is a joining of $\mu_j$ and $\mu_{j'}$, so, in fact, it suffices to show that $\mu_j$ and $\mu_{j'}$ are uncorrelated. Since both measures are ergodic, every their joining decomposes to ergodic joinings, thus it suffices to examine their ergodic joinings (denoted henceforth by $\theta$) only.
Now we must go back to the original skew product representation and study possible ergodic joinings $\theta$ of $\mu_t$ and $\mu_{t'}$ (where $t, t'$ abbreviate $t_j$ and $t_{j'}$, respectively). Let $(x,x')$ be a pair generic for $\theta$. This pair is obtained in the following manner: we choose two points, $s_0$ and $s_0'$ on the circle, and two initial values, $\kappa_0$ and $\kappa_0'$, from $\Z_2$, and then $x$ and $x'$ are given (as symbolic \sq s) by the rule
\begin{align*}
x_n &= \kappa_0 \prod_{i=0}^{n-2} \varphi_t(s_0+i\alpha),\\
x'_n &= \kappa'_0 \prod_{i=0}^{n-2} \varphi_{t'}(s'_0+i\alpha)= \kappa_0' \prod_{i=0}^{n-2} \varphi_{t'}(s_0+u+i\alpha),
\end{align*}
where $u=s'_0-s_0$.
By genericity of $(x,x')$, the integral of the product of the first-symbol value functions can be evaluated
as the limit of the averages of the products of the $j$th-symbol values, i.e., we just need to look at the \sq\ $x_nx'_n$ (obtained by coordinatewise multiplication of the above two \sq s). Since $\kappa_0\kappa'_0$ is just another element of $\Z_2$, such \sq\ is obtained as the symbolic representation of the point $(s_0,\kappa_0\kappa'_0)$ in the cocycle extension (of the same rotation by $\alpha$), with the new cocycle $\varphi(s)=\varphi_t(s)\varphi_{t'}(s+u)$. This new cocycle equals $-1$ on the symmetric difference of the intervals $[0,t)$ and $[u,u+t')$ (and 1 on the rest). Suppose that this new cocycle extension is ergodic (with respect to the product measure $ds\times d\kappa$). By a classical theorem of Furstenberg (\cite{F}), this extension is also strictly ergodic, and hence every point (in particular the one we have selected, $(s_0,\kappa_0\kappa_0')$) is generic for
$ds\times d\kappa$. Thus, the limit of the averages we are interested in equals the integral of the
``first symbol value'' function in the symbolic representation of the new cocycle extension, i.e., of the function $(s,\kappa)\mapsto\kappa$. Clearly, the integral of this function with respect to $ds\times d\kappa$ equals zero.
In this manner, we have arrived to the following conclusion: All we need is the existence of a set $E\subset S_1^2$ of full product Lebsgue measure, such that every pair of parameters $(t,t')\in E$, $t\neq t'$ fulfills:
\begin{itemize}
\item for any $u\in S_1$ the cocycle extension corresponding to the cocycle equal to $-1$ on the
symmetric difference of the intervals $[0,t)$ and $[u,u+t')$ (and 1 on the rest) is ergodic.
\end{itemize}
The following section is devoted to studying ergodicity of four-jump $\Z_2$-extensions. As a corollary of
the criteria which we provide, we will derive that the above set $E$ indeed exists (see Theorem \ref{ergCocy1}). This ends the verification of our example.
\end{exam}
\begin{exam}
This example shows that the property of being uncorrelated to any ergodic measure is not a conjugacy invariant.
In the preceding example, we have a shift-\im\ $\mu$ on $\{-1,1\}^\N$. The code
$$
\Pi(x)_n = x_n x_{n+1}
$$
has the effect that it turns the cocycle $\varphi$ into a semicocycle, that is it reproduces the
symbolic system arising from reading the function $\varphi$ along the orbits (without choosing randomly the initial value and without the cumulative multiplication). In this factor, the first symbol value function is equal (up to measure) to the function $\varphi$ on $S_1^2$ with the Lebesgue measure. Now consider the code
$$
\Pi'(x)_n = \frac34 x_n + \frac14 \Pi(x)_n.
$$
This is a conjugacy sending our system to a subshift over four symbols $\{-1,-\frac12,\frac12,1\}$
so that the first symbol carries information about both the original first symbol (by just looking at the sign) and the first symbol of the factor by $\Pi$ (by looking at the finer value). We will show that the measure $\Pi'(\mu)$, although it is conjugate to $\mu$ uncorrelated to any ergodic measure, is correlated to an ergodic measure, namely to the rotation by $\alpha$ represented symbolically as a Sturmian system
given by the semicocycle $\varphi_t$ (the choice of $t$ is in fact arbitrary, but to get the classical Sturmian representation we choose $t=\alpha$). Indeed, for any joining $\xi$ of $\Pi(\mu_\alpha)$ with $\Pi'(\mu)$ we have
\begin{gather*}
\int y_1x_1\,d\xi = \frac34 \int \varphi(\alpha,s')x_1\,d\xi + \frac14\int\varphi(\alpha,s')\varphi(t,s)\,d\xi,
\end{gather*}
where $\xi$ is understood as a joining of the Lebesgue measure on the circle $\{\alpha\}\times S_1$ (here the variable is $s'$) with $\mu$, which in the rightmost integral is replaced by the product Lebesgue measure (here the variables are $t$ and $s$). The central integral equals zero, because it attempts to correlate $\mu$ with an ergodic measure. We can choose $\xi$ so that in the last integral it represents a joining concentrated on the diagonal set $\{s'=s\}$ and here it is the Lebesgue measure $dt\times ds$ (such measure is easily seen to be a joining of $\Pi(\mu_\alpha)$ with $\Pi(\mu)$, so it can be lifted to a joining of $\mu_\alpha$ with $\mu$). Then the integrated function equals $-1$ for pairs $(t,s)$ such that $t\le s <\alpha$ and $\alpha\le s <t$, and $1$ otherwise. As very easy to see, this integral is positive
($\alpha$, being irrational, differs from $0$ or $1$) and so $\xi$ is a correlating joining.
\end{exam}
\section{Ergodicity of four-jump $\Z_2$-cocycles}\label{section6}
In this section we will consider $\Z_2$-exten\-sions $T_\varphi$ of an irrational rotation (by $\alpha$)
on the circle $S_1$ equipped with the Lebesque measure (denoted by $ds$), determined by a cocycle $\varphi:S_1\to\Z_2$:
$$
T_\varphi(s,\kappa) = (s + \alpha, \kappa\cdot\varphi(s)).
$$
For $n\ge 1$, the $n$th iterate of $T_\varphi$ is determined by the \emph{$n$-step cocycle}
$$
\varphi^{(n)}(s) = \prod_{j=0}^{n-1}\varphi(s+j\alpha),
$$
namely
$$
T^n_\varphi(s,\kappa) = (s + n\alpha, \kappa\cdot\varphi^{(n)}(s)).
$$
As before, we will say that the cocycle $\varphi$ is ergodic if the product measure $ds\times d\kappa$
is ergodic under $T_\varphi$. One easily proves the following criterion for this $\Z_2$-extension: $\varphi$ is ergodic if and only if it is not a \emph{coboundary}, i.e., there is no measurable solution $\psi$ of the so-called \emph{cohomological equation}, which, in the multiplicative notation, reads:
\begin{equation}\label{eqfunct}
\varphi(s) = \frac{\psi(s + \alpha)}{\psi(s)}.
\end{equation}
The function $\psi$, if it exists, can be taken with values in $\Z_2$.
In such case, for each $n\ge 1$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eqfunct1}
\varphi^{(n)}(s) = \frac{\psi(s + n\alpha)}{\psi(s)}.
\end{equation}
The following lemma gives a sufficient condition for ergodicity of a cocycle.
\begin{lem} \label{noSolLem} If there exist a sequence $(n_k)$ of positive integers such that
\begin{itemize}
\item $n_k \alpha \to 0$ in $S_1$, and
\item $\varphi^{(n_k)} \not\to 1$ in $L^1(ds)$,
\end{itemize}
then the cocycle $\varphi$ is ergodic.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
If $\varphi$ is not ergodic then \eqref{eqfunct} has a measurable solution $\psi$, and \eqref{eqfunct1} holds. But then $n_k\alpha\to 0$ in $S_1$ implies (via Luzin Theorem) that $\psi(s+n_k\alpha)$
tends to $\psi(s)$ in $L^1(ds)$ which yields that $\varphi^{(n_k)} \to 1$ in $L^1(ds)$.
\end{proof}
\medskip
We will be using the following notation: For $s\in S_1=[0,1)$, we let
$$
\|s\| = \min (s, 1 - s)
$$
(the distance of $s$ to 0 in $S_1$). This quantity satisfies, for $s,s' \in S_1$, the triangle inequality $\|s + s'\| \leq \|s\| + \|s'\|$, and $\|q s\| \leq q\|s\|$, for $q \in \N$ (the sums and multiples of elements in $S_1$ are understood modulo 1).
\smallskip
The continued fraction expansion of $\alpha$ will be written as $[0; a_1,..., a_k,...]$ and $(\frac{p_k}{q_k})_{k \ge -1}$ will be the sequence of its convergents. Recall that, for all $k \ge 1$, we have
\begin{align}
&\alpha = \frac{p_k}{q_k} + \frac{\zeta_k}{q_k}, \text{ \ where \ } |\zeta_k| \leq \frac1{q_{k+1}}
\leq \frac1{a_{k+1}} \frac1{q_k}, \ \ \ \|q_ k\alpha\| \leq \frac1{q_{k+1}}, \label{pnqn} \\
&\frac1{2q_k} \le \frac1{q_k + q_{k-1}} \le \|q_{k-1} \alpha\| \leq \|j \alpha\|, \ \forall j: 0<|j| < q_k.
\label{minmajqn}
\end{align}
According to the inequality (\ref{minmajqn}), for $s \in S_1$, the distance between any two elements of the set $\{s - j\alpha : j = 0,\dots, q_k -1\}$ is larger than $\frac1{2q_k}$.
\medskip
For $t, t', u\in S_1$ we will consider the $\Z_2$-extensions given by the cocycles
\begin{itemize}
\item $\varphi_t = e^{\pi i\mathbf 1_{[0,t)}}$,
\item $\varphi_{t,t'}^u(s) = \varphi_t(s)\cdot\varphi_{t'}(s+u)$.
\end{itemize}
The function $\varphi_{t,t'}^u$ equals $-1$ on the symmetric difference of the (positively oriented) arcs $[0,t)$ and $[u,u+t')$ and $1$ otherwise.
\medskip
Ergodicity of the two-jump cocycles $\varphi_t$ has been discussed in a series of papers
(W. Veech \cite{Ve69}, \cite{Ve75}, K. Merrill \cite{Me85}, M. Guenais and F. Parreau \cite{GuPa06}).
In the latter paper a complete characterization of ergodicity has been given in terms of Ostrowski's expansion of the parameter $t$ relatively to $\alpha$. These results in particular imply that
\begin{equation}\label{state}
\text{the set of parameters $t$ for which $\varphi_t$ is ergodic has full Lebesgue measure.}
\end{equation}
Ergodicity of cocycles with 4 jump points has been proved for some families (cf \cite{Me85}, \cite{GuPa06}, \cite{CoPi14}). Nevertheless, for cocycles of the form $\varphi_{t,t'}^u$, it seems that no complete characterization of the ergodic case has been given.
If $t=t'$, as shown in \cite{Me85} (even when $\alpha$ is of bounded type), there exists an uncountable family of parameters $(t,u)$ such that the cocycle $\varphi_{t,t}^u$ is not ergodic.
\vskip 3mm
We will prove:
\begin{thm} \label{ergCocy0} If the cocycle $\varphi_{t,t'}^u$ is not ergodic
then the parameters $t, t', u$ satisfy simultaneously the following four convergences
\begin{align*}\label{fourcon}
&\lim_k \min\{\|q_k t\|, \|q_k u\|, \|q_k (t'+u)\|\} = 0, \\
&\lim_k \min\{\|q_k t\|, \|q_k (t-u)\|, \|q_k (t - t' - u)\|\} = 0, \\
&\lim_k \min\{\|q_k u\|, \|q_k (t-u)\|, \|q_k t'\|\} = 0, \\
&\lim_k \min\{\|q_k (t'+u)\|, \|q_k(t - t' - u)\|, \|q_k t'\|\} = 0,
\end{align*}
where $(q_k)$ is the \sq\ of denominators in the continued fraction expansion of~$\alpha$.
In particular, we have
\begin{equation}\label{minn0}
\lim_k \min\{\|q_k (t-t')\|, \|q_k (t+t')\|\} = 0.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{rem}\label{nonsep}
The points $0, t, u, t'+u$ are discontinuities of the cocycle $\varphi_{t,t'}^u$ (they may appear in $[0,1)$ in a different order). Of course, it may happen that some of these points coincide (and the cocycle has only two or even no discontinuities). If we denote these points as $x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4$, the four convergences in the assertion of the theorem can be written as one condition:
\begin{equation}\label{condC1}
\text{for every } i \in \{1, 2, 3, 4\} \text{ \ \ we have \ \ } \lim_k \, \min_{i' \neq i} \, \|q_k (x_i - x_{i'})\| = 0.
\end{equation}
\end{rem}
The proof of the theorem will be provided in a moment. First we derive from it the following, important for us, result:
\begin{thm} \label{ergCocy1} The set $E\subset S_1^2$ of pairs $(t,t')$ such that the cocycles $\varphi_{t,t'}^u$ are ergodic for all $u\in S_1$
has full product Lebesgue measure $dt\times dt'$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof} By Theorem \ref{ergCocy0} it suffices to show that \eqref{minn0} fails for Lebesgue-almost
all pairs $(t,t')$. For a moment let $(q_k)_{k\ge1}$ be any strictly increasing \sq\ of positive integers.
We recall the \emph{equirepartition property}: Lebesgue-almost every pair $(x,y)$ satisfies, for every
continuous function $f$ on $S_1^2$, the condition
$$
\lim_N \frac1N \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} f(q_k x, q_k y) = \int f \, du\, dv.
$$
Indeed, by approximation of $f$ by trigonometric polynomials and linearity, it suffices to prove the above for $f(x,y) =e^{2 \pi i (n x+m y)}$, with $n,m \in \Z$, and clearly this is nontrivial only when either $n$ or $m$ is different from 0. Since $(q_k)$ strictly increases, the bounded functions
$e^{2 \pi i (n q_k \, x+m q_k \, y)}$ are pairwise orthogonal (in the Hilbert space $L^2(dx\times dy)$).
By Rajchman's Strong Law of Large Numbers (cf. \cite{Ch68}) this implies that
$$
\lim_N \frac1N \sum_{k=0}^{N-1}e^{2 \pi i (n q_k x+m q_k y)} = 0,
$$
for almost every $(x,y)$, as needed. Since there are countably many pairs $(n,m)$, the equirepartition property holds on a full measure set. In particular, for each pair $(x,y)$ in this set, the \sq\
$(q_k x, q_k y) \text{ mod } 1$ is dense in $S_1^2$. By change of coordinates, there exists a set $E$
of full Lebesgue measure in $S_1^2$, such that for every pair $(t,t') \in E$ the \sq\ $(q_k (t-t'), q_k (t+t')) \text{ mod } 1$ is dense in $S_1^2$, in particular $(t, t')$ does not satisfy \eqref{minn0}.
The assertion of the theorem is obtained by choosing $(q_k)$ to be the sequence of denominators in the continued fraction expansion of $\alpha$.
\end{proof}
We now pass to the main proof.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{ergCocy0}] According to Remark \ref{nonsep}, we will focus on proving condition \eqref{condC1}. Condition \eqref{minn0} will be derived at the end.
So, suppose that \eqref{condC1} fails. Then there is $i_0\in\{1,2,3,4\}$ and a sub\sq\ $(k_{\,l})$ (of the indices $k$) and $\gamma>0$ such that for any $i\neq i_0$ in $\{1,2,3,4\}$ the limit below exists and satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{totu}
\lim_l\|q_{k_l}(x_i-x_{i_0})\|>\gamma.
\end{equation}
Denote $\varphi=\varphi_{t,t'}^u$.
The discontinuities of the $n$-step cocycle $\varphi^{(n)}$ occur at the $4n$ points $x_i - j\alpha$, where $i \in \{1,2,3,4\}$, $j\in\{0,1,\dots,n-1\}$. Points obtained for the same index $i$ will be called \emph{discontinuities of type~$i$}. In fact, some of the discontinuity points may coincide (in which case the corresponding discontinuities disappear), but this case will turn out to be trivial.
\smallskip
By minimality of the irrational rotation, the return times of the orbit of 0 to its neighborhood form a
syndetic set. Since $(q_k)$ grows to infinity, it is easy to find a \sq\ $n_k$ such that $n_k\alpha \to 0$ in $S_1$ and which has the same asymptotics as $\gamma q_k$, i.e., $\frac{n_k}{q_k}\to \gamma$.
We are assuming that $\varphi$ is not ergodic. Lemma \ref{noSolLem} yields that $\varphi^{(n_k)}$ tends to 1 in $L^1(ds)$. The $L^1$-distance of $\varphi^{(n_k)}$ to the constant function $1$ equals twice the joint measure of the intervals on which $\varphi^{(n_k)}=-1$. First suppose that no discontinuity of type $i_0$
coincides with another discontinuity. The function $\varphi^{(n_k)}$ assumes the value $-1$ on exactly one side of each discontinuity of type $i_0$, until the nearest discontinuity point on that side. Thus, the measure of the set where $\varphi^{(n_k)}=-1$ is estimated from below by $n_k$ (the number of discontinuities of type $i_0$) times the minimal distance between such a discontinuity and the nearest discontinuity. If a discontinuity of type $i_0$ coincides with another, this minimal distance equals zero and the above estimate holds trivially. In either case, we conclude that this minimal distance must be of the order $o(\frac1{n_k})$, which is the same as $o(\frac1{q_k})$.
By the remark following \eqref{minmajqn}, for large enough $k$, the above minimal distance must not occur between discontinuities of the same type $i_0$, that is the minimal distance occurs between a discontinuity of type $i_0$ and one of a different type $i\neq i_0$ (depending on $k$). Clearly, as we proceed along the previously selected sub\sq\ $(k_{\,l})$, some type $i_1\neq i_0$ appears in this role infinitely many times. Replacing $(k_{\,l})$ by a sub\sq, we can thus assume that we always have the same (fixed) type $i_1\neq i_0$. Summarizing, we have fixed a sub\sq\ $(k_{\,l})$ of the indices $k$ and a pair of types $i_0$ and $i_1\neq i_0$ such that there exist two \sq s of nonnegative integers $(j_l), (j'_l)$ bounded from above by $(n_{k_l}-1)$, satisfying
$$
\lim_l q_{k_l}\|(x_{i_0} - j_l \alpha) - (x_{i_1} - j'_l \alpha)\| = 0.
$$
Now, since
$$
\|q_{k_l}(j_l - j'_l)\alpha\| \le |j_l - j'_l| \cdot \|q_{k_l}\alpha\| \le \frac{n_{k_l}}{q_{k_l+1}} \le \frac{n_{k_l}}{q_{k_l}}\underset{l}\longrightarrow \gamma,
$$
(we have used \eqref{pnqn} for the central inequality), we can write
\begin{multline*}
\gamma < \lim_l\|q_{k_l} (x_{i_0} - x_{i_1})\|\le \\
\lim_l q_{k_l}\|(x_{i_0} - j_l \alpha) - (x_{i_1} - j'_l \alpha)\| + \limsup_l\|q_{k_l}(j_l- j'_l) \alpha\| \le 0+ \gamma.
\end{multline*}
This contradiction ends the proof of \eqref{condC1}.
\medskip
To show (\ref{minn0}), it suffices to consider sub\sq s $J=(k_j)$ such that the limits
$$
\beta_J(s) = \lim_j \|q_{k_j}x\|
$$
exist for all the 24 points $x$ obtained by adding or subtracting pairs of different points from $\{x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4\}$ (every sub\sq\ of $(k)$ contains a sub-sub\sq\ $J$ of this kind), and prove
that for any such $J$ either $\beta_J(t-t') = 0$ or $\beta_J(t+t') = 0$.
The already proved four convergences in the assertion of the theorem imply that
\begin{align*}
&\min\{\beta_J(t), \beta_J(u), \beta_J(t'+u)\} = 0, \\
&\min\{\beta_J(t), \beta_J(t-u), \beta_J(t - t' - u)\} = 0, \\
&\min\{\beta_J(u), \beta_J(t-u), \beta_J(t')\}= 0, \\
&\min\{\beta_J(t'+u), \beta_J(t - t' - u), \beta_J(t')\} = 0.
\end{align*}
We will consider three cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $\beta_J(u) = 0$ then $\min\{\beta_J(t), \beta_J(t - t')\} = 0$ (from the second relation) and $\min\{\beta_J(t'), \beta_J(t - t')\} = 0$ (from the fourth relation), therefore either $\beta_J(t - t')=0$
or both $\beta_J(t)=0$ and $\beta_J(t')=0$. But the latter possibility also implies $\beta_J(t - t')=0$.
\item If $\beta_J(u) > 0$ and $\beta_J(t) = 0$ then $\beta_J(t') = 0$ (from the third relation), which implies $\beta_J(t-t')=0$.
\item If $\beta_J(u) > 0$ and $\beta_J(t) > 0$ then $\beta_J(t'+u) = 0$ (from the first relation) and $\min\{\beta_J(t-u), \beta_J(t')\}= 0$ (from the third relation). In this case, $\beta_J(t')= 0$ is impossible (it would give $\beta_J(t'+u) =\beta_J(u)> 0$), so that we must have $\beta_J(t-u)=0$,
which combined with $\beta_J(t'+u) = 0$ yields $\beta_J(t+t') = 0$.
\end{itemize}
Therefore in all cases we have either $\beta_J(t-t') = 0$ or $\beta_J(t+t') = 0$, as needed.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
Nucleon-antinucleon quasi-bound states, or states coupled to these, were searched for in the days of LEAR at CERN.
Nothing has been found,
but broad states or states close to the threshold were not excluded. References~\cite{BER82, ADI86} indicate conclusions
of a long series of measurements.
In reference~\cite{ADI86} a search for\emph{ narrow} signals in the $\gamma$ spectrum from $p \bar{p}$ annihilation at rest
was performed and no discoveries were found in the region below $1770$~MeV and $ \Gamma < 25$~MeV.
Experiments looking for missing mass in reaction $p \overline{p}\rightarrow X \pi$ or $p \overline{p}\rightarrow X p$ brought
similar conclusions.
On the experimental side, one possible reason for the failure is the heavy
background due to annihilation processes. Another is the large number of allowed partial waves. On the theory side, it was assumed that
the annihilation reaction involve $\sim 2 M_p$ mass transfer and by the uncertainty principle it has to be very short ranged.
It was thus expected that widths of quasi-bound states might be narrow. The first part of the argument is still true but it is also
known from scattering data that the annihilation potential is strong already at $p \overline{p}$ separations of $ 1 fm $.
\begin{table}[ht]
\caption{ Low energy $p \bar{p}$ states allowed in the $ J/\psi \rightarrow \gamma p\bar{p}$ decays. The first column gives decay modes
and specifies the internal states of $ p\bar{p} $ pair. For both photon and $ J/\psi $ the $J^{PC} = 1^{(--)}$. The second column gives
$J^{PC}$ for the $p \bar{p}$ system. }
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|}
\hline
decay mode & $J^{PC}( p \bar{p} ) $ \\
\hline
$\gamma p \bar{p} (^1S_0) $ & $0^{-+}$ \\
$\gamma p \bar{p} (^3P_0) $ & $ 0^{++}$ \\
$\gamma p \bar{p} (^3P_1)$ & $ 1^{++}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table0}
\end{table}
A convincing detection requires selective experiments, and the first such measurement is the decay
\begin{equation}
\label{1}
J/\psi \rightarrow \gamma p\overline{p},
\end{equation}
studied by the BES Collaboration~\cite{BAI03}. A strong threshold
enhancement is observed in the invariant $p \bar{p}$ mass distribution (see Fig.~\ref{fig-2gamdist}).
There are three final $p \bar{p}$ states allowed by $P$ and $C$
conservation in the $\gamma p \bar{p}$ channel. These are listed in
tables~\ref{table0} and~\ref{tableCP}
and denoted by $^{2S+1}L_{J}$ or $^{2I+1,2S+1}L_{J}$, $S,L,J$
being the spin, angular momentum, total momentum of the pair and
$I$ denotes the isospin. Radiative decay does not conserve isospin but already in Ref.~\cite{BAI03}
it was realized that $ I=0$ is the state which leads to the enhancement.
From potential descriptions of $N \bar{N}$ interactions based on the $G$-parity rule it is known that the
pion exchange potential is very strong in this state being capable to form bound states. On the other hand
the annihilation and short range interactions act repulsively, thus quasi-bound states are not guaranteed.
In particular the Paris potential generates a $52$~MeV broad
quasi-bound state at $4.8$~MeV below threshold~\cite{lac09} but the the Bonn-J\"ulich potential does not generate bound state in this
wave~\cite{jul06}. Both can describe the threshold enhancement~\cite{loi05, jul06}.
The radiative process itself is puzzling as the decay rate is comparable to the mesonic decay rates. On the other hand
the conventional coupling constants $ \alpha / g^2_{NN,meson} $ are $ \sim10^{-3}$ and a strong enhancement mechanism
has to exist. In section~\ref{J}
this question is discussed jointly with the origin of the threshold enhancement.
\begin{table}[ht]
\caption{ Decay modes and the $p \bar{p}$ states allowed in the $ J/\psi \rightarrow ~ boson ~ p \bar{p}$ decays. }
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}
\hline decay mode & branching & $p \bar{p}$ states allowed \\\hline
$\gamma p \bar{p} $ & $3.8(\pm1.0)\cdot10^{-4}$ \cite{PDG10} & $^{1}S_0, ^{3}P_1, ^{3}P_0$ \\
$\omega p \bar{p} $ & $1.1(\pm0.15)\cdot10^{-3}$\cite{abl07a} & $^{11}S_0, ^{13}P_1, ^{13}P_0$ \\
$ \pi^{0} p \bar{p} $ & $1.19(\pm.08)\cdot10^{-3}$\cite{PDG10} & $^{33}S_1 , ^{31}P_1$ \\
$ p \bar{p} $ & $2.12(\pm0.1)\cdot10^{-3}$ \cite{PDG10} & $^{13}S_1 $ \\
\hline
\end{tabular} \label{tableCP}
\end{table}
There are other indications of $N\bar{p}$ structures existing below threshold coming from antiprotonic atoms. These are discussed
in section~\ref{A}.
In section~\ref{newera} we list possible experimental researches of the baryonia which could be performed
in a near future.
\section{Final state interactions in $J/\psi$ decays}
\label{J}
We have attempted calculations of the radiative and mesonic decay rates presented in table \ref{tableCP}, assuming that mesons are emitted in the final states of the decay when the baryons have been formed. With conventional meson-nucleon coupling constants this model reproduces
branching ratios of $meson\ p \bar{p}$ channels relative to the basic $ p \bar{p} $ channel~\cite{DED14}.
It offers also
a consistent description of the spectra in cases of $ \pi^0,\omega$ mesons at the
expense of one free parameter, the $ N \bar{N} $ formation radius $R=0.28 ~ fm $.
However, this model fails in the description
of radiative decays in two ways: first the branching ratio is only about $1/3$ of the experimental one, and second the threshold enhancement is not reproduced. The transition to $^1S_0$ state is a magnetic one and it turns out that in the intermediate stage of such decay one has both
$ p \bar{p} $ and $ n \bar{n} $ as intermediate states. Since the magnetic moments of $p$ and $n$ have opposite sign the effect of
final state enhancement cancels strongly. At the same time such a model indicates that final state interactions increase the overall decay rate by an
order of magnitude in the $I=1$ states.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4cm,clip]{Fig2_jpsi1.eps}
\caption{The photon is emitted either from $J/\psi$ or during the hadronisation stage of the process and the final baryons are formed
in the $S$ wave}
\label{fig-1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5cm]{Fig2_jpsi1_FSI.eps}
\caption{The final state interaction is described by half-off shell $T$ matrix
generated by the Paris potential}
\label{fig-2}
\end{figure}
In this note we report an extension of the FSI calculations of Ref.~\cite{loi05} which is now used to cover the whole photon spectrum. The basic
assumption of this approach (also that in Ref.~\cite{jul06}) is that the photon is emitted before the baryons are formed. The two related processes
are in the diagrams of Figs.~\ref{fig-1} and~\ref{fig-2} and the FSI is calculated in terms of half-off shell $T$ matrix
generated by the Paris potential~\cite{lac09} plotted in figure~\ref{fig-4parispot}.
This approach allows to calculate the spectrum but not the absolute decay rate. One free parameter, the radius $R$ (=0.28~fm)
of a Gaussian source function is used to describe the creation of a $\gamma p\overline{p}$ state (see figure~\ref{fig-1}). However, in order to reproduce in a better way both maxima in figure \ref{fig-2gamdist} (the $ X(1859) $ and $X(2170)$ in BES terminology), it turns out profitable to assume the radius to be weakly dependent on the photon energy. It was found to change from $0.28$~fm at maximal $k\sim1.2$ GeV
to $0.39$~fm at $k=0$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5cm, angle=90]{Fig3_direct_emi_g.eps}
\caption{The $p \overline{p}$ invariant mass spectrum obtained under the assumption that the photon is emitted before the baryons are formed.
The missing strength at large $p\overline{p}$ invariant mass, $M_{p\overline{p}}$, comes from the photon radiated by final hadrons~\cite{DED14}
}
\label{fig-2gamdist}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5cm, angle=90]{Fig1_Vreal.eps}
\caption{The Paris $N \overline{N}$ real potential in the $ ^{11}S_0$ wave. It generates a $50$~MeV broad quasi-bound state
at~$ \sim 5 $~MeV binding. The well and barrier structure generate the shape resonance visible in the spectrum
in figure~\ref{fig-2gamdist} at~$ 2170 $~MeV}
\label{fig-4parispot}
\end{figure}
Inspection of figure~\ref{fig-2gamdist} shows that both states may be reproduced by the $N \overline{N}$ potential related at
large distances via G-parity transformation to the $N N$ interactions. However, the proper description of both peaks involves
distant extrapolation of the $T_{N\overline{N}}$ matrices off energy shell, which corresponds to very short range interactions.
This figure shows also that a
sizable portion of the spectrum is missing and this part comes from photon emissions by final $N\overline{N}$ baryons and exchange currents
\cite{DED14}.
As already discussed the threshold enhancement indicates a "nearby singularity" that might describe an analogue of the bound state or the virtual
state known from the physics of two nucleons. To discern these possibilities one has to test directly the sub-threshold region.
\section{Studies of the $N \overline{N}$ sub-threshold region}
\label{A}
One way to look below
the threshold is the detection of $N \bar{N}$ decay products. The
specific decay mode
\begin{equation}
\label{3i}
J/\psi \rightarrow \gamma \pi^+ \pi^- \eta'
\end{equation}
has been studied by the BES collaboration~\cite{abl05}.
This reaction is attributed by BES to an intermediate
$p \bar{p}$ configuration in the $J^{PC}( p \bar{p} ) = 0^{-+}$ state
that is the $^1S_0$ wave.
A peak in the invariant mass of the mesons was observed and was
interpreted as a new baryon state and named X(1835).
Under the assumption that all mesons are produced in relative
$S$-waves the reaction (\ref{3i}), if attributed to an intermediate
$p \bar{p}$, is even more restrictive than the reaction (\ref{1}).
It allows only one intermediate state, the
$p\bar{p}$ $^{1}S_0$, which coincides with the previous findings.
The intermediate state of $p \bar{p}$ in reaction (\ref{3i}) is
possible but not warranted. In Ref.~\cite{ded09} a more consistent
interpretation is obtained with the dominance of
the $^{11}S_0$
state which is a mixture of $p\bar{p}$ and $n\bar{n}$ pairs. It
has been argued that the peak is due to an interference of a
quasi-bound, isospin 0, $ N \bar{N}$ state with a background amplitude. A typical interference pattern obtained in this way
is plotted in figure~\ref{fig-2XS}. It is fairly close to the data. The same quasi-bound
state was found in Ref.~\cite{loi05} to be responsible for the threshold enhancement in reaction (\ref{1}).
In this sense Paris potential unifies the two effects and attributes it to single quasi-bound state with an
energy dependent width.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4cm,clip,angle=90]{figx1835_55_45.eps}
\caption{ The spectral function X$_S$ representing the $X(1835)$ shape.
The parameter of the annihilation range is $r_f=0.45~fm$.
This $S$-wave contribution has been normalized to reproduce the data close to the $X(1835)$ peak. The experimental points are from Ref.~\cite{abl05},
calculation from Ref.~\cite{ded09}. }
\label{fig-2XS}
\end{figure}
Testing the subthreshold amplitudes may be also realized in few body systems in particular in light antiprotonic atoms or at
extreme nuclear peripheries.
In these conditions nucleons are bound and the effective subthreshold energies are composed of binding energies and recoil of the $N\overline{p}$
pair with respect to the rest of the system. For valence nucleons the $ E_{binding}+ E_{recoil} $ may reach down to - 40~MeV below threshold.
Let us indicate an atomic experiment that discovered an interesting anomaly.
Table~\ref{tab:radio} shows the ratios of antiproton capture rates on neutrons and protons $ C(n \overline{p})/ C(p \overline{p})$ bound to nuclear peripheries. These reflect the ratios of neutron and proton densities. The second and third columns indicate such ratios extracted from widths of two antiprotonic
atomic levels the "lower" and the "upper" one. These widths are determined at nuclear densities $ \sim 10 \% $ and $ \sim 5\%$ of the central density $\rho_0$. The last column is obtained
with radiochemical studies of final nuclei with one neutron or one proton removed in the annihilation reaction~\cite{TRZ03}.
The latter process is localized
at densities $\rho \sim 10^{-3} \rho_0$. In standard nuclei shown in the upper part of the table the ratios $ N(n \overline{p})/ N(p \overline{p}) \sim \rho_n /\rho_p $
increase at nuclear peripheries. However, in some nuclei characterized by small proton binding, indicated in the lower part of the table, and typical ($\sim$ 8~MeV) neutron binding the ratio $ N(n \overline{p})/ N(p \overline{p})$ suddenly drops at extreme nuclear peripheries. That effect cannot be explained by the nuclear structure alone and we attribute it to the
existence of a narrow bound state in the $N \overline{N}$ system. Such a narrow state is in fact predicted by the Paris potential in the $^{33}P_1$ wave, see table~\ref{tab-1}.
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\caption{Ratios of $ N(n \overline{p}) $ and $ N(p \overline{p}) $ capture
rates from atomic states. The last column shows experimental
numbers from radiochemical experiments. Other columns (see text) give ratios
calculated with optical potential and plausible nuclear
densities based on experimental results
from Ref.~\cite{TRZ03}.}
\label{tab:radio}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\hline
atom & lower & upper& radiochemistry \\\hline
$^{96}$Zr &0.95(9)&1.53(29)&2.6(3) \\
$^{124}$Sn &1.79(10)&2.44(39)&5.0(6) \\ \hline
$^{106}$Cd &1.64(80)&2.10(80)&0.5(1) \\
$^{112}$Sn &1.90(13)&2.43(49)&0.79(14)\\
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\caption{Binding energies in MeV of the close to
threshold quasi-bound states in the Paris potential ~\cite{lac09} }
\label{tab-1}
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\hline
$^{2T+1\ 2S+1}L_J$ & $ E - i \Gamma/2$ \\\hline
$^{11}S_0$ & -4.8-i26 \\
$^{33}P_1$ & -4.5-i9.0 \\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
A similar effect is indicated by studies of experimental absorption lengths in light antiprotonic
atoms~\cite{lightatoms1, lightatoms2}. From the lower and upper
atomic level widths one can extract average $S$ wave absorption length Im~$a$ and $ P$ wave absorption volumes Im~$b$.
The results shown in figure~\ref{fig5} indicate increase of the absorption in the $S$ wave down below the threshold. This result is
consistent with the presence of the $ X(1835)$ state. The absorption volume extracted from antiprotonic deuterium indicates some enhancement
possibly related to radiochemical anomalies observed in nuclei with loosely bound protons and interpreted in terms of Paris potential as the $ P$ wave
bound state.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics*[height=7.5cm]{sw-fig5.epsi}
\caption{\label{fig5} The absorptive parts of spin-isospin
averaged $N \bar{p} $ scattering amplitudes extracted
from the atomic level widths in antprotonic H, $^2$H,
$^3$He and $^4$He~\cite{lightatoms1, lightatoms2}. Squares: $S$ waves and
circles: $P$ waves. The bottom scale indicates the energy below
threshold.
The curves, calculated with the
Paris potential, give the
amplitudes separately: $a_{n(p)}$ denote the $n \bar{p} $ or $p \bar{p} $ $S$-wave amplitudes. Similarly $b_{n(p)}$, $b_{p(p)}$
are the corresponding $P$-wave amplitudes. The strong increase of absorption in the
$\bar{p}p$ $S$ wave is attributed mainly to the $^{11}S_0 $
state. }
\end{figure}
\section{New era}
\label{newera}
Following indications from antiprotonic atoms and from BES experiments the baryonia should be searched in the region of 0-60~MeV below the $N \overline{N}$ threshold.
With the new $\bar p$ beams expected to operate in J-PARC and FAIR it would be advisable to repeat two old experiments possibly at different energies, possibly with polarized particles:
$\bullet$ Search for narrow signals in the $\gamma$-spectrum from $p \overline{p}$ annihilation was performed at rest~\cite{ADI86},
The signals (in the region that we expect them now to exist) were covered by heavy background due to $\pi^0$ decays and
$\pi^-p \rightarrow \gamma n $. It would be better to perform this experiment with higher energy antiprotons (a few hundred~MeV/c)
antiprotons which could shift the expected signal away from the heavy background region.
$\bullet $ The $ \overline{p} d \rightarrow n X $ experiment~\cite{BER82} was performed at $ 1.3 $~GeV/c. This gives rather small
chance of $p\overline{p}$ coupling in the statistically insignificant $ ^{11}S_0$ wave. Lower energies and polarized (one or two particles)
would reduce the background.
New instructive experiments that possibly could be performed at FLAIR are:
$\bullet$ Fine structure splitting in light antiprotonic atoms $^1H,^2H,^3H,^3He,^4He$ would allow to trace energy dependence
of the selected $ \overline{p}N$ amplitudes in the subthreshold region down to $ \sim - 40 $~MeV.
$\bullet$ Studies of mesons emitted from annihilations of $ \overline{p} $ at nuclear peripheries. In particular nuclei with closed shells
with one loosely bound valence nucleon could be profitable. In the latter case the baryonium signal would be separated from
a complicated background due to other annihilation channels.
\vspace{0.2cm}
\noindent
This work has been partially supported by a grant from the French-Polish exchange program COPIN/CNRS-
IN2P3, collaboration 05-115.
SW was also supported by Narodowe Centrum Nauki grant 2011/03/B/ST2/00270.
|
\section{Introduction}
Harnessing energy stored in inaccessible forms such as heat or chemical energy and transforming it into useful work is one of the most important, technological achievements. Nevertheless, the underlying principles and ultimate limitations imposed by quantum mechanics on such thermodynamic processes are still an active field of research \cite{Gemmer2009a,Kosloff2013c}. Modern studies range from implementations of quantum heat engines in ion traps \cite{abah_2012} over thermodynamic cycles in optomechanical
systems~\cite{Zhang_2014,Gelbwaser-Klimovsky2015} to the description of the principles of photosynthesis as photo-Carnot engines~\cite{Castro_2014,Romero_2014}. The natural question arises how generic quantum features such as coherence and entanglement affect classical formulations of the thermodynamic axioms.
This problem has been studied from many different perspectives~\cite{Goold} including stochastic thermodynamics~\cite{Parrondo,Verley2014a,Proesmans2015} and information theory~\cite{Terry,Rudolph,Oppenheim_2013}. However, a conclusive consensus appears still to be lacking.
In particular, it has been studied whether quantum correlations could be harnessed, and whether quantum devices could operate with efficiencies larger than the Carnot efficiency~\cite{scully_2003,Lutz_2009, HTQ, Paolo} -- therefore demanding a reformulation of
the Carnot statement of the second law of thermodynamics.
The Carnot statements of the second law of thermodynamics declares~\cite{carnot_24}
\begin{center}
\textit{No engine operating between two heat reservoirs can be more efficient than a Carnot engine operating between those same reservoirs.}
\end{center}
Recent studies, however, raised the question whether quantum effects such as coherence and entanglement could provide means to break the limit posed by the Carnot efficiency~\cite{scully_2003,Lutz_2009,Kurizki_2013,Oppenheim_2013}. To this end, a variety of theoretical and experimental setups have been developed~\cite{abah_2012,Zhang_2014,Amikam_2014}.
Thermal equilibrium states of classical systems are universally described by the Boltzmann-Gibbs distribution~\cite{callen,Jin_2013}. It can be easily shown that the Carnot statement is only a consequence of this universality of equilibrium states~\cite{callen}. The situation is dramatically different for thermally open quantum systems. Generically, quantum systems, which are not only ultra-weakly coupled to their environment, do not relax into Gibbs states \cite{Gelin2009,Barkai_2014}. This can be seen most clearly for the analytically solvable case of quantum Brownian motion \cite{Hu1992}. It has been shown that the quantum correlations between system and environment prevent relaxation into the Gibbs equilibrium states \cite{Horhammer2008}. Therefore, such non-Gibbsian equilibrium states are not fully ``thermalized'' and contain additional information, encoded in quantum coherence and entanglement~\cite{hor_2009,vedral_2012}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{pom2}
\caption{\label{fig:model} Illustration of a generic quantum heat engine: A quantum particle inside in a quantum piston consisting, e.g., of an optical cavity.}
\end{figure}
It is only natural to ask whether a quantum heat engine such as in Fig.~\ref{fig:model} could be realized that utilizes this ``extra" information and thus constitutes a device operating with an efficiency larger than predicted by Carnot \cite{scully_2003}. The present study will elucidate that this is not permitted by the laws of thermodynamics. In particular, we will argue that there is a specific thermodynamic price that has to be to paid to maintain quantum correlations and thus to prevent the system from relaxing into a Gibbs state. How to properly modify the definition of heat has been recently studied with great intensity for various model systems \cite{Kurizki,Gelbwaser-Klimovsky2015,Yamamoto2015,Zheng2015,Lin2015}. However, to the best of our knowledge, the only rigorous and model independent distinction has been previously discussed in the context of the heat capacity \cite{Hanggi2008} of open quantum systems (see Eq. (23) of Ref.~\cite{Hanggi2008}).
In the present work we further develop this notion of quantum heat. As a main result we will see that the classical Carnot statement remains unchanged for open quantum systems with arbitrary coupling to their environment. More specifically, we will show
\begin{center}
\textit{No quantum heat engine operating in quasistatic Carnot cycles can harness quantum correlations.}
\end{center}
This insight has far-reaching consequences for all areas of engineering at the nanoscale. Nanoengines performing beyond the Carnot limit necessarily operate far from thermal equilibrium \cite{Lutz_2014}. To the best of our knowledge, however, this has only been proven rigorously, if at least the initial state is Gibbsian~\cite{Alicki1979,sagawa,Campisi2014}.
\section{Quasistatic processes}
Before we analyze the quantum Carnot cycle, let us establish an important concept, first. Consider a quantum system with Hamiltonian $H(\omega_t)$, where $\omega_t$ is an external control parameter. Then the dynamics of the system is governed by the Liouville type equation $\dot{\rho}=\mc{L}_{\omega_t}(\rho)$, where the superoperator $\mc{L}_{\omega_t}$ reflects both the unitary dynamics generated by $H$ and the non-unitary contribution induced by the interaction with the environment. We further have to assume that the equation for the steady state, $\mc{L}_{\omega_t}(\rho)=0$, has a unique solution~\cite{spohn_1978}. The classical Carnot statement is formulated for cycles of quasistatic (infinitely slow) processes, i.e., successions of stationary states \footnote{Infinitely slow processes are an idealization of processes whose time scales are much longer than the relaxation time \cite{callen}}. In complete analogy to the classical theory quasistatic processes are the only processes considered in the present analysis.
\section{Thermodynamics of Gibbs equilibrium states}
We begin with a brief review of fundamental thermodynamic concepts for Gibbs equilibrium states,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq01}
\rho=\e{-\beta H}/Z, \quad\text{where}\quad Z=\tr{\e{-\beta H}}\,.
\end{equation}
Here $\beta$ is the inverse temperature of the environment, $\beta=1/T$, and we work in units for which the Boltzmann constant is unity. The thermodynamic entropy is then given by the Gibbs entropy \cite{callen}, $ S=-\tr{\rho\log{\rho}} = \beta \left( E - F \right)$, where $E=\tr{\rho H}$ is the internal energy of the system, and $F=-T\,\log{Z}$ denotes the Helmholtz free energy. For isothermal, quasistatic processes, $\dot{\beta}=0$, the change of thermodynamic entropy $\mathrm{d} S$ becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{eq02}
\mathrm{d} S = \beta\, \left( \tr{\delta\rho\, H} + ( \tr{\rho\, \delta H } - \mathrm{d} F ) \right) = \beta\, \tr{\delta\rho\, H}\,,
\end{equation}
where $\delta$ denotes an infinitesimal change. Therefore, two forms of energy can be identified \cite{Gemmer2009a}: heat is the change of internal energy associated with a change of entropy; work is the change of internal energy due to the change of an extensive parameter, i.e., change of the Hamiltonian of the system. We have,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq03}
\mathrm{d} E = \delta Q + \delta W \equiv \tr{\delta\rho\, H} + \tr{\rho\, \delta H}\,.
\end{equation}
The first law of thermodynamics \eqref{eq03} is a universally valid expression of the conservation of energy. However,
the identification of heat $\delta Q$, and work $\delta W$ \eqref{eq03} is consistent with the second law of thermodynamics for
quasistatic processes \eqref{eq02} \emph{if}, and as will shortly see, \emph{only if} $\rho$ is a Gibbs state \eqref{eq01}.
It is worth emphasizing that for isothermal, quasistatic processes we have,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq04}
\mathrm{d} S=\beta\, \delta Q \quad \text{and}\quad \mathrm{d} F= \delta W\,,
\end{equation}
for which the first law of thermodynamics takes the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq05}
\mathrm{d} E=T\,\mathrm{d} S +\mathrm{d} F\,.
\end{equation}
In this particular formulation it becomes apparent that changes of the internal energy $\mathrm{d} E$ can be separated into ``useful" work $\mathrm{d} F$ and an additional contribution, $T\,\mathrm{d} S$, reflecting the \emph{entropic cost} of the process.
\section{Thermodynamics of non-Gibbsian equilibrium states}
For systems, whose equilibrium states are not described by a Boltzmann-Gibbs distribution \eqref{eq01}, the identification of heat only with changes of the state of the system \eqref{eq03} is no longer possible \cite{Hanggi2008}. Mathematically similar situations have been studied for classical systems under non-conservative forcing \cite{Oono_1998,Sasa_2001,Seifert2012a}. Such systems relax into so-called nonequilibrium stationary states, and it has been recognized that not all heat absorbed by the system accounts for the entropic cost \cite{Sasa_2001}. Some contribution to the total heat, coined \emph{housekeeping} energy (or heat) $\delta Q_{hk}$ \cite{Oono_1998,Sasa_2001,Seifert2012a}, fulfills the sole purpose of preventing the system from relaxing into the thermal Gibbs state. The concept of quantum housekeeping heat has been analyzed carefully in Refs.~\cite{Horowitz_2013,Yuge2013}.
For generic quantum systems, whose thermal equilibrium states are non-Gibbsian, the situation is mathematically analogous. However, we stress that in the present context we are interested in quantum systems in non-Gibbsian \emph{equilibrium} states, and not in generic nonequilibrium situations. The deviation from the Gibbsian equilibrium is only due to the interaction and correlations between system and environment. In particular, there is no continuous supply of energy from the environment into the system. For instance, it has been seen explicitly in the context of quantum Brownian motion \cite{Horhammer2008} that system and environment are generically entangled. In such situations the reduced equilibrium state, $\sigma$, of the system only can be written as \cite{Gelin2009},
\begin{equation}
\label{eq_rev_1}
\sigma=\e{-\beta\, (H+\Delta)}/Z_\Delta
\end{equation}
where $H$ is the reduced Hamiltonian and $Z_\Delta$ the modified partition function. A similar situation is encountered in classical systems with non-negligible interacting energy between a system of interest and its environment. For such classical systems it has been shown that $H+\Delta$ can be interpreted as a potential of mean force \cite{Jarzynski2004}, and that the identification of thermodynamic work is subtle \cite{Jarzynski2004}.
Note, however, that generically the physical situation is even more involved in the quantum case. Whereas $\Delta$ for classical systems only includes contributions from interaction energies, solvation energies and classical correlations, for quantum systems $\Delta$ is also governed by quantum correlations. This means that even for situations for which the surface terms such as the interaction energy are vanishingly small, the purely quantum part of $\Delta$ can not necessarily be neglected \cite{Gelin2009}.
Therefore, to formulate thermodynamics consistently the energetic back action due to the correlation of system and environment has always to be considered carefully \cite{Hanggi2008,Horhammer2008}. During quasistatic processes parts of the energy exchanged with the environment are not related to a change of the thermodynamic entropy of the system, but rather constitute the energetic price to maintain the non-Gibbsian state, i.e., coherence and correlations between system and environment.
In complete analogy to stochastic thermodynamics we identify the thermodynamic entropy with the von Neumann entropy \cite{Sasa_2001,tank_2012,Mandal2013a,Horowitz_2013,Sagawa_2015}. With $\sigma$ being the stationary state, we can write
\begin{equation}
\label{eq06}
\begin{split}
\mc{H} & = -\tr{\sigma\log{\sigma}} + \left( \tr{\sigma\log{\rho}} - \tr{\sigma\log{\rho}} \right) \\
& = \beta ( \mc{E} -(F + T\, \mrm{D}(\sigma || \rho )) ) = \beta\, ( \mc{E} -\mc{F} ),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\mc{E}=\tr{\sigma H}$ is the internal energy of the system, and $\mc{F} \equiv F + T\, \mrm{D}(\sigma || \rho )$ is the information
free energy~\cite{tank_2012}. Here, $\mrm{D}(\sigma|| \rho )\equiv \tr{\sigma\left(\log\sigma - \log\rho\right)}$ is the quantum relative entropy \cite{Vedral_2002}. Note that it has been shown that $\mc{F}$ is the only thermodynamically consistent definition of a free energy for non-Gibbsian states \cite{tank_2012,Deffner2013}.
As before \eqref{eq02} we now consider isothermal, quasistatic processes, for which the infinitesimal change of the entropy reads
\begin{equation}
\label{eq07}
\begin{split}
\mathrm{d}\mc{H} & = \beta\, \left[ \tr{\delta\sigma H} + ( \tr{\sigma \delta H } - \mathrm{d}\mc{F} ) \right] \\
& \equiv \beta\, (\delta Q_\mrm{tot} - \delta Q_{c} ) \,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we identified the total heat as $\delta Q_\mrm{tot}\equiv \tr{\delta\sigma H} $ and the correlation part as $\delta Q_{c}\equiv\mathrm{d}\mc{F}-\tr{\sigma \delta H}$.
The total heat exchanged with the environment has two contributions. The correlation heat is the energetic price that has to be paid to maintain coherence and quantum correlations. The \emph{excess heat} $\delta Q_\mrm{ex}$ is the only contribution that is associated with the entropic cost,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq08}
\mathrm{d} \mc{H} = \beta\, \delta Q_{\rm ex}, \quad\text{and}\quad \delta Q_{\rm ex} = \delta Q_\mrm{tot} - \delta Q_{c}\,.
\end{equation}
Notice that $\delta Q_\mrm{ex}$ is mathematically analogous to the excess heat for classical systems under non-conservative driving \cite{Sasa_2001}.
Accordingly, the first law of thermodynamics takes the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq09}
\mathrm{d} \mc{E}=\delta W_\mrm{ex}+\delta Q_\mrm{ex}
\end{equation}
where $\delta W_\mrm{ex}\equiv\delta W+\delta Q_{c}$ is the excess work \cite{tank_2012}, which reduces in the classical limit to the notion analyzed in Ref.~\cite{Jarzynski2004}. Finally, Eq.~\eqref{eq05} generalizes for isothermal, quasistatic processes in generic quantum systems to
\begin{equation}
\label{eq10}
\mathrm{d} \mc{E}= T\,\mathrm{d}\mc{H}+\mathrm{d}\mc{F}\,.
\end{equation}
In the remainder of the present analysis we will show how the universal Carnot statement follows from these generalized thermodynamic relations.
\section{Universal efficiency of quantum Carnot engines}
Imagine a generic quantum system that operates between two heat reservoirs with hot, $T_{\rm hot}$, and cold, $T_{\rm cold}$, temperatures, respectively. Then, the Carnot cycle consists of two isothermal processes during which the systems absorbs/exhausts heat and two thermodynamically adiabatic, i.e., isentropic strokes during which the extensive control parameter $\omega$ is varied.
During the first isothermal stroke, the system is put into contact with the hot reservoir. As a result, the excess heat $Q_{\rm{ex},1}$ is absorbed
at temperature $T_{\rm hot}$ and excess work $ W_{\rm{ex},1}$ is performed,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq11}
\begin{split}
W_{\rm{ex},1} &= \mc{F}(\omega_2,T_{\rm hot}) - \mc{F}(\omega_1,T_{\rm hot}) \\
Q_{\rm{ex},1} &= T_{\rm hot}\,(\mc{H}(\omega_2,T_{\rm hot}) - \mc{H}(\omega_1,T_{\rm hot})).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Next, during the isentropic stroke, the system performs work $W_{\rm{ex},2}$ and no excess heat is exchanged with the reservoir, $\Delta\mc{H}=0$. Therefore, the temperature of the engine drops from $T_{\rm hot}$ to $T_{\rm cold}$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq12}
\begin{split}
W_{ex,2} & = \Delta\mc{E} = \mc{E}(\omega_3,T_{\rm cold}) - \mc{E}(\omega_2,T_{\rm hot}) \\
&=\Delta\mc{F} - \left(T_{\rm hot}-T_{\rm cold}\right)\,\mc{H}(\omega_3,T_{\rm cold}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In the second line, we employed the thermodynamic identity $\mc{E}=\mc{F} + T\,\mc{H}$, which follows from the definition of $\mc{F}$. During the second isothermal stroke, the excess work
$ W_{\rm{ex},3} $ is performed on the system by the cold reservoir. This allows for the system to exhaust the excess heat $ Q_{\rm{ex},3} $ at temperature $T_{\rm cold}$. Hence we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq13}
\begin{split}
W_{ex,3} &= \mc{F}(\omega_4,T_{\rm cold}) - \mc{F}(\omega_3,T_{\rm cold}) \\
Q_{ex,3} &= T_{\rm cold}(\mc{H}(\omega_c,T_{\rm cold}) - \mc{H}(\omega_3,T_{\rm cold})).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Finally, during the second isentropic stroke, the cold reservoir performs the excess work $ W_{\rm{ex},4} $ on the system. No excess heat is exchanged and the temperature of the engine increases from $T_{\rm cold}$ to $T_{\rm hot}$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq14}
\begin{split}
W_{ex,4} & = \Delta\mc{E} = \mc{E}(\omega_1,T_{\rm hot}) - \mc{E}(\omega_4,T_{\rm cold}) \\
& = \Delta\mc{F} + \left(T_{\rm hot}-T_{\rm cold}\right)\,\mc{H}(\omega_1,T_{\rm hot}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
As before, Eq.~\eqref{eq14} reflects the isentropic condition, $\mc{H}(\omega_1,T_{\rm hot})=\mc{H}(\omega_4,T_{\rm cold})$.
The efficiency of a thermodynamic device is defined as the ratio of ``output" to ``input". In the present case the ``output'' is the total work performed
during each cycle, i.e., the total excess work, $W_\mrm{ex}= W + Q_{c}$. There are two physically distinct contributions: work in the usual sense, $W$, that can be utilized, e.g., to power external devices, and correlation energy, $Q_{c}$, which cannot serve such purposes as it is the thermodynamic cost to maintain the non-Gibbsian equilibrium state. Therefore, the only thermodynamically consistent definition of the efficiency has to read
\begin{equation}
\label{eq15}
\eta = \frac{\sum_{i} W_{\rm ex, i} }{ Q_{{\rm ex},1} } = 1 - \frac{T_{\rm cold}}{T_{\rm hot}}\equiv \eta_\mrm{C},
\end{equation}
which is identical to the classical Carnot efficiency. Earlier analyses did not distinguish between correlation and excess part of the heat, and the efficiency was simply defined as $\eta=W/Q_\mrm{tot}$, see for instance \cite{scully_2003}.
\paragraph*{Example 1}
To illustrate these concepts and to build intuition we now turn to illustrative systems. As a first example we consider quantum Brownian motion, i.e., a harmonic oscillator coupled to an ensemble of harmonic oscillators. In this case the non-Gibbsian equilibrium state of a Brownian particle with mass $m$ becomes \cite{Horhammer2008},
\begin{equation}
\label{new1}
\bra{x}\sigma\ket{y}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi\,\left\langle x^2\right\rangle}}\,\e{-\frac{(x+y)^2}{8\left\langle x^2\right\rangle}-\frac{(x-y)^2}{2\hbar^2/\left\langle p^2\right\rangle}}\,,
\end{equation}
where $\left\langle x^2\right\rangle = (D_{pp}+ m \gamma D_{xp})/m^2\gamma^2\omega^2$ and $\left\langle p^2\right\rangle =D_{pp}/\gamma$. Here $\gamma$ is the damping constant, and $D_{pp}$ and $D_{xp}$ are diffusion coefficients, which read in a high temperature expansion $D_{pp}=m \gamma/\beta +m\gamma\beta \hbar^2\,(\omega^2-\gamma^2)/12$ and $D_{xp}=\hbar^2\gamma^2\beta/12$ \cite{Dillenschneider2009a}. To implement the cycle we assume that the angular frequency $\omega$ is controlled externally.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{harm}
\caption{\label{fig:eta_harm}(color online) Efficiency of the quantum Carnot cycle for Eq.~\eqref{new1}. The blue, solid line results from $W/Q_\mrm{tot}$, which does not properly account for the correlation energy $ Q_{c}$. The red, dashed line is the Carnot efficiency \eqref{eq15}. Parameters are $T_{\rm cold}=1$, $T_{\rm hot}=1.5$, $\omega_1=0.2$, $\omega_2=0.6$, $\hbar=1$, and $m=1$.}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:eta_harm} we plot the resulting efficiency. We observe that the Carnot efficiency is, indeed, attained for all values of $\gamma$ if one properly accounts for the correlation heat. The blue, solid line is the ratio of work over total heat, $W/Q_\mrm{tot}$. Notice that in this case $\eta=W/Q_\mrm{tot}$ deviates from $\eta_C$.
\paragraph{Example 2}
This deviation becomes even more dramatic in our second example. Consider a quantum particle in a quantum piston as in Fig.~\ref{fig:model}. Such a system can be realized, for instance, as a qubit coupled to an optical cavity with Hamiltonian ($\hbar=1$)
\begin{equation}
\label{eq16}
H = \frac{\omega_q}{2}\,\sig{z} + \omega_b a^{\dagger}a + g\,\sig{x}\otimes ( a^{\dagger} + a )\,.
\end{equation}
Here, $a$, $a^{\dagger}$ are the annihilation and creation operators of bosonic modes with frequency
$\omega_b$ \cite{kumar_2013}. The base frequency $\omega_b$ is the parameter to be changed, which can be experimentally realized by varying the laser in the cavity. Pauli matrices $\sig{z}$, $\sig{z}$ represent a two level atom with energy $\omega_q/2$
and its coupling to the cavity \cite{Zhang_2014}. Finally, the last term $\sig{x}\otimes(a^{\dagger}+a)\equiv \sig{x} \otimes \hat{x}$ describes the interaction of qubit and piston and can be interpreted as an intra-system non-conservative forcing of strength $g$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=.52\textwidth]{eta_big}
\caption{\label{fig:eta}(color online) Efficiency of the quantum Carnot cycle for Eq.~\eqref{eq16} with Eqs.~\eqref{eq17} and \eqref{eq18}. The blue triangles are a numerical verification of \eqref{eq15}, whereas the green circles result from $W/Q_\mrm{tot}$, which does not properly account for the correlation energy $ Q_{c}$. The inset is a magnification for small values of $g$. Parameters are $\omega_q=1$, $\gamma_q=\gamma_b=0.05$, $T_{\rm cold}=1$, $T_{\rm hot}=1.5$, $\omega_1=0.2$, $\omega_2=0.6$.
}
\end{figure}
Finally, the thermal reservoirs are phenomenologically modeled by a Lindblad master equation~\cite{breuer_book},
$\mc{L}(\rho) = -i\left[ H,\rho \right] + \mc{D}_q \left( \rho \right) + \mc{D}_b \left( \rho \right)$, where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq17}
\begin{split}
\mc{D}_q \left( \rho \right) &= \gamma_q\, (N_{\omega_q}+1)\left(\sigma_{-}\rho\sigma_{+}-\frac{1}{2}\{\sigma_{-}\sigma_{+},\rho\} \right) \\
&+ \gamma_q\, N_{\omega_q}\left(\sigma_{+}\rho\sigma_{-}-\frac{1}{2}\{\sigma_{+}\sigma_{-},\rho\} \right),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
with ladder operators for the atom, $\sigma_{\pm}$, and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq18}
\begin{split}
\mc{D}_b \left( \rho \right) &= \gamma_b\, (N_{\omega_b}+1)\left(a_{-}\rho a^{\dagger}-\frac{1}{2}\{aa^{\dagger},\rho\} \right) \\
&+ \gamma_b\, N_{\omega_b}\left(a^{\dagger}\rho a-\frac{1}{2}\{a^{\dagger}a,\rho\} \right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Here, $N_{x}=1/(\e{\beta x}-1)$ and $\gamma_q$, $\gamma_b$ are fermionic and bosonic coupling constants, respectively. Lindblad master equations are generally applicable only to describe quantum system weakly coupled to the (classical) environment. For the present case this assumption is justified as the Hamiltonian \eqref{eq16} describes a generic quantum optomechanical system, for which Lindblad master equations have been proven to be adequate~\cite{breuer_book,Carmichael1991}. Moreover, we do not have to account for dynamical corrections as we are only interested in quasistatic, i.e., infinitely slow processes. It is worth emphasizing that from microscopic treatment one would expect that the interaction between the two subsystems changes the individual dissipators~\cite{Huelga}. However, for a macroscopic Lindblad master equation those corrections would force the system to relax into a Gibbs state. For the present purposes, we have specifically chosen a phenomenological system which does not relax into a Gibbs equilibrium state.
In this model the two subsystems are coupled to the thermal reservoir independently. However, they ``feel" each other through the direct interaction. Only in the limit $g \to 0$ the steady state is a Gibbs state~\cite{breuer_book}. For finite interaction qubit and cavity are correlated and they share information. The thermodynamic price for maintaining this correlation during the thermodynamic cycle is the correlation energy $ Q_{c}$~\eqref{eq07}.
Figure~\ref{fig:eta} plots the resulting efficiency \eqref{eq15}. We observe again that the classical Carnot efficiency is, indeed, attained for all values of $g$. The green circles are the ratios of work over total heat, $W/Q_\mrm{tot}$. Notice that in this case the Carnot statement appears to be violated as $\eta=W/Q_\mrm{tot}$ can be larger or smaller than $\eta_\mrm{C}$ as a function of $g$. This apparent violation is not physical, but is rather rooted in an thermodynamically inconsistent identification of the excess heat.
\vspace*{1em}
\section{Concluding remarks}
The present studied analyzed the thermodynamics of non-Gibbsian quantum heat engines -- devices that operate cyclically in
non--Gbbsian equilibrium states. We investigated the thermodynamic processes underlining such nanodevices
and concluded that it is impossible to harness quantum correlations in quasistatic processes to enhance the maximum efficiency
of such devices. Instead one has to modify the definition of heat, and account for the correlation energy necessary to maintain coherence and correlations. In conclusion, we showed that the Carnot statement of the second law is universally valid also for quantum heat engines.
\acknowledgments
It is a pleasure to thank Wojciech H. \.Z{}urek, Christopher Jarzynski, and Dibyendu Mandal for stimulating discussions. We gratefully acknowledge Marta Paczy\'n{}ska, who put our theoretical ideas into a artistically pleasing form for Fig.~\ref{fig:model}. This work was supported by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education under project Mobility Plus, $1060/$MOB$/2013/0$,
(BG). SD acknowledges financial support from the U.S. Department of Energy through a LANL Director's Funded Fellowship.
|
\section{Introduction}
The \emph{$L^p$-norm joint spectral radius}~\cite{Lau1995,Protasov1997} (often
called {\it $p$-radius}) of {an indexed family} of $n\times n$ real matrices
$\mathcal M = \{A_1, \dotsc, A_N\}$ is defined by, for $p\geq 1$,
\begin{equation*}
\rho_p(\mathcal M) =
\lim_{k\to\infty} \left( \frac{\sum_{i_1,\dotsc,i_k =1}^N
\norm{A_{i_k}\dotsm A_{i_1}}^p}{N^k} \right)^{\!1/(pk)},
\end{equation*}
where $\norm{\cdot}$ denotes the maximum singular value of a matrix. Introduced
by Jia~\cite{Jia1995} and Wang~\cite{Wang1996} independently for $p=1$, the
$p$-radius now plays an important role in various fields of applied mathematics.
A classical application of the $p$-radius is in the characterization of the
regularity of wavelet functions in $L^p$ spaces~\cite{Wang1996,Lau1995}. The
mean stability of a class of switched linear systems is determined by the value
of the $p$-radius~\cite{Ogura2012b,Jungers2010}. The so-called indeterminacy of
a switching linear economic model can be checked through the
$p$-radius~\cite{Barthelemy2013a}.
However, being defined as a limit of a sequence on matrix products, the
$p$-radius is known to be difficult to compute. There is no formula available
for its computation except under the conditions that $p$ is an even integer or
that the given set of matrices leaves a common proper cone
invariant~\cite{Protasov1997,Ogura2012b}. Although for the latter case there
exists a converging approximation method~\cite{Jungers2011b} that does not
require $p$ to be an integer, in a general case, even approximating the
$p$-radius is an NP-hard problem~\cite{Jungers2011b}. As for bounds on the
$p$-radius, the sequence defining the $p$-radius is decreasing and therefore
gives upper bounds, though their computation requires exponentially growing
costs. Finally, the lower bounds on the $p$-radius in the literature~\cite{Zhou1998a,Barthelemy2013a} are often not very accurate.
In this paper we propose novel lower bounds on the $p$-radius for integer values
of $p$ with no assumptions on the given set of matrices on the contrary
to~\cite{Protasov1997,Jungers2011b}. The lower bounds are given as the spectral
radius of a weighted average of the given matrices and the weights are realized
by Kronecker product of matrices. We will show that, with appropriately chosen
weighting matrices, the proposed bounds extend and also can improve the lower
bounds in the literature~\cite{Zhou1998a,Barthelemy2013a}. The obtained results
are furthermore generalized to the Markovian setting. This in particular enables
us to use the $p$-radius to study the stability of so-called Markov jump linear
systems~\cite{Costa2005}, which are switched linear systems whose parameter
changes by following a time-homogeneous Markov chain. The generalization is
based on a stochastic counterpart of the so-called $\Omega$-lift of
matrices~\cite{Kozyakin2014}.
The organization of this paper is as follows. In Section~\ref{sec:NovelLBB}, we
derive a novel lower {bound} for the $p$-radius. In Section~\ref{sec:markov}, we
provide a Markovian extension. The notations used in this paper are standard.
{The identity matrix is denoted by $I$.} The spectral radius of a square matrix
is denoted by~$\rho(\cdot)$. The Kronecker product (see, e.g.,
\cite{Brewer1978}) of matrices $A$ and $B$ is denoted by~$A\otimes B$.
{$\mathcal M$ denotes an indexed family $\{ A_1, \dotsc, A_N\}$ of $n\times n$
real matrices.} Finally, for ease of reference, we list some important
properties of the $p$-radius in the following proposition:
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:ease}
Let $p\geq 1$ be a positive integer.
\begin{enumerate}
\item The sequence $\{h_k (\mathcal M)\}_{k=1}^\infty$ defined by
\begin{equation*}
h_k(\mathcal M)= \left( \frac{\sum_{i_1,\dotsc,i_k =1}^N
\norm{A_{i_k}\dotsm A_{i_1}}^p}{N^k} \right)^{\!1/(pk)}
\end{equation*}
is decreasing \cite{Jungers2011b}.
\item If either $p$ is even or $\mathcal M$ leaves a proper cone invariant,
then $\rho_p(\mathcal M) = \rho\big( N^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^N A_i^{\otimes
p}\big)^{1/p}$, where $A^{\otimes p}$ denotes the Kronecker product of $p$
copies of $A$ (see \cite{Protasov1997}).
\item It holds that $\rho_p(A_1, \dotsc, A_N) = \bigl( \rho_{1}(A_1^{\otimes p},
\dotsc, A_N^{\otimes p}) \bigr)^{1/p}$ (see \cite{Jungers2011b}).
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark}
Throughout the paper, we often omit the dependence of quantities on the
underlying {family} $\mathcal M$ of matrices when it is clear from the context.
Precisely speaking, for a function $f$ defined on $(\mathbb{R}^{n\times n})^N$,
we may simply write $f(\mathcal M)$ as $f$. Also, abusing notation, we sometimes
write $f(\mathcal M)$ as $f(A_1, \dotsc, A_N)$ when $\mathcal M = \{A_1, \dotsc,
A_N\}$.
\end{remark}
\section{Novel lower bounds}\label{sec:NovelLBB}
In this section, we present novel lower bounds on the $p$-radius. We also prove
that these new bounds outperform existing lower bounds. Notice that, according
to the third claim of Proposition~\ref{prop:ease}, any result on the $1$-radius
($p=1$) is directly applicable to the general $p$-radius; thus, we shall focus
on the particular case $p=1$ for the rest of the paper. In order to state our
main results, we need to recall the definition of the joint spectral
radius~\cite{Jungers2009}:
\begin{equation*}
\rho_\infty(\mathcal M)
=
\adjustlimits \limsup_{k\to\infty} \max_{i_1, \dotsc, i_k \in \{1, \dotsc, N\}}
\norm{A_{i_k} \dotsm A_{i_1}}^{1/k}.
\end{equation*}
Our first result is stated in the next theorem:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main}
For $\mathcal W = \{W_1, \dotsc, W_N\} \subset \mathbb{R}^{m\times m}$, let
\begin{equation*}
\lambda_{ \mathcal W}(\mathcal M)
=
\rho\left(
\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^N W_i \otimes A_i
\right).
\end{equation*}
If $\rho_\infty(\mathcal W) = 1$, then $\lambda_{\mathcal W}(\mathcal M)\leq
\rho_1(\mathcal M)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Using Gelfand's formula, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Gelfand}
\lambda_{\mathcal W}(\mathcal M)
=
\lim_{k\to\infty} \Norm{
\left(\frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N W_i \otimes A_i \right)^k
}^{1/k}.
\end{equation}
Using general identities \cite{Brewer1978} about Kronecker products:
\begin{align}
(A\otimes C) (B\otimes D) &= (AB)\otimes (CD),
\label{eq:ABCD}
\\
\norm{A\otimes B} &= \norm{A}\,\norm{B},
\label{eq:|AoxB|}
\end{align}
we can evaluate the norm in \eqref{eq:Gelfand} as
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\Norm{
\left(\frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N W_i \otimes A_i \right)^k
}
&=
\Norm{
\sum_{i_1, \dotsc, i_k = 1}^N\frac{{(W_{i_k} \otimes A_{i_k}) \dotsm ( W_{i_1} \otimes A_{i_1})}}{N^k}
}
\\
&\leq
\sum_{i_1, \dotsc, i_k=1}^N \frac{\norm{(W_{i_k} \otimes A_{i_k}) \dotsm ( W_{i_1} \otimes A_{i_1})}}{N^k}
\\
&=
\sum_{i_1, \dotsc, i_k = 1}^N \frac{ \norm{W_{i_k} \dotsm W_{i_1}} \,\norm{A_{i_k} \dotsm A_{i_1}}}{N^k}
\\
&\leq
\left(\max_{i_1, \dotsc, i_k}\norm{W_{i_k} \dotsm W_{i_1}} \right)
\frac{\sum_{i_1, \dotsc, i_k} \norm{A_{i_k} \dotsm A_{i_1}}}{N^k}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
Taking the power of $1/k$ of the last expression, and substituting in
\eqref{eq:Gelfand}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:fromtheproof}
\lambda_{\mathcal W}(\mathcal M) \leq
\rho_\infty(\mathcal W) \rho_1(\mathcal M) = \rho_1(\mathcal M),
\end{equation}
as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:rho_infty<=1}
From \eqref{eq:fromtheproof}, we can see that the equality constraint
$\rho_\infty(\mathcal W) = 1$ in Theorem~\ref{thm:main} can be relaxed to the
inequality constraint $\rho_\infty(\mathcal W) \leq 1$. Although the largest
lower bound is clearly attained when the joint spectral radius of $\mathcal W$
is equal to one, it is convenient in practice to relax the equality constraint
because checking that $\rho_\infty(\mathcal W) = 1$ is
NP-hard~\cite{Jungers2009}. In contrast, checking the inequality
$\rho_\infty(\mathcal W) \leq 1$ can be efficiently done (using, for example,
the JSR software toolbox~\cite{Vankeerberghen2014}).
\end{remark}
In what follows, we compare the proposed lower bounds with the most relevant
existing bounds found in the literature. The first lower bound is the one
implicitly obtained by Zhou~\cite{Zhou1998a}; if we let
\begin{equation*}
\ell_{\text{\upshape Z}}
=
\frac{\rho(\sum_{i=1}^N A_i\otimes A_i)}{{N}\rho_\infty},
\end{equation*}
then $\rho_1 \geq \ell_{\text{\upshape Z}}$. This inequality can be derived from the following
bound on the joint spectral radius: $\rho_\infty \geq
({\rho_{p+q}}/{\rho_p})^{p/q} \rho_{p+q}$ whenever $p, q \geq 1$
\cite[p.~48]{Zhou1998a}. Letting $p=q=1$ gives $\rho_1 \geq
\rho_2^2/\rho_\infty$. Then, applying {assertion~2 of}
Proposition~\ref{prop:ease} to this inequality proves $\rho_1\geq \ell_{\text{\upshape Z}}$. The
second lower bound was introduced in~\cite{Barthelemy2013a}: for $w_1, \dotsc,
w_N \in [-1,1]$ it holds that
\begin{equation*}
\rho_1 \geq \rho\left(\frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N w_i A_i\right).
\end{equation*}
In the following theorem, we show that the lower bound herein proposed extends the ones mentioned above:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:5}
For each $m\geq 1$ define
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ell_m}
\ell_m(\mathcal M)
=
\sup \{
\lambda_{\mathcal W}
: \mathcal W \in (\mathbb{R}^{m\times m})^N,\ \rho_\infty(\mathcal W) = 1
\}.
\end{equation}
The following statements are true:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $m\geq n$, then $\ell_m \geq \ell_{\text{\upshape Z}}$.
\item Define
\begin{equation}\label{eq:def:ell_[-1,1]}
\ell_{[-1, 1]}
=
\max_{{w_1, \dotsc, w_N} \in [-1, 1]}
\rho\left(\frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N w_i A_i\right).
\end{equation}
Then $\ell_{[-1,1]} \leq \ell_m$ for every $m\geq 1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We begin by {showing} that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:mm'}
[m <m']\ \Rightarrow\ [\ell_m \leq \ell_{m'}].
\end{equation}
Let us take an arbitrary $\mathcal W \subset (\mathbb{R}^{m\times m})^N$ such
that $\rho_\infty (\mathcal W) = 1$. For each $i$ we define the block diagonal
matrix $V_i = \diag (W_i, O_{m'-m}) \in \mathbb{R}^{m'\times m'}$ and let
$\mathcal V = \{V_1, \dotsc, V_N\}$. Then, it holds that $\lambda_{\mathcal W} =
\lambda_{\mathcal V}$. Since $\rho_\infty(\mathcal V) = 1$, this implies that
$\lambda_{\mathcal W} \leq \ell_{m'}$. Finally, taking the {supremum} with
respect to $\mathcal W$ in the last inequality proves \eqref{eq:mm'}
Let us prove the theorem. It is clear that the normalized {family of matrices}
$\mathcal M_0 = \{A_1/\rho_\infty, \dotsc, A_N/\rho_\infty \} \subset
\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ has a joint spectral radius equal to one. Therefore,
from Theorem~\ref{thm:main} it follows that $\ell_n \geq \lambda_{\mathcal M_0}
= \rho( N^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^N A_i \otimes A_i)/{\rho_\infty} = \ell_{\text{\upshape Z}}$. This
inequality and \eqref{eq:mm'} prove the first claim in the theorem. To prove the
second claim, we take an arbitrary {family} $\{w_1, \dotsc, w_N\} \subset
[-1,1]$. Since this {family} has a joint spectral radius less than or equal to
one, we obtain $\rho(N^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^N w_i A_i) = \lambda_{\{w_1, \dotsc,
w_N\}} \leq \ell_1$ by Theorem~\ref{thm:main} and Remark~\ref{rem:rho_infty<=1}.
Therefore, $\ell_{[-1,1]} \leq \ell_1$ and hence \eqref{eq:mm'} proves the
second claim. {We finally remark that the maximum in {\eqref{eq:def:ell_[-1,1]}}
exists because the set $[-1, 1]^N$ is compact and the function $\rho(\cdot)$ is
continuous.}
\end{proof}
In what follows, we illustrate our results with some examples.
\begin{example}
Let $N\geq 1$ be arbitrary. {Consider the matrix family $\mathcal M = \{ A_1,
\dotsc, A_{N+1}\}$, where} $A_1 = NI$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:IRRR}
A_2 = \cdots =
A_{N+1} = R = \begin{bmatrix}
0 &-1 \\ 1 & 0
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation}
Since $\norm{R^k} = 1$ for every $k\geq 0$, we see that $\rho_1$ equals the
$1$-radius of the {family of scalars} $\{N, 1, \dotsc, 1\}${, where element~$1$
has multiplicity~$N$}. The $1$-radius of this {family} equals
\begin{equation*}
\rho\left(\frac{N + 1 + \cdots + 1}{N+1}\right) = \frac{2N}{N+1}
\end{equation*}
by {assertion~2 of} Proposition~\ref{prop:ease}. Therefore {$\rho_1(\mathcal M)
= (2N)/(N+1)$}. This value is attained by the proposed lower bound $\ell_2$
because
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
{\lambda_{\{I,\,R,\,\dotsc,\,R\}}}
&{= \rho\left(\frac{1}{N+1}\left(I\otimes (NI) + N R\otimes R \right)\right)}
\\
&
{=\frac{N}{N+1}\rho(I\otimes I + R\otimes R)}
\\
&
{=\frac{2N}{N+1}.}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
On the other hand, a straightforward computation shows that $\ell_{\text{\upshape Z}} = 1$.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
Let $\mathcal M = \{I,\,R,\,R^2,\,R^3\}$, where $R$ is given in \eqref{eq:IRRR}.
Clearly, $\rho_1 = 1$ because $\norm{R^k} = 1$ for every $k\geq 0$. The proposed
lower bound attains this exact value of the $1$-radius as $\ell_2 = 1$ because
$\lambda_{I,\,R,\,R^2,\,R^3} = 1$. On the other hand, we can show that
$\ell_{[-1,1]} \leq \sqrt{2}/2$ as follows. Let $w_i\in [-1, 1]$ ($i=1,\dotsc,
4$) be arbitrary. Then we have
\begin{equation*}
S = \frac{w_1I + w_2R + w_3 R^2 + w_4 R^3}{4} =
\frac{1}{4} \begin{bmatrix}
u & -v\\v &u
\end{bmatrix},
\end{equation*}
where $u = w_1 - w_3$ and $v = w_2 - w_4$. Since $\abs u \leq 2$ and $\abs v
\leq 2$, we can see $\rho(S) \leq \sqrt 2 /2$ and therefore $\ell_{[-1,1]} \leq
\sqrt 2 /2$.
\end{example}
Although $\ell_m$ can largely improve other lower bounds in the literature, it
is not easy to compute. The first reason is the non-convexity of the
function~$\rho$ (see, e.g., \cite{Overton1988}). The other reason is that the
set $\{ \mathcal W \in (\mathbb{R}^{m\times m})^N :\rho_\infty(\mathcal W) = 1
\}$ does not admit an appropriate parametrization due to the
NP-hardness~\cite{Jungers2009} of computing $\rho_\infty$. For these reasons, we
here propose using the set of matrix weights from the following set:
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak O_m
=
\left\{
\{D_i L_i\}_{i=1}^N
:
\text{$D_i$ is diagonal, $\norm{D_i} \leq 1$, and $L_i$ is orthogonal}
\right\}.
\end{equation*}
Since the matrices in this set have a joint spectral radius less than or equal
to one, the best lower bound $\ell_{\mathfrak O_m} = \max\{\lambda_{\mathcal W}:
\mathcal W \in \mathfrak O_m\}$\label{def:ell_Dm} achieved by using such matrix
weights provides a lower bound on the $1$-radius by Theorem~\ref{thm:main} and
Remark~\ref{rem:rho_infty<=1}. Moreover, since an orthogonal matrix~$L$ admits
\cite{Hurlimann2013} the parametrization $L = D(I-S)(I+S)^{-1}$ where $S$ is a
skew-symmetric matrix and $D$ is a diagonal matrix whose diagonals are either
$+1$ or $-1$, we can maximize $\ell_{\mathfrak O(m)}$ using, for example, a
stochastic gradient descent algorithm~\cite{Burke2005}. Notice that the result
of this algorithm will be a local maximum.
In the following example, we illustrate the effectiveness of the weights from
the set $\mathfrak O_m$ by studying the stability of a switched linear system.
\begin{example}\label{ex:}
Consider the switched linear system
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Xsystem:iid}
X(k+1) = A_{\sigma(k+1)}X(k),\ X(0) = I
\end{equation}
where $ \{\sigma(k)\}_{k=1}^\infty$ are random variables independently and
uniformly distributed on~$\{1, \dotsc, N\}$. The system is said to be {\it $p$th
mean stable} \cite{Kozin1969} if there exist $C>0$ and $\gamma \in [0, 1)$ such
that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:def:Sigma:pth-stbl}
E[\norm{X(k)}^p] \leq C\gamma^{pk}
\end{equation}
for every $k\geq 0$. It is well known \cite{Jungers2009} that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:iidstblchar}
[\text{\eqref{eq:Xsystem:iid} is $p$th mean stable}] \
\Leftrightarrow\ [\text{$\rho_p < 1$}].
\end{equation}
In this example, we let $N=2$ and randomly choose two matrices
\begin{equation*}
A_1 =
\begin{bmatrix}
-0.87&-0.77\\ 1.17&-1.09
\end{bmatrix}
,\
A_2 =
\begin{bmatrix}
0.14&0.40\\ 0.89&-0.73
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation*}
Using a MATLAB implementation~\cite{Burke} of the stochastic gradient descent
algorithm, we perform the maximization over the set $\mathfrak O_m$ and find
\begin{equation*}
W_1 =
\begin{bmatrix}
-0.71&-0.70
\\
0.70&-0.71
\end{bmatrix}
,\
W_2 =
\begin{bmatrix}
0.85&-0.53
\\
0.53&-0.85
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation*}
Since $\lambda_{\{W_1,W_2\}} = 1.07$ we obtain $\ell_2 \geq 1.07$. Thus,
Theorem~\ref{thm:main} implies that $\rho_1 > 1$ and hence the the system
in~\eqref{eq:Xsystem:iid} is unstable, according to \eqref{eq:iidstblchar}. We
cannot prove that the system in~\eqref{eq:Xsystem:iid} is unstable using the
other lower bounds in the literature, since $\ell_{\text{\upshape Z}} = 0.93$ and $\ell_{[-1,1]} =
0.73$. We remark that the joint spectral radius appearing in $\ell_{\text{\upshape Z}}$ is
evaluated with the JSR Toolbox \cite{Vankeerberghen2014}. Also, the maximum in
$\ell_{[-1,1]}$ has been evaluated with extensive simulations on the weights.
\end{example}
We propose a further extension of our bounds based on product families of a set
of matrices. Let us define ${\mathcal M}^q$ to be the {family of matrices
consisting} of all the {$N^q$} products of the matrices from $\mathcal M$ having
length $q$. Then, our extension can be stated as follows:
\begin{theorem}
Let $m$ and $q$ be positive integers. Define $\ell^{(q)}_m(\mathcal M)
= \ell_m(\mathcal M^q)^{1/q}$. Then, $\ell^{(q)}_m \leq \rho_1$.
Furthermore, if $q$ is a divisor of another positive integer $q'$,
then $\ell^{(q)}_m \leq \ell^{(q')}_m$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let us first recall the following identities~\cite{Jungers2009}:
\begin{align}\label{eq:rho_p(M^k)}
\rho_p(\mathcal M^q) &= \rho_p(\mathcal M)^q,
\\
\label{eq:rho_infty(M^k)}
\rho_\infty(\mathcal M^q) &= \rho_\infty(\mathcal M)^q.
\end{align}
Then, using Theorem~\ref{thm:main} and Equation~\eqref{eq:rho_p(M^k)}, we can
prove the first claim in the theorem as $\rho_1(\mathcal M) = \rho_1(\mathcal
M^q)^{1/q} \geq \ell_m(\mathcal M^q)^{1/q} = \ell_m^{(q)}(\mathcal M)$. To prove
the second claim in the theorem, we let $q=1$ and $q'=2$ for simplicity. The
proof for general $q$ and $q'$ is similar to this particular case and hence is
omitted. Let $\mathcal W = \{W_1, \dotsc, W_N\} \subset \mathbb{R}^{m\times m}$
be arbitrary and assume $\rho_\infty(\mathcal W) = 1$. Since $\rho(M)^2 =
\rho(M^2)$ for a square matrix $M$, we can show that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pf:(q)}
\begin{aligned}
\lambda_{\mathcal W}(\mathcal M)^2
&=
\rho\left(
\left(\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^N W_i \otimes A_i
\right)^{2}\right)
\\
&=
\rho \left(
\frac{1}{N^2}{\sum_{i, j = 1}^N (W_i W_{\!j}) \otimes (A_i A_j)}
\right)
\\&
=
\lambda_{\mathcal W^2}(\mathcal M^2).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Also, since $\rho_\infty(\mathcal W^2) = \rho_\infty(\mathcal W)^2 = 1$ by
\eqref{eq:rho_infty(M^k)}, {it follows that} $\lambda_{\mathcal W^2}(\mathcal
M^2) \leq \ell(\mathcal M^2) = \ell^{(2)}(\mathcal M)^2$. This inequality and
\eqref{eq:pf:(q)} yield $\lambda_{\mathcal W} \leq \ell^{(2)}$. Taking the
{supremum} with respect to $\mathcal W$ in the left-hand side of this inequality
proves $\ell_m^{(1)} \leq \ell^{(2)}_m$, as desired.
\end{proof}
We close this section by giving a remark on complex weights.
\begin{remark}\label{rem:}
In principle, one could obtain better lower bounds using complex weights in
$\ell_m$ instead of the real weights $W_1, \dotsc, W_N$. However, we can show
that it does not lead to an essential improvement. Precisely speaking, we here
prove the following claim: if $\mathcal W = \{W_1, \dotsc, W_N\} \subset
\mathbb{C}^{m\times m}$ satisfies $\rho_\infty(\mathcal W) = 1$, then
\begin{equation}\label{eq:complexweights}
\lambda_{\mathcal W} \leq \ell_{2m}.
\end{equation}
To prove this claim, for $W \in \mathbb{C}^{m\times m}$ we let
\begin{equation*}
T_W = \begin{bmatrix}
\real W&-\imag W\\\imag W& \real W
\end{bmatrix} \in \mathbb{R}^{(2m) \times (2m)},
\end{equation*}
where $\real W$ and $\imag W$ denotes the real and imaginary parts of $W$,
respectively. The multiplicative property $T_{WW'} = T_W T_{W'}$ and the
identity $\norm{T_W} = \norm{W}$ yield
\begin{equation}\label{eq:JSR:TW}
\rho_\infty(T_{W_1}, \dotsc, T_{W_N}) = 1.
\end{equation}
Also, {since} $\rho(W) = \rho(T_W)$, we can show that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\lambda_{\mathcal W}(\mathcal M)
&=
\rho\left(
T_{N^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^N W_i \otimes A_i }
\right)
\\
&=
\rho\left(\frac{1}{N}
\begin{bmatrix}
\sum_{i=1}^N (\real W_i) \otimes A_i & \sum_{i=1}^N -(\imag W_i) \otimes A_i
\\
\sum_{i=1}^N (\imag W_i) \otimes A_i & \sum_{i=1}^N (\real W_i) \otimes A_i
\end{bmatrix}
\right)
\\
&=
\rho\left(\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^N
T_{W_i} \otimes A_i\right)
\\
&=
\lambda_{\{T_{W_1}, \dotsc, T_{W_N}\}}(\mathcal M).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
This equation and \eqref{eq:JSR:TW} prove Inequality~\eqref{eq:complexweights}.
\end{remark}
\section{The Markovian case}\label{sec:markov}
In this section, we extend the results presented in the last section to the
Markovian case. Let $\sigma = \{\sigma(k)\}_{k=1}^\infty$ be a time-homogeneous
Markov chain with a state space~$\{1, \dotsc, N\}$ and a transition probability
matrix~$Q\in \mathbb{R}^{N\times N}$. We define the Markovian version of the
$p$-radius as follows.
\begin{definition}\label{defn:}
Let $X(\cdot;\mu)$ denote the trajectory of the Markov jump linear system
\begin{equation*}
\Sigma: X(k+1) = A_{\sigma(k+1)}X(k),\ X(0) = I,\,\sigma(1) \sim \mu,
\end{equation*}
where $\mu$ is an arbitrary probability distribution on $\{1, \dotsc, N\}$. The
{\it $L^p$-norm Markovian joint spectral radius} ({\it Markovian $p$-radius} for
short) of the pair $(\mathcal M, Q)$ is defined by
\begin{equation*}
\rho_p(\mathcal M, Q)
=
\sup_{\mu} \limsup_{k\to\infty}\left(E[\norm{X(k;\mu)}^p]^{1/(pk)}\right).
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
The logarithm of the Markovian $p$-radius corresponds to a quantity called
Lyapunov exponent of the $p$th mean \cite[p.~307]{Fang1995}.
\end{remark}
We will later see that this definition coincides with the originally defined
$p$-radius in the case where the matrices~$A_{\sigma(k)}$ are independent and
uniformly distributed at every time step. Moreover, as can be naturally
expected, the Markovian $p$-radius has a close connection with the mean
stability of $\Sigma$, which is defined as follows. We say that $\Sigma$ is {\it
$p$th mean stable} if there exist $C>0$ and $\gamma \in [0, 1)$ such that
\eqref{eq:def:Sigma:pth-stbl} holds for all $k$ and $\mu$. The next proposition
is an immediate consequence from the definition of the Markovian $p$-radius.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:markovstblchar}
$\Sigma$ is $p$th mean stable if and only if $\rho_p(\mathcal M, Q) < 1$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The necessity is obvious. Let us prove the sufficiency. Assume that
$\rho_p(\mathcal M, Q) $ $< 1$. Then there exists a $\gamma \in [0, 1)$ such
that, for every \mbox{$i\in \{1, \dotsc, N\}$}, we have $\limsup_{k\to\infty}
(E[\norm{X(k;\delta_i)}^p]^{1/(pk)}) < \gamma$, where $\delta_i$ is the
probability distribution on $\{1, \dotsc, N\}$ such that $\delta_i(\{i\}) = 1$.
Then, for each $i$ there exists a positive integer $K_i$ such that, if $k>K_i$,
then $E[\norm{X(k;\delta_i)}^p] < \gamma^{pk}$. Therefore, for an arbitrary
$\mu$, if $k>\max(K_1, \dotsc, K_N)$ then $E[\norm{X(k;\mu)}^p] = \sum_{i=1}^N
\mu_i E[\norm{X(k;\delta_i)}^p] \leq \sum_{i=1}^N \mu_i \gamma^{pk} =
\gamma^{pk}$. This implies that $\Sigma$ is $p$th mean stable.
\end{proof}
The main result in this section is stated in the following theorem, which can be
used to compute upper and lower bounds on the Markovian $p$-radius.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main:Markov}
\begin{enumerate}
\item The sequence $\{h_k(\mathcal M, Q)\}_{k=1}^\infty$ defined by
\begin{equation*}
h_k(\mathcal M, Q)
=
\left(
\sum_{i_1,\dotsc,i_k =1}^N
q_{i_1,i_2} \dotsm q_{i_{k-1},i_k}
\norm{A_{i_k} \dotsm A_{i_1}}^p\right)^{1/(pk)}
\end{equation*}
is decreasing. Moreover $\rho_p(\mathcal M, Q) = \lim_{k\to\infty} h_k(\mathcal M, Q)$.
\item For $\bar{\mathcal W} = \{W_{ij}\}_{1\leq i, j\leq N} \subset
\mathbb{R}^{m\times m}$ define
\begin{equation*}
{\mathcal A}_{\bar{\mathcal W}} =
\begin{bmatrix}
q_{11} W_{11}\otimes A_1 & \cdots & q_{N1}W_{N1}\otimes A_N
\\
\vdots &\ddots&\vdots
\\
q_{1N} W_{1N}\otimes A_1 & \cdots & q_{NN}W_{NN}\otimes A_N
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation*}
If $\rho_\infty(\bar{\mathcal W}) = 1$, then $\rho_{1}(\mathcal M, Q) \geq
\rho({\mathcal A}_{\bar{\mathcal W}})$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
Let us observe some consequences of Theorem~\ref{thm:main:Markov} before proving
it. First, consider the special case when $\sigma$ is a sequence of independent
and uniformly distributed random variables on $\{1, \dotsc, N\}$. The
corresponding transition probability matrix $Q$ is the $N\times N$ matrix whose
entries are all $1/N$. In this case, we have $h_k(\mathcal M, Q)
=${$(\sum_{i_1,\dotsc,i_k =1}^N ({1/N})^{k-1} \norm{A_{i_k} \dotsm
A_{i_1}}^p)^{1/(pk)}$} $=N^{1/kp}h_k(\mathcal M)$. {This equation implies that
$h_k(\mathcal M, Q)$, the average of the norm of $k$-product $A_{i_k}\dotsm
A_{i_1}$, coincides with the other average $h_k(\mathcal M)$ under the
identification of $\Sigma$ as a switched linear system having independent and
identically distributed system parameters, except the factor $N^{1/kp}$. This
factor, roughly speaking, arises because $h_{k}(\mathcal M, Q)$ does not take
the initial probability distribution of the switching signal $\sigma$ into
account.} {Then, by this equation and} the first claim of
Theorem~\ref{thm:main:Markov}, taking the limit {as} $k\to\infty$ shows that
$\rho_p(\mathcal M, Q) = \rho_p(\mathcal M)$. Hence Definition~\ref{defn:}
indeed recovers the original $p$-radius.
Next, as a corollary of Theorem~\ref{thm:main:Markov}, we can recover a lower
bound of the Markovian $p$-radius implicitly presented in~\cite{Barthelemy2013a}.
\begin{corollary}[\cite{Barthelemy2013a}]
Define
\begin{equation*} \label{eq:def:ellm(M,Q)}
\ell_m(\mathcal M, Q)
=
{\sup} \left\{
\rho({\mathcal A}_{\bar{\mathcal W}}) : \bar{\mathcal W} \in (\mathbb{R}^{m\times m})^{N^2},\ \rho_\infty(\bar {\mathcal W}) = 1
\right\}.
\end{equation*}
Then, $\ell_1(\mathcal M, Q) \leq \rho_{1}(\mathcal M, Q)$.
\end{corollary}
Before we prove Theorem~\ref{thm:main:Markov}, we illustrate its use with an example.
\begin{example}
Consider the Markov jump linear system~$\Sigma$ with
\begin{equation*}
\begin{gathered}
A_1 =
\begin{bmatrix}
0.77&0.80\\ -0.60&0.87
\end{bmatrix}
,\
A_2 =
\begin{bmatrix}
-0.77&0.83\\ -0.70&-0.70
\end{bmatrix}
,
\\
Q =
\begin{bmatrix}
0.70&0.30\\ 0.43&0.57
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation*}
A brute force search indicates that $\ell_{1}(\mathcal M, Q) = 0.844$ with the
weights $W_{11} = 1$, $W_{12} = 1$, $W_{21} = -1$, and $W_{22} = 0.932$. On the
other hand, using a MATLAB implementation~\cite{Burke} of the stochastic
gradient descent algorithm used in Example~\ref{ex:}, we locally maximize
$\ell_{2}(\mathcal M, Q)$ over the set $\mathfrak O_2$ of matrix weights to find
the set $\bar{\mathcal W}$ consisting of the following matrices:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{gathered}
W_{11} =
\begin{bmatrix}
-0.412&-0.911
\\
0.911&-0.412
\end{bmatrix}
,\
W_{12} =
\begin{bmatrix}
0.839&-0.544
\\
0.544&-0.839
\end{bmatrix}
, \\
W_{21} =
\begin{bmatrix}
-0.204&-0.979
\\
0.979&-0.204
\end{bmatrix}
,\
W_{22} =
\begin{bmatrix}
0.937&-0.349
\\
0.349&-0.937
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation*}
Since $\rho(\mathcal A_{\bar{\mathcal W}}) = 1.067$, we conclude
$\rho_1(\mathcal M, Q) \geq 1.067$. This proves that the corresponding Markov
jump linear system is unstable.
\end{example}
The rest of this section is devoted to the proof of
Theorem~\ref{thm:main:Markov}. In our proof, we employ a reduction of the
Markovian $p$-radius to the original $p$-radius, for which we can apply the
results obtained in Section~\ref{sec:NovelLBB}.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:markov:char}
Let $p$ be a positive integer. For each $1\leq i\leq N$, let $e_i$ denote the
$i$th vector in the canonical basis of $\mathbb{R}^N$. Define the set of
matrices $\bar{\mathcal M}_p = \{B_{ij}^{(p)}\}_{i, j\in \{1, \dotsc, N\}}$ as
\begin{equation*}
B_{ij}^{(p)} = N^{2/p} q_{ij}^{1/p} A_i\otimes (e_j e_i^\top).
\end{equation*}
Then,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:prop:markov:char}
\rho_p(\mathcal M, Q) = \rho_p(\bar {\mathcal M}_p).
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
{We first claim that, for the proof of \eqref{eq:prop:markov:char}, it is
sufficient to show that}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:equiv}
[\text{$\rho_p(\mathcal M, Q) < 1$}]
\ \Leftrightarrow \
\text{[$\rho_p(\bar{\mathcal M}_p) < 1$],}
\end{equation}
due to the following reason. Suppose that \eqref{eq:prop:markov:char} does not
hold while \eqref{eq:equiv} is true. Then, we have either $\rho_p(\mathcal M, Q)
> \rho_p(\bar {\mathcal M}_p)$ or $\rho_p(\mathcal M, Q) < \rho_p(\bar {\mathcal
M}_p)$. If the former inequality holds, then one can find a $c>0$ such that the
matrix family $c\mathcal M = \{cA_i\}_{i=1}^N$ satisfies $\rho_p(c\mathcal M, Q)
> 1 > \rho_p(c \bar {\mathcal M}_p)= \rho_p( \overline{c \mathcal M}_p)$.
However, this cannot be true by \eqref{eq:equiv}. In a similar way, we can also
show that the latter inequality, $\rho_p(\mathcal M, Q) < \rho_p(\bar {\mathcal
M}_p)$, cannot hold. Therefore, \eqref{eq:prop:markov:char} must be true.
{Consequently, it suffices to prove \eqref{eq:equiv}.} In order to prove the
claim in~\eqref{eq:equiv}, we introduce an alternative switched linear system
with independent and identically distributed jumping parameters. Let
$\{\theta(k)\}_{k=1}^\infty$ and $\{\phi(k)\}_{k=1}^\infty$ be independent
random variables uniformly distributed on $\{1, \dotsc, N\}$. Define the
switched linear system $\bar \Sigma_p$ by
\begin{equation*}
\bar \Sigma_p
:
\bar X(k+1) = B_{\theta(k+1), \phi(k+1)}^{(p)} \bar X(k),\ \bar X(0) = I.
\end{equation*}
From \eqref{eq:iidstblchar}, we see that $\rho_p(\bar{\mathcal M}_p) < 1$ if and
only if $\bar{\Sigma}_p$ is $p$th mean stable. Moreover, from
Proposition~\ref{prop:markovstblchar}, we know that $\rho_p(\mathcal M, Q) < 1$
if and only if $\Sigma$ is $p$th mean stable. Therefore, to prove
\eqref{eq:equiv}, we need to show that $\Sigma$ is $p$th mean stable if and only
if $\bar \Sigma_p$ is $p$th mean stable.
To prove the equivalence of stability, let us first compute $E[\norm{\bar
X(k)}^p]$. By the definition of $\bar{\Sigma}_p$ and Equation \eqref{eq:ABCD},
we can compute $\bar X(k)$ as
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\bar X(k)
&=
\prod_{i=1}^k \left(
N^{2/p} q_{\theta(i), \phi(i)}^{1/p} A_{\theta(i)} \otimes (e_{\phi(i)} e_{\theta(i)}^\top)
\right)
\\
&=
N^{2k/p}
\left(q_{\theta(1),\phi(1)} \dotsm q_{\theta(k),\phi(k)}\right)^{1/p}
(A_{\theta(k)} \dotsm A_{\theta(1)})\otimes J_k,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
where the symbol $\prod_{i=1}^k$ denotes the left product of matrices and also
$J_k = e_{\phi(k)}e_{\theta(k)}^\top \dotsm e_{\phi(1)} e_{\theta(1)}^\top$.
Since the vectors $e_1, \dotsc, e_N$ are orthonormal, $\norm{J_k} = 1$ if
\begin{equation}\label{eq:event}
\phi(i) = \theta(i+1),\ i=1, \dotsc, k-1,
\end{equation}
and otherwise $\norm{J_k} = 0$. Therefore, if we denote by $\chi$ the
characteristic function of the event~\eqref{eq:event}, using \eqref{eq:|AoxB|}
we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\norm{\bar X(k)}^p
=
\chi N^{2k} q_{\theta(1),\theta(2)} \dotsm q_{\theta(k-1),\theta(k)} q_{\theta(k),\phi(k)}
\norm{A_{\theta(k)} \dotsm A_{\theta(1)}}^p.
\end{equation*}
Since the event in \eqref{eq:event} occurs with probability $1/N^{k-1}$, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:E[normY(k)^p]}
\begin{aligned}
&E[\norm{\bar X(k)}^p]
\\
=&\,
\frac{N^{2k}}{N^{k-1}}
E\left[q_{\theta(1),\theta(2)} \dotsm q_{\theta(k-1),\theta(k)} q_{\theta(k),\phi(k)}
\norm{A_{\theta(k)} \dotsm A_{\theta(1)}}^p
\right]
\\
=&\,
N^{k+1}\sum_{i_1, \dotsc, i_k, j = 1}^N
\frac{1}{N^{k+1}}
q_{i_1,i_2} \dotsm q_{i_{k-1},i_k} q_{i_k,j}
\norm{A_{i_k} \dotsm A_{i_1}}^p
\\
=&\,
\sum_{i_1,\dotsc,i_k =1}^N q_{i_1,i_2} \dotsm q_{i_{k-1},i_k}
\norm{A_{i_k} \dotsm A_{i_1}}^p
\\
=&\,
\sum_{i_1=1}^N E[\norm{X(k; \delta_{i_1})}^p],
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where we used $\sum_{j=1}^N q_{i_k, j} = 1$ to show the third equality.
Now, assume that $\Sigma$ is $p$th mean stable. Then, by
\eqref{eq:E[normY(k)^p]} we have $E[\norm{\bar X(k)}^p]$ $\leq \sum_{i_1=1}^N
C\gamma^{pk} = CN\gamma^{pk}$ for some $C>0$ and $\gamma\in [0, 1)$, and hence
$\bar{\Sigma}_p$ is $p$th mean stable. On the other hand, assume that $\bar
\Sigma_p$ is $p$th mean stable. Then, there exist $C>0$ and $\gamma\in [0, 1)$
such that $E[\norm{\bar X(k)}^p] \leq C\gamma^{pk}$. Therefore,
\eqref{eq:E[normY(k)^p]} shows that $E[\norm{X(k; \delta_{i_1})}^p] \leq
C\gamma^{pk}$ for every $i_1 \in \{1, \dotsc, N\}$. Then, in the same way as the
proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:markovstblchar}, we can conclude the $p$th mean
stability of $\Sigma$. This completes the proof of the theorem.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
From Proposition~\ref{prop:markov:char}, we can regard the matrix $B_{ij}^{(p)}$
as an $L^p$-averaged version of the $\Omega$-lift introduced in
\cite{Kozyakin2014}, which is used to generalize the so-called Berger-Wang
formula to a Markovian version of the joint spectral radius. Also, we remark
that considering the auxiliary switched linear system~$\bar \Sigma_p$ with an
extended state space is similar to considering an extended state-variable
consisting of the original state variable and the underlying Markov chain, which
is frequently employed for studying (semi-)Markov jump linear
systems~\cite{Costa2005} (\cite{Ogura2013f}).
\end{remark}
Finally, let us prove Theorem~\ref{thm:main:Markov}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:main:Markov}]
From Equation \eqref{eq:E[normY(k)^p]}, we see that
\begin{equation*}
h_k(\bar{\mathcal M}_{p})
= E[\norm{\bar X(k)}^p]^{1/(pk)} = h_k(\mathcal M, Q).
\end{equation*}
Therefore, by Proposition~\ref{prop:ease}, the sequence $\{h_k(\mathcal M,
Q)\}_{k=1}^\infty$ is decreasing. Furthermore, it converges to
$\lim_{k\to\infty} h_k(\bar{\mathcal M}_{p}) = \rho_p(\bar {\mathcal M}_p) =
\rho_p(\mathcal M, Q)$ by \eqref{eq:prop:markov:char}. Thus, the first claim is
proved. Let us then prove the second claim. Assume that $\bar{\mathcal W} =
\{W_{ij}\}_{1\leq i, j\leq N} \subset \mathbb{R}^{m\times m}$ satisfies
$\rho_\infty(\bar{\mathcal W}) = 1$. By \eqref{eq:prop:markov:char}, it is
enough to show that $\rho_1(\bar{\mathcal M}_1) \geq \rho({\mathcal
A}_{\bar{\mathcal W}})$. From Theorem~\ref{thm:main} we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:lobbpre}
\begin{aligned}
\rho_1(\bar{\mathcal M}_1)
&\geq
\rho\left(
\frac{1}{N^2}\sum_{i, j =1}^N W_{ij} \otimes B_{ij}^{(1)}\right)
\\
&=
\rho\left(
\sum_{i, j = 1}^N q_{ij} W_{ij} \otimes A_i \otimes (e_j e_i^\top)\right).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Here we recall that there exists~\cite{Brewer1978} an invertible matrix~$T$
satisfying $C\otimes D = T^{-1}(D\otimes C)T$ for all $C\in \mathbb{R}^{N\times
N}$ and $D\in \mathbb{R}^{(nm)\times (nm)}$. {Consequently, there exists an
invertible matrix $T$ such that} $W_{ij} \otimes A_i \otimes (e_j e_i^\top) =
T^{-1} ((e_j e_i^\top)\otimes W_{ij} \otimes A_i)T$. Therefore, the matrix
appearing in the last term of \eqref{eq:lobbpre} is similar to $\sum_{i, j=1}^N
q_{ij}(e_j e_i^\top) \otimes W_{ij} \otimes A_i$, which in fact equals
${\mathcal A}_{\bar{\mathcal W}}$. Therefore $\rho_1(\bar{\mathcal M}_1) \geq
\rho({\mathcal A}_{\bar{\mathcal W}})$, as desired.
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusion}
This paper proposed novel lower bounds on the $p$-radius of a finite set of
matrices. The obtained lower bound is given by the spectral radius of an average
of the given matrices weighted via Kronecker products. We showed that the
proposed lower bounds theoretically extend and also practically improve the
existing lower bounds. We have also shown the extension of the $p$-radius and
its lower bounds to the Markovian case.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
This work was supported in part by the NSF under grants CNS-1302222 and
IIS-1447470. R.J. is an FNRS Research Associate. His work is supported by the
Communaut\'e fran\c caise de Belgique (ARC), and by the Belgian state (PAI).
Parts of this work were carried out while the first author was visiting the
Institute of ICTEAM (Information and Communication Technologies, Electronics and
Applied Mathematics) at Universit\'e catholique de Louvain. He would like to
acknowledge the generous hospitality of the institute.
|
\section{Introduction}
The Temperley--Lieb algebra was introduced by Temperley and Lieb in \cite{TL} for its applications in statistical mechanics. It was later shown by Jones \cite{jo1,jo} that it can be obtained as a quotient of the Iwahori--Hecke algebra of type $A$. Both algebras depend on a parameter $q$. Jones showed that there exists a unique Markov trace, called the Ocneanu trace, on the Iwahori--Hecke algebra, which depends on a parameter $z$. For a specific value of $z$, the Ocneanu trace passes to the Temperley--Lieb algebra.
Jones used the Ocneanu trace on the Temperley--Lieb algebra to define a polynomial knot invariant, the famous Jones polynomial. Using the Ocneanu trace as defined originally on the Iwahori--Hecke algebra of type $A$ yields another famous polynomial invariant, the HOMFLYPT polynomial, which is also known as the $2$-variable Jones polynomial (the $2$ variables being $q$ and $z$).
Yokonuma--Hecke algebras were introduced by Yokonuma \cite{yo} as generalisations of Iwahori--Hecke algebras in the context of finite Chevalley groups. The Yokonuma--Hecke algebra of type $A$ is the centraliser algebra associated to the permutation representation with respect to a maximal unipotent subgroup of the general linear group over a finite field.
Juyumaya has given a generic presentation for this algebra, depending on a parameter $q$, and defined a Markov trace on it, the latter depending on several parameters \cite{ju,ju2,ju3}. This trace was subsequently used by Juyumaya and Lambropoulou for the construction of invariants for framed knots and links \cite{jula1,jula2}. They later showed that these invariants can be also adapted for classical and singular knots and links \cite{jula3, jula4}. The next step was to construct an analogue of the Temperley--Lieb algebra in this case.
As it is explained in more detail in \cite{jula5}, where the technique of framisation is thoroughly discussed, three possible candidates arose.
The first candidate was the Yokonuma--Temperley--Lieb algebra, which was defined in \cite{gjkl1}
as the quotient of the Yokonuma--Hecke algebra by exactly the same ideal as the one used by Jones in the classical case. We studied the representation theory of this algebra and constructed a basis for it in \cite{CP}. The values of the parameters for which Juyumaya's Markov trace passes to the Yokonuma--Temperley--Lieb algebra are given in \cite{gjkl1}.
For these values, the invariants for classical knots and links obtained from the Yokonuma--Temperley--Lieb algebra are equivalent to the Jones polynomial.
A second candidate, which is more interesting knot theoretically, was suggested in \cite{gjkl2}. This is the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra, which we study in this paper. The Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra is defined in a subtler way than the Yokonuma--Temperley--Lieb algebra, as the quotient of the Yokonuma--Hecke algebra by a more elaborate ideal, and it is larger than the Yokonuma--Temperley--Lieb algebra. The values of the parameters for which Juyumaya's Markov trace passes to this quotient are given in \cite{gjkl2}. It was recently shown that the invariants for classical links obtained from the Yokonuma--Hecke algebra are stronger than the HOMFLYPT polynomial \cite{CJKL}. It turns out that, in a similar way, the invariants for classical links obtained from the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra are stronger than the Jones polynomial.
The third candidate is the Complex Reflection Temperley--Lieb algebra, defined also in \cite{gjkl2}, which is larger than the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra, but provides the same knot theoretical information.
In the first part of this paper, we study the representation theory of the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra. In Theorem \ref{res1} we give a complete description of its irreducible representations, by showing which irreducible representations of the Yokonuma--Hecke algebra pass to the quotient. The representations of the Yokonuma--Hecke algebra of type $A$ were first studied by Thiem \cite{Thi1,Thi2,Thi3}, but here we use their explicit description given later in \cite{ChPo}. Our result generalises in a natural way the analogous result in the classical case. We then use the dimensions of the irreducible representations of the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra in order to compute the dimension of the algebra. We deduce a combinatorial formula involving Catalan numbers, given in Theorem \ref{res2}.
We also take this opportunity to write down the relations between three types of generators used in the literature so far, and show that the Yokonuma--Hecke algebra is split semisimple over a smaller field than the one considered in \cite{ChPo}.
In the second part of this paper, we provide an algebraic connection between the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra and the Temperley--Lieb algebra. Lusztig \cite{Lu} has shown that Yokonuma--Hecke algebras
are isomorphic to direct sums of matrix algebras over certain subalgebras of classical Iwahori--Hecke algebras. For the Yokonuma--Hecke algebra of type $A$, these are all Iwahori--Hecke algebras of type $A$. This result was reproved recently in \cite{JP} using Juyumaya's presentation for the Yokonuma--Hecke algebra of type $A$. Another proof of the same result has been given recently in \cite{ER}. In Theorem \ref{our iso}, we show that the isomorphism can be defined over a smaller ring than the one considered in all three papers. Then, in Theorem \ref{thm-iso-CP}, we prove that the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra is isomorphic to a direct sum of matrix algebras over tensor products of Temperley--Lieb algebras. Using this result, we provide a basis for the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra in Proposition \ref{FTLbasis}.
We would like to remark that these isomorphism theorems discussed above render the fact that the invariants for classical links arising from the Yokonuma--Hecke algebra and the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra are stronger than the HOMFLYPT and the Jones polynomial respectively even more surprising and intriguing.
Finally, in the last section, we study the representation theory and give a dimension formula for the Complex Reflection Temperley--Lieb algebra. We then prove that the Complex Reflection Temperley--Lieb algebra is isomorphic to a direct sum of matrix algebras over tensor products of Temperley--Lieb and Iwahori--Hecke algebras. We also give a basis for it. Our results in this section, combined with the results on the Famisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra in the previous sections and on the Yokonuma--Temperley--Lieb algebra in \cite{CP}, provide a clear indication that the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra is the natural analogue of the Temperley--Lieb algebra in the context of Yokonuma--Hecke algebras.
\section{Representation theory of the Temperley--Lieb algebra}
In this section, we recall the definition of the Temperley--Lieb algebra as a quotient of the Iwahori--Hecke algebra of type $A$ given by Jones \cite{jo}, and some classical results on its representation theory.
\subsection{The Iwahori--Hecke algebra $\mathcal{H}_n(q)$}
Let $n \in \mathbb{N}$ and let $q $ be an indeterminate. The \emph{Iwahori--Hecke algebra of type} $A$, denoted by $\mathcal{H}_n(q)$, is a ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-associative algebra generated by the elements
$$
G_1, \ldots, G_{n-1}
$$
subject to the following braid relations:
\begin{equation}\label{modularh}
\begin{array}{rcll}
G_iG_j & = & G_jG_i & \mbox{for all $i,j=1,\ldots,n-1$ with $\vert i-j\vert > 1$,}\\
G_iG_{i+1}G_i & = & G_{i+1}G_iG_{i+1} & \mbox{for all $i=1,\ldots,n-2$,}\\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
together with the quadratic relations:
\begin{equation}\label{quadrh}
G_i^2 =q+ (q-1) G_i\qquad \mbox{for all $i=1,\ldots,n-1$.}
\end{equation}
\begin{rem}{\rm
If we specialise $q$ to $1$, the defining relations (\ref{modularh})--(\ref{quadrh}) become the defining relations for the symmetric group $\mathfrak{S}_n$. Thus, the algebra $\mathcal{H}_n(q)$ is a deformation of ${\mathbb C}[\mathfrak{S}_n]$, the group algebra of $\mathfrak{S}_n$ over ${\mathbb C}$.}
\end{rem}
Let $w \in \mathfrak{S}_n$ and let $w=s_{i_1}s_{i_2}\ldots s_{i_r}$ be a reduced expression for $w$, where $s_i$ denotes the transposition $(i,i+1)$. By Matsumoto's lemma, the element $G_w:=G_{i_1}G_{i_2}\ldots G_{i_r}$ is well defined. It is well-known that the set
$\{G_w\}_{w \in \mathfrak{S}_n}$ forms a basis of $\mathcal{H}_n(q)$ over ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$, which is called the \emph{standard basis}. In particular, $\mathcal{H}_n(q)$
is a free ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-module of rank $n!$.
\subsection{The Temperley--Lieb algebra ${\rm TL}_{n}(q)$}
Let $i=1,\ldots,n-2$. We set
$$G_{i,i+1}:=1 + G_i + G_{i+1} + G_iG_{i+1} +G_{i+1}G_i + G_iG_{i+1}G_i =\sum_{w \in {\langle s_i,s_{i+1}\rangle}}G_w.$$
We define the \emph{Temperley--Lieb algebra} ${\rm TL}_{n}(q)$ to be the quotient
$\mathcal{H}_n(q)/I_n$, where $I_n$ is the ideal generated by the element $G_{1,2}$ (if $n \leqslant 2$, we take $I_n = \{0\}$).
We have
$ G_{i,i+1} \in I_n$ for all $i=1,\ldots,n-2$, since
$$G_{i,i+1} = (G_1G_2 \ldots G_{n-1})^{i-1}\, G_{1,2}\, (G_1G_2 \ldots G_{n-1})^{-(i-1)}.$$
\subsection{Combinatorics of partitions}
Let $\lambda\vdash n$ be a partition of $n$, that is, $\lambda=(\lambda_1,\dots,\lambda_k)$ is a family of positive integers such that $\lambda_1\geq\lambda_2\geq\dots\geq\lambda_k \geq 1$ and $|\lambda|:=\lambda_1+\dots+\lambda_k=n$. We also say that $\lambda$ is a partition {\em of size} $n$.
We identify partitions with their Young diagrams: the Young diagram of $\lambda$ is a left-justified array of $k$ rows such that
the $j$-th row contains $\lambda_j$ {\em nodes } for all $j=1,\dots,k$. We write $\rho=(x,y)$ for the node in row $x$ and column $y$.
For a node $\rho$ lying in the line $x$ and the column $y$ of $\lambda$ (that is, $\rho=(x,y)$), we define $\mathrm{c}(\rho):=q^{y-x}$. The number $\mathrm{c}(\rho)$ is called the \emph{(quantum) content} of $\rho$.
Now, a {\em tableau of shape $\lambda$} is a bijection between the set $\{1,\dots,n\}$ and the set of nodes in $\lambda$. In other words, a tableau of shape $\lambda$ is obtained by placing the numbers $1,\dots,n$ in the nodes of $\lambda$.
The \emph{size} of a tableau of shape $\lambda$ is $n$, that is, the size of $\lambda$.
A tableau is {\em standard} if its entries increase along each row and down
each column of the Young diagram of $\lambda$.
For a tableau ${\mathcal{T}}$, we denote by $\mathrm{c}({\mathcal{T}}|i)$ the quantum content of the node with the number $i$ in it. For example, for the standard tableau ${\mathcal{T}}^{^{\phantom{A}}}\!\!\!\!={\textrm{$
\,\fbox{\scriptsize{$1$}}\fbox{\scriptsize{$2$}}\fbox{\scriptsize{$3$}}\,$}}$ of size $3$, we have
\[\mathrm{c}({\mathcal{T}}|1)=1\,,\ \ \mathrm{c}({\mathcal{T}}|2)=q\,\ \ \text{and} \, \ \ \mathrm{c}({\mathcal{T}}|3)=q^2\,.\]
For any tableau $\mathcal{T}$ of size $n$ and any permutation $\sigma \in \mathfrak{S}_n$, we denote by $\mathcal{T}^{\sigma}$ the tableau obtained from $\mathcal{T}$ by applying the permutation $\sigma$ on the numbers contained in the nodes of $\mathcal{T}$. We have
$$
\mathrm{c}(\mathcal{T}^{\sigma}|i)=\mathrm{c}\bigl(\mathcal{T}|\sigma^{-1}(i)\bigr)\ \ \ \ \ \ \text{for all $i=1,\dots,n$.}
$$
Note that if the tableau $\mathcal{T}$ is standard, the tableau $\mathcal{T}^{\sigma}$ is not necessarily standard.
\subsection{Formulas for the irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q)\mathcal{H}_n(q)$}
We set ${\mathbb C}(q)\mathcal{H}_n(q):={\mathbb C}(q) \otimes_{{\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]}\mathcal{H}_n(q)$.
Let $\mathcal{P}(n)$ be the set of all partitions of $n$, and let
$\lambda \in \mathcal{P}(n)$. Let $V_{\lambda}$ be a ${\mathbb C}(q)$-vector space with a basis $\{\mathrm{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}\}$ indexed by the standard tableaux of shape $\lambda$. We set $\mathrm{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}:=0$ for any non-standard tableau $\mathcal{T}$ of shape $\lambda$. We have the following result on the representations of ${\mathbb C}(q)\mathcal{H}_n(q)$, established in \cite{Hoe}:
\begin{thm}\label{thm-rep-hecke}
Let $\mathcal{T}$ be a standard tableau of shape $\lambda \in \mathcal{P}(n)$. For brevity, we set $\mathrm{c}_i:=\mathrm{c}(\mathcal{T}|i)$ for $i=1,\dots,n$.
The vector space $V_{\lambda}$ is an irreducible representation of ${\mathbb C}(q)\mathcal{H}_n(q)$ with the action of the generators on the basis element $\mathrm{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}$ defined as follows:
for $i=1,\dots,n-1$,
\begin{equation}\label{rep-G}
G_i(\mathrm{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}})=\frac{q\mathrm{c}_{i+1}-\mathrm{c}_{i+1}}{\mathrm{c}_{i+1}-\mathrm{c}_i}\,\mathrm{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}+\frac{q\mathrm{c}_{i+1}-\mathrm{c}_i}{\mathrm{c}_{i+1}-\mathrm{c}_i}\,\mathrm{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}^{s_i}}}\ ,
\end{equation}
where $s_i$ is the transposition $(i,i+1)$.
Further, the set $\{V_{\lambda}\}_{\lambda \in \mathcal{P}(n)}$ is a complete set of pairwise non-isomorphic irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q)\mathcal{H}_n(q)$.
\end{thm}
\begin{cor}
The algebra ${\mathbb C}(q)\mathcal{H}_n(q)$ is split semisimple.
\end{cor}
\subsection{Irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm TL}_n(q)$}
Since the algebra ${\mathbb C}(q)\mathcal{H}_n(q)$ is semisimple, the algebra ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm TL}_{n}(q):={\mathbb C}(q) \otimes_{{\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]}{\rm TL}_{n}(q)$ is also semisimple. Moreover, we have that the irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm TL}_{n}(q)$ are
precisely the irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q)\mathcal{H}_n(q)$ that pass to the quotient. That is,
$V_{\lambda}$ is an irreducible representation of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm TL}_{n}(q)$ if and only if
$G_{1,2} (\mathrm{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) =0$ for every standard tableau ${\mathcal{T}}$ of shape $\lambda$.
It is easy to see that the latter is equivalent to the trivial representation not being a direct summand of the restriction $\mathrm{Res}_{\langle s_1,s_2\rangle}^{\mathfrak{S}_n}(E^{\lambda})$, where $E^{\lambda}$ is the irreducible representation of the symmetric group $\mathfrak{S}_n$ (equivalently, the algebra ${\mathbb C}\mathcal{H}_n(1)$) labelled by $\lambda$. We obtain the following description of the irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm TL}_n(q)$:
\begin{prop}\label{classical case}
We have that $V_{\lambda}$ is an irreducible representation of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm TL}_n(q)$ if and only if the Young diagram of $\lambda$ has at most two columns.
\end{prop}
\subsection{The dimension of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm TL}_{n}(q)$}
For $n \in \mathbb{N}$, we denote by $C_n$ the $n$-th Catalan number, that is, the number
$$C_n = \frac{1}{n+1} \binom{2n}{n} =\frac{1}{n+1} \sum_{k=0}^n \binom{n}{k}^2 .$$
We have the following standard result on the dimension of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm TL}_{n}(q)$:
\begin{prop}\label{dim-TL}
We have
$${\rm dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)}({\mathbb C}(q){\rm TL}_{n}(q)) = C_n.$$
\end{prop}
\section{Representation theory of the framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra}
In this section, we look at a generalisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra, which is obtained as a quotient of the Yokonuma--Hecke algebra of type $A$. This algebra was introduced in \cite{gjkl2}, where some of its topological properties were studied. Here we determine its irreducible representations and calculate its dimension.
\subsection{The Yokonuma--Hecke algebra ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$}
Let $d,\,n \in \mathbb{N}$. Let $q $ be an indeterminate. The \emph{Yokonuma--Hecke algebra of type} $A$, denoted by ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$, is a ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-associative algebra generated by the elements
$$
g_1, \ldots, g_{n-1}, t_1, \ldots, t_n
$$
subject to the following relations:
\begin{equation}\label{modular}
\begin{array}{crcll}
\mathrm{(b}_1) & g_ig_j & = & g_jg_i & \mbox{for all $i,j=1,\ldots,n-1$ with $\vert i-j\vert > 1$,}\\
\mathrm{(b}_2) & g_ig_{i+1}g_i & = & g_{i+1}g_ig_{i+1} & \mbox{for all $i=1,\ldots,n-2$,}\\
\mathrm{(f}_1) & t_i t_j & = & t_j t_i & \mbox{for all $i,j=1,\ldots,n$,}\\
\mathrm{(f}_2) & t_j g_i & = & g_i t_{s_i(j)} & \mbox{for all $i=1,\ldots,n-1$ and $j=1,\ldots,n$,}\\
\mathrm{(f}_3) & t_j^d & = & 1 & \mbox{for all $j=1,\ldots,n$,}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $s_i$ denotes the transposition $(i, i+1)$, together with the quadratic
relations:
\begin{equation}\label{quadr}
g_i^2 =q + (q-1) \, e_{i} \, g_i\qquad \mbox{for all $i=1,\ldots,n-1$,}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{ei}
e_i :=\frac{1}{d}\sum_{s=0}^{d-1}t_i^s t_{i+1}^{-s}.
\end{equation}
Note that we have $e_i^2=e_i$ and $e_ig_i=g_ie_i$ for all $i=1,\ldots,n-1$.
Moreover, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eiti}
t_{i}e_i=t_{i+1}e_i\ \,\,\,\,\,\,\mbox{ for all $ i =1,\dots,n-1$.}
\end{equation}
\begin{rem}\label{ref rem}{\rm
In \cite{ChPo}, the first author and Poulain d'Andecy consider the braid generators
$\widetilde{g}_i:=q^{-1/2} g_i$ which satisfy the quadratic relation
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{g}_i^2 = 1 + (q^{1/2} - q^{-1/2}) e_i \widetilde{g}_i\ .
\end{equation}
On the other hand, in all the papers \cite{ju3, jula2, jula3, jula4, chla, gjkl1, gjkl2} prior to \cite{ChPo}, the authors consider the braid generators
$\overline{g}_i: = \widetilde{g}_i+(q^{1/2}-1)\, e_{i} \widetilde{g}_i$ (and thus, $\widetilde{g}_i:= \overline{g}_i+(q^{-1/2}-1)\, e_{i} \overline{g}_i$)
which satisfy the quadratic relation
\begin{equation}
\overline{g}_i^2 =1 + (q-1) \,e_i + (q-1) \, e_{i} \, \overline{g}_i\ .
\end{equation}
We have $\overline{g}_i = q^{-1/2} g_i + (1-q^{-1/2}) e_i g_i$. Note that
\begin{equation}\label{FTL is ok}
e_ig_i = e_i \overline{g}_i = q^{1/2} e_i \widetilde{g}_i \,\,\,\,\,\,\mbox{ for all $ i =1,\dots,n-1$.}
\end{equation}
}
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}{\rm
If we specialise $q$ to $1$, the defining relations (\ref{modular})--(\ref{quadr}) become the defining relations for the complex reflection group $G(d,1,n) \cong ({\mathbb Z}/d{\mathbb Z}) \wr \mathfrak{S}_n$. Thus, the algebra ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ is a deformation of ${\mathbb C}[G(d,1,n)]$. Moreover, for $d=1$, the Yokonuma--Hecke algebra ${\rm Y}_{1,n}(q)$ coincides with the Iwahori--Hecke algebra $\mathcal{H}_n(q)$ of type $A$.}
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}{\rm
The relations $({\rm b}_1)$, $({\rm b}_2)$, $({\rm f}_1)$ and $({\rm f}_2)$ are defining relations for the classical framed braid group $\mathcal{F}_n \cong {\mathbb Z}\wr B_n$, where $B_n$ is the classical braid group on $n$ strands, with the $t_j$'s being interpreted as the ``elementary framings" (framing 1 on the $j$th strand). The relations $t_j^d = 1$ mean that the framing of each braid strand is regarded modulo~$d$. Thus, the algebra ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ arises naturally as a quotient of the framed braid group algebra over the modular relations ~$\mathrm{(f}_3)$ and the quadratic relations~(\ref{quadr}). Moreover, relations (\ref{modular}) are defining relations for the modular framed braid group $\mathcal{F}_{d,n}\cong ({\mathbb Z}/d{\mathbb Z}) \wr B_n$, so the algebra ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ can be also seen as a quotient of the modular framed braid group algebra over the quadratic relations~(\ref{quadr}).
}\end{rem}
Let $w \in \mathfrak{S}_n$ and let $w=s_{i_1}s_{i_2}\ldots s_{i_r}$ be a reduced expression for $w$. By Matsumoto's lemma, the element $g_w:=g_{i_1}g_{i_2}\ldots g_{i_r}$ is well defined.
Juyumaya \cite{ju3} has shown that the set
$$\{t_1^{a_1}t_2^{a_2}\ldots t_n^{a_n} g_w \,|\, 0\leqslant a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_n \leqslant d-1,\,w \in \mathfrak{S}_n\}$$
forms a basis of ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ over ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$, which is called the \emph{standard basis}. In particular, ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$
is a free ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-module of rank $d^nn!$.
\subsection{The Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra ${\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$}
Let $i=1,\ldots,n-2$. We set
$$g_{i,i+1}:=1 + g_i + g_{i+1} + g_ig_{i+1} +g_{i+1}g_i + g_ig_{i+1}g_i = \sum_{w \in {\langle s_i,s_{i+1}\rangle}}g_w.$$
We define the \emph{Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra} to be the quotient
${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)/I_{d,n}$, where $I_{d,n}$ is the ideal generated by the element
$e_1e_2\, g_{1,2}$ (if $n \leqslant 2$, we take $I_{d,n} = \{0\}$).
Note that, due to (\ref{eiti}), the product $e_1e_2$ commutes with $g_1$ and with $g_2$, so it commutes with $g_{1,2}$. Further, we have
$ e_ie_{i+1}g_{i,i+1} \in I_{d,n}$ for all $i=1,\ldots,n-2$, since
$$e_ie_{i+1}g_{i,i+1} = (g_1g_2 \ldots g_{n-1})^{i-1} \,e_1e_2 \,g_{1,2}\, (g_1g_2 \ldots g_{n-1})^{-(i-1)}.$$
\begin{rem}{\rm In \cite{gjkl2}, the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra is defined to be the quotient
${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)/J_{d,n}$, where $J_{d,n}$ is the ideal generated by the element
$e_1e_2\,\overline{g}_{1,2}$, where
$$\overline{g}_{1,2} = 1 + \overline{g}_1+ \overline{g}_{2} + \overline{g}_1\overline{g}_{2} +\overline{g}_{2}\overline{g}_1 + \overline{g}_1\overline{g}_{2}\overline{g}_1.$$
Due to (\ref{FTL is ok}) and the fact that the $e_i$'s are idempotents, we have $e_1e_2\,\overline{g}_{1,2} = e_1e_2\,g_{1,2}$, and so $I_{d,n}=J_{d,n}$.
}
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}{\rm The ideal $I_{d,n}$ is the ideal generated by the element
$ \sum_{0\leqslant a,b \leqslant d-1} t_1^a t_2^b t_3^{-a-b} \,g_{1,2}$.}
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}{\rm
For $d=1$, the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra ${\rm FTL}_{1,n}(q)$ coincides with the classical Temperley--Lieb algebra $\mathrm{TL}_n(q)$.}
\end{rem}
\subsection{Combinatorics of $d$-partitions}
A $d$-partition $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ of size $n$ is a $d$-tuple of partitions such that the total number of nodes in the associated Young diagrams is equal to $n$. That is, we have $\boldsymbol{\lambda}=(\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)},\dots,\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(d)})$ with $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)},\dots,\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(d)}$ usual partitions such that $|\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)}|+\dots+|\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(d)}|=n$.
We write $\boldsymbol{\rho}=(x,y,k)$ for the node in row $x$ and column $y$ of the Young diagram of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(k)}$, and we say that
$\boldsymbol{\rho}$ is a \emph{$d$-node} of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$. For a $d$-node $\boldsymbol{\rho}=(x,y,k)$, we define $\mathrm{p}(\boldsymbol{\rho}):=k$ and $\mathrm{c}(\boldsymbol{\rho}):=q^{y-x}$. The number $\mathrm{p}(\boldsymbol{\rho})$ is the position of $\boldsymbol{\rho}$ and the number $\mathrm{c}(\boldsymbol{\rho})$ is called the \emph{(quantum) content} of $\boldsymbol{\rho}$.
Let $\boldsymbol{\lambda}=(\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)},\ldots,\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(d)})$ be a $d$-partition of $n$. A {\em $d$-tableau of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$} is a bijection between the set $\{1,\dots,n\}$ and the set of $d$-nodes in $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$. In other words, a $d$-tableau of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ is obtained by placing the numbers $1,\dots,n$ in the $d$-nodes of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$.
The \emph{size} of a $d$-tableau of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ is $n$, that is, the size of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$.
A $d$-tableau is {\em standard} if its entries increase along each row and down
each column of every diagram in $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$. For $d=1$, a standard $1$-tableau is a usual standard tableau.
For a $d$-tableau ${\mathcal{T}}$, we denote respectively by $\mathrm{p}({\mathcal{T}}|i)$ and $\mathrm{c}({\mathcal{T}}|i)$ the position and the quantum content of the $d$-node with the number $i$ in it. For example, for the standard $3$-tableau ${\mathcal{T}}^{^{\phantom{A}}}\!\!\!\!={\textrm{$\left(
\,\fbox{\scriptsize{$2$}}\fbox{\scriptsize{$3$}}\, ,\,\varnothing\, ,\,\fbox{\scriptsize{$1$}}\,\right)$}}$ of size $3$, we have
\[\mathrm{p}({\mathcal{T}}|1)=3\,,\ \ \mathrm{p}({\mathcal{T}}|2)=1\,,\ \ \mathrm{p}({\mathcal{T}}|3)=1\ \ \ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ \ \ \mathrm{c}({\mathcal{T}}|1)=1\,,\ \ \mathrm{c}({\mathcal{T}}|2)=1\,,\ \ \mathrm{c}({\mathcal{T}}|3)=q\,.\]
For any $d$-tableau $\mathcal{T}$ of size $n$ and any permutation $\sigma \in \mathfrak{S}_n$, we denote by $\mathcal{T}^{\sigma}$ the $d$-tableau obtained from $\mathcal{T}$ by applying the permutation $\sigma$ on the numbers contained in the $d$-nodes of $\mathcal{T}$. We have
$$
\mathrm{p}(\mathcal{T}^{\sigma}|i)=\mathrm{p}\bigl(\mathcal{T}|\sigma^{-1}(i)\bigr)\ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ \mathrm{c}(\mathcal{T}^{\sigma}|i)=\mathrm{c}\bigl(\mathcal{T}|\sigma^{-1}(i)\bigr)\ \ \ \ \ \ \text{for all $i=1,\dots,n$.}
$$
Note that if the $d$-tableau $\mathcal{T}$ is standard, the $d$-tableau $\mathcal{T}^{\sigma}$ is not necessarily standard.
\subsection{Formulas for the irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$}\label{formYH}
The representation theory of ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ has been first studied by Thiem \cite{Thi1,Thi2,Thi3} and subsequently by the first author and Poulain d'Andecy \cite{ChPo}, who gave a description of its irreducible representations in terms of $d$-partitions and $d$-tableaux.
Let $\mathcal{P}(d,n)$ be the set of all $d$-partitions of $n$, and let
$\boldsymbol{\lambda} \in \mathcal{P}(d,n)$. Let $\widetilde{V}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ be a ${\mathbb C}(q^{1/2})$-vector space with a basis $\{\widetilde{\mathbf{v}}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}\}$ indexed by the standard $d$-tableaux of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$. In \cite[Proposition 5]{ChPo}, the first author and Poulain d'Andecy describe actions of the generators $\widetilde{g}_i$, for $i=1,\ldots,n-1$, and $t_j$, for $j=1,\ldots,n$, on $\{\widetilde{\mathbf{v}}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}\}$, which make $\widetilde{V}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ into a representation of ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ over ${\mathbb C}(q^{1/2})$.
The matrices describing the action of the generators $t_j$ have complex coefficients, while the ones describing the action of the generators $\widetilde{g}_i$ have coefficients in ${\mathbb C}(q^{1/2})$. However, the change of basis
\begin{equation}\label{change of basis}
\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}} := q^{N_{\mathcal{T}}/2}\, \widetilde{\mathbf{v}}_{_{\mathcal{T}}},
\end{equation}
where $N_{\mathcal{T}}: = \# \{ i \in \{1,\ldots,n-1\} \,|\, \mathrm{p}(\mathcal{T}|i) < \mathrm{p}(\mathcal{T}|i+1)\}$, and the change of generators
\begin{equation}\label{change of generators}
g_i=q^{1/2}\,\widetilde{g}_i
\end{equation}
yield a description of the action of ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ on $\widetilde{V}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ which is realised over ${\mathbb C}(q)$ (see theorem below).
Let $V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ be a ${\mathbb C}(q)$-vector space with a basis $\{\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}\}$ indexed by the standard $d$-tableaux of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$. We set $\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}:=0$ for any non-standard $d$-tableau $\mathcal{T}$ of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$.
Let $\{\xi_1,\dots,\xi_d\}$ be the set of all $d$-th roots of unity (ordered arbitrarily).
We set ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm Y}_{d,n}(q):={\mathbb C}(q) \otimes_{{\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]}{\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$. The following result is \cite[Proposition 5]{ChPo} and \cite[Theorem 1]{ChPo}, with the change of basis and generators described by (\ref{change of basis}) and (\ref{change of generators}).
\begin{thm}\label{thm-rep}
Let $\mathcal{T}$ be a standard $d$-tableau of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda} \in \mathcal{P}(d,n)$. For brevity, we set $\mathrm{p}_i:=\mathrm{p}(\mathcal{T}|i)$ and $\mathrm{c}_i:=\mathrm{c}(\mathcal{T}|i)$ for $i=1,\dots,n$.
The vector space $V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ is an irreducible representation of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ with the action of the generators on the basis element $\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}$ defined as follows:
for $j=1,\dots,n$,
\begin{equation}\label{rep-t}
t_j(\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}})=\xi_{\mathrm{p}_j}\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}\ ;
\end{equation}
for $i=1,\dots,n-1$, if $\mathrm{p}_{i}>\mathrm{p}_{i+1}$ then
\begin{equation}\label{rep-g1}
g_i(\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}})=\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}^{s_i}}}\ ,
\end{equation}
if $\mathrm{p}_{i} < \mathrm{p}_{i+1}$ then
\begin{equation}\label{rep-g2}
g_i(\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}})=q\,\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}^{s_i}}}\ ,
\end{equation}
and if $\mathrm{p}_{i}=\mathrm{p}_{i+1}$ then
\begin{equation}\label{rep-g3}
g_i(\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}})=\frac{q\mathrm{c}_{i+1}-\mathrm{c}_{i+1}}{\mathrm{c}_{i+1}-\mathrm{c}_i}\,\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}+\frac{q\mathrm{c}_{i+1}-\mathrm{c}_i}{\mathrm{c}_{i+1}-\mathrm{c}_i}\,\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}^{s_i}}}\ ,
\end{equation}
where $s_i$ is the transposition $(i,i+1)$.
Further, the set $\{V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}\}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda} \in \mathcal{P}(d,n)}$ is a complete set of pairwise non-isomorphic irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$.
\end{thm}
\begin{cor}
The algebra ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ is split semisimple.
\end{cor}
\begin{rem}{\rm Note that
\begin{equation}\label{eirep}
e_i(\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}} & \text{if } \mathrm{p}_{i} = \mathrm{p}_{i+1} ; \\
0 & \text{if } \mathrm{p}_{i} \neq \mathrm{p}_{i+1}.
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}}
\end{rem}
\subsection{Irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$}
Since the algebra ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ is semisimple, the algebra
${\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q):={\mathbb C}(q) \otimes_{{\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]}{\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$ is also semisimple. Moreover, we have that the irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$ are
precisely the irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ that pass to the quotient. That is,
$V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ is an irreducible representation of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$ if and only if
$e_1 e_2 g_{1,2} (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) =0$ for every standard $d$-tableau ${\mathcal{T}}$ of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$.
\begin{thm}\label{res1}
We have that $V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ is an irreducible representation of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$ if and only if the Young diagram of
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}$ has at most two columns for all $i=1,\ldots,d$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let us assume first that $V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ is an irreducible representation of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$ and let $i \in \{1,\ldots,d\}$.
Set $n_i:=|\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}|$. If $n_i \leqslant 2$, then $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}$ has at most two columns. If $n_i \geq 3$, let us consider all the standard $d$-tableaux
$\mathcal{T} = (\mathcal{T}^{(1)},\ldots,\mathcal{T}^{(d)})$ of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ such that
$$ \mathrm{p}_{1}=\mathrm{p}_{2}=\mathrm{p}_{3} = \cdots= \mathrm{p}_{n_i} = i.$$
Then, using the notation of Theorem \ref{thm-rep-hecke} for the Iwahori--Hecke algebra $\mathcal{H}_{n_i}(q)$ and Equation (\ref{eirep}), we obtain
$$G_{1,2}(\mathrm{v}_{_{{\mathcal{T}}^{({i})}}}) = g_{1,2}(\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}})= g_{1,2}e_1 e_2 (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) =e_1 e_2 g_{1,2} (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}})=0$$
Since $\mathcal{T}^{(i)}$ runs over all the standard tableaux of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}$,
Proposition \ref{classical case} yields that $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}$ has at most two columns.
Now assume that $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}$ has at most two columns for all $i=1,\ldots,d$.
Let $\mathcal{T} = (\mathcal{T}^{(1)},\ldots,\mathcal{T}^{(d)})$ be a standard $d$-tableau of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$.
If $\mathrm{p}_{1}=\mathrm{p}_{2}=\mathrm{p}_{3} = :\mathrm{p}$, then, by (\ref{eirep}), $e_1 e_2 g_{1,2} (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) =g_{1,2}e_1 e_2 (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) = g_{1,2} (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}})$.
In this case,
$g_{1,2}$ acts on $\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}$ in the same way that $G_{1,2}$ acts on $\mathrm{v}_{_{{\mathcal{T}}^{(\mathrm{p})}}}$ (replacing the entries greater than $3$ by entries in $\{4,\ldots,|\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(\rm p)}|\}$).
Following Proposition \ref{classical case},
we have $g_{1,2} (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) = 0$.
Otherwise, again by (\ref{eirep}), we have $e_1e_2 (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) =0$, so $e_1 e_2 g_{1,2} (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) =g_{1,2}e_1 e_2 (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}})=0$ as desired.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The dimension of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$} We will now use the complete description of the irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$ by
Theorem \ref{res1} to obtain a dimension formula for ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$. Set
$${\rm Comp}_d(n):= \{\mu=(\mu_1,\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_d) \in \mathbb{N}^d\,|\, \mu_1+\mu_2+\cdots+\mu_d = n\}.$$
\begin{thm}\label{res2} We have
$${\rm dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)}({\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)) = \sum_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} \left( \frac{n!}{\mu_1!\mu_2!\ldots \mu_d!}\right)^2 C_{\mu_1}C_{\mu_2} \cdots C_{\mu_d}.$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let us denote by $\mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(d,n)$ the set of $d$-partitions $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ of $n$ such that the Young diagram of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}$ has at most two columns for all $i=1,\ldots,d$. By Theorem \ref{res1}, and since the algebra ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$ is semisimple,
we have
$${\rm dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)}({\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)) = \sum_{\boldsymbol{\lambda} \in \mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(d,n)} \mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}})^2,$$
where $\mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}})$ is the number of standard $d$-tableaux of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$.
Fix $\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)$.
We denote by $\mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(\mu)$ the set of all $d$-partitions $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ in $\mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(d,n)$ such that $|\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}|=\mu_i$ for all $i=1,\ldots,d$.
We have
$${\rm dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)}({\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)) = \sum_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)}\sum_{\boldsymbol{\lambda} \in \mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(\mu)} \mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}})^2.$$
Let $\boldsymbol{\lambda} \in \mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(\mu)$.
We have
$$\binom{n}{\mu_1}\binom{n-\mu_1}{\mu_2}\binom{n-\mu_1-\mu_2}{\mu_3}\cdots \binom{n-\mu_1-\mu_2-\cdots - \mu_{d-1}}{\mu_d}=\frac{n!}{\mu_1!\mu_2!\ldots \mu_d!}$$
ways to choose the numbers in $\{1,\ldots,n\}$ that will be placed in the nodes of the Young diagram of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}$ for each $i=1,\ldots,d$. We deduce that
$$\mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}) = \frac{n!}{\mu_1!\mu_2!\ldots \mu_d!} \prod_{i=1}^d \mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}})\ ,$$
where $V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}}$ is the irreducible representation of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm TL}_{\mu_i}(q)$ labelled by $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}$.
We thus obtain that
$$ {\rm dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)}({\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q))=\sum_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)}\left( \frac{n!}{\mu_1!\mu_2!\ldots \mu_d!}\right)^2 \sum_{\boldsymbol{\lambda} \in \mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(\mu)}
\prod_{i=1}^d \mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}})^2.$$
We now have that
$$\sum_{\boldsymbol{\lambda} \in \mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(\mu)}
\prod_{i=1}^d \mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}})^2$$
is equal to
$$\sum_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)} \in \mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(1,\mu_1)}\sum_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(2)} \in \mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(1,\mu_2)}\ldots \sum_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(d)} \in \mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(1,\mu_d)}
\prod_{i=1}^d \mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}})^2,
$$
which in turn is equal to
$$\prod_{i=1}^d \left( \sum_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)} \in \mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(1,\mu_i)} \mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}})^2 \right).$$
By Proposition \ref{dim-TL}, we have that
$$\sum_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)} \in \mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(1,\mu_i)} \mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}})^2 = {\rm dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)}({\mathbb C}(q){\rm TL}_{\mu_i}(q)) =C_{\mu_i}\ ,$$
for all $i=1,\ldots,d$.
We conclude that
$${\rm dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)}({\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)) = \sum_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} \left( \frac{n!}{\mu_1!\mu_2!\ldots \mu_d!}\right)^2 C_{\mu_1}C_{\mu_2} \cdots C_{\mu_d}.$$
\end{proof}
\section{An isomorphism theorem for the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra}\label{sec-iso}
Lusztig has proved that Yokonuma--Hecke algebras are isomorphic to direct sums of matrix algebras over certain subalgebras of classical Iwahori--Hecke algebras \cite[\S 34]{Lu}. For the Yokonuma--Hecke algebras ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$, these are all Iwahori--Hecke algebras of type $A$. This result was reproved in \cite{JP} using the presentation of ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ given by Juyumaya. Since we use the same presentation, we will use the latter exposition of the result in order to prove an analogous statement for ${\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$. Note that in both cases the result has been obtained over the ring ${\mathbb C}[q^{1/2},q^{-1/2}]$ (with the use of the generators $\widetilde{g}_i$ defined in Remark \ref{ref rem}). We will show here that it is still valid over the smaller ring ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$.
\subsection{Compositions and Young subgroups}\label{Young}
Let $\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)$, where
$${\rm Comp}_d(n)= \{\mu=(\mu_1,\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_d) \in \mathbb{N}^d\,|\, \mu_1+\mu_2+\cdots+\mu_d = n\}.$$
We say that $\mu$ is a {\em composition of $n$ with $d$ parts}.
The Young subgroup $\mathfrak{S}_\mu$ of $\mathfrak{S}_n$ is the subgroup $\mathfrak{S}_{\mu_1}\times \mathfrak{S}_{\mu_2} \times \cdots
\times \mathfrak{S}_{\mu_d}$, where $\mathfrak{S}_{\mu_1}$ acts on the letters
$\{1,\ldots,\mu_1\}$, $\mathfrak{S}_{\mu_2}$ acts on the letters
$\{\mu_1+1,\ldots,\mu_1+\mu_2\}$, and so on. Thus, $\mathfrak{S}_\mu$ is a parabolic subgroup of $\mathfrak{S}_n$ generated by the transpositions $s_j=(j,j+1)$ with $j \in J^\mu :=\{1,\ldots,n-1\} \setminus \{\mu_1,\mu_1+\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_1+\mu_2+\cdots+\mu_{d-1}\}$.
We have an Iwahori--Hecke algebra $\mathcal{H}^\mu(q)$ associated with $\mathfrak{S}_\mu$, which is the subalgebra of $\mathcal{H}_n(q)$ generated by $\{G_j\,|\, j \in J^\mu\}$. The algebra $\mathcal{H}^\mu(q)$ is a free ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-module
with basis $\{G_w \,|\, w \in \mathfrak{S}_\mu\}$, and it is isomorphic to the tensor product (over ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$) of Iwahori--Hecke algebras
$\mathcal{H}_{\mu_1}(q) \otimes \mathcal{H}_{\mu_2}(q) \otimes \cdots \otimes \mathcal{H}_{\mu_d}(q)$
(with $\mathcal{H}_{\mu_i}(q) \cong {\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$ if $\mu_i \leqslant 1$).
For $i=1,\ldots,d$, we denote by $\rho_i$ the natural surjection $\mathcal{H}_{\mu_i}(q) \twoheadrightarrow
\mathcal{H}_{\mu_i}(q) /I_{\mu_i} \cong {\rm TL}_{\mu_i}(q)$, where
$I_{\mu_i}$ is the ideal generated by $G_{\mu_1+\cdots+\mu_{i-1}+1,\mu_1+\cdots+\mu_{i-1}+2}$
if $\mu_i >2$ and $I_{\mu_i} =\{0\}$ if $\mu_i \leqslant 2$.
We obtain that
$\rho^\mu:=\rho_1 \otimes \rho_2 \otimes \cdots \otimes \rho_d$ is a surjective ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebra homomorphism
$\mathcal{H}^\mu(q)\twoheadrightarrow {\rm TL}^{\mu}(q)$, where ${\rm TL}^{\mu}(q)$ denotes the tensor product of Temperley--Lieb algebras ${\rm TL}_{\mu_1}(q) \otimes {\rm TL}_{\mu_2}(q) \otimes \cdots \otimes {\rm TL}_{\mu_d}(q)$.
\subsection{Two isomorphism theorems for the Yokonuma--Hecke algebra ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$}
Let $\{\xi_1,\dots,\xi_d\}$ be the set of all $d$-th roots of unity (ordered arbitrarily).
Let $\chi$ be an irreducible character of the abelian group $\mathcal{A}_{d,n} \cong ({\mathbb Z}/d{\mathbb Z})^n$ generated by the elements $t_1,t_2,\ldots,t_n$.
There exists a primitive idempotent of ${\mathbb C}[\mathcal{A}_{d,n}]$ associated with $\chi$ defined as
$$E_\chi := \prod_{j=1}^n \left(\frac{1}{d} \sum_{s=0}^{d-1} \chi(t_j^s) t_j^{-s}\right) = \prod_{j=1}^n \left(\frac{1}{d} \sum_{s=0}^{d-1} \chi(t_j)^s t_j^{-s}\right) .$$
Moreover, we can define a composition $\mu^\chi \in{\rm Comp}_d(n)$ by setting
$$\mu_i^\chi := \# \{ j \in \{1,\ldots,n\}\,|\, \chi(t_j) = \xi_i\} \quad \text{for all } i=1,\ldots,d.$$
Conversely, given a composition $\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)$, we can consider the subset ${\rm Irr}^\mu(\mathcal{A}_{d,n})$ of ${\rm Irr}(\mathcal{A}_{d,n})$
defined as
$${\rm Irr}^\mu(\mathcal{A}_{d,n}) := \{ \chi \in {\rm Irr}(\mathcal{A}_{d,n})\,|\, \mu^\chi = \mu\}.$$
There is an action of $\mathfrak{S}_n$ on ${\rm Irr}^\mu(\mathcal{A}_{d,n})$ given by
$$ w(\chi)(t_j) := \chi(t_{w^{-1}(j)}) \quad \text{ for all } w\in \mathfrak{S}_n, \, j=1,\ldots,n.$$
Let $\chi_1^\mu \in {\rm Irr}^\mu(\mathcal{A}_{d,n})$ be the character given by
$$\left\{\begin{array}{ccccccc}
\chi_1^\mu (t_1) & = & \cdots & = & \chi_1^\mu(t_{\mu_1}) & = & \xi_1 \\
\chi_1^\mu (t_{\mu_1+1}) & = & \cdots & = & \chi_1^\mu(t_{\mu_1+\mu_2}) & = & \xi_2 \\
\chi_1^\mu (t_{\mu_1+\mu_2+1}) & = & \cdots & = & \chi_1^\mu(t_{\mu_1+\mu_2+\mu_3}) & = & \xi_3 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots &\vdots \\
\chi_1^\mu (t_{\mu_1+\cdots+\mu_{d-1}+1}) & = & \cdots & = & \chi_1^\mu(t_{n}) & = & \xi_d \\
\end{array}\right.$$
The stabiliser of $\chi_1^\mu$ under the action of $\mathfrak{S}_n$ is the Young subgroup $\mathfrak{S}_\mu$.
In each left coset in $\mathfrak{S}_n/\mathfrak{S}_\mu$,
we can take a representative of minimal length; such a representative is unique (see, for example, \cite[\S 2.1]{GePf}).
Let
$$\{ \pi_{\mu,1}, \pi_{\mu,2},\ldots, \pi_{\mu,m_\mu}\}$$
be this set of distinguished left coset representatives of $\mathfrak{S}_n/\mathfrak{S}_\mu$,
with
$$m_\mu = \frac{n!}{\mu_1!\mu_2!\ldots \mu_d!}\,$$
and the convention that $\pi_{\mu,1}=1$.
Then, if we set
$$\chi_k^{\mu} := \pi_{\mu,k}(\chi_1^{\mu}) \quad \text{for all } k=1,\ldots,m_\mu,$$
we have
$$ {\rm Irr}^\mu(\mathcal{A}_{d,n}) = \{ \chi_1^{\mu}, \chi_2^{\mu},\ldots, \chi_{m_\mu}^{\mu}\}.$$
We now set
$$E_\mu: = \sum_{\chi \in {\rm Irr}^\mu(\mathcal{A}_{d,n})} E_\chi = \sum_{k=1}^{m_\mu} E_{\chi_k^\mu} .$$
Since
the set $\{E_\chi \,|\, \chi \in {\rm Irr}(\mathcal{A}_{d,n})\}$ forms a complete set of orthogonal idempotents in ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$, and
\begin{equation}\label{Echi}
t_j E_\chi = E_\chi t_j = \chi(t_j)E_\chi \quad \text{and} \quad g_wE_\chi = E_{w(\chi)}g_w
\end{equation}
for all $\chi \in {\rm Irr}(\mathcal{A}_{d,n})$, $j=1,\ldots,n$ and $w \in \mathfrak{S}_n$, we have that the set $\{E_\mu \,| \,\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)\}$ forms a complete set of central orthogonal idempotents in ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ (cf.~\cite[\S 2.4]{JP}). In particular, we have the following decomposition of ${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ into a direct sum of two-sided ideals:
$${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q) = \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q).$$
For the moment, let us consider all the algebras defined over the Laurent polynomial ring ${\mathbb C}[q^{1/2},q^{-1/2}]$ (by extension of scalars).
Let $\ell : \mathfrak{S}_n \rightarrow \mathbb{N}$ denote the length function on $\mathfrak{S}_n$.
We define a ${\mathbb C}[q^{1/2},q^{-1/2}]$-linear map
$$\widetilde{\Psi}_\mu : E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q) \rightarrow {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q))$$
as follows:
for all $k \in \{1,\ldots,m_\mu\}$ and $w \in \mathfrak{S}_n$, we set
$$ \widetilde{\Psi}_\mu(E_{\chi_k^\mu}g_w) := q^{\frac{1}{2}(\ell(w)-\ell(\pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}w\pi_{\mu,l}))}G_{\pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}w\pi_{\mu,l}} M_{k,l} \,, $$
where $l \in \{1,\ldots,m_\mu\}$ is uniquely defined by the relation $w(\chi_l^\mu)=\chi_k^\mu$ and
$M_{k,l}$ is the elementary $m_\mu \times m_\mu$ matrix with $1$ in position $(k,l)$.
Note that $\pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}w\pi_{\mu,l} \in \mathfrak{S}_\mu$.
We also define a ${\mathbb C}[q^{1/2},q^{-1/2}]$-linear map
$$\widetilde{\Phi}_\mu : {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q)) \rightarrow E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q) $$
as follows: for all $k,l \in \{1,\ldots,m_\mu\}$ and $w \in \mathfrak{S}_\mu$, we set
$$ \widetilde{\Phi}_\mu(G_w M_{k,l}) := q^{\frac{1}{2}(\ell(w)-\ell(\pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}w\pi_{\mu,l}))}E_{\chi_k^\mu}g_{\pi_{\mu,k}w\pi_{\mu,l}^{-1}} E_{\chi_l^\mu}.$$
Using the generators $\widetilde{g}_i$ and $\widetilde{G}_i$ defined in Remark \ref{ref rem}, the above maps are equivalent to
$$ \widetilde{\Psi}_\mu(E_{\chi_k^\mu}\widetilde{g}_w) := \widetilde{G}_{\pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}w\pi_{\mu,l}} M_{k,l} \quad \text{ and } \quad \widetilde{\Phi}_\mu(\widetilde{G}_w M_{k,l}) := E_{\chi_k^\mu}\widetilde{g}_{\pi_{\mu,k}w\pi_{\mu,l}^{-1}} E_{\chi_l^\mu}.$$
Then we have the following \cite[Theorem 3.1]{JP}:
\begin{thm} \label{thm-iso-JP}
Let $\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)$. The linear map $\widetilde{\Psi}_\mu$
is an isomorphism of ${\mathbb C}[q^{1/2},q^{-1/2}]$-algebras with inverse map $\widetilde{\Phi}_\mu$. As a consequence, the map
$$\widetilde{\Psi}_n:= \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} \widetilde{\Psi}_\mu : {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q) \rightarrow \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q))$$
is also an isomorphism of ${\mathbb C}[q^{1/2},q^{-1/2}]$-algebras, with inverse map
$$\widetilde{\Phi}_n:= \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} \widetilde{\Phi}_\mu : \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q)) \rightarrow {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q).$$
\end{thm}
We will now show that we can construct similar isomorphisms over the smaller ring ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$. In order to do this, we will make use of Deodhar's lemma (see, for example, \cite[Lemma 2.1.2]{GePf}) about the distinguished left coset representatives of $\mathfrak{S}_n/\mathfrak{S}_\mu$.
\begin{lem}\label{Deodhar} {\rm (Deodhar's lemma)} Let $\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)$. For all $k \in \{1,\ldots,m_\mu\}$ and $i= 1,\ldots,n-1$,
let $l \in \{1,\ldots,m_\mu\}$ be uniquely defined by the relation $s_i(\chi_l^\mu)=\chi_k^\mu$.
We have
$$\pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}s_i \pi_{\mu,l} = \left\{ \begin{array}{cl}
1 & \text{ if } k\neq l ; \\ & \\
s_j & \text{ if } k = l,
\end{array}\right.$$
for some $j \in J^\mu$.
\end{lem}
Deodhar's lemma implies that, for all $i=1,\ldots,n-1$, $\widetilde{\Psi}_\mu(E_\mu g_i)$ is a symmetric matrix whose diagonal non-zero coefficients are of the form $G_j$ with $j \in J^\mu$, while all non-diagonal non-zero coefficients are equal to $q^{1/2}$.
Now, let us consider the diagonal matrix
$$U_\mu := \sum_{k=1}^{m_\mu} q^{\ell(\pi_{\mu,k})/2}M_{k,k}.$$
The coefficients of the matrix $U_\mu\widetilde{\Psi}_\mu(E_\mu g_i)U_\mu^{-1}$ satisfy:
$$(U_\mu\widetilde{\Psi}_\mu(E_\mu g_i)U_\mu^{-1})_{k,l} = q^{(\ell(\pi_{\mu,k})-\ell(\pi_{\mu,l}))/2} (\widetilde{\Psi}_\mu(E_\mu g_i))_{k,l}\,,$$
for all $k,l \in \{1,\ldots,m_\mu\}$. Therefore, following the definition of $\widetilde{\Psi}_\mu$ and Deodhar's lemma, the matrix $U_\mu\widetilde{\Psi}_\mu(E_\mu g_i)U_\mu^{-1}$ is a matrix whose diagonal coefficients are the same as the diagonal coefficients of $\widetilde{\Psi}_\mu(E_\mu g_i)$ (and thus of the form $G_j$ with $j \in J^\mu$), while all non-diagonal non-zero coefficients are equal to either $1$ or $q$.
Moreover, since, for all $j=1,\ldots,n$,
$$\widetilde{\Psi}_\mu(E_\mu t_j) = \sum_{k=1}^{m_\mu} \chi_k^\mu(t_j) M_{k,k}$$
is a diagonal matrix, we have $U_\mu\widetilde{\Psi}_\mu(E_\mu t_j)U_\mu^{-1}=\widetilde{\Psi}_\mu(E_\mu t_j)$. We conclude the following:
\begin{thm}\label{our iso}
Let $\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)$. The map
$${\Psi}_\mu : E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q) \rightarrow {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q))$$ defined by
$$ {\Psi}_\mu(E_\mu a):= U_\mu\widetilde{\Psi}_\mu(E_\mu a)U_\mu^{-1},$$ for all $a \in {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$, is an isomorphism of ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebras.
Its inverse is the map
$$ \Phi_\mu: {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q)) \rightarrow E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$$ defined by
$$ {\Phi}_\mu(A):= \widetilde{\Phi}_\mu(U_\mu^{-1} A U_\mu),$$ for all $ A \in {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q))$. As a consequence, the map
$${\Psi}_n:= \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} {\Psi}_\mu : {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q) \rightarrow \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q))$$
is also an isomorphism of ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebras, with inverse map
$${\Phi}_n:= \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} {\Phi}_\mu : \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q)) \rightarrow {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q).$$
\end{thm}
\begin{rem}
{\rm We believe that, using a similar method, one can prove that Lusztig's isomorphism theorem for Yokonuma--Hecke algebras \cite[\S 34]{Lu} is valid over the ring ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$.}
\end{rem}
\subsection{From ${\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$ to Temperley--Lieb}
Recall that ${\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$ is the quotient
${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)/I_{d,n}$, where $I_{d,n}$ is the ideal generated by the element
$e_1e_2\, g_{1,2}$ (with $I_{d,n}=\{0\}$ if $n \leqslant 2$). Let $\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)$. We will study the image of $e_1e_2\, g_{1,2}$ under the isomorphism $\Psi_\mu$.
By \eqref{Echi}, for all $i=1,\ldots,n-1$ and $\chi \in {\rm Irr}(\mathcal{A}_{d,n})$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eiEchi}
e_i E_\chi = E_\chi e_i= \frac{1}{d} \sum_{s=0}^{d-1} \chi(t_i)^s \chi(t_{i+1})^{-s} E_\chi =
\left\{ \begin{array}{cl}
E_\chi & \text{ if } \chi(t_i) = \chi(t_{i+1}) ; \\ & \\
0 & \text{ if } \chi(t_i) \neq \chi(t_{i+1}).
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
We deduce that, for all $k=1,\ldots,m_\mu$,
\begin{equation}\label{i-1}
E_{\chi_k^\mu}e_1e_2g_{1,2} =
\left\{ \begin{array}{cl}
E_{\chi_k^\mu}g_{1,2} & \text{ if } \chi_k^\mu(t_1)=\chi_k^\mu(t_2)=\chi_k^\mu(t_3); \\ & \\
0 & \text{ otherwise } .
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{prop}\label{imageofpsi}
Let $\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)$ and $k \in \{1,\ldots,m_\mu\}$. We have
$$
\Psi_\mu(E_{\chi_k^\mu}e_1e_2g_{1,2}) =
\left\{ \begin{array}{cl}
G_{i,i+1} M_{k,k} & \text{ for some } i \in \{1,\ldots,n-2\}
\,\text{ if } \chi_k^\mu(t_1)=\chi_k^\mu(t_2)=\chi_k^\mu(t_3); \\ & \\
0 & \text{ otherwise } .
\end{array}\right.
$$
Thus, $\Psi_\mu(E_\mu e_1e_2g_{1,2})$ is a diagonal matrix in $ {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q))$
with all non-zero coefficients being of the form $G_{i,i+1}$ for some $i \in \{1,\ldots,n-2\}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
If $\chi_k^\mu(t_1)=\chi_k^\mu(t_2)=\chi_k^\mu(t_3)$, then $w(\chi_k^\mu)=\chi_k^\mu$ for all
$w \in {\langle s_1,s_2\rangle} \subseteq \mathfrak{S}_n$,
and so
\begin{equation}\label{almost 1}
\Psi_\mu(E_{\chi_k^\mu}g_{1,2}) = \sum_{w \in {\langle s_1,s_2\rangle}}\Psi_\mu(E_{\chi_k^\mu}g_w) =
\sum_{w \in {\langle s_1,s_2\rangle}}U_\mu\widetilde{\Psi}_\mu(E_{\chi_k^\mu}g_w)U_\mu^{-1}=
\sum_{w \in{\langle s_1,s_2\rangle}} G_{\pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}w\pi_{\mu,k}} M_{k,k} .
\end{equation}
We will show that there exists $i \in \{1,\ldots,n-2\}$ such that
$$ \sum_{w \in{\langle s_1,s_2\rangle}} G_{\pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}w\pi_{\mu,k}} = G_{i,i+1}.$$
By Lemma \ref{Deodhar}, there exist $i,j \in J^\mu$ such that
$$ \pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}s_1\pi_{\mu,k} =s_i \quad \text{and} \quad \pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}s_2\pi_{\mu,k} =s_j.$$
Consequently,
$ \pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}s_1s_2\pi_{\mu,k} =s_is_j$, $\pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}s_2s_1\pi_{\mu,k} =s_js_i$ and
$ \pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}s_1s_2s_1\pi_{\mu,k} =s_is_js_i$. Moreover, since $s_1$ and $s_2$ do not commute, $s_i$ and $s_j$ do not commute either, so we must have
$j \in \{i-1,i+1\}$. Hence, if $j=i-1$, then
$$\sum_{w \in{\langle s_1,s_2\rangle}} G_{\pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}w\pi_{\mu,k}} = G_{i-1,i},$$
while if $j=i+1$, then
$$\sum_{w \in{\langle s_1,s_2\rangle}} G_{\pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}w\pi_{\mu,k}} = G_{i,i+1}.$$
We conclude that there exists $i \in \{1,\ldots,n-2\}$ such that
$$ \sum_{w \in{\langle s_1,s_2\rangle}} G_{\pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}w\pi_{\mu,k}} = G_{i,i+1},$$
whence we deduce that
$$
\Psi_\mu(E_{\chi_k^\mu}g_{1,2}) = G_{i,i+1} M_{k,k}.
$$
Combining this with \eqref{i-1} yields the desired result.
\end{proof}
\begin{exmp}\label{example1}{\rm Let us consider the case $d=2$ and $n=4$. We have
$$(\mu,m_\mu) \in \{ ((4,0),1), ((3,1),4), ((2,2),6), ((1,3),4), ((0,4),1) \}.$$
Then
$$
\Psi_\mu(E_{\chi_k^\mu}e_1e_2g_{1,2}) =
\left\{ \begin{array}{cl}
G_{1,2} & \text{ if $\mu=(4,0)$ or $\mu=(0,4)$ }, \\ & \\
G_{1,2}\,M_{1,1} & \text{ if $\mu=(3,1)$ and $k=1$ }, \\ & \\
G_{2,3}\,M_{4,4} & \text{ if $\mu=(1,3)$ and $k=4$ }, \\ & \\
0 & \text{ otherwise } ,
\end{array}\right.$$
where we take $\pi_{(1,3),4}=s_3s_2s_1$. }
\end{exmp}
Now, recall the surjective ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebra homomorphism $\rho^\mu : \mathcal{H}^\mu(q)\twoheadrightarrow {\rm TL}^{\mu}(q)$ defined in \S\ref{Young}. The map $\rho^{\mu}$ induces a surjective ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebra homomorphism
${\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q))\twoheadrightarrow {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}^{\mu}(q))$, which we also denote by $\rho^\mu$. We obtain that
$$ \rho^{\mu}\circ \Psi_\mu : E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q) \rightarrow {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}^{\mu}(q))$$
is a surjective ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebra homomorphism.
In order for $\rho^{\mu}\circ \Psi_\mu$ to factor through $E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)/ E_\mu I_{d,n} \cong E_\mu {\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$, all elements of $E_\mu I_{d,n}$ have to belong to the kernel of $\rho^{\mu}\circ \Psi_\mu$. Since $I_{d,n}$ is the ideal generated by the element
$e_1e_2 g_{1,2}$, it is enough to show that $(\rho^{\mu}\circ \Psi_\mu)(e_1e_2 g_{1,2}) =0$. This is immediate by Proposition
\ref{imageofpsi}. Hence, if we denote by $\theta^{\mu}$ the natural surjection
$E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q) \twoheadrightarrow E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)/ E_\mu I_{d,n} \cong E_\mu {\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$, there exists
a unique ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebra homomorphism $\psi_\mu : E_\mu {\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q) \rightarrow {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}^{\mu}(q))$ such that
the following diagram is commutative:
\begin{equation}\label{diag1} \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\,
\diagram E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q) \dto^{\theta^{\mu}}&\rto^{\Psi_\mu}& &
{\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q)) \dto^{\rho^{\mu}}\\
E_\mu {\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q) & \rto^{\psi_\mu} & & {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}^{\mu}(q)) & & \enddiagram
\end{equation}
Since $\rho^{\mu}\circ \Psi_\mu$ is surjective, $\psi_\mu$ is also surjective.
\subsection{From Temperley--Lieb to ${\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$} We now consider the surjective
${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebra homomorphism:
$$ \theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu : {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q)) \rightarrow { E_\mu {\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)},$$
where $\Phi_\mu$ is the inverse of $\Psi_\mu$.
In order for $ \theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu$ to factor through ${\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}^{\mu}(q))$, we have to show
that $G_{i,i+1} M_{k,l}$ belongs to the kernel of $\theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu$
for all $i=1,\ldots,n-2$ such that $G_{i,i+1} \in \mathcal{H}^\mu(q)$ (that is, $\{i,i+1\} \subseteq J^{\mu}$)
and for all $k,l \in \{1,\ldots,m_\mu\}$.
Since $$G_{i,i+1} M_{k,l} = M_{k,1} G_{i,i+1} M_{1,1} M_{1,l}$$
and $\theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu$ is an homomorphism of ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebras, it is enough to show that
$(\theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu) ( G_{i,i+1} M_{1,1}) =0$.
Let $i=1,\ldots,n-2$ such that $G_{i,i+1} \in \mathcal{H}^\mu(q)$.
By definition of $\Phi_\mu$, and since $\pi_{\mu,1}=1$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{almost 2}
\Phi_\mu(G_{i,i+1} M_{1,1}) = \widetilde{\Phi}_\mu(U_\mu^{-1} G_{i,i+1} M_{1,1}U_\mu) =\widetilde{\Phi}_\mu(G_{i,i+1} M_{1,1}) = E_{\chi_1^\mu}g_{i,i+1} E_{\chi_1^\mu}.
\end{equation}
Now, since $G_{i,i+1} \in \mathcal{H}^\mu(q)$, there exists $j \in \{1,\ldots,d\}$ such that
$\mu_j>2$ and $G_{i,i+1} \in \mathcal{H}_{\mu_j}(q)$, that is,
$i \in \{ \mu_1+\cdots+\mu_{j-1}+1,\ldots, \mu_1+\cdots+\mu_{j-1}+\mu_j-2\}$. By definition of $\chi_1^\mu$, we have
$$ \chi_1^\mu(t_{ \mu_1+\cdots+\mu_{j-1}+1} ) = \cdots = \chi_1^\mu(t_{ \mu_1+\cdots+\mu_{j-1}+\mu_j} ) =\xi_j,$$
whence
$$ \chi_1^\mu(t_i) = \chi_1^\mu(t_{i+1})=\chi_1^\mu(t_{i+2}) = \xi_j.$$
Following \eqref{eiEchi}, we obtain
$$\Phi_\mu(G_{i,i+1} M_{1,1}) = E_{\chi_1^\mu}g_{i,i+1} E_{\chi_1^\mu} = E_{\chi_1^\mu}e_i e_{i+1} g_{i,i+1} E_{\chi_1^\mu}.$$
Since $e_i e_{i+1} g_{i,i+1} \in I_{d,n}$, we deduce that
$(\theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu) ( G_{i,i+1} M_{1,1}) =0$, as desired.
We conclude that there exists
a unique ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebra homomorphism $\phi_\mu : {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}^{\mu}(q)) \rightarrow E_\mu {\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q) $ such that the following diagram is commutative:
\begin{equation}\label{diag2} \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\,
\diagram E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q) \dto^{\theta^{\mu}}& & \lto_{\Phi_\mu}&
{\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q)) \dto^{\rho^{\mu}}\\
E_\mu {\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q) & & \lto_{\phi_\mu} & {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}^{\mu}(q)) & & \enddiagram
\end{equation}
Since $\theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu$ is surjective, $\phi_\mu$ is also surjective.
\subsection{An isomorphism theorem for the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra ${\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$}
We are now ready to prove the main result of this section.
\begin{thm} \label{thm-iso-CP}
Let $\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)$. The linear map $\psi_\mu$
is an isomorphism of ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebras with inverse map $\phi_\mu$. As a consequence, the map
$$\psi_n:= \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} \psi_\mu : {\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q) \rightarrow \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}^{\mu}(q))$$
is also an isomorphism of ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebras, with inverse map
$$\phi_n:= \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} \phi_\mu : \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}^{\mu}(q)) \rightarrow {\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q).$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Since the diagrams \eqref{diag1} and \eqref{diag2} are commutative, we have
$$ \rho^{\mu}\circ \Psi_\mu = \psi_\mu \circ \theta^{\mu} \quad \text{and} \quad \theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu = \phi_\mu \circ \rho^{\mu}.$$
This implies that
$$ \rho^{\mu}\circ \Psi_\mu \circ \Phi_\mu = \psi_\mu \circ \phi_\mu \circ \rho^{\mu} \quad \text{and} \quad
\theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu \circ \Psi_\mu = \phi_\mu \circ \psi_\mu \circ \theta^{\mu}.$$
By Theorem \ref{our iso}, $\Psi_\mu \circ \Phi_\mu = {\rm id}_{ {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q))}$
and $\Phi_\mu \circ \Psi_\mu = {\rm id}_{E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)}$, whence
$$ \rho^{\mu} = \psi_\mu \circ \phi_\mu \circ \rho^{\mu} \quad \text{and} \quad
\theta^{\mu} = \phi_\mu \circ \psi_\mu \circ \theta^{\mu}.$$
Since the maps $\rho^{\mu}$ and $ \theta^{\mu}$ are surjective, we obtain
$$\psi_\mu \circ \phi_\mu = {\rm id}_{ {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}^\mu(q))} \quad \text{and} \quad
\phi_\mu \circ \psi_\mu = {\rm id}_{E_\mu {\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)} ,$$
as desired.
\end{proof}
\subsection{A basis for the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra ${\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$}\label{subs-basis}
Let $n \in \mathbb{N}$.
Let $\underline{i}=(i_1,\ldots,i_p)$ and $\underline{k}=(k_1, \ldots k_p)$ be two $p$-tuplets of non-negative integers, with $0 \leqslant p \leqslant n-1$.
We denote by $\mathfrak{H}_n$ the set of pairs $(\underline{i},\underline{k})$ such that
$$1\leqslant i_1 < i_2< \cdots < i_p \leqslant n-1 \,\,\,\,\,\text{and}\,\,\,\,\, i_j - k_j > 0\,\,\,\,\,\forall\,j=1,\ldots,p.$$
For $(\underline{i},\underline{k}) \in \mathfrak{H}_n$, we set
$$G_{\underline{i},\underline{k}}:=(G_{i_1}G_{i_1-1}\ldots G_{i_1-k_1})(G_{i_2}G_{i_2-1}\ldots G_{i_2-k_2})\ldots (G_{i_p}G_{i_p-1}\ldots G_{i_p-k_p})\in \mathcal{H}_n(q).$$
We take $G_{\emptyset,\emptyset}$ to be equal to $1$.
We have that the set
$$\mathcal{B}_{\mathcal{H}_n(q)} := \{G_{\underline{i},\underline{k}} \,|\, (\underline{i},\underline{k}) \in \mathfrak{H}_n\} = \{G_w\,|\, w \in \mathfrak{S}_n\}$$
is the standard basis of $\mathcal{H}_n(q)$ as a ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-module.
Now, let us denote by $\mathfrak{T}_n$ the subset of $\mathfrak{H}_n$ consisting of the pairs $(\underline{i},\underline{k})$ such that
$$1\leqslant i_1 < i_2< \cdots < i_p \leqslant n-1 \,\,\,\,\,\text{and}\,\,\,\,\, 1\leqslant i_1-k_1 < i_2-k_2< \cdots < i_p-k_p \leqslant n-1.$$
Jones \cite{jo1} has shown that the set
$$\mathcal{B}_{{\rm TL}_n(q)} := \{G_{\underline{i},\underline{k}} \,|\, (\underline{i},\underline{k}) \in \mathfrak{T}_n\}$$
is a basis of ${\rm TL}_n(q)$ as a ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-module. We have $|\mathcal{B}_{{\rm TL}_n(q)} |=C_n$.
By Theorem \ref{thm-iso-CP}, we obtain the following basis for ${\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$:
\begin{prop}\label{FTLbasis}
The set
$$ \left\{ \phi_\mu (b_1b_2\ldots b_d\, M_{k,l}) \,|\, \mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n), b_i \in \mathcal{B}_{{\rm TL}_{\mu_i}(q)} \text{ for all }
i=1,\ldots,d, 1 \leqslant k,l \leqslant m_\mu \right\}$$
is a basis of \,${\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$ as a ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-module.
In particular, ${\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$ is a free ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-module of rank
$$\sum_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)}m_\mu^2\, C_{\mu_1}C_{\mu_2} \cdots C_{\mu_d}.$$
\end{prop}
\begin{rem}{\rm Theorem \ref{res2} is a consequence of Proposition \ref{FTLbasis}, but we decided to keep the proof that uses the irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm FTL}_{d,n}(q)$.}
\end{rem}
\section{Representation theory and an isomorphism theorem for the Complex Reflection Temperley--Lieb algebra}
In this section, we determine the irreducible representations and calculate the dimension of the Complex Reflection Temperley--Lieb algebra, which is also defined as a quotient of the Yokonuma--Hecke algebra of type $A$ \cite{gjkl2}.
We then prove an isomorphism theorem similar to Theorem \ref{thm-iso-CP} and produce a basis for the Complex Reflection Temperley--Lieb algebra.
Our results here reinforce the opinion that the Framisation of the Temperley--Lieb algebra is the most natural analogue of the Temperley--Lieb algebra in this case.
\subsection{The Complex Reflection Temperley--Lieb algebra ${\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$}
Let $j=1,\ldots,n$. We set
$$T_j := \frac{1}{d} \sum_{s=0}^{d-1}t_j^s .$$
We define the \emph{Complex Reflection Temperley--Lieb algebra} to be the quotient
${\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)/\mathfrak{I}_{d,n}$, where $\mathfrak{I}_{d,n}$ is the ideal generated by the element
$T_1 e_1e_2\, g_{1,2}$ (if $n \leqslant 2$, we take $\mathfrak{I}_{d,n} = \{0\}$).
The element $T_1$ commutes with $e_1e_2\, g_{1,2}$, since, for all $s=0,1,\ldots,d-1$, we have
$$ t_1^s e_1e_2\, g_{1,2} = t_1^s g_{1,2} e_1e_2 =
(t_1^s+ g_1t_2^s + g_2 t_1^s + g_1g_2t_3^s+g_2g_1t_2^s+ g_1g_2g_1t_3^s)e_1e_2$$
and
$t_1^s e_1 e_2 = t_2^s e_1 e_2 = t_3^s e_1 e_2 = e_1e_2 t_1^s\,$ due to Equation \eqref{eiti}.
Further, we have
$ T_i e_ie_{i+1}g_{i,i+1} \in \mathfrak{I}_{d,n}$ for all $i=1,\ldots,n-2$, since
$$T_i e_ie_{i+1}g_{i,i+1} = (g_1g_2 \ldots g_{n-1})^{i-1} \, T_1 e_1e_2 \,g_{1,2}\, (g_1g_2 \ldots g_{n-1})^{-(i-1)}.$$
\begin{rem}{\rm The ideal $\mathfrak{I}_{d,n}$ is the ideal generated by the element
$\sum_{0\leqslant a,b,c \leqslant d-1} t_1^a t_2^b t_3 ^c\,g_{1,2}$, which is the sum of all standard basis elements of ${\rm Y}_{d,3}(q)$.}
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}{\rm
For $d=1$, the Complex Reflection Temperley--Lieb algebra ${\rm CTL}_{1,n}(q)$ coincides with the classical Temperley--Lieb algebra $\mathrm{TL}_n(q)$.}
\end{rem}
\subsection{Irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$}
Since the algebra ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ is semisimple, the algebra
${\mathbb C}(q){\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q):={\mathbb C}(q) \otimes_{{\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]}{\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$ is also semisimple. Moreover, we have that the irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$ are
precisely the irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)$ that pass to the quotient. That is, given $\boldsymbol{\lambda} \in \mathcal{P}(d,n)$,
$V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ is an irreducible representation of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$ if and only if
$T_1e_1 e_2 g_{1,2} (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) =0$ for every standard $d$-tableau ${\mathcal{T}}$ of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$.
Let $\boldsymbol{\lambda} \in \mathcal{P}(d,n)$ and let $\mathcal{T}$ be a standard $d$-tableau ${\mathcal{T}}$ of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$.
Let $\{\xi_1,\dots,\xi_d\}$ be the set of all $d$-th roots of unity, ordered so that $\xi_1=1$. Recall that, following Theorem
\ref{thm-rep}, the action of the generators
$t_1,t_2,\ldots,t_n$ on the basis element $\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}$ of $V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ is defined as follows:
$$t_j(\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}})=\xi_{\mathrm{p}_j}\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}} \quad \text{ for } j=1,\dots,n,$$
where $\mathrm{p}_j:=\mathrm{p}(\mathcal{T}|j)$. We deduce that, for $j=1,\dots,n$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{T_j}
T_j(\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}} & \text{if } \mathrm{p}_{j} = 1 ; \\
0 & \text{if } \mathrm{p}_{j} \neq 1.
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{thm}\label{rep-ctl}
We have that $V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ is an irreducible representation of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$ if and only if
the Young diagram of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)}$ has at most two columns.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We have that
$V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ is an irreducible representation of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$ if and only if
$T_1e_1 e_2 g_{1,2} (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) =0$ for every standard $d$-tableau ${\mathcal{T}}=(\mathcal{T}^{(1)},\ldots,\mathcal{T}^{(d)})$ of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$.
Combining Equation \eqref{T_j} with Equation (\ref{eirep}) yields:
$$T_1e_1 e_2 g_{1,2} (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) = g_{1,2} e_1 e_2 T_1(\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}})
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
g_{1,2} (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) & \text{if } \mathrm{p}_{1} = \mathrm{p}_{2}=\mathrm{p}_{3}=1 ; \\
0 & \text{otherwise. }
\end{array}\right.
$$
Now, if $ \mathrm{p}_{1} = \mathrm{p}_{2}=\mathrm{p}_{3}=1$, then
$g_{1,2}$ acts on $\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}$ in the same way that $G_{1,2}$ acts on $\mathrm{v}_{_{{\mathcal{T}}^{(1)}}}$ (replacing the entries greater than $3$ by entries in $\{4,\ldots,|\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)}|\}$).
Following Proposition \ref{classical case},
we have $g_{1,2} (\mathbf{v}_{_{\mathcal{T}}}) = 0$ if and only if the Young diagram of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)}$ has at most two columns, as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}{\rm If the roots of unity $\{\xi_1,\dots,\xi_d\}$ are ordered so that $\xi_i=1$ for some $i>1$, then the above proposition holds for $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(i)}$ in the place of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)}$.}
\end{rem}
\subsection{The dimension of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$} We will now use the complete description of the irreducible representations of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$ by
Theorem \ref{rep-ctl} to obtain a dimension formula for ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$.
\begin{thm} We have
$${\rm dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)}({\mathbb C}(q){\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)) = \sum_{k=0}^n \binom{n}{k}^2 C_k\, (d-1)^{n-k} (n-k)! .$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let us denote by $\mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(n)$ the set of partitions of of $n$ whose Young diagram has at most two columns. By Theorem \ref{rep-ctl}, and since the algebra ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$ is semisimple,
we have
$${\rm dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)}({\mathbb C}(q){\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)) =
\sum_{ \begin{array}{c}\scriptstyle{\boldsymbol{\lambda} \in \mathcal{P}(d,n)}\\
\scriptstyle{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)} \in \mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(| \boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)} |)}\end{array}}
\mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}})^2,$$
where $\mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}})$ is the number of standard $d$-tableaux of shape $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$.
Let $k \in \{0,1,\ldots,n\}$. Let
$\boldsymbol{\lambda} \in \mathcal{P}(d,n)$ be such that $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)} \in \mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(k)$, where $k = | \boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)} |$.
Since there are $\binom{n}{k}$ ways to choose the numbers in $\{1,\ldots,n\}$ that will be placed in the nodes of the Young diagram of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)}$, we have
$$ \mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}) = \binom{n}{k} \, \mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)}}) \,
\mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{(\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(2)},\ldots, \boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(d)})}),$$
where $V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)}}$ is the irreducible representation of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm TL}_{k}(q)$ labelled by $\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(1)}$ and
$V_{(\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(2)},\ldots, \boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(d)})}$ is the irreducible representation of ${\mathbb C}(q){\rm Y}_{d-1,n-k}(q)$ labelled by
$(\boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(2)},\ldots, \boldsymbol{\lambda}^{(d)}) \in \mathcal{P}(d-1,n-k)$.
We deduce that
$$ {\rm dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)}({\mathbb C}(q){\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)) = \sum_{k=0}^n \binom{n}{k}^2 \left(
\sum_{ \begin{array}{c}\scriptstyle{\lambda \in \mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(k)}\\
\scriptstyle{\boldsymbol{\mu} \in \mathcal{P}(d-1,n-k)}\end{array}}
\mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\lambda})^2 \,
\mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\mu}})^2\right).
$$
Now, we have that the sum inside the parenthesis is equal to
$$ \left( \sum_{\lambda \in \mathcal{P}^{\leqslant 2}(k)}
\mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\lambda})^2 \right) \left(
\sum_{\boldsymbol{\mu} \in \mathcal{P}(d-1,n-k)}
\mathrm{dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)} (V_{\boldsymbol{\mu}})^2 \right) = C_k\, (d-1)^{n-k} (n-k)! \, ,$$
whence we obtain the desired result.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}{\rm
Note that the dimension of ${\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$ can be rewritten, using the set
${\rm Comp}_d(n)$, in the following way:
$${\rm dim}_{{\mathbb C}(q)}({\mathbb C}(q){\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)) = \sum_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} \left( \frac{n!}{\mu_1!\mu_2!\ldots \mu_d!}\right)^2 C_{\mu_1} \, \mu_2! \ldots \mu_d! ,$$
using the fact that
$$ \sum_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} \frac{n!}{\mu_1!\mu_2!\ldots \mu_d!} = d^n.$$
}
\end{rem}
\subsection{An isomorphism theorem for the Complex Reflection Temperley--Lieb algebra ${\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$}
We will now reuse the notation of Section \ref{sec-iso}, and assume again, without loss of generality, that $\xi_1=1$.
For all $j=1,\ldots,n$ and $\chi \in {\rm Irr}(\mathcal{A}_{d,n})$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{TjEchi}
T_j E_\chi = E_\chi T_j= \frac{1}{d}\sum_{s=0}^{d-1} \chi(t_j)^s E_\chi =
\left\{ \begin{array}{cl}
E_\chi & \text{ if } \chi(t_j) = 1 ; \\ & \\
0 & \text{ if } \chi(t_j) \neq 1.
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{prop}\label{imageofpsi2}
Let $\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)$ and $k \in \{1,\ldots,m_\mu\}$. We have
$$
\Psi_\mu(E_{\chi_k^\mu}T_1e_1e_2g_{1,2}) =
\left\{ \begin{array}{cl}
G_{1,2} \,M_{k,k} & \text{ if } \chi_k^\mu(t_1)=\chi_k^\mu(t_2)=\chi_k^\mu(t_3)=1; \\ & \\
0 & \text{ otherwise } .
\end{array}\right.
$$
Thus, $\Psi_\mu(E_\mu T_1 e_1e_2g_{1,2})$ is a diagonal matrix in $ {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q))$
with all non-zero coefficients being equal to $G_{1,2}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Combining \eqref{TjEchi} with \eqref{i-1} yields:
\begin{equation}\label{Tjplus}
E_{\chi_k^\mu}T_1e_1e_2g_{1,2} =
\left\{ \begin{array}{cl}
E_{\chi_k^\mu}g_{1,2} & \text{ if } \chi_k^\mu(t_1)=\chi_k^\mu(t_2)=\chi_k^\mu(t_3)=1; \\ & \\
0 & \text{ otherwise } .
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
If now $\chi_k^\mu(t_1)=\chi_k^\mu(t_2)=\chi_k^\mu(t_3)=1$, then the following hold: \smallbreak
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mu_1 > 2$\,; \smallbreak
\item $w(\chi_k^\mu)=\chi_k^\mu$ for all $w \in {\langle s_1,s_2\rangle} \subseteq \mathfrak{S}_n$\,; \smallbreak
\item there exists
$\sigma \in {\langle s_4,\ldots,s_{n-1} \rangle} \subseteq \mathfrak{S}_n$ such that
$\chi_k^{\mu} = \sigma(\chi_1^{\mu})$, since
$\chi_1^\mu(t_1)=\chi_1^\mu(t_2)=\chi_1^\mu(t_3)=1$.
\end{itemize}
We have $\sigma \mathfrak{S}_\mu = \pi_{\mu,k} \mathfrak{S}_\mu$, and so there exists $x \in \mathfrak{S}_\mu$ such that
$\sigma=\pi_{\mu, k}x$ and $\ell(\sigma)=\ell(\pi_{\mu,k})+\ell(x)$. Thus, the product of a reduced expression for $\pi_{\mu,k}$ and a reduced expression for $x$ yields a reduced expression for $\sigma$. However, all reduced expressions for $\sigma$ have all their
factors in $\{ s_4,\ldots,s_{n-1} \}$ (see, for example, \cite[Proposition 1.2.10]{GePf}).
Therefore, $\pi_{\mu,k} \in {\langle s_4,\ldots,s_{n-1} \rangle}$, whence we obtain that $\pi_{\mu,k}w=w\pi_{\mu,k}$ for all $w \in {\langle s_1,s_2\rangle} $.
Thus, similarly to \eqref{almost 1}, we have
$$ \Psi_\mu(E_{\chi_k^\mu}g_{1,2}) = \sum_{w \in {\langle s_1,s_2\rangle}}\Psi_\mu(E_{\chi_k^\mu}g_w) =
\sum_{w \in{\langle s_1,s_2\rangle}} G_{\pi_{\mu,k}^{-1}w\pi_{\mu,k}} M_{k,k} =
\sum_{w \in{\langle s_1,s_2\rangle}} G_{w} M_{k,k} = G_{1,2}\, M_{k,k}. $$
Combining this with \eqref{Tjplus} yields the desired result.
\end{proof}
\begin{exmp}{\rm Let us consider again the case $d=2$ and $n=4$ as in Example \ref{example1}. We have
$$
\Psi_\mu(E_{\chi_k^\mu}T_1e_1e_2g_{1,2}) =
\left\{ \begin{array}{cl}
G_{1,2} & \text{ if $\mu=(4,0)$ }, \\ & \\
G_{1,2}\,M_{1,1} & \text{ if $\mu=(3,1)$ and $k=1$ }, \\ & \\
0 & \text{ otherwise } .
\end{array}\right.$$}
\end{exmp}
We now consider the natural surjection $\rho_1 : \mathcal{H}_{\mu_1}(q) \twoheadrightarrow \mathcal{H}_{\mu_1}(q)/I_{\mu_1} \cong {\rm TL}_{\mu_1}(q)$, where $I_{\mu_1}$ is the ideal generated by $G_{1,2}$ if $\mu_1 >2$ and
$I_{\mu_1} = \{0\}$ if $\mu_1 \leqslant 2$.
Let us denote by $\mathcal{H}^{(\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_d)}(q)$ the tensor
product of Iwahori--Hecke algebras $\mathcal{H}_{\mu_2}(q) \otimes \cdots \otimes \mathcal{H}_{\mu_d}(q)$.
Then the map
${\rm P}_{1}:= \rho_1 \otimes {\rm id}_{\mathcal{H}^{(\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_d)}(q)} $
is a surjective ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebra homomorphism
$\mathcal{H}^\mu(q)\twoheadrightarrow {\rm TL}_{\mu_1}(q) \otimes
\mathcal{H}^{(\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_d)}(q)$.
This in turn induces a surjective ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebra homomorphism
${\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q))\twoheadrightarrow {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}_{\mu_1}(q) \otimes \mathcal{H}^{(\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_d)}(q))$, which we also denote by ${\rm P}_{1}$.
We obtain that
$$ {\rm P}_{1}\circ \Psi_\mu : E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q) \rightarrow {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}_{\mu_1}(q) \otimes \mathcal{H}^{(\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_d)}(q))$$
is a surjective ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebra homomorphism.
In order for ${\rm P}_{1}\circ \Psi_\mu$ to factor through $E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)/ E_\mu \mathfrak{I}_{d,n} \cong E_\mu {\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$, all elements of $E_\mu \mathfrak{I}_{d,n}$ have to belong to the kernel of ${\rm P}_{1}\circ \Psi_\mu$. Since $\mathfrak{I}_{d,n}$ is the ideal generated by the element
$T_1e_1e_2 g_{1,2}$, it is enough to show that $({\rm P}_{1}\circ \Psi_\mu)(T_1e_1e_2 g_{1,2}) =0$. This is immediate by Proposition
\ref{imageofpsi2}. Hence, if we denote by $\Theta^{\mu}$ the natural surjection
$E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q) \twoheadrightarrow E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q)/ E_\mu \mathfrak{I}_{d,n} \cong E_\mu{\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$, there exists
a unique ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebra homomorphism $\overline{\psi}_\mu : E_\mu{\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q) \rightarrow {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}_{\mu_1}(q) \otimes \mathcal{H}^{(\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_d)}(q))$ such that
the following diagram is commutative:
\begin{equation}\label{diag3} \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\,
\diagram E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q) \dto^{\Theta^{\mu}}&\rto^{\Psi_\mu}& &
{\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q)) \dto^{{\rm P}_{1}}\\
E_\mu {\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q) & \rto^{\overline{\psi}_\mu} & & {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}_{\mu_1}(q) \otimes \mathcal{H}^{(\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_d)}(q))& & \enddiagram
\end{equation}
Since ${\rm P}_{1}\circ \Psi_\mu$ is surjective, $\overline{\psi}_\mu$ is also surjective.
Let us now consider the surjective
${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebra homomorphism:
$$ \Theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu : {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q)) \rightarrow { E_\mu {\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)},$$
where $\Phi_\mu$ is the inverse of $\Psi_\mu$.
In order for $ \Theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu$ to factor through ${\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}_{\mu_1}(q) \otimes \mathcal{H}^{(\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_d)}(q))$, we have to show
that $G_{1,2} M_{k,l}$ belongs to the kernel of $\Theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu$
if $\mu_1 >2$.
Since $$G_{1,2} M_{k,l} = M_{k,1} G_{1,2} M_{1,1} M_{1,l}$$
and $\Theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu$ is an homomorphism of ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebras, it is enough to show that
$(\Theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu) ( G_{1,2} M_{1,1}) =0$.
Similarly to \eqref{almost 2}, by definition of $\Phi_\mu$, and since $\pi_{\mu,1}=1$, we have
$$\Phi_\mu(G_{1,2} M_{1,1}) = E_{\chi_1^\mu}g_{1,2} E_{\chi_1^\mu}.$$
Now, by definition of $\chi_1^\mu$, we have
$$ \chi_1^\mu(t_{1} ) = \cdots = \chi_1^\mu(t_{ \mu_1} ) =\xi_1=1.$$
Since $\mu_1>2$, we deduce that
$$ \chi_1^\mu(t_1) = \chi_1^\mu(t_{2})=\chi_1^\mu(t_{3}) = 1.$$
Following \eqref{Tjplus}, we obtain
$$\Phi_\mu(G_{1,2} M_{1,1}) = E_{\chi_1^\mu}g_{1,2} E_{\chi_1^\mu} = E_{\chi_1^\mu}T_1e_1 e_{2} g_{1,2} E_{\chi_1^\mu}.$$
Since $T_1 e_1 e_{2} g_{1,2} \in \mathfrak{I}_{d,n}$, we deduce that
$(\Theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu) ( G_{1,2}\, M_{1,1}) =0$, as desired.
We conclude that there exists
a unique ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebra homomorphism $$\overline{\phi}_\mu : {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}_{\mu_1}(q) \otimes \mathcal{H}^{(\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_d)}(q)) \rightarrow E_\mu {\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q) $$ such that the following diagram is commutative:
\begin{equation}\label{diag4} \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\,
\diagram E_\mu {\rm Y}_{d,n}(q) \dto^{\Theta^{\mu}}& & \lto_{\Phi_\mu}&
{\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}(\mathcal{H}^\mu(q)) \dto^{{\rm P}_{1}}\\
E_\mu{\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q) & & \lto_{\overline{\phi}_\mu} & {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}_{\mu_1}(q) \otimes \mathcal{H}^{(\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_d)}(q)) & & \enddiagram
\end{equation}
Since $\Theta^{\mu}\circ \Phi_\mu$ is surjective, $\overline{\phi}_\mu$ is also surjective.
Similarly to Theorem \ref{thm-iso-CP}, we obtain the following result:
\begin{thm} \label{thm-iso-CP2}
Let $\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)$. The linear map $\overline{\psi}_\mu$
is an isomorphism of ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebras with inverse map $\overline{\phi}_\mu$. As a consequence, the map
$$\overline{\psi}_n:= \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} \overline{\psi}_\mu : {\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q) \rightarrow \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}_{\mu_1}(q) \otimes \mathcal{H}^{(\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_d)}(q))$$
is also an isomorphism of ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-algebras, with inverse map
$$\overline{\phi}_n:= \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} \overline{\phi}_\mu : \bigoplus_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} {\rm Mat}_{m_\mu}({\rm TL}_{\mu_1}(q) \otimes \mathcal{H}^{(\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_d)}(q)) \rightarrow {\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q).$$
\end{thm}
\subsection{A basis for the Complex ReflectionTemperley--Lieb algebra $ {\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$}
By Theorem \ref{thm-iso-CP2}, using the notation of \S \ref{subs-basis}, we obtain the following basis for ${\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$:
\begin{prop}\label{FTLbasis}
The set
$$ \left\{ \overline{\phi}_\mu (b_1b_2\ldots b_d\, M_{k,l}) \,|\, \mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n), b_1 \in \mathcal{B}_{{\rm TL}_{\mu_1}(q)},
b_i \in \mathcal{B}_{\mathcal{H}_{\mu_i}(q)}
\text{ for all }
i=2,\ldots,d, 1 \leqslant k,l \leqslant m_\mu \right\}$$
is a basis of ${\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$ as a ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-module.
In particular, ${\rm CTL}_{d,n}(q)$ is a free ${\mathbb C}[q,q^{-1}]$-module of rank
$$\sum_{\mu \in {\rm Comp}_d(n)} m_\mu^2\, C_{\mu_1} {\mu_2}! \ldots {\mu_d}!.$$
\end{prop}
|
\section{Introduction}
It is widely recognized that the recent trend in computational physics
is parallel computing with a large number of computational resources. This recognition
is supported by the fact that all of the top 100 supercomputers released in November 2014
consist of more than ten thousand cores.~\cite{top500}
Furthermore, computation with a graphics processing unit (GPU) has been a hot topic in recent
years~\cite{GPU01, GPU02, GPU03, GPU04, GPU05, GPU06, GPU07, GPU08, GPU09} because it enables us
to perform massively parallel computing at a fraction of the cost. To fully utilize these parallel
architectures, the development of efficient parallel algorithms is indispensable. Such parallel
algorithms are required particularly in long-range interacting systems because of their high
computational cost.
One example in which the parallelization of computation has been successfully achieved
is the molecular dynamic (MD) method (see Refs.~\citen{Heffelfinger00,Larsson11}, and references therein).
If there are only short-range forces, parallel computations are performed
by dividing the simulation box into cubic domains and assigning each domain to
each processor~\cite{Fincham89}. If the system involves long-range forces
such as the Coulomb ones, long-range forces for all the molecules are
efficiently calculated with ${\cal O}(N \log N)$ or ${\cal O}(N)$ computational time
($N$ is the number of molecules) by sophisticated methods such as
the Barnes-Hut tree algorithm,~\cite{Appel85,Barnes86,Makino90}
first multipole method,~\cite{Greengard88,Carrier88}
and particle mesh Ewald method.~\cite{PME01,PME02}
Because these methods can be parallelized, it is possible to perform parallel computations
in the MD methods even in the presence of long-range forces.
The main reason why parallel computations in the MD methods are relatively simple
lies in their simultaneous feature. In the MD methods, forces acting
on all the molecules are calculated at the beginning of each step, and new positions of
molecules in the next time step are determined simultaneously using forces calculated
in advance. In contrast, in a normal Monte-Carlo (MC) method, elements such as particles and spins
are moved one at a time. This sequential feature of the MC method makes parallelization difficult.
If the system involves only short-range interactions, it is still possible to perform parallel
computations in the MC method. For example, MC simulations in lattice systems can be
parallelized by a checkerboard decomposition.~\cite{LandauBinder_checkerboard}
Even in off-lattice systems, parallel computations are still possible by
a spatial decomposition method.~\cite{HeffelfingerLewitt96,Uhlherr02,RenOrkoulas07,Sadigh12}
The spatial-decomposition technique is also used in the kinetic (event-driven) MC method in short-range
interacting systems to parallelize the
computation.~\cite{Lubachevsky87,Korniss99,Martinez08,Arampatzis12}
However, such a spatial-decomposition method does not work in long-range interacting systems
because all the elements interact with each other. Furthermore, the above-mentioned efficient algorithms
used in the MD method to calculate long-range forces do not work in the MC method
because these methods calculate long-range forces (and potentials) {\it for all the elements} at once.
In the MC methods, long-range forces calculated for all the elements become invalid
after a part of the elements are updated because of the sequential feature of the MC method.
Therefore, it is difficult for long-range interacting systems to perform parallel
computations in a normal (and most widely applicable) single-update MC method.
To overcome this difficulty, we utilize the stochastic cutoff (SCO) method.~\cite{SCO,Sasaki10,SCO_book}
The SCO method is a Monte-Carlo method for long-range interacting lattice systems.
The basic idea of the method is to switch long-range interactions $V_{ij}$ stochastically
to either zero or a pseudointeraction ${\bar V}_{ij}$ using the Stochastic Potential
Switching (SPS) algorithm~\cite{Mak05,MakSharma07}. The SPS algorithm enables us to switch
the potentials with the detailed balance condition strictly satisfied. Therefore,
the SCO method does not involve any approximation. Fukui and Todo have
developed an efficient MC method based on a similar strategy using different
pseudointeractions and different way of switching interactions~\cite{FukuiTodo09}.
Because most of the distant and weak interactions are eliminated by being switched
to zero, the SCO method markedly reduces the number of interactions and computational
time in long-range interacting systems. For example, in a two-dimensional magnetic
dipolar system, to which we will apply our MC method later,
the number of potentials per spin and the computational time for a single-spin update
are reduced from ${\cal O}(N)$ to ${\cal O}(1)$.
This reduction of potentials also makes it possible to subdivide the lattice into noninteracting
interpenetrating sublattices, i.e., so that the elements on a single sublattice
do not interact with each other. This subdivision enables us to parallelize the computation.
However, one problem is that there is no trivial way of finding such a subdivision.
In the case of Ising models on a square lattice with nearest-neighbouring interactions,
the checkerboard decomposition is responsible for it. In contrast, there is no trivial
subdivision in the this case because interactions are stochastically switched.
To resolve this problem, we numerically solve the vertex coloring on a graph created by
the potential switching procedure. This computation is performed in a parallel fashion
using an algorithm proposed by Kuhn and Wattenhofer.~\cite{KuhnWattenhofer06,book_KW}
The paper is organized as follows: In Sect.~\ref{sec:method}, we briefly explain the SCO method
and describe the parallel computation of the vertex coloring, which is a key feature of the present method.
In Sect.~\ref{sec:result}, we show the results obtained by applying the present method to a two-dimensional
magnetic dipolar system. In Sect.~\ref{sec:conclusions}, we give our conclusions.
\section{Methods}
\label{sec:method}
\subsection{Stochastic Cutoff (SCO) Method}
\label{subsec:SCO}
In this subsection, we briefly explain the SCO method. We consider a system with pairwise long-range
interactions described by a Hamiltonian ${\cal H}=\sum_{i<j}{V}_{ij}(\bm{S}_i,\bm{S}_j)$,
where $\bm{S}_i$ is a variable associated with the $i$-th element of the system. In the SCO method,
$V_{ij}$ is stochastically switched to either $0$ or a pseudointeraction $\bar{V}_{ij}$ as
\begin{equation}
V_{ij}(\bm{S}_i,\bm{S}_j)=
\begin{cases}
0& prob.:P_{ij}(\bm{S}_i,\bm{S}_j),\\
\overline{V}_{ij}(\bm{S}_i,\bm{S}_j) & prob.:1-P_{ij}(\bm{S}_i,\bm{S}_j).
\label{sps}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
The probability $P_{ij}$ and the pseudointeraction $\overline{V}_{ij}$ are given by
\begin{equation}
P_{ij}(\bm{S}_i,\bm{S}_j) = \exp[\beta(V_{ij}(\bm{S}_i,\bm{S}_j)- V_{ij}^{\text{max}})],
\label{eqn:Pij}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\overline{V}_{ij}(\bm{S}_i,\bm{S}_j) = V_{ij}(\bm{S}_i,\bm{S}_j)-\beta^{-1}\log[1-P_{ij}(\bm{S}_i,\bm{S}_j)],
\end{equation}
where $\beta$ is the inverse temperature and $V_{ij}^\text{max}$ is a constant equal to (or greater than)
the maximum value of $V_{ij}$ over all $\bm{S}_i$ and $\bm{S}_j$. With this potential switching,
the algorithm proceeds as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(A)] Switch the potentials $V_{ij}$ to either $0$ or $\bar{V}_{ij}$ with the probability of $P_{ij}$ or $1-P_{ij}$,
respectively.
\item[(B)] Perform a standard MC simulation with the switched Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}
{\cal H}'=\sum\nolimits_{ij}'\bar{V}_{ij}(\bm{S}_i,\bm{S}_j),
\end{equation}
for $n_{\text{sw}}$ MC steps, where $\sum_{ij}'$ runs over all the potentials switched to $\bar{V}_{ij}$ and
one MC step is defined by one trial for each $\bm{S}_i$ to be updated.
\item[(C)] Return to (A).
\end{itemize}
In the SCO method, an efficient method is employed to reduce the computational time of
the potential switching in step (A) (see Ref.~\citen{SCO} for details). As a result,
the computational time in step (A) becomes comparable to that in step (B) per MC step.
For example, in the case of a two-dimensional magnetic dipolar system, both computational
times are reduced to ${\cal O}(N)$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{67097Fig1.eps}
\caption{(Color online) Schematic illustration of parallel computations of the SCO method.
A vertex denotes a variable $\bm{S}_i$ and an edge denotes a potential
$V_{ij}$ or $\overline{V}_{ij}$.
In step (1), each potential is switched to either $0$ or $\overline{V}_{ij}$.
The edges whose potentials are switched to $0$ are eliminated in the subsequent steps.
In step (2), the vertex coloring of the graph is solved numerically in a parallel fashion.
In step (3), variables with a specific color are updated simultaneously by a
standard MC simulation. This procedure is carried out for all the colors.
}
\label{fig:outline_parallelSCO}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Outline of parallel computations of the SCO method}
Figure~\ref{fig:outline_parallelSCO} shows a schematic illustration of parallel computations
of the SCO method. A vertex denotes a variable $\bm{S}_i$ and an edge denotes
a potential $V_{ij}$ or $\overline{V}_{ij}$. In step (1), each potential is switched to
either $0$ or $\overline{V}_{ij}$. The edges whose potentials are switched to $0$
are eliminated in the subsequent steps. Because each potential is switched independently
with the probability $P_{ij}$, we can easily parallelize the computation in this step.
In step (2), the vertex coloring of the graph created in step (1) is solved
numerically in a parallel fashion. The parallel computation of the vertex coloring
will be explained in detail in the next subsection. Lastly, we perform a standard
MC simulation with the switched Hamiltonian ${\cal H}'$ in step (3). It is apparent
from the definition of the vertex coloring that variables with the same color
do not interact with each other. Therefore, we can update variables with a specific
color by parallel computation, as we do in MC simulations of Ising models
by a checkerboard decomposition. By doing this simultaneous update for all the colors,
we can parallelize the MC calculation in step (3).
\subsection{Parallel computation of the vertex coloring}
\label{subsec:parallelColoring}
In this subsection, we briefly explain parallel computation of the vertex coloring.
We refer the reader to the book in Ref.~\citen{book_KW} for more details.
By solving the vertex coloring in a parallel fashion, we can perform all the three steps
mentioned in the previous subsection by parallel computation.
We hereafter call the vertex coloring by parallel computation {\it distributed graph coloring}.
The organization of this subsection is as follows: In Sect.~\ref{subsubsec:basis}, we explain
the basis of the distributed graph coloring. In Sect.~\ref{subsubsec:BCR}, we explain
a basic color reduction algorithm for the distributed graph coloring.
This algorithm is used in an algorithm proposed by Kuhn and Wattenhofer,~\cite{KuhnWattenhofer06,book_KW}
which is used in this study. This algorithm
is explained in Sect.~\ref{subsubsec:KW}.
\subsubsection{Basis of the distributed graph coloring}
\label{subsubsec:basis}
We start with the introduction of several technical terms in the graph theory. The degree of a vertex is
the number of edges that connect the vertex with others, and the maximum degree
is the largest value of the degrees of a graph. In general, it is known that a graph
with a maximum degree $\Delta$ can be colored with $\Delta+1$ colors, while,
in most cases, it is not the smallest number of colors needed to color the graph.
The aim of the distributed graph coloring is to color a graph with $\Delta+1$ colors
by parallel computation.
In the distributed graph coloring, each vertex is initially colored by different colors,
i.e., a graph is colored with $N$ colors, where $N$ is the number of vertices.
The number of colors is gradually reduced from $N$ to $\Delta +1$ by repeating synchronous communication
and parallel computation. In synchronous communication, vertices communicate with each other
to know the colors of their neighbouring vertices. In parallel computation, all vertices
simultaneously recolor themselves. The new color is locally calculated by using
the information of the neighbouring colors obtained in the preceding communication.
Vertices do not communicate with each other in parallel computation.
The number of times of synchronous communications required to accomplish a $(\Delta+1)$-coloring
is called {\it running time}, hereafter denoted as $t_{\rm R}$.
The main aim of the distributed graph coloring is to reduce $t_{\rm R}$ as much as possible.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[clip,width=8cm]{67097Fig2.eps}
\caption{(Color online) A graph and its initial coloring to which we apply the BCR algorithm.
The number of vertices $N$ and the maximum degree $\Delta$ are $8$ and $3$, respectively.
The number of colors $\alpha$ is $6$. The vertices recolored in step (2) and those
recolored in step (2)' are enclosed by solid circles and dashed ones, respectively.}
\label{fig:BCR_UpdatedVertex}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Basic color reduction algorithm}
\label{subsubsec:BCR}
The basic color reduction (BCR) algorithm is one of the most fundamental algorithms
for the distributed graph coloring. Figure~\ref{fig:BCR_UpdatedVertex} shows a graph
and its coloring to which we apply the BCR algorithm. We assume that the number of vertices
and the maximum degree of the graph are $N$ and $\Delta$, respectively.
The graph is initially colored with $\alpha$ colors $(\Delta+1 < \alpha \le N)$ and the coloring is valid,
i.e., no adjacent vertices share the same color. The color of a vertex is specified
by an integer between 1 and $\alpha$.
In the BCR algorithm, the number of colors is reduced from $\alpha$ to $\alpha-1$ by the following steps:~\cite{book_DBR_BCR}
\begin{itemize}
\item [(1)] Each vertex communicates with each other to obtain the colors of the neighbouring vertices.
\item [(2)] Each vertex recolors itself if its color is $\alpha$. The new color is chosen
from a palette between $1$ and $\Delta+1$ by using the information obtained in step (1).
\end{itemize}
Steps (1) and (2) correspond to synchronous communication and parallel computation
in the previous subsection, respectively. We can always choose a new color among $\Delta+1$
colors because the maximum degree of the graph is $\Delta$. It is also important to notice that
the vertices with the color $\alpha$ cannot be adjacent to each other because the initial coloring
is valid (see the vertices enclosed by a solid circle in Fig.~\ref{fig:BCR_UpdatedVertex}).
This means that the new coloring is also valid even if each vertex with the color $\alpha$
simultaneously changes its color according to the information of the neighbouring colors.
The BCR algorithm reduces the number of colors one at a time by repeating these two steps.
Therefore, the running time $t_{\rm R}$ to accomplish a $(\Delta+1)$-coloring
from an initial $N$-coloring is $N-\Delta-1$.
When we implemented the BCR algorithm in our simulation, we slightly modified the algorithm to improve its efficiency.
To be specific, we modified step (2) in the following manner:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(2)'] Each vertex recolors itself if its color is locally maximum. The new color is chosen
from a palette between $1$ and $\Delta+1$ using the information obtained in step (1).
\end{itemize}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:BCR_UpdatedVertex}, the vertices recolored in steps (2)' and (2)
are enclosed by dashed circles and solid ones, respectively. We see that the former involves the latter.
This means that the running time is reduced by this modification. We also find in Fig.~\ref{fig:BCR_UpdatedVertex}
that the vertices recolored in step (2)' are not adjacent to each other because they are locally maximum.
Therefore, the new coloring is also valid by the same reason as before. A demerit of this modification lies
in the computational cost to check whether the color of a vertex is locally maximum.
However, this demerit was not significant in our simulations because the degrees of graphs were not so large.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[clip,width=8cm]{67097Fig3.eps}
\caption{(Color online) Schematic illustration of the KW algorithm.
The number of vertices $N$ is related to the maximum degree $\Delta$
by $N=(\Delta+1)\times 2^M$ with $M=2$.
After two groups $G_1(1)$ and $G_1(2)$ are made by integrating two adjacent
groups at level $0$, we apply the color reductions $R_1(1)$ and $R_1(2)$
to the groups $G_1(1)$ and $G_1(2)$, respectively.
These two color reductions are performed simultaneously.
The number of colors is halved from $4(\Delta+1)$ to
$2(\Delta+1)$ by the two color reductions.
We then apply the color reduction $R_2(1)$ to the group $G_2(1)$,
which is made by integrating the two groups $G_1(1)$ and $G_1(2)$.
As a result, the number of colors is reduced
from $2(\Delta+1)$ to $\Delta +1$.}
\label{fig:KWtree}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{KW algorithm}
\label{subsubsec:KW}
In this subsection, we explain an algorithm proposed by Kuhn and Wattenhofer.~\cite{KuhnWattenhofer06}
We hereafter call it the KW algorithm. The KW algorithm markedly reduces the running time $t_{\rm R}$
by applying the BCR algorithm recursively. As mentioned above, we used this algorithm to numerically
solve the vertex coloring.
Figure~\ref{fig:KWtree} shows a schematic illustration of the KW algorithm.
For simplicity, we assume that the number of vertices $N$ and the maximum degree $\Delta$
are related by $N=(\Delta+1)\times 2^M$, where $M$ is an integer.
Generalization to other cases is straightforward. We suppose that all the vertices are
initially colored by different colors. The color is specified by an integer between $1$ and $N$.
The KW algorithm starts by partitioning all vertices into $N/(\Delta+1)=2^M$ groups according to their colors.
We hereafter denote them by $G_0(k)$ $(k=1,2,\cdots,2^{M})$, where the subscript ``0'' represents
the level of the grouping. In this partitioning, vertices whose color is between $1+(k-1)(\Delta+1)$ and $k(\Delta+1)$
are assigned to the $k$-th group $G_{0}(k)$. We next make groups at level $1$ by integrating two adjacent groups
at level $0$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:KWtree}). We denote them by $G_1(k)$ $(k=1,2,\cdots,2^{M-1})$.
Just after the integration, $2(\Delta+1)$ vertices in the group $G_1(k)$ are colored by $2(\Delta+1)$ colors.
We then apply the BCR algorithm to reduce the number of colors from $2(\Delta+1)$ to $\Delta+1$.
We denote this color reduction applied to vertices in the group $G_1(k)$ by $R_1(k)$.
We can simultaneously perform all the color reductions at level $1$ because there is no overlap of colors
among the groups. In the color reduction $R_1(k)$, the color of vertices is changed so that the new color
is between $1+(k-1)(\Delta+1)$ and $k(\Delta+1)$. This guarantees that there is no overlap of colors
among groups at level $1$ even after the color reductions. As a result of all the color reductions at level $1$,
the number of colors used for coloring the whole graph is reduced from $N$ to $N/2$.
By repeating the integration of two adjacent groups and the subsequent parallel color reduction $M$ times,
the number of colors is reduced to $\Delta+1$.
We next consider the running time of the KW algorithm.
At a level $p$, there are $2^{M-p}$ groups.
In each group, the number of colors is reduced
from $2(\Delta+1)$ to $\Delta+1$ by the BCR algorithm. Now, the point is that we can simultaneously
perform BCRs in all the $2^{M-p}$ groups. To be specific, we simultaneously perform BCRs in all the groups
to reduce the number of colors by one, and perform synchronous communication just once
for the next color reductions. By repeating this procedure $\Delta+1$ times,
we can reduce the numbers of colors of all the groups from $2(\Delta+1)$ to $\Delta+1$.
The running time to achieve this color reduction at the level $p$ is $\Delta+1$.
Because the number of levels is $M$, the total running time to reduce
the number of colors from $N$ to $\Delta+1$ is estimated to be
\begin{equation}
t_{\rm R} = (\Delta +1) \times M = (\Delta +1)\log_2\left(\frac{N}{\Delta+1}\right),
\end{equation}
where we have used the relation $N=(\Delta+1)2^{M}$. If $N >> \Delta$,
this running time is much shorter than
that of the BCR algorithm, which is, as mentioned above, on the order of $N$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[clip,width=8cm,angle=0]{67097Fig4.eps}
\caption{(Color online) The circular component of the magnetization $M_{\phi}$
defined by Eq.~(\ref{eqn:Mphi}) is plotted as a function of $T/J$.
The data for single-thread computation with $1$ processor
and those for multiple-thread computation with $8$ processors
are denoted by squares and circles, respectively.
The size $L$ is $128$. The average is taken over $10$
different runs with different initial conditions and
random sequences. }
\label{fig:Mag_ave}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Results}
\label{sec:result}
\subsection{Model}
To investigate the efficiency of parallel computation of the method developed in this study,
we apply the method to a two-dimensional magnetic dipolar system on an $L\times L$ square lattice
with open boundaries. The Hamiltonian of the system is described as
\begin{equation}
{\cal H}=-J\sum_{\langle ij\rangle}\bm{S}_i \cdot \bm{S}_j
+D\sum_{i<j}\left[ \frac{\bm{S}_i\cdot \bm{S}_j}{r_{ij}^3}
-3\frac{(\bm{S}_i\cdot\bm{r}_{ij})(\bm{S}_j\cdot\bm{r}_{ij})}
{r_{ij}^5}\right],
\label{eqn:Hamiltonian1}
\end{equation}
where $\bm{S}_i$ is a classical Heisenberg spin of $|\bm{S}_i|=1$,
$\langle ij \rangle$ runs over all the nearest-neighbouring pairs,
$\bm{r}_{ij}$ is the vector spanned from a site $i$
to $j$ in the unit of the lattice constant $a$, and $r_{ij}=|\bm{r}_{ij}|$.
The first term describes short-range ferromagnetic exchange interactions and
the second term describes long-range dipolar interactions,
where $J(>0)$ is an exchange constant and $D(>0)$ is a constant
that represents the strength of magnetic dipolar interactions.
We hereafter consider the case that $D/J=0.1$. We choose this model
because it was used as a benchmark of the SCO method.~\cite{SCO}
It is established that the model undergoes a phase transition from a paramagnetic state
to a circularly ordered state at $T_{\rm c}\approx 0.88J$ as a consequence
of the cooperation of exchange and dipolar interactions.~\cite{Sasaki96}
We applied the SCO method only for magnetic dipolar interactions.
The system was gradually cooled from an initial temperature $T=1.25J$
to $0.05J$ in steps of $\Delta T=0.05J$. The initial temperature was
set to be well above the critical temperature.
We set $n_{\rm sw}$ defined in Sect.~\ref{subsec:SCO} to be $100$,
i.e., potential switching and subsequent vertex coloring are
performed every $100$ MC steps. It was determined in Ref.~\citen{SCO} that
this frequency of potential switching is sufficient for this model
to obtain reliable results.
To check the correctness of our parallel computation, we performed MC simulation
and measured the absolute value of the circular component of magnetization defined by
\begin{equation}
M_{\phi} \equiv \left\langle \left| \left[ \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^{N}
\bm{S}_i \times \frac{\bm{r}_i-\bm{r}_{\rm c}}
{|\bm{r}_i-\bm{r}_{\rm c}|}
\right]_z \right|\right\rangle,
\label{eqn:Mphi}
\end{equation}
where $[ \cdots ]_z$ denotes the $z$-component of a vector,
$\langle \cdots\rangle$ denotes thermal average,
and $\bm{r}_{\rm c}$ is a vector describing the center
of the lattice. In this measurement, the system was kept
at each temperature for $100,000$ MC steps.
The first $50,000$ MC steps are for equilibration and the following
$50,000$ MC steps are for measurement.
We performed simulations for $10$ different runs
with different initial conditions and random sequences.
The result is shown in~Fig.~\ref{fig:Mag_ave}. The squares and circles denote
the result of single-thread computation with $1$ processor and
that of multiple-thread computation with $8$ processors, respectively.
Both data coincide with each other within statistical error.
We also see that $M_\phi$ rapidly increases
around the critical temperature $T_{\rm c}\approx 0.88J$. From these results,
we conclude that our parallel computation is performed correctly.
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Temperature dependences of the mean degree $\langle k \rangle$ and the maximum degree
$\langle \Delta \rangle$. Graphs are created by the potential switching in the SCO method.
The size $L$ is 2304. The average is taken over $35$ graphs.
}
\label{table:degree_mean_max}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline
temperature & $\langle k \rangle$ & $\langle \Delta \rangle$ \\
\hline
$1.25J$ & 1.40 & 8.54\\
$0.45J$ & 3.36 & 12.9\\
$0.05J$ & 22.7 & 41.6\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[clip,width=8cm,angle=0]{67097Fig5.eps}
\caption{(Color online) The probability $P_{\rm survive}$ that a potential survives
by being switched to ${\bar V}$ is plotted as a function of $r$,
where $r$ is the distance between two interacting sites.
\textcolor{black}{The size $L$ is $2304$.} The temperatures are $0.05J$ (squares),
$0.45J$ (circles), and $1.25J$ (triangles), respectively.
}
\label{fig:Psurvive_vs_R}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[clip,width=8cm]{67097Fig6.eps}
\caption{(Color online) The proportion $P_{\rm IPC}$ of surviving potentials that require
interprocessor communication is plotted as a function of temperature.
The size $L$ is $2304$. The numbers of processors $N_{\rm proc}$'s are $48$ (triangles),
$144$ (circles), and $288$ (squares), respectively.
}
\label{fig:Ratio_IPC}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Properties of graphs and improvements to reduce communication traffic}
\label{subsec:improvement}
In Table~\ref{table:degree_mean_max}, we show the mean degree $\langle k \rangle$ and the maximum degree
$\langle \Delta \rangle$ of graphs at three temperatures. These are important quantities because
the maximum degree determines the number of colors and the mean degree $\langle k \rangle$ is
proportional to the computational time per MC step. The size $L$ is $2304$.
As found in Ref.~\citen{SCO}, these quantities hardly depend on the size
in two-dimensional magnetic dipolar systems if the size is sufficiently large.
As expected from Eq.~(\ref{eqn:Pij}), both $\langle k \rangle$ and $\langle \Delta \rangle$ increase
with decreasing temperature. However, they are several tens at most. This means that
most of the interactions are cut off by the potential switching. It should be noted
that both $\langle k \rangle$ and $\langle \Delta \rangle$ are $N-1\approx 5\times 10^6$
before potentials are switched. Figure~\ref{fig:Psurvive_vs_R} shows the distance
dependence of the probability $P_{\rm survive}$ that a potential survives
by being switched to $\bar V$. The temperatures are the same as those
in Table~\ref{table:degree_mean_max}. We see that the probability increases with
decreasing temperature. The probability is close to one when $T=0.05J$ and $r=1$.
However, $P_{\rm survive}$ rapidly decreases with increasing $r$ at any temperature.
Taking these properties of the SCO method into consideration, we implemented our simulation
in the following way: We first divide a lattice into $N_{\rm proc}$ square cells
($N_{\rm proc}$ is the number of processors) and assign each cell to each processor.
We then list the vertices whose information should be sent by interprocessor communication
when we update spins with a certain color. For example, a vertex $i$ is added to a list
for red-spin update if it satisfies the following two conditions:
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\bullet$] The vertex $i$ is connected with a red vertex $j$.
\item[$\bullet$] The two vertices $i$ and $j$ belong to different cells.
\end{itemize}
This list is made for each color just once when a new graph is created by the potential switching.
When we update spins of a certain color, we perform interprocessor communication in advance
according to the list. Although it requires some computational cost to make the lists,
they enable us to reduce the communication traffic before
parallel MC calculation as much as possible. Figure~\ref{fig:Ratio_IPC} shows
the temperature dependence of the proportion \textcolor{black}{$P_{\rm IPC}$}
of surviving potentials that require
interprocessor communication. The proportion increases with increasing number
of processors. Note that the mesh size decreases as the number
of processors increases. The proportion also increases with decreasing temperature.
However, it is less than $20\%$ in most cases, meaning that communication traffic
is considerably reduced by this improvement.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[clip,width=8cm,angle=0]{67097Fig7.eps}
\caption{\textcolor{black}{(Color online) The average computational time $t_{\rm ave}$ in the strong scaling
is plotted as a function of the number of processors $N_{\rm proc}$
for $L=2304$ (squares) and $L=1152$ (circles).
$t_{\rm ave}$ is defined by Eq.~(\ref{eqn:t_ave}).}
The average is taken over the temperatures between $0.05J$ and $1.25J$.
}
\label{fig:Time_vs_CPU}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,angle=0]{67097Fig8.eps}
\caption{\textcolor{black}{(Color online) The ratio $t_{\rm ave}(N_{\rm proc})/t_{\rm ave}(1)$ in the weak scaling is plotted
as a function of $N_{\rm proc}$, where $t_{\rm ave}(X)$ is the average computational time
defined by Eq.~(\ref{eqn:t_ave}) when the number of processors is $X$.
The numbers of sites per processor $N_{\rm site}^*$'s are
$50^2$ (triangles), $100^2$ (squares), and $300^2$ (circles), respectively.
The average is taken over the temperatures between $0.05J$ and $1.25J$.}}
\label{fig:weakscaling_rate}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Efficiency of parallel computation}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:Time_vs_CPU}, we plot the average computational time per MC step $t_{\rm ave}$
as a function of the number of processors. The average time $t_{\rm ave}$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
t_{\rm ave}=\frac{1}{100}t_{\rm switch}+\frac{1}{100}t_{\rm color}+t_{\rm MC},
\label{eqn:t_ave}
\end{equation}
where $t_{\rm switch}$, $t_{\rm color}$, and $t_{\rm MC}$ are the computational times
to switch potentials, to solve vertex coloring, and to perform MC simulation for one MC step,
respectively. Recall that potential switching and the subsequent vertex coloring are performed
every $100$ MC steps. The average is taken over the temperatures between $0.05J$ and $1.25J$.
The data for $L=2304$ and those for $L=1152$ are denoted by squares and circles, respectively.
\textcolor{black}{The data correspond
to the strong scaling because $N_{\rm proc}$ is increased with the system size $L$ fixed.}
When $L$ is $2304$, the computations with $144$ and $288$ processors
are about $85$ and $102$ times faster than that with one processor, respectively.
In the case of $L=1152$, the speedups by $144$ and $288$ processors
are about $58$ and $57$, respectively.
\textcolor{black}{
Figure~\ref{fig:weakscaling_rate} shows the data of the weak scaling.
In the weak scaling, we increase both the system size and $N_{\rm proc}$
with the number of sites per processor $N_{\rm site}^*$ fixed.
In the figure, the ratio $t_{\rm ave}(N_{\rm proc})/t_{\rm ave}(1)$ is
plotted as a function of $N_{\rm proc}$, where $t_{\rm ave}(X)$ is the average
computational time when the number of processors is $X$.
We see that the ratio decreases with increasing $N_{\rm site}^*$.
This means that the parallelization efficiency is improved as the system size increases.
}
\textcolor{black}{
We next consider fluctuations in the number of sites assigned to each processor
in the MC calculation. As mentioned in Sect.~\ref{subsec:improvement},
when we update spins with some color in the MC calculation,
each processor updates spins in the assigned cell. The number of sites
with the color is different from cell to cell. Because these fluctuations cause
the difference in the computational time among processors, it may significantly
decrease the parallelization efficiency. To evaluate the effect of fluctuations,
we measured the following quantity:
\begin{equation}
\Delta R \equiv \frac{K_{\rm max}-K_{\rm ave}}{K_{\rm ave}},
\label{eqn:def_DeltaR}
\end{equation}
where $K_{\rm max}$ and $K_{\rm ave}$ are the maximum and average values
of the number of sites with a certain color, respectively. We measured this quantity because
the computational time is determined by the maximum number of sites
among processors. Figure~\ref{fig:how_much_color} shows
the $N_{\rm proc}$ dependence of $\Delta R$. The average is taken over
the colorings and the colors of each coloring. The temperature $T$ is $0.05J$.
Because the number of colors increases with decreasing temperature,
this temperature corresponds to the worst case.
The data for $L=1152$ and those for $L=2304$ are denoted by circles and squares, respectively.
When $N=1152$ and $N_{\rm proc}=288$, $\Delta R$ is about $22\%$. This means that
the fluctuations decrease the parallelization efficiency to some extent.
However, we also see that the fluctuations decrease with increasing system size.
}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:Breakdown}, $t_{\rm switch}/100$, $t_{\rm color}/100$,
and $t_{\rm MC}$ are plotted as functions of the number of processors.
The size $L$ is $2304$. The sum of the three computational times is equal to
$t_{\rm ave}$ for $L=2304$ shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Time_vs_CPU} (see Eq.~(\ref{eqn:t_ave})).
The computation time of MC simulation $t_{\rm MC}$ is dominant owing to the factor $1/100$
in $t_{\rm switch}$ and $t_{\rm color}$. \textcolor{black}{
We see that each computational time saturates as $N_{\rm proc}$ increases.
Although there are several causes of the saturation, such as the fluctuations
in the number of sites discussed in the previous paragraph, the main reason
for the saturation is an increase in communication traffic. In the
MC calculation, we reduced communication traffic by the method
described in Sect.~\ref{subsec:improvement}.
Therefore, the saturation of $t_{\rm MC}$ is gradual. In contrast, the proportion
of communication traffic is large in the potential switching and coloring
because the improvement mentioned in Sect.~\ref{subsec:improvement}
is not applicable to them.}
To make the present method effective even for larger parallel computations,
we need to improve the parallelization efficiencies of the two processes.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,angle=0]{67097Fig9.eps}
\caption{\textcolor{black}{(Color online) $\Delta R$ defined by Eq.~(\ref{eqn:def_DeltaR}) is plotted as a function of
$N_{\rm proc}$ for $L=1152$ (circles) and $L=2304$ (squares). The average is taken over
the colorings and the colors of each coloring. The number of colorings is 10.
The temperature $T$ is $0.05J$.
}}
\label{fig:how_much_color}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[clip,width=8cm,angle=0]{67097Fig10.eps}
\caption{(Color online) $t_{\rm MC}$ (squares), $t_{\rm color}/100$ (triangles), and $t_{\rm switch}/100$ (circles)
are plotted as functions of the number of processors $N_{\rm proc}$.
The size $L$ is $2304$. The average is taken over the temperatures between
$0.05J$ and $1.25J$.
}
\label{fig:Breakdown}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
In this study, we have developed a method of parallelizing the SCO method,
which is a MC method for long-range interacting systems.
To parallelize the MC calculation in the SCO method, we numerically solve the vertex
coloring of a graph created by the SCO method. This computation is performed
in parallel using the KW algorithm.~\cite{KuhnWattenhofer06,book_KW}
We applied this method to a two-dimensional magnetic dipolar system
on an $L\times L$ square lattice to examine its parallelization efficiency.
The result showed that, in the case of $L=2304$, the speed of computation
increased about $102$ times by parallel computation with $288$ processors.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 25400387. Some of
the experimental results in this research were obtained using supercomputing
resources at Cyberscience Center, Tohoku University.
|
\section{Introduction}
Much of
observational cosmology can be thought of
as an attempt
to use astronomical data to
discriminate between the different cosmological models
under consideration.
Given both the inevitably imperfect data and the intrinsically stochastic
nature of many cosmological measurements ({\textit{i.e.}}, cosmic variance),
it is generally impossible to come to absolute conclusions about
the various candidate models;
the best that can be hoped for is to evaluate the probabilities,
conditional on the the available data,
that each of the candidate models is the correct description of the
Universe.
The fact that there is,
as far as is known,
just a single observable Universe
({\textit{i.e.}}, there is no ensemble from which it has been drawn),
means that
such probabilities cannot be frequency-based, and must instead
must represent a degree of implication.
Self-consistency arguments then require
(\cite[Cox 1946]{Cox:1946})
that these probabilities
be manipulated and inverted using Bayes's theorem.
Taken together, the above facts imply that Bayesian
model comparison (Section~\ref{section:bmc}) should be used to assess
how well different cosmological models
explain the available data,
although the fact that most such models have unspecified parameters
is a significant difficulty for this approach
(Section~\ref{section:noprior}).
This problem can be solved for separable data-sets
as it is possible to use a two-step method of model comparison
(Section~\ref{section:sep}),
illustrated here with
high-redshift supernova (SN) data
(Section~\ref{section:sn}).
\section{Bayesian model comparison}
\label{section:bmc}
Given that one of a set of $N$ models,
$\{M_1, M_2, \ldots M_N\}$,
is assumed to be true, the state of knowledge conditional on
all the available (and relevant) information, $I$,
is fully summarised by the probabilities
${\textrm{Pr}}(M_1 | I),
{\textrm{Pr}}(M_2 | I),
\ldots,
{\textrm{Pr}}(M_N | I)$,
where
${\textrm{Pr}}(M_i | I)$ is the
probability that the $i$'th model is correct
(and $i \in \{ 1, 2, \ldots, N\}$).
In the light of some new data, $d$, that has not already
been included in the above probabilities,
Bayes's theorem gives the updated probability that
model $i$ is correct
as
\begin{equation}
\label{equation:bt}
{\textrm{Pr}}(M_i | d, I)
=
\frac
{{\textrm{Pr}}(M_i | I) \, {\textrm{Pr}}(d | M_i, I)}
{\sum_{j = 1}^N
{\textrm{Pr}}(M_j | I) \, {\textrm{Pr}}(d | M_j, I)},
\end{equation}
where
${\textrm{Pr}}(d | M_i , I)$ is the
marginal likelihood
under model $M_i$.
If model $M_i$ has $N_i$ unspecified parameters
$\{\theta_i\} = \{\theta_{i,1}, \theta_{i,2}, \ldots, \theta_{i,N_i}\}$
then the model-averaged likelihood is obtained by marginalising over
these parameters to give
\begin{equation}
\label{equation:ev}
{\textrm{Pr}}(d | M_i, I)
=
\int
{\textrm{Pr}}(\{\theta_i\} | M_i, I) \,
{\textrm{Pr}}(d | \{\theta_i\}, M_i, I) \,
{\rm{d}} \theta_{i,1} \, {\rm{d}} \theta_{i,2} \ldots {\rm{d}} \theta_{i,N_i},
\end{equation}
where ${\textrm{Pr}}(\{\theta_i\} | M_i, I)$ is the
prior distribution of the parameter values in this model.
This expression demonstrates that the
full specification of a model
requires not just an explicit parameterisation,
but a distribution for those parameters as well;
two mathematically identical descriptions with different parameter priors
are, in fact, different models.
\section{Comparison of models without parameter priors}
\label{section:noprior}
Equations \ref{equation:bt} and \ref{equation:ev}
together summarise a self-consistent method
for assessing which of a set of models is better supported by the
available information, provided
that the parameter priors for all the models are explicitly defined
and unit-normalised.
In particular, while it is often possible to obtain sensible
parameter constraints based on an improper prior, such as
${\textrm{Pr}}(\{\theta_i\} | M_i, I)$ constant for all $\{\theta_i\}$,
the resultant marginal likelihood is meaningless
(\cite[Dickey 1961]{Dickey:1961}).
Unfortunately, it is commonly the case in astronomy and cosmology
that there is no compelling form for the models' parameter priors
and, further, that the natural uninformative prior distributions are
improper and cannot be normalised.
The apparent implication is
that Bayesian model comparison,
at least in the form described in Section~\ref{section:bmc},
cannot be used in cosmology,
an idea that has been explored previously by,
\eg, \cite{Efstathiou:2008}
and
\cite{Jenkins_Peacock:2011}.
The disturbing corollary would be that
there is no self-consistent method to
choose between the available cosmological models,
even if they are
completely
quantitative and mathematically well-defined.
\section{Model comparison with separable data}
\label{section:sep}
The idea that the relative
degree of support for models with unspecified parameters is undefined
is at odds with the marked -- and data-driven -- progress that has
been made in cosmology over the last century.
Clearly it {\em is} possible to use data to choose sensibly
between models even if they do not have well-motivated parameter priors;
but can this be formalised in a way that satisfies Bayes's theorem
and is hence logically self-consistent?
One possibility is, for separable data-sets
(such as those which consist of measurements of
many astronomical sources),
to use some of the available data to obtain
the necessary parameter priors and to then use the remaining data
for model comparison.
This is an old concept, dating back at least to \cite{Lempers:1971}
and explored subsequently by, \eg,
\cite{Spiegelhalter_Smith:1982}
and
\cite{OHagan:1995}.
The central idea is to partition the data as
$d = (d_1, d_2)$, with the first partition
of training data used to
obtain the (partial) posterior distribution for the parameters of $i$'th model
as
\begin{equation}
{\textrm{Pr}}(\{\theta_i\} | d_1, M_i, I)
= \frac{{\textrm{Pr}}(\{\theta_i\} | M_i, I) \,
{\textrm{Pr}}(d_1 | \{\theta_i\}, M_i, I)}
{\int {\textrm{Pr}}(\{\theta^\prime_i\} | M_i, I) \,
{\textrm{Pr}}(d_1 | \{\theta^\prime_i\}, M_i, I) \,
{\rm{d}} \theta_{i,1}^\prime \, {\rm{d}} \theta_{i,2}^\prime
\ldots {\rm{d}} \theta_{i,N_i}^\prime,
},
\end{equation}
where ${\textrm{Pr}}(\{\theta_i\} | M_i, I)$,
which need {\em not} be normaliseable,
should be a highly uninformative prior.
This posterior distribution can then be used as the prior needed
to obtain a meaningful marginal likelihood, which can then be evaluated
for the testing data as
\begin{equation}
{\textrm{Pr}}(d_2 | d_1, M_i, I)
= \int {\textrm{Pr}}(\{\theta_i\} | d_1, M_i, I)
\, {\textrm{Pr}}(d_2 | \{\theta_i\}, M_i, I)
\, {\rm{d}} \theta_{i,1} \, {\rm{d}} \theta_{i,2} \ldots {\rm{d}} \theta_{i,N_i}
.
\end{equation}
This marginal likelihood is coherent, in the sense that it provides
self-consistent updated posterior probabilities when inserted into
Equation~\ref{equation:bt}, but there is also ambiguity in how to
partition the data:
there is no compelling scheme for
partitioning the data.
It is tempting to average over the possible
partitions, but this approach does not have a rigorous motivation.
Despite these ambiguities, this two-step method of
Bayesian model comparison for separable data does
satisfy the \cite[Cox (1946)]{Cox:1946} self-consistency
requirements and so
provide a means
of calculating posterior probabilities for cosmological
models with unspecified parameter priors.
\section{Example: late-time acceleration and supernovae}
\label{section:sn}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6cm]{posterior.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=6cm]{paccel.pdf}
\caption{(left) The posterior distribution of $\Omega_{\rm m}$ and $\Omega_\Lambda$
implied by the \cite{Perlmutter_etal:1999} SCP SN data
and a uniform prior with $\Omega_{\rm m} \geq 0$.
Highest posterior density contours enclosing 68.3\%, 95.4\%
and 99.7\% of the posterior probability are shown.
Also shown are the prior distributions of
the accelerating model and matter only model for $\Omega_{\rm max} = 3$.
(right) The dependence of ${\textrm{Pr}}({\rm accel.} |d, I)$
on $\Omega_{\rm max}$, shown for different prior probabilities,
${\textrm{Pr}}({\rm accel.} | I)$.}
\label{figure:posterior}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
One of the most significant recent cosmological discoveries was that
the Universe's expansion rate is increasing,
a result which is often linked most strongly to
the observations of distant SNe
made by \cite{Riess_etal:1998} and \cite{Perlmutter_etal:1999}.
The comparative faintness of the SNe,
given their redshifts and light-curve decay timescales,
indicated
that the (normalised) cosmological constant, $\Omega_\Lambda$,
is sufficiently large to override the deceleration
caused by the (normalised) matter density, $\Omega_{\rm m}$.
\cite{Riess_etal:1998} and \cite{Perlmutter_etal:1999}
used their SNe measurements, $d$,
to obtain posterior distributions of the form
${\textrm{Pr}}(\Omega_\Lambda, \Omega_{\rm m} | d, I)$,
under the assumption of
uninformative (and improper) uniform
priors of the form ${\textrm{Pr}}(\Omega_{\rm m}, \Omega_\Lambda) \propto \Theta(\Omega_{\rm m})$,
where $\Theta(x)$ is the Heaviside step function.
The posterior distribution for the 42 SCP SNe from
\cite{Perlmutter_etal:1999}, reproduced in
Figure~\ref{figure:posterior}, reveals that
most of the models that are consistent with the data correspond
to an accelerating universe ({\textit{i.e.}}, $\Omega_\Lambda > \Omega_{\rm m} / 2$).
But do these data provide {\em quantitive} evidence of
cosmological acceleration?
\cite{Riess_etal:1998} approached this question by calculating the
fraction of the posterior with $\Omega_\Lambda > \Omega_{\rm m} / 2$,
which is an apparently compelling 0.997 for the case shown
in Figure~\ref{figure:posterior}.
The relevant Bayesian calculation
(\textit{c.f.}\ \cite[Drell \etal\ 2000]{Drell_etal:2000})
should, however,
be based on the marginal likelihoods of an
accelerating model (for which the prior is
non-zero only for $\Omega_\Lambda > \Omega_{\rm m} / 2$)
and a decelerating model
(for which the obvious option is a matter-only model with $\Omega_\Lambda = 0$).
Such models can be fully specified (in the sense defined in
Section~\ref{section:bmc}) by adding the restrictions
that $0 \leq \Omega_{\rm m} \leq \Omega_{\rm max}$
and $0 \leq \Omega_\Lambda \leq \min[\Omega_{\rm max}, \Omega_{\Lambda,{\rm BB}}(\omm)]$
(defined to reject models that did not begin with
a Big Bang), where $\Omega_{\rm max} \geq 0$ is an unspecified ``hyper-parameter''.
Figure~\ref{figure:posterior} shows the dependence of
the posterior probability of the accelerating model,
${\textrm{Pr}}({\rm accel.} | d, I)$,
on $\Omega_{\rm max}$.
Even the peak values of ${\textrm{Pr}}({\rm accel.} | d, I)$ are
considerably lower than the posterior
fraction quoted above,
and the dependence on the unknown value of $\Omega_{\rm max}$ is significant as well.
Rather than introducing an arbitrary new parameter, another option
is to adopt the two-step method described in Section~\ref{section:sep},
using some of the SN data to obtain a partial posterior in
$\Omega_{\rm m}$ and $\Omega_\Lambda$ for both the accelerating and matter-only models
and then using the remainder to perform model comparison.
The results of doing so are shown in Figure~\ref{figure:prob}
for several different partitioning options
(and assuming the two models are equally probable a priori).
These results again illustrate the standard Bayesian result that
the better-fitting accelerating model is not favoured so decisively
over the more predictive ({\textit{i.e.}}, ``simpler'') matter-only model,
a result that is robust to prior choice.
This two-step approach to model comparison could be applied to a
variety of problems in astrophysics and cosmology
(\eg, \cite[Bailer-Jones 2012]{Bailer-Jones:2012},
\cite[Khanin \& Mortlock 2014]{Khanin:2014}).
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6cm]{pacceldist_1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=6cm]{pacceldist_2.pdf}
\caption{The distribution of ${\textrm{Pr}}({\rm accel.} | d_2, I)$
obtained from different partitions of the
\cite{Perlmutter_etal:1999} SN data set with training sets of
10 (left) and 21 (right) SNe.
The open symbols indicate the prior values
(of, from left to right, 0.01, 0.05, 0.1 and 0.5)
and the solid symbols show the posterior values given by
training and testing samples that alternate in redshift.}
\label{figure:prob}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
|
\section{Introduction}
By a higher-order root distiller we mean an algorithm to compute, simultaneously, all (or almost all) the real roots of a polynomial $f$
of (high) degree $d$, in a given interval $[a,b]$. The algorithm relies on a single application, on the interval, of a map $g$ of (very) high
order of convergence $m$ (for instance $m= 2^{10}=1024$ or $m= 2^{20}=1\, 048\,576$). The approach may be seen as
a modern computational perspective of the global Lagrange{'}s ideal \cite{La}.\\
\\
Once defined such a higher-order map $g$, the roots of the function $f$ in the interval are obtained from a table $\mathcal{L}= \left\{ (x_1,y_1), (x_2,y_2), \ldots,(x_N,y_N)\right\}$, where $y_i=g (x_i)$, and $x_i$ belong to an uniform grid (of $N+1$ nodes) of width $h$,
defined on $[a,b]$. For suitable choices of $h$ and $k$ (the parameter $k$ controls the order of $g$), the map $g$ induces an \textit{invariant monotone step function} leading to certain subsets of $\mathcal{L}$, say $S_1,S_2,\text{...},S_i,\text{...}, S_r$. These subsets will be called \lq{platforms}\rq\
(see Section \ref{sec3}) and have the property that the second component of the points $(x,y)_i$ on the platform $S_i$ are equal to (or close to) the i-th root of the polynomial.
\\
A graphical inspection of the list $\mathcal{L}$ may be useful not only to observe the distribution of the roots in $[a,b]$ but also to suggest
good choices for the two parameters controlling the algorithm, which are the mesh width $h$ and the index $k$, the latter related to the order of convergence $m$
of the map $g$ ($m=2^{k+1}$ in the case of simple roots). \\
\\
Although in this work we only deal with roots of polynomials, the same procedure can be adapted to non-algebraic equations $f(x)=0$ having
at least one root in a given interval, or with the case of multiple roots or even to functions in $\mathbb{R}^n$ \cite{MG}.
\medskip
\noindent
In finite arithmetic, one of the main feature of our distiller process is that, by construction, the values $y_i$ are generally quite immune to
rounding error propagation. Therefore a roots{'}s distiller can be seen as a powerful pre-conditioning instrument, in particular for polynomials
whose coefficients are numeric. The referred immunity to rounding error propagation is closely related to the fact that a map of higher-order of
convergence leads necessarily to a stationary {`}monotone machine step function{'} --- if the recursive process which generates the map $g$ is taken
appropriately, that is, for $k$ sufficiently large. Details on the monotone machine step functions are further explained in sections \ref{sec2} and \ref{sec3}.
\medskip
\noindent
Thanks to the super-attracting property of a map of a high order of convergence, each tread (or {`}platform{'}) of the monotone machine step function
-- corresponding to the theoretical subsets \(S_i\) referred above-- contains several machine accurate values $y_i$ which are close approximations
of the zeros of the given function $f$. In general, all the necessary information in order to approximate the zeros of a given map with a prescribed
accuracy is contained in these treads.
\medskip
\noindent
Our root distiller is constructed in order to overcome some common numerical issues appearing in the computation of zeros of a given function and
in particular of roots of polynomials of high degree. It is well known the inherent ill conditioning of the computation of polynomial roots. For
instance \textit{Mathematica} commands for approximating roots of polynomials of high degree may produce useless numerical results when low-precision
finite arithmetic is used. On the other hand, dealing with exact polynomials of high degree $d$, say $d\geq 100$, prevents us from using exact arithmetic
due to CPU excessive cost.
\\
To be more precise, suppose that a numeric expression for the (first kind) Chebyshev polynomial of degree 40 is
defined by the command
{\tt N[ChebyshevT[40}, {\tt $x],8]$}, where the coefficients are deliberately forced to have 8-digits precision. The commands {\tt Solve},
{\tt Reduce}, and {\tt Roots} produce useless numerical results (cf. paragraph \ref{subsec1}) since the computed roots are heavily contaminated by rounding error (even though
the degree $d=40$ of such polynomial is moderate). Our root distiller deals efficiently not only with this case but it also produces accurate answers,
for instance with a $500$\--degree Chebyshev polynomial.
\medskip
\noindent
In Section \ref{sec2} we detail the construction of a specific map $g$. For that, it is given a positive integer $prec$ and two parameters $h$ and $k$. The
parameter $k$ controls the order of the map $g$ to be constructed, $h$ is the mesh size and $prec$ fixes the precision to be used in the computations of
the images $y_i=g(x_i)$ in the list $\mathcal{L}$.
\medskip
\noindent
In Section \ref{sec3} it is illustrated how a map $g$ of high order of convergence leads to a monotone step function which contains the relevant information
to be distilled. We chose as basic model a 4-degree Chebyshev polynomial of the first kind with $prec=8$ and the parameters $h=0.1$ and $ k=3$. The
respective map $g$ has order of convergence 16 and the absolute error of computed roots is of order $10^{-8}$, meaning that the accuracy used
on $\mathcal{L}$ is preserved.
\medskip
\noindent
{\sl Mathematica} code is presented in sections \ref{sec2} and \ref{sec4}, including the process used for filtering the relevant values in the respective list
$\mathcal{L}$ (other filtering possibilities may also be considered).
\medskip
\noindent
Numerical examples have shown the efficiency of the proposed distillers. In particular, we construct here a distiller for the computation of the positive
roots of the Chebyshev polynomial of degree 500, defined in $[-1,1]$, with precision forced to be $prec=5000$ and parameters $h=0.00025$ and $k=20$ (and so the respective map $g$ has order of convergence $m=2^{21}= 2 \,097 \,152$). The computed roots have 5000-correct digits.
\medskip
\noindent
An automatic choice of appropriate parameters $h$ and $k$ in order to achieve a preassigned tolerance error can be done, but this is out of the
scope of the present work.
\subsection{Motivation: a low precision Chebyshev polynomial}\label{subsec1}
Setting the precision $ prec=8$, we obtain the following \textit{Mathematica} expression for the Chebyshev{'}s polynomial of degree
40, $N[ChebyshevT[40\,,\,x],\,prec]$:
$$
\begin{array}{l}
1.0000000-800.00000 x^2+106400.00 x^4-5.6179200\times 10^6 x^6+\\
+1.5690048\times 10^8 x^8-2.6777682\times10^9 x^{10}+3.0429184\times 10^{10} x^{12}-\\
-2.4343347\times 10^{11} x^{14}+1.4240858\times 10^{12} x^{16}-6.2548083\times 10^{12} x^{18}+\\
+2.1002988\times10^{13} x^{20}-5.4553215\times 10^{13} x^{22}+1.1029237\times 10^{14} x^{24}-\\
-1.7375290\times 10^{14} x^{26}+2.1236466\times 10^{14} x^{28}-1.9918340\times10^{14} x^{30}+\\
+1.4055280\times 10^{14} x^{32}-7.2155451\times 10^{13} x^{34}+2.5426206\times 10^{13} x^{36}-\\
-5.4975581\times 10^{12} x^{38}+5.4975581\times10^{11} x^{40}.
\end{array}
$$
The \textit{ Mathematica} commands {\tt Solve}, {\tt Reduce} and {\tt Roots} produce, respectively, the following useless output:
\medskip
\noindent
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.95]{until2}}
\medskip
\noindent
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.85]{until3} }
\medskip
\noindent \centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.89]{until4}}
\noindent Of course the commands {\tt NSolve} and {\tt NRoots} also give useless values.
\medskip
\noindent
We aim to obtain \lq{machine}\rq\ acceptable answers, that is to compute the real roots of the 40-degree Chebyshev polynomial in the interval $[a,b]=[-1,1]$,
which are simple and distinct, with an accuracy close to that of the data (recall that 8-digits precision has been assigned to the polynomial coefficients).
\medskip
\noindent
The algorithm which
we call \lq{root distiller}\rq\ is described in what follows, and shows to be able to accomplish such a desideratum. The code can easily be included
in a single function in order to produce the referred machine point list $\mathcal{L}$, once predefined the function f, the bounds of the interval, the preassigned
precision $prec$ and the mesh size $h$. After a convenient filtration of the data in $\mathcal{L}$, the respective output should be considered global
in the sense that it is able to (simultaneously) produce accurate approximations of the roots in the interval, as well as realistic error estimates to
each of them (see Section 4).
\section{Higher-order educated maps and monotone step functions}\label{sec2}
In a global approach to roots{'}s computation by means of a smooth high order
of convergence map $g: [a,b] \subset \mathbb{R}\longrightarrow \mathbb{R}$, many of the domain points are irrelevant, in the sense that their image under $g$ might not be a number or is repealed from a fixed point of $g$. In fact any map of order of convergence greater than one enjoys such a repealing/attracting property -- like
in the well known cases of the Newton's or secant methods for approximation of simple roots. So, once defined a map $g$ of sufficiently high order of
convergence, the points which are not a number, nor in the interval $[a,b]$, neither attracted to a fixed point will be ignored. This is the reason
why we then will call $g$ an \lq{educated}\rq\ higher-order map.
\medskip
\noindent
In general, the recursive maps to be considered have order $m$ of convergence which can go up to $m= 2^{10}=1024$, or greater. The recursive
process used to define the map makes possible to obtain a monotone step function defined in the interval $[a,b]$. From this step function one extracts
the relevant computed $g$-images through a filtering process in order to obtain as output most, or all, the roots of the equation $f(x)=0$. In particular,
our distillers will allow us to compute the roots of a Chebyshev{'}s polynomial of high degree, a task not feasible by the exact methods provided
by the \textit{Mathematica }system (version 10.02.0 running on a Mac OS X personal computer has been used in this work), unless the interval is small and the working precision high.
\subsection{Recursive construction of the higher-order map g}\label{subsec21}
We now explain the recursive construction of a map $g$ of high order of convergence by taking as a seed the Newton's map. The map $g$ is the $k$-fold composition
of this seed and has order of convergent $m=2^{k+1}$. The construction of $g$ goes through and \lq{education}\rq \ process aiming to obtain a map satisfying
a fixed point theorem in the interval [a,b]. More precisely, $g$ is constructed in order to satisfy the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $g([a,b])\subseteq [a,b]$ .
\item[(ii)] $|g(x)-x|\leqq (b-a)$, { }for all $x$ for which \ {\tt NumericQ[g(x)]} is \textit{True }.
\item[(iii)] The points $x\in [a,b]$ not satisfying (i) and (ii) are ignored (a \textit{Null} is assigned to $g(x)$) .
\end{itemize}
\medskip
\noindent
For $k$ sufficiently high, the educated map $g$ will act on $[a,b]$ as a kind of a 'magnet'\ having both good theoretical and computational properties.
This \lq{magnetic}\rq \ property is better perceived by inspecting a plot of the respective induced monotone step function.
\medskip
\noindent
It can be proved that for a fixed mesh size $h$, an educated map induces an invariant (or stationary) monotone step function, whenever the
folding parameter $k$ is sufficiently large. This invariant step function will be called the \textit{machine step function} associated to a map
$ g=g[h,k]$.
\medskip
\noindent
Choosing suitable values for $k$, the second component of points on the treads or \lq{platforms}\rq\ of the associated step function contain (by construction) accurate approximations of the roots of $f(x)=0$. Moreover, the platforms of such step function are automatically sorted in increasing order of their heights, defining so a monotone step function in the interval $[a,b]$. The later filtering process of the data of this step function will hopely solve the referred global Lagrangian root's problem.
\medskip
\noindent
In the following illustrative example an uniform mesh of points, of width $h$, is defined on the domain range $[a,b]$. The {\tt ListPlot} command is used in
order to observe the behaviour of an higher-order educated map $g$ on the referred mesh.
\medskip
\noindent
Although in this work the seed used in the recursive process is the Newton's map, any other method of order of convergence greater
than one could be used. For instance, the secant method, of order $(1+\sqrt{5})/2$, and Ostrowsky's methods, of orders $\geq 3$, are other obvious
options.
\subsection{The map g from the Newton{'}s seed}\label{subsec21}
Fixing a precision $prec$, assume that the numeric expression for a given function $f $ is in memory as well as the bounds $a$ and $b$ of the interval where
the roots of $f(x)=0$ are required. Given the (folding) parameter $k$, the following code defines a general recursive function {\tt g[x,prec]} using Newton{'}s
map as seed (see below functions {\tt newt[0,x,prec]} and its recursive version {\tt newt[k,x,prec]}). The map $g$, of order of convergence $m=2^{k+1}$,
is given below as the function named {\tt g[x,prec]}.
\\
Note that when $y$={\tt g[x,prec]} is a number, the assigned precision to $y$ is forced to be the same as the precision of $x$. This prevents the \textit{Mathematica} system to correct the output of each calculation of $y$ in the case it occurs of a loss of significant digits.
The code for the function {\tt g[x,prec]} follows.
\medskip
\noindent
\noindent \centerline{
\includegraphics[scale=0.88]{until5}
}
\section{An illustration with a low precision 4-degree Chebyshev polynomial}\label{sec3}
As an illustration of the occurrence of a monotone step function induced by the map $g$, let us consider a 4-degree Chebyshev polynomial in the interval $[a,b]=[-1,1]$, and define an uniformly spaced mesh of width $h=0.1$ (that is 21 equally spaced nodes).
We apply the above {\tt g[x,prec]} code, with assigned parameters $prec=8$ and $k=3$, that is, in this case the map $g$ has order of convergence $m =2^{k+1}=16$.
\medskip
\noindent
In Figure \ref{figure1} it is displayed the plot of the respective point list $\mathcal{L}$ and the computed values $g[x,prec]$. This figure is self-explanatory: there are 4 roots corresponding to the 4 platforms in the displayed graphic; an increasing step function is suggested
by the dotted broken line.
Each of the four observed platforms is formed by a set of points and from this set of pairs $(x,y)$ we filter the value $y$ of the pair which has the second component closer to the first. The value of $y$ filtered this way is an approximation of a polynomial's root. In this example, the 4 points filtered are displayed in the last column of the table. These 4 values are 8-digit accurate roots of the Chebyshev
polynomial of degree 4.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figura1}
\caption{A step function associated to a 8\--digits precision, 3\--fold map $g$, applied to a 4\--degreed Chebyshev polynomial. \label{figure1}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\medskip
\noindent
Looking at the second column of the table in Figure 1, it is clear the super-attracting property of the \lq{magnet}\rq\ $g$: all the numeric points in each
platform have the second component very close to the respective exact fixed point of the map $g$.
Repetting the computations for $k=4$, the corresponding table is identical to the one in Figure 1, except the image of $x= - 0.8$, which is $-0.92387953$.
This means that the respective map $g$, now of order $2^{k+1}=32$, is invariant and so the former computed roots have indeed 8 correct digits. Saying it in other words \--- the 4 computed values are \lq{machine\rq\, fixed points for this map (see the last column in Figure 1).
\section{Distilling Chebyshev polynomials of high degree}\label{sec4}
For a given precision $prec$ and appropriate parameters $h$ and $k$, we developed a simple \textit{Mathematica} code which will be tested in order to
approximate the roots of high degree Chebyshev polynomials. A realistic estimative of the error of each computed root is also easily obtained.
In fact, if $g$ has order of convergence $m>1$ and $y=g(x)$ is a value close to a fixed point $\alpha $, the error of $y$ satisfies $\alpha -y\simeq
g(y)-y$.
\medskip
\noindent
Concerning our polynomial models, since the roots become closer when we increase the degree of the Chebyshev{'}s polynomial, the value of the
mesh size $h$ and the parameter precision $prec$ need to be adjusted accordingly. Our aim is to obtain a highly accurate bound for the positive
roots of a 500-degree Chebyshev polynomial of the first kind.
\subsection{Example: a 500-degree Chebyshev polynomial}\label{subsec41}
A 500-degree Chebyshev{'}s polynomial is highly oscillating and so its roots are very close. Therefore, it is necessary to set a sufficiently
large value of the precision $prec$, and choose a convenient mesh size $h$ in order to obtain the required numerical results. We consider now the interval to be $[0,1]$.
\medskip
\noindent
In order to observe the platforms of our distiller, we display the plots of the educated maps $g$ for some values of the parameter $k$ and of $prec$ as a guide for the choice of the right values of these parameters. The next figure compares the graphics of the function
{\tt g[x, 100]}, respectively for $k=0$ and $k=10$ (the mesh size in the plot is not uniform since it is automatically generated by function {\tt Plot} in the interval $[a,b]$).\\
\\
It is clear from Figure \ref{figure2} that a $100$\--digits precision is not enough to obtain the roots localised on the right\--half domain, while one can expect a good separation of roots in the interval by setting $prec=5000$, as suggested by Figure \ref{figure3}.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{figura2} \caption{For $prec=100$ and a mesh automatically generated by $Plot$, only the roots localised on the left half\--domain are detected. \label{figure2}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\\
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{figura3}
\caption{Increasing $prec$ to $prec=5000$ and for $k=10$\--folding, the roots on $[0,1]$ of the 500\--degree Chebyshev's polynomial are detected. \label{figure3}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\noindent
An advantage of choosing an higher order of convergence map $g$ will become more apparent if we restrict the interval to $[0.9,1.0]$, which contains
the desired greatest root of the polynomial. We proceed with the computation of a $5000$ correct digits bound for the positive roots of the polynomial by using a distiller whose folding parameter is $k=20$ (the respective educated map has order $m = 2^{21}=2\,097\,152$). We note that this time the graphics are quickly produced since we use {\tt ListPlot} instead of {\tt Plot} and therefore the respective mesh has now much less points than in the usage of {\tt Plot}.
\subsection{ The filtering stage}\label{subsec4}
Efficient \textit{Mathematica} commands for manipulating lists, such as $Cases$, $Parti\-tion$ and $Union$, are particularly useful in the filtering stage
of the distiller algorithm.
\\
Assume that all the numeric points in $\mathcal{L}$ have been assigned to a list named $data$. The first step in the filtration deals with the choice
of points $(x,y)$ sufficiently close to the bisector line, that is to the line $y=x$. We test the condition say, $\left| y-x\right |^2<0.1$,
on the $data$ list, and assign the captured points to a sublist named {\it data1}, as follows
\medskip
{\tt data1} = {\tt Cases[data, x, y; Abs}$[y - x]^2 < 0.1$ {\tt ]; } (* distille close to bissector *)
\medskip
\noindent
The points in {\it data1} belonging to a certain platform (that is to a \lq{horizontal}\rq\ segment crossing the bisector line) are good candidates for an
approximation of the root. The next sublist, named $data2$, keeps the interesting points. These points are chosen in order to satisfy the condition $(y_1-x_1)(y_2-x_2)<0$, which assures
that at least a machine fixed point exists in the interval denoted by $[ x_1, x_2]$:
\medskip
\noindent{\tt data2}= \\
\indent{\small{\tt Cases[Partition[data1,2,1],\{\{x1\_,y1\_\},\{x2\_,y2\_\} \}/;(y1-x1)*(y2-x2)<0 ]; }}
\medskip
\noindent
For a given tolerance, say $tol=10^{-\text{prec}}$, we are interested in filtering the points in the list $data2$ whose second component $y$ differ
from an amount greater than $tol$. Using the command {\tt Union}, we project the platform ignoring machine-duplicate-numbers, obtaining a sublist named $union$,
\medskip
{\tt union = Union[Map[Last, Flatten[data2, 1] ]];}
\medskip
\noindent
The final step in the filtering process checks for the accuracy of the former captured points. First, one filters the values $y$ in the list $union$
for which $f(y)$ is not greater than say $10^{-5000}$. The result is assigned to a sublist called {\it finalA}. Second, one filters the values $y$ in the list $finalA$, whose estimated absolute error is less than a tolerance, say $tol=10^{-5000}$ . An error bound for each machine root is also computed. The respective code follows.
\medskip
{\tt finalA = Cases[union, y\_ /; f[y] < }$10^{-5000}${\tt];}
{\tt mapf = Map[}$\{${\tt \#, g[\#, prec] - \#$\}$ \&, finalA]; (* roots and error *)}\\
{\tt tol = $10^{-100}$;}
{\tt final = Cases[mapf,$\{$x\_, error\_$\}$/;Abs[error]< tol]; (* error bound *)}
\medskip
\noindent
Assembling the above filtering stage and the one given at paragraph \ref{subsec21}, a general function is easily obtainable for the whole distiller
algorithm.
\subsection{A $5000$\--correct digits approximation for the bound of the positive roots}\label{subsec51}
We now apply our distiller to compute a bound for the positive roots of the 500-degree Chebyshev polynomial in $[0.99,1.0]$, with an error not exceeding
$10^{-5000}$. Since a bound for the positive roots of the polynomial is required, only the greatest computed root in the interval will be displayed as well as its
estimated error.
\medskip
\noindent
In Figure \ref{figure4} the {\tt ListPlot} of the map $g$ is shown, where here $g$ is the Newton{'}s educated method ($k=0$), the precision is $prec=5000$, and the mesh size $h=0.00025$. After filtration an empty list is obtained, meaning that this map is useless under the previously described filtering criteria. So a more
powerful \lq{magnet}\rq\ should be used, that is, one needs to increase the order of convergence of $g$ by taking a greater value of the folding parameter $k$.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.22]{figura4}
\caption{After filtration no points have been captured using the Newton's seed. \label{figure4}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\medskip
\noindent
Increasing to $k=10$, the respective 2048-order map $g$ (Figure 5 left) enable us to filter relevant points (see Figure \ref{figure5} right) from which high precision
roots can be distilled.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.25]{figura5} \includegraphics[scale=0.27]{figura6}
\caption{For a $10$\--fold map the points in the list $data2$ of the respective \lq{machine}\rq\ step function are shown on the right.\label{figure5}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\noindent
For $h=0.0025$ and $k=20$ (Figure 6), the complete filtration process leads to 20 fixed points, which are the machine roots of the $500$\--degree Chebyshev polynomial, in the interval $[0.99,1.00]$, for the considered distiller.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.25]{figura7}\includegraphics[scale=0.27]{figura8}
\caption{Points captured by a 20\--fold $g$ map. \label{figure7}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\medskip
\noindent
Denoting by $\alpha $ the last computed root, a 5000 correct digits bound is obtained. Respectively the first 100 and the last 100 digits of $\alpha
$ are displayed below, as well as its estimated error.
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{out1}
\end{center}
Note that a \textit{Mathematica} instruction such as
$$ x\, /.\, Solve[\{ f[x] == 0, 0.99\leq x\leq 1.0\},x]\}$$
does not produce an answer within an acceptable CPU running time.
\medskip
\noindent
Of course, the classical formula giving the zeros of a d-degree Chebyshev polynomial, $\alpha _j=\cos\left( \frac{(2 j+1) \pi }{2 d}\right)$, for $j=0,...(d-1)$,
can be used in order to confirm the above computed value of $\alpha $.
\small{ |
\section{Introduction}
\blfootnote{Part of this work will be presented at the 2015 Information Theory Workshop (ITW 2015), Jerusalem, Israel. The work of O. Sabag and H. H. Permuter was partially supported by the European Research Council (ERC) starting grant. All authors have also been partially supported by a Joint UGC-ISF research grant. O. Sabag and H. H. Permuter are with the department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel (<EMAIL>, <EMAIL>). N. Kashyap is with the department of Electrical Communication Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India (<EMAIL>).}
Memoryless channels have been the focus of research activity in information theory since they were introduced in 1948 by Shannon \cite{Shannon48}. The capacity of a memoryless channel has an elegant, single-letter expression, $C = \sup_{p(x)} I(X;Y)$, and this can be calculated for a broad range of channels \cite{Blahut72,Arimoto72}. When considering a memoryless channel with input that is constrained, the capacity is given by the maximum mutual information rate between the input and output sequences. The capacity calculation of such channels involves a calculation of the entropy rate of a Hidden Markov Model (HMM), since the transmission of a constrained sequence through a memoryless channel results in an output sequence that is described by an HMM. This makes the capacity of input-constrained memoryless channels difficult to compute \cite{vontobel_generalization,han_constrained_BSC_BEC,wolf_RLL,han_RLL_BSC}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\psfrag{A}[b][][.8]{Constrained}
\psfrag{K}[][][.8]{Encoder}
\psfrag{B}[][][1]{$P_{Y|X}$}
\psfrag{C}[][][1]{Decoder}
\psfrag{D}[][][0.8]{Unit Delay}
\psfrag{E}[][][1]{$M\in 2^{nR}$}
\psfrag{F}[][][.9]{$x_i(m,y^{i-1})$}
\psfrag{G}[][][1]{$y_i$}
\psfrag{H}[][][1]{$y_i$}
\psfrag{I}[][][1]{$y_{i-1}$}
\psfrag{J}[][][1]{$\hat{M}(Y^n)$}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.7]{Channel.eps}
\caption{System model for an input-constrained memoryless channel with perfect feedback.}
\label{fig:channel}
\end{figure}
Constrained coding arises naturally in many communication and recording systems\cite{Marcus98,Immink04}; a common constraint that is useful in magnetic and optical recording is the $(d,k)$-runlength limited (RLL) constraint. A binary sequence satisfies this constraint if the number of zeros between any pair of successive ones is at least $d$ and at most $k$. This constraint has also recently appeared in code designs for energy harvesting systems, where communication is used not only for information transfer but also for charging the receiver's battery\cite{osvalso_charge_battery}. In this paper, we focus on the special case of the $(1,\infty)$-RLL constraint, in which no consecutive ones are allowed.
It is well known that feedback does not increase the capacity of a memoryless channel, as shown by Shannon \cite{shannon56}. However, Shannon's argument does not apply to memoryless channels with constrained inputs, and special tools are required to determine the capacity of such channels with or without feedback.
We consider an $(1,\infty)$-RLL input-constrained binary erasure channel (BEC) with feedback, represented pictorially in Fig. \ref{fig:channel}, with the channel depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:erasure}. Based on the message $M$ and the previous channel outputs, $y^{i-1}$, the encoder chooses the input $X_{i}$, such that the input constraint is satisfied. The mechanism of the BEC is simple: each transmitted bit is transformed into an erasure symbol with probability $\epsilon$ or received successfully with its complementary probability. The decoder estimates the message $\hat{M}$ with low probability of error as a function of the output sequence $Y^{n}$. In this paper, we derive the explicit expression for the feedback capacity of the $(1,\infty)$-RLL input-constrained BEC.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\psfrag{A}[][][1]{$0$}
\psfrag{B}[][][1]{$1$}
\psfrag{C}[][][1]{$0$}
\psfrag{D}[][][1]{$?$}
\psfrag{E}[][][1]{$1$}
\psfrag{F}[][][1]{$\epsilon$}
\psfrag{G}[][][1]{$1-\epsilon$}
\psfrag{X}[][][1]{$X$}
\psfrag{Y}[][][1]{$Y$}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.5]{BEC.eps}
\caption{Erasure channel with erasure probability $\epsilon$.}
\label{fig:erasure}
\end{figure}
The feedback capacity that is derived here also serves as an upper bound on the capacity of the $(1,\infty)$-RLL input-constrained BEC without feedback, a problem that is still open. A lower bound on the capacity of the non-feedback setting was derived in \cite{constrained_erasure_nofeedback_isit} by considering an input that is restricted to first-order Markov process (first-order capacity). The lower bound in \cite{constrained_erasure_nofeedback_isit} and our feedback capacity are presented in Fig. \ref{fig:comparison}, and it can be seen that maximal gap is attained at $\epsilon=0.71$, where the first-order capacity is $\sim 0.2354$ while the feedback capacity is $\sim 0.2547$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\psfrag{A}[t][][.8]{Erasure probability $\epsilon$}
\psfrag{B}[t][][1]{}
\psfrag{C}[b][][1]{}
\psfrag{E}[l][][.8]{Feedback Capacity}
\psfrag{D}[r][][.8]{First-order capacity \cite{constrained_erasure_nofeedback_isit}}
\psfrag{q}[][][.4]{$\mathbf{0}$}
\psfrag{w}[][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.1}$}
\psfrag{e}[][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.2}$}
\psfrag{r}[][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.3}$}
\psfrag{t}[][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.4}$}
\psfrag{y}[][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.5}$}
\psfrag{u}[][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.6}$}
\psfrag{i}[][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.7}$}
\psfrag{o}[][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.8}$}
\psfrag{p}[][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.9}$}
\psfrag{l}[][][.4]{$\mathbf{1}$}
\psfrag{a}[r][][.4]{$\mathbf{0}$}
\psfrag{s}[r][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.1}$}
\psfrag{d}[r][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.2}$}
\psfrag{f}[r][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.3}$}
\psfrag{g}[r][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.4}$}
\psfrag{h}[r][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.5}$}
\psfrag{j}[r][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.6}$}
\psfrag{k}[r][][.4]{$\mathbf{0.7}$}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.32]{capacity_plot_comparison.eps}
\caption{Lower and upper bounds on the capacity of the input-constrained BEC without feedback.}
\label{fig:comparison}
\end{figure}
The relation between feedback-capacity calculation and dynamic programming (DP) first appeared in Tatikonda's thesis \cite{Tatikonda00}. Subsequent works included the formulation of capacity as DP for channels where the state is a function of the input \cite{Yang05}, Markov channels \cite{TatikondaMitter_IT09} and power-constrained Gaussian noise channels with memory \cite{YangKavcicTatikondaGaussian}. To apply algorithms from DP, such as value and policy iteration, quantization is required, and therefore, only lower bounds were derived in the above papers.
In \cite{PermuterCuffVanRoyWeissman08} and \cite{Ising_channel}, the feedback-capacities of the trapdoor and Ising channels, respectively, were found by solving their corresponding Bellman equations. The idea is that the feedback capacity is equal to the optimal reward of the DP, and therefore, it suffices to find a solution which satisfies the Bellman equation\cite{Bertsekas05}. Besides reward optimality verification, the Bellman equation also establishes a mechanism for optimal policy verification, which is a significant additional benefit.
The novelty in our work is the derivation of the optimal input distribution from the Bellman equation solution. The optimal solution of the DP is then utilized to understand how the dynamic program evolves under an optimal policy. We show that converting the DP solution into channel coding terms results in a straightforward interpretation of optimal encoding procedure. This encoding procedure led us to an innovative and zero-error coding scheme for our input-constrained setting. This establishes that DP as a tool is good not only for solving optimization problems, but also for deriving optimal coding schemes.
We also consider an input-constrained BEC where the encoder knows ahead of time if there is an erasure in the channel. Clearly, this non-causal setting is superior in terms of capacity compared to the feedback setting. We have managed to show that the capacity of this setting coincides with our feedback capacity expression, and therefore, a priori knowledge of the erasure in the channel does not increase the feedback capacity. Although this finding and the coding scheme for the feedback setting are sufficient for the feedback-capacity derivation, we argue that the capacity-achieving coding scheme is hard to construct without the DP solution.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{sec:definition} includes notation and description of the problem. Section \ref{sec:main} states the main results of this paper. In Section \ref{sec:formulation}, we provide a brief review of infinite-horizon DP and present the DP formulation of the feedback capacity. In Section \ref{sec:solution_for_eras}, the DP for the erasure channel is calculated, evaluated numerically and, finally, we prove that the Bellman equation is satisfied. In Section \ref{sec:relation_coding}, we present the derivation of the optimal scheme from the solution of the DP. In Section \ref{sec:upperbound}, we derive the capacity of non-causal input-constrained BEC. Finally, the paper is concluded in Section \ref{sec:conclusions}.
\section{Notation and Problem Definition}\label{sec:definition}
Throughout this paper, random variables will be denoted by upper-case letters, such as $X$, while realizations or specific values will be denoted by lower-case letters, e.g., $x$. Calligraphic letters will denote the alphabets of the random variables, e.g., $\mathcal{X}$.
Let $X^{n}$ denote the $n$-tuple $(X_{1},\dots,X_{n})$. For any scalar $\alpha\in[0,1]$, $\bar{\alpha}$ stands for $\bar{\alpha}=1-\alpha$. Let $H_b(\alpha)$ denote the binary entropy for scalar $\alpha\in[0,1]$, i.e., $H_b(\alpha)=-\alpha\log_2\alpha-\bar{\alpha}\log_2\bar{\alpha}$. Let $H_{ter}(\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\alpha_3)$ denote the ternary entropy for scalars $\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\alpha_3\in[0,1]$ such that $\sum_i\alpha_i = 1$, i.e., $H_{ter}(\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\alpha_3)=\sum_i-\alpha_i\log_2\alpha_i$.
The communication setting of a memoryless channel with feedback is described in Fig. \ref{fig:channel}. A message $M$ is drawn uniformly from the set $\{1,\dots,2^{nR}\}$ and made available to the encoder. The encoder at time $i$ knows the message $m$ and the feedback samples $y^{i-1}$, and produces a binary output, $x_i \in \{0,1\}$, as a function of $m$ and $y^{i-1}$. The sequence of encoder outputs, $x_1x_2x_3\ldots$, must satisfy the $(1,\infty)$-RLL input-constraint of the channel, namely, no two consecutive ones are allowed. The channel is memoryless in the sense that the output at time $i$, given the existing information in the system, depends only on the current input, i.e.,
\begin{align}\label{def_memoryless}
p(y_i|x^{i},y^{i-1})=p(y_i|x_i),\ \forall i.
\end{align}
We focus on the erasure channel, shown in Fig. \ref{fig:erasure}. The input alphabet is $\mathcal{X}=\{0,1\}$, while the output can take values in $\mathcal{Y}=\{0,1,?\}$. The probability for erasure in the channel is $\epsilon$ and can take any value in $[0,1]$.
\begin{definition} A $(n,2^{nR},(1,\infty))$ \emph{code} for a constrained-input channel with feedback is defined by a set of encoding functions:
\begin{equation*}
f_i: \{1,\dots,2^{nR}\}\times \mathcal{Y}^{i-1} \rightarrow \mathcal{X}_i, \ i=1,\dots,n,
\end{equation*}
satisfying $f_i(m,y^{i-1})=0 \ \text{if} \ f_{i-1}(m,y^{i-2})=1$ for all $(m,y^{i-1})$, and a decoding function:
\begin{equation*}
\Psi: \mathcal{Y}^{n} \rightarrow \{1,\dots,2^{nR}\}.
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
In addition, we define the non-causal $(1,\infty)$-RLL BEC. For this setting, all definitions remain the same as in the previous setting, but the encoder knows ahead of time whether there is an erasure in the channel. Formally, define $\theta_i$ as the indicator that corresponds to erasure in the channel at time $i$, namely, $\theta_i=0$ if $x_i=y_i$ and $\theta_i=1$ otherwise. The set of encoding functions for this setup is then defined as:
\begin{equation*}
f_i: \{1,\dots,2^{nR}\}\times \mathcal{Y}^{i-1}\times\{0,1\} \rightarrow \mathcal{X}_i, \ i=1,\dots,n,
\end{equation*}
satisfying $f_i(m,y^{i-1},\theta_i)=0 \ \text{if} \ f_{i-1}(m,y^{i-2},\theta_{i-1})=1$ for all $(m,y^{i-1},\theta_{i-1},\theta_{i})$.
The \textit{average probability of error} for a code is defined as $P_{e}^{(n)}=\Pr(M\neq\Psi(Y^{n}))$. A rate $R$ is said to be $(1,\infty)$\textit{-achievable} if there exists a sequence of $(n,2^{nR},(1,\infty))$ codes, such that $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} P_{e}^{(n)}=0$. The \textit{capacity}, $C^{\text{fb}}_\epsilon$, defined to be the supremum over all $(1,\infty)$-achievable rates, is a function of the erasure probability $\epsilon$. Let $C^{\text{nc}}_\epsilon$ denote the capacity for the non-causal $(1,\infty)$-RLL BEC. From operational considerations of the encoding functions for both settings, it is clear that $C^{\text{nc}}_\epsilon\geq C^{\text{fb}}_\epsilon$.
\section{Main Results}\label{sec:main}
The following is our main result concerning the capacity of the $(1,\infty)$-RLL constrained BEC with feedback.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:main}
The capacity of the $(1,\infty)$-RLL input-constrained erasure channel with feedback is
\begin{align}\label{eq:main_capacity}
C^{\text{fb}}_{\epsilon} &= \max_{0\leq p \leq \frac{1}{2}} \frac{H_b(p)}{p+\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}}.
\end{align}
Furthermore, the capacity is achieved by an explicit zero-error coding scheme that is presented in Section \ref{subsec:coding_scheme}, in Algorithm \ref{alg:encoding} and Algorithm \ref{alg:decoding}.
\end{theorem}
In Fig. \ref{fig:capacity}, the feedback capacity is evaluated for different values of erasure probability $\epsilon$. As can be seen, the capacity is a decreasing function for an increasing value of $\epsilon$. For $\epsilon=0$, the capacity is $C^{\text{fb}}_{0}\approx 0.6942$, which can be represented as $\log_2 \phi$, where $\phi$ is the golden ratio and is known as the entropy rate of a binary source with no consecutive ones. For $\epsilon=1$, the capacity value is $C^{\text{fb}}_{1}=0$, as expected.
The capacity of the non-constrained BEC can be expressed as $\max_{0\leq p\leq\frac{1}{2}}\frac{H_{b}(p)}{\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}}=1-\epsilon$. Note that the only difference between this term and our capacity expression in \eqref{eq:main_capacity} is the denominator. This fact hints that the capacity expressions of other input constraints may share a common structure.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\psfrag{A}[][][1]{}
\psfrag{B}[t][][1]{Erasure probability $\epsilon$}
\psfrag{C}[b][][1]{Capacity $C^{\text{fb}}_{\epsilon}$}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.28]{capacity_plot.eps}
\caption{The capacity $C^{\text{fb}}_{\epsilon}$, as a function of $\epsilon$, of the $(1,\infty)$-RLL input-constrained BEC with feedback.}
\label{fig:capacity}
\end{figure}
The next theorem states that the non-causal $(1,\infty)$-RLL input-constrained BEC has the same capacity as the feedback setting.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:non_causal}
Non-causal knowledge of erasures does not increase the feedback capacity, i.e.,
\begin{align*}
C^{\text{nc}}_{\epsilon}&=C^{\text{fb}}_{\epsilon}.
\end{align*}
\end{theorem}
Next, we show the properties of the capacity expression \eqref{eq:main_capacity}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:concave} Define the function $f_{\epsilon}(p)=\frac{H_b(p)}{p+\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}}$, where $p\in[0,1]$. The following properties hold for $f_{\epsilon}(p)$:
\begin{itemize}
\item The function $f_{\epsilon}(p)$ is concave on $[0,1]$, for any $\epsilon\geq 0$.
\item The function $f_{\epsilon}(p)$ has only one maximum in $[0,1]$, which is the only real solution of the equation $p^{\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}=(1-p)^{1+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}$. This maximum lies in $[0,\frac{1}{2}]$.
\item Denote by $p_{\epsilon}$ the argument that achieves the maximum of $f_{\epsilon}(p)$. The capacity can also be expressed by,
\begin{equation*}
C_{\epsilon}^{\text{fb}} = \frac{-\log_2(p_{\epsilon})}{1+\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
The proof of Lemma \ref{lemma:concave} is presented in Appendix \ref{app:lemma concave}.
\section{Feedback Capacity and Dynamic Programming}\label{sec:formulation}
The normalized, directed information was introduced by Massey in \cite{Massey90} as $\frac{1}{n}I(X^n\rightarrow Y^n)= \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n I(X^i;Y_i|Y^{i-1})$. Massey showed that the maximum normalized directed information upper bounds the capacity of channels with feedback, and subsequently, it was proved that this expression indeed characterizes the feedback capacity for a broad class of channels \cite{TatikondaMitter_IT09,Kramer03,Kim08_feedback_directed,PermuterWeissmanGoldsmith09,ShraderPermuter09CompoundIT}. Of most relevance to our work is the feedback capacity of the unifilar finite state channel that was characterized in \cite{PermuterCuffVanRoyWeissman08}. The next theorem follows from Theorem $1$ in \cite{PermuterCuffVanRoyWeissman08}, by substituting $S_{t-1}=X_{t-1}$ as the channel state at time $t$.
\begin{theorem}[Theorem 1, \cite{PermuterCuffVanRoyWeissman08}]\label{theorem:cap_as_DP}
The capacity of an $(1,\infty)$-RLL input-constrained memoryless channel with feedback can be written as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_capacity_as_DP}
C_{\epsilon}^{\text{fb}} = \sup \liminf_{N\rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{N} \sum_{t=1}^{N}I(X_t,X_{t-1};Y_t|Y^{t-1}),
\end{equation}
where the supremum is taken with respect to $\{p(x_{t}|x_{t-1},y^{t-1}):p(x_{t}=1|x_{t-1}=1,y^{t-1})=0\}_{t\geq 1}$.
\end{theorem}
Having written the capacity of the input constrained channel with feedback as \eqref{eq_capacity_as_DP}, we proceed to show that calculating the capacity can be formulated as an average-reward DP.
\subsection{Average-Reward Dynamic Programs}\label{subsec:Av_Re_DP}
Each DP is defined by the tuple $(\mathcal{Z},\mathcal{U},\mathcal{W},F,P_Z,P_w,g)$.
We consider a discrete-time dynamic system evolving according to:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_DP}
z_t=F(z_{t-1},u_t,w_t),\ t=1,2,\dots
\end{equation}
Each state, $z_t$, takes values in a Borel space $\mathcal{Z}$, each action, $u_t$, takes values in a compact subset $\mathcal{U}$ of a Borel space, and each disturbance, $w_t$, takes values in a measurable space $\mathcal{W}$. The initial state, $z_0$, is drawn from the distribution $P_Z$, and the disturbance, $w_t$, is drawn from $P_w(\cdot|z_{t-1},u_t)$.
The history, $h_t=(z_0,w_1,\dots,w_{t-1})$, summarizes all the information available to the controller at time $t$. The controller at time $t$ chooses the action, $u_t$, by a function $\mu_t$ that maps histories to actions, i.e., $u_t = \mu_t(h_t)$. The collection of these functions is called a policy and is denoted as $\pi=\{\mu_1,\mu_2,\dots\}$. Note that given a policy, $\pi$, and the history, $h_t$, one can compute the actions vector, $u^t$, and the states of the system, $z_1,z_2,\dots,z_{t-1}$.
Our objective is to maximize the average reward given a bounded reward function $g: \mathcal{Z}\times \mathcal{U}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$. The average reward for a given policy $\pi$ is given by:
\begin{equation*}
\rho_{\pi} = \liminf _{N\rightarrow\infty} \frac{1}{N}\mathbb{E}_{\pi}\left[\sum_{t=1}^{N}g(Z_{t-1}, \mu_t(h_t))\right],
\end{equation*}
where the subscript $\pi$ indicates that actions $u_t$ are generated by the policy $\pi$. The optimal average reward is defined as
\begin{equation*}
\rho = \sup_{\pi} \rho_{\pi}.
\end{equation*}
\subsection{Formulation of the feedback capacity as DP}\label{subsec:formulation}
The state of the dynamic programming, $z_{t-1}$, is defined as the conditioned probability vector $\beta_{t-1}(x_{t-1}) = p(x_{t-1}|y^{t-1})$. The action space, $\mathcal{U}$, is the set of stochastic matrices, $p(x_t|x_{t-1})$, satisfying the $(1,\infty)$-RLL constraint. For a given policy and an initial state, the encoder at time $t-1$ can calculate the state, $\beta_{t-1}(x_{t-1})$, since the tuple $y^{t-1}$ is available from the feedback. The disturbance is taken to be the channel output, $w_t=y_{t}$, and the reward gained at time $t-1$ is chosen as $I(Y_{t};X_{t},X_{t-1}|y^{t-1})$. The formulation is summarized in Table \ref{table:formulation}.
\textbf{Existence of System:}
We need to show that for a given policy, $\pi=\{\mu_1,\mu_2,\dots\}$, the state $z_t$ can be calculated from the tuple $(z_{t-1},u_t,y_{t})$.
Consider,
\begin{align}\label{state_DP}
\beta_t(x_t)&=p(x_t|y^{t}) \nonumber\\
&=\sum_{x_{t-1}} p(x_t,x_{t-1}|y^{t}) \nonumber\\
&=\frac{\sum_{x_{t-1}} p(x_t,x_{t-1},y_{t}|y^{t-1})}{p(y_{t}|y^{t-1})} \nonumber\\
&= \frac{\sum_{x_{t-1}} p(x_{t-1}|y^{t-1})p(x_t|x_{t-1},y^{t-1})p(y_{t}|y^{t-1},x_t,x_{t-1})}{\sum_{x_{t},x_{t-1}} p(y_{t},x_{t},x_{t-1}|y^{t-1})} \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(a)}= \frac{\sum_{x_{t-1}} p(x_{t-1}|y^{t-1})p(x_t|x_{t-1},y^{t-1})p(y_{t}|x_t)}{\sum_{x_{t},x_{t-1}} p(x_{t-1}|y^{t-1})p(x_{t}|x_{t-1},y^{t-1})p(y_{t}|x_{t})} \nonumber\\
&= \frac{\sum_{x_{t-1}} \beta_{t-1}(x_{t-1})u_t(x_t,x_{t-1})p(y_{t}|x_t)}{\sum_{x_{t},x_{t-1}} \beta_{t-1}(x_{t-1})u_t(x_{t},x_{t-1})p(y_{t}|x_{t})},
\end{align}
where $(a)$ follows from the memoryless property \eqref{def_memoryless}.
Therefore, there exists a function $F$, such that $\beta_t(x_t)=F(\beta_{t-1}(x_{t-1}),u_t(x_t,x_{t-1}),w_{t})$.
\begin{table}[ht]
\caption{Formulation of capacity as DP}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
\hline
Input-constrained memoryless channel & Dynamic Programming \\ \hline\hline
$p(x_{t-1}|y^{t-1})$ & $z_{t-1}$, state at time $t-1$\\ \hline
Constrained $p(x_t|x_{t-1})$ & $u_t$, action taken at time $t-1$ \\ \hline
$y_{t}$ & $w_t$, disturbance generated at time $t$ \\ \hline
Equation \eqref{state_DP} & $z_t=F(z_{t-1},u_t,w_t)$, system equation \\ \hline
$I(Y_{t};X_{t},X_{t-1}|y^{t-1})$ & $g(z_{t-1},u_t)$, reward gained at time $t-1$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}\label{table:formulation}
\end{table}
\textbf{Disturbance:}
Let us show that the disturbance distribution depends on the current state and action only, with no dependence on past information, i.e., $p(w_t|w^{t-1},z^{t-1},u^t) = p(w_t|z_{t-1},u_t)$.
\begin{align*}
p(w_t|w^{t-1},z^{t-1},u^t)&=p(y_{t}|y^{t-1},\beta^{t-1},u^t)\\
&=\sum_{x_{t},x_{t-1}} p(y_{t},x_{t},x_{t-1}|y^{t-1},\beta^{t-1},u^t)\\
&=\sum_{x_{t},x_{t-1}} p(x_{t-1}|y^{t-1},\beta^{t-1},u^t)p(x_{t}|x_{t-1},y^{t-1},\beta^{t-1},u^t)p(y_{t}|x_{t},x_{t-1},\beta^{t-1},u^t,y^{t-1})\\
&\stackrel{(a)}=\sum_{x_{t},x_{t-1}} p(x_{t-1}|\beta_{t-1},u_t)p(x_{t}|x_{t-1},\beta_{t-1},u_t)p(y_{t}|x_{t})\\
&=\sum_{x_{t},x_{t-1}} p(y_{t},x_{t},x_{t-1}|\beta_{t-1},u_t)\\
&= p(y_{t}|\beta_{t-1},u_t)\\
&= p(w_{t}|z_{t-1},u_t),\\
\end{align*}
where $(a)$ follows from the fact that the value of $p(x_{t-1}|y^{t-1},\beta^{t-1},u^t)$ is determined by $\beta_{t-1}$, the fact that $x_t$ depends only on the triplet $(x_{t-1},\beta_{t-1},u_t)$, and finally, the fact that the channel is memoryless.
\textbf{Reward:}
We need to show that the reward, $I(Y_{t};X_{t},X_{t-1}|y^{t-1})$, that is achieved at time $t-1$ is a function of the current state, $\beta_{t-1}(x_{t-1})$, and of the chosen action $u_{t}$. Note that the term of the reward depends on the conditional distribution $p(y_t,x_{t},x_{t-1}|y^{t-1})$ only.
For an initial state $z_0$ and a given policy $\pi=\{\mu_1,\mu_2,\dots\}$, the term $\beta_{t-1}$ is determined by $y^{t-1}$. Let us show that the reward achieved at time $t-1$ depends on the current state, action and the channel characterization,
\begin{align*}
p(y_t,x_{t},x_{t-1}|y^{t-1})&\stackrel{(a)}=p(x_{t-1}|y^{t-1})p(x_{t}|x_{t-1},y^{t-1})p(y_{t}|x_{t})\\
&=\beta_{t-1}(x_{t-1})u_t(x_t,x_{t-1})p(y_{t}|x_{t}),
\end{align*}
where $(a)$ follows from the chain rule and the memoryless property \eqref{def_memoryless}. Recall that the term $p(y_t|x_t)$ is given by the channel characterization, and thus, the reward depends on the state, $\beta_{t-1}$, and the chosen action, $u_t$. Therefore, the reward at time $t-1$ can be written as:
\begin{equation*}
g(z_{t-1},u_t) = I(Y_{t};X_t,X_{t-1}|\beta_{t-1},u_t).
\end{equation*}
It then follows that the optimal average reward of the DP is:
\begin{align*}
\rho^{\ast} &= \sup_{\pi}\liminf _{N\rightarrow\infty} \frac{1}{N}\sum_{t=1}^{N}I_{\pi}(Y_{t};X_t,X_{t-1}|Y^{t-1}),
\end{align*}
where the subscript $\pi$ indicates that the mutual information is calculated with respect to the policy $\pi$. This term is the capacity for an input-constrained memoryless channel with feedback as presented in Theorem \ref{theorem:cap_as_DP}, and we conclude that the optimal average reward is equal to the capacity.
\section{Solution For the Erasure Channel}\label{sec:solution_for_eras}
This section is organized as follows: Section \ref{subsec:form_for_erasure} formulates feedback capacity of the BEC as DP using the notation from Section \ref{subsec:formulation}. In Section \ref{subsec:numer_eval}, we evaluate a numerical solution using the value iteration algorithm, and finally, in Section \ref{subsec:bellman}, we present the Bellman equation and its solution for the BEC. The solution of the Bellman equation concludes the derivation of the feedback capacity expression in Theorem. \ref{theorem:main}.
\subsection{Formulation of the erasure channel as DP}\label{subsec:form_for_erasure}
The state of the DP at time $t-1$, $z_{t-1}$, is the probability vector $[p(x_{t-1}=0|y^{t-1}), p(x_{t-1}=1|y^{t-1})]$. With some abuse of notation, we refer from now on to $z_{t-1}\triangleq p(x_{t-1}=0|y^{t-1})$ as the first component of the vector, which also determines the second component, since they sum to $1$.
Each action, $u_{t}$, is a constrained $2\times2$ stochastic matrix, $p(x_t|x_{t-1})$, of the form:
\begin{equation*}
u_{t}=\left[\begin{array}{cc}
p(x_t=0|x_{t-1}=0) & p(x_t=1|x_{t-1}=0) \\
1 & 0 \end{array}\right].
\end{equation*}
The disturbance $w_t$ is the channel output, $y_t$, and can take values in $\{0,1,?\}$. With the above definitions and \eqref{state_DP}, the system equation can be expressed as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:system_erasure}
z_{t}=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \text{if } w_t=0, \\
1 - z_{t-1} + z_{t-1}u_{t}(1,1) & \text{if } w_t=?, \\
0 & \text{if } w_t=1. \end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
At this point, to simplify notations we note that $1 - z_{t-1} + z_{t-1}u_{t}(1,1)$ can be written as $1-z_{t-1}u_{t}(1,2)$ . We denote $\delta_t\triangleq z_{t-1}u_{t}(1,2)$, and this implies the constraint $0\leq\delta_t\leq z_{t-1}$, since $u_t$, by definition, must be a stochastic matrix. Furthermore, when investigating the relation of DP and encoding procedures, $u_t$ has to be recovered from $\delta_t$, given $z_{t-1}$. This calculation is trivial for $z_{t-1}\neq0$, while for $z_{t-1}=0$, we note that $u_t(1,2)$ has no effect on the DP, and therefore, $u_t(1,2)$ can be fixed to zero.
To calculate the reward, the conditional distribution $p(x_t,x_{t-1},y_t|z_{t-1},u_t)$ is described in Table \ref{table:joint_distr}, and it follows that the reward is:
\begin{align*}
g(z_{t-1},u_t) &= I(Y_t;X_t,X_{t-1}|z_{t-1},u_t) \\
&= H(Y_t|z_{t-1},u_t) - H(Y_t|X_t,X_{t-1},z_{t-1},u_t)\\
&\stackrel{(a)}= H_{ter}((1-\delta_t)\bar{\epsilon}, \epsilon , \delta_t\bar{\epsilon}) - H_b(\epsilon)\\
&\stackrel{(b)}= H_{b}(\epsilon)+ \bar{\epsilon}H_b(\delta_t) - H_b(\epsilon)\\
&= \bar{\epsilon}H_b(\delta_t),
\end{align*}
where $(a)$ follows from the marginal distribution $p(y_t|z_{t-1},u_t)$ in Table \ref{table:joint_distr} and the definition of $\delta_t$, while $(b)$ follows from an easily verifiable identity: $H_{ter}(a\bar{b},\bar{a}\bar{b},b)=H_{b}(b) + \bar{b}H_{b}(a)$, for all $a,b\in [0,1]$.
\begin{table}[ht]
\caption{the conditional distribution $p(x_t,x_{t-1},y_t|z_{t-1},u_t)$}
\label{table:joint_distr}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c||c|c|c|}
\hline
$x_t$ & $x_{t-1}$ & $y_t=0$ & $y_t=?$ & $y_t=1$ \\ \hline \hline
$0$ & $0$ & $z_{t-1}u_t(1,1)\bar{\epsilon}$ & $z_{t-1}u_t(1,1)\epsilon$ & $0$ \\ \hline
$1$ & $0$ & $0$ & $z_{t-1}u_t(1,2)\epsilon$ & $z_{t-1}u_t(1,2)\bar{\epsilon}$ \\ \hline
$0$ & $1$ & $(1-z_{t-1})\bar{\epsilon}$ & $(1-z_{t-1})\epsilon$ & $0$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
To apply the value iteration in the next subsection, it is convenient to define the operator of the DP:
\begin{align}\label{eq_operator}
(Th)(z) &= \sup_{u\in\mathcal{U}} g(z,u) + \int P_{W}(dw|z,u)h(F(z,u,w)),
\end{align}
for all functions $h:\mathcal{Z}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$.
For our case, the operator of the DP takes the form of
\begin{align}\label{eq_operator_erasure}
(Th_{\epsilon})(z)&= \sup_{0\leq\delta \leq z} \bar{\epsilon}H_b(\delta) + (1-\delta)\bar{\epsilon}h_{\epsilon}(1) + \epsilon h_{\epsilon}(1-\delta) + \delta\bar{\epsilon}h_{\epsilon}(0),
\end{align}
for all $h_{\epsilon}:[0,1]\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, where the subscript $\epsilon$ indicates that $h_{\epsilon}$ depends on the parameter ${\epsilon}$.
\subsection{Numerical evaluation}\label{subsec:numer_eval}
Now, that we have the DP formulation for our problem, we can apply the value iteration algorithm to estimate the optimal average reward. The value iteration algorithm is simply applying the DP operator from \eqref{eq_operator_erasure} successively, and it has the form $h_k(z)=(Th_{k-1})(z)$ with $h_{0}(z)=0$. The state of the DP and the values in the action matrices are continuous, which cannot be implemented by a finite-precision computer. To this end, a quantization of $5000$ points in the unit interval for both $z_t$ and $\delta_t$ was performed, and the results after 20 iterations are presented in Fig. \ref{fig:numerical} for erasure probability $\epsilon=0.5$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\psfrag{A}[b][][1]{Action $\delta_{20}$}
\psfrag{B}[b][][1]{Value function $h_{20}$}
\psfrag{C}[t][][1]{State $z$}
\psfrag{D}[b][][1]{$\delta_{20}$}
\psfrag{E}[b][][1]{$h_{20}$}
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Numerical.eps}}
\caption{Value iteration evaluation for the erasure channel with $\epsilon=0.5$. The algorithm was implemented with 20 iterations and quantization of 5000 points for both action and state.}
\label{fig:numerical}
\end{figure}
We also simulated the system with the estimated optimal action $\delta_{20}$. The initial state, $z_0$, was chosen to be zero and the action was taken according to $\delta_{20}$ which led to a gained reward. The disturbance was generated randomly according to the induced distribution from Table \ref{table:joint_distr}. Having in hand the current state, action and disturbance, the new state was calculated and the process was repeated $10^6$ times. This simulation led to an approximate average reward of $0.4056$ and the histogram of the states is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:hist}. The significant importance of a discrete histogram will be discussed in Section \ref{sec:relation_coding}, where it is explained how the DP simulation leads us to derive an optimal coding scheme for our channel setting.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\psfrag{A}[b][][0.8]{Histogram of the state $z$}
\centerline{\includegraphics[height=6cm]{hist.eps}}
\caption{Histogram of system states after $10^6$ runs.}
\label{fig:hist}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The Bellman Equation}\label{subsec:bellman}
In dynamic programming, the Bellman equation suggests a sufficient condition for average reward optimality. This equation establishes a mechanism for verifying that a given average reward is optimal. The next result encapsulates the Bellman equation and can be found in \cite{Arapos93_average_cose_survey}.
\begin{theorem}[Theorem 6.1, \cite{Arapos93_average_cose_survey}]\label{theorem:bellman}
If $\rho\in\mathbb{R}$ and a bounded function $h:\mathcal{Z}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ satisfies for all $z \in \mathcal{Z}$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_bellman}
\rho + h(z) = \sup_{u\in\mathcal{U}} g(z,u) + \int P_{W}(dw|z,u)h(F(z,u,w)),
\end{equation}
then $\rho=\rho^{\ast}$. Furthermore, if there is a function $\mu : \mathcal{Z} \rightarrow \mathcal{U}$ such that $\mu(z)$ attains the supremum for each $z$, then $\rho_\pi = \rho^{\ast}$ for $\pi=\{\mu_0, \mu_1,\dots\}$ with $\mu_t(h_t) = \mu(z_{t-1})$ for each $t$.
\end{theorem}
For our DP, substituting \eqref{eq_operator_erasure} into \eqref{eq_bellman} yields the next Bellman equation:
\begin{align}\label{eq_our_bellman}
h_{\epsilon}(z) + \rho_{\epsilon} &= \sup_{0\leq\delta \leq z} \bar{\epsilon}H_{b}(\delta) + \bar{\epsilon}(1-\delta)h_{\epsilon}(1) + \epsilon h_{\epsilon}(1-\delta) + \bar{\epsilon}\delta h_{\epsilon}(0),
\end{align}
for all functions $h_{\epsilon}$.
Let us denote two constants $\rho_{\epsilon}^{\ast}$ and $p_{\epsilon}$,
\begin{align}\label{eq:rho_z_defintion}
\rho_{\epsilon}^{\ast} &= \max_{0\leq p \leq \frac{1}{2}} \frac{H_b(p)}{p+\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}}, \nonumber\\
p_\epsilon &= \argmax_{0\leq p \leq \frac{1}{2}} \frac{H_b(p)}{p+\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}},
\end{align}
and a bounded function,
\begin{align}\label{eq:func_star}
h_{\epsilon}^{\ast}(z) =
\begin{cases} \bar{\epsilon}H_b(z) - z\bar{\epsilon}\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}} &\mbox{if } 0 \leq z \leq p_{\epsilon} \\
\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}} & \mbox{if } p_{\epsilon} \leq z \leq 1. \end{cases}
\end{align}
We proceed to show the DP solution by solving \eqref{eq_our_bellman}.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:sol_bellman}
The constant $\rho_{\epsilon}^{\ast}$ and the function $h_\epsilon^{\ast}(z)$ given in \eqref{eq:rho_z_defintion} and \eqref{eq:func_star}, respectively, satisfy the Bellman equation \eqref{eq_our_bellman} for each $\epsilon$.
Therefore, $\rho_{\epsilon}^{\ast}$ is the optimal average reward.
\end{theorem}
As $\rho_{\epsilon}^{\ast}$ is equal to the capacity expression \eqref{eq:main_capacity}, Theorem \ref{theorem:sol_bellman} concludes the proof for the first part of Theorem \ref{theorem:main}. The proof of Theorem \ref{theorem:sol_bellman} is presented in Appendix \ref{app:proof_bellman}.
\section{Derivation of the capacity-achieving coding scheme from the DP solution}\label{sec:relation_coding}
In this section, we derive the optimal coding scheme using the DP solution and finally show that this leads to a capacity-achieving coding scheme. The method comprises recovering the optimal constrained input distributions $\{p(x_t|x_{t-1},y^{t-1})\}_{t\geq 1}$ from the solution of the DP.
\subsection{Relation of the Coding Scheme to Dynamic Programming Results}\label{subsec:relation}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\psfrag{A}[][][1.2]{$z=0$}
\psfrag{B}[][][1.2]{$z=1$}
\psfrag{C}[][][1]{$z=1-p$}
\psfrag{D}[][][0.9]{$\delta^{\ast}=0$}
\psfrag{E}[][][0.9]{$\delta^{\ast}=p$}
\psfrag{F}[][][0.9]{$\delta^{\ast}=p$}
\psfrag{G}[][][1]{$w=0 / ?$}
\psfrag{H}[][][1]{$w=0$}
\psfrag{I}[][][1]{$w=1$}
\psfrag{J}[][][1]{$w=?$}
\centerline{\includegraphics[height=9.5cm]{DP_scheme.eps}}
\caption{State diagram of the DP for the input-constrained BEC under an optimal policy.}
\label{fig:DP_scheme}
\end{figure}
The histogram for $\epsilon=0.5$, in Fig. \ref{fig:hist}, shows that under an optimal policy, $\delta^{\ast}$, the system evolves between three steady states. Moreover, the solution of the Bellman equation indicates that there exists an optimal stationary policy, and therefore, we look at the stationary phase of the DP. The states, $z$, take values in the finite set $\{0,1-p,1\}$, with $p\triangleq p_{\epsilon}$ (Eq. \eqref{eq:rho_z_defintion}); the subscript $\epsilon$ is omitted for convenience, but all details are discussed for a fixed $\epsilon\in[0,1]$ and its corresponding $p_{\epsilon}$. For each state, the optimal policy, $\delta^{\ast}$, is known from the Bellman equation and arrows can be drawn between the states as a function of the disturbance. The state diagram for our DP is presented in Fig. \ref{fig:DP_scheme}.
Converting the state diagram in Fig. \ref{fig:DP_scheme} into channel coding terms, using the formulation described in Table \ref{table:formulation}, results in an encoding procedure as described in Fig. \ref{fig:encoding_procedure}. Specifically, the states, $p(x_{t-1}=0|y^{t-1})$, take values from $\{0,1-p,1\}$. Each state has its corresponding action, $p(x_{t}=1|x_{t-1}=0)$, and the encoding procedure evolves as a function of the output $y_t$. Recall that $p(x_{t}=0|x_{t-1}=1)=1$, and therefore, the action $p(x_{t}=1|x_{t-1}=0)$ is sufficient to determine the transfer matrix between $X_{t-1}$ and $X_t$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\psfrag{A}[b][][.8]{$\mathbf{p(x_{t-1}=0|y^{t-1})}$}
\psfrag{B}[t][][.8]{$\mathbf{=0}$}
\psfrag{C}[b][][.8]{$\mathbf{p(x_{t-1}=0|y^{t-1})}$}
\psfrag{D}[t][][.8]{$\mathbf{=1}$}
\psfrag{E}[b][][.8]{$\mathbf{p(x_{t-1}=0|y^{t-1})}$}
\psfrag{F}[t][][.8]{$\mathbf{=1-p}$}
\psfrag{K}[b][][1]{$p(x_{t}=1|x_{t-1}=0)=0$}
\psfrag{L}[b][][1]{$p(x_{t}=1|x_{t-1}=0)=p$}
\psfrag{M}[r][][1]{$p(x_{t}=1|x_{t-1}=0)=\frac{p}{1-p}$}
\psfrag{G}[][][1]{$y_t=0 / ?$}
\psfrag{H}[][][1]{$y_t=0$}
\psfrag{I}[][][1]{$y_t=1$}
\psfrag{J}[][][1]{$y_t=?$}
\psfrag{Z}[][][.7]{}
\psfrag{X}[][][.7]{}
\centerline{\includegraphics[height=10.5cm]{encoding_procedure_try.eps}}
\caption{Optimal encoding procedure for the input-constrained BEC. This encoding procedure was achieved from Fig. \ref{fig:DP_scheme} by converting states, actions and disturbances into their corresponding channel coding terms.}
\label{fig:encoding_procedure}
\end{figure}
Let us explain how the encoding procedure evolves. We refer to the state $p(x_{t-1}=0|y^{t-1})=1$ as the \emph{ground state}, since this indicates that $'0'$ was received at the decoder and, therefore, the encoder is allowed to transmit any input to the channel. For the ground state, the next transmitted bit is distributed according to $\text{Ber}(p)$ and it is shown to be the optimal action.
Upon receiving $y_t=0$ at the decoder, the system remains at the ground state and the encoding procedure starts over again. When the output is $y_t=1$, the system moves to the state $p(x_{t-1}=0|y^{t-1})=0$. At this state, since the last input was necessarily $'1'$, the encoder is forced to transmit $'0'$. Therefore, the decoder knows that $'0'$ is the only legitimate input, and the system returns to the ground state regardless of whether the input was erased or not.
The remaining scenario to examine begins at the ground state and is followed by $y_t=?$. The optimal action at the lower state, $p(x_{t-1}=0|y^{t-1})=1-p$, suggests that if $'0'$ is erased, the new transmitted bit should be distributed according to $\text{Ber}(\frac{p}{1-p})$. The term $\frac{p}{1-p}$ is in the unit interval, since $p\leq \frac{1}{2}$. Additionally, the input constraint implies that if $'1'$ was erased then $'0'$ should be transmitted. Upon consecutive erasures, the encoder continues to transmit bits according to this policy. When an output is not an erasure, the system returns to the ground state, and this might take one or two time instances, depending on whether the (unerased) output bit is $'0'$ or $'1'$.
The main challenge is to understand how this encoding procedure can be interpreted as transmitting a message by the encoder. Let the messages be points in the unit interval, i.e., messages take values in the set $\mathcal{M}\triangleq\{\frac{k}{2^{nR}}\}_{k=0}^{2^{nR}-1}$. At each time instance, the unit interval contains sub-intervals with labels that can be $'0'$ or $'1'$, and the input to the channel is simply the label of the sub-interval containing the message. Such an association of messages into a specified interval has been done before in \cite{horstein_original,Kailath_scheme_one,Kim06_MA,shayevitz_posterior_mathcing}.
The partition into sub-intervals will be according to parameters $p$ and $q\triangleq\frac{p}{1-p}$, as described in Fig. \ref{fig:encoding_procedure}. When performing a partition at the ground state, the lower interval is labelled $'0'$ while the upper interval is labelled $'1'$. Before providing the precise encoding algorithm, it will be convenient to understand the labelling process in the example described in Fig. \ref{fig:encoding_example}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\psfrag{A}[t][][.9]{$\bar{p}$}
\psfrag{B}[t][][.9]{$\bar{p}\bar{q}$}
\psfrag{C}[t][][.9]{$\bar{p}\bar{q}\bar{q}$}
\psfrag{D}[t][][0.9]{$1$}
\psfrag{Z}[t][][0.9]{$0$}
\psfrag{E}[t][][0.9]{$\bar{p} + p\bar{q}$}
\psfrag{L}[l][][0.6]{Messages}
\psfrag{G}[l][][0.6]{Partition}
\psfrag{F}[l][][.6]{Transmitted message}
\psfrag{H}[r][][.7]{$y_1=?$}
\psfrag{I}[r][][.7]{$y_2=?$}
\psfrag{J}[l][][.7]{$y_2=0/1$}
\psfrag{K}[l][][.7]{$y_3=0/1$}
\psfrag{x}[l][][0.7]{\underline{\textbf{Legend:}}}
\centerline{\includegraphics[height=8cm]{Scheme.eps}}
\caption{Example for transmitting the black-dot message using the encoding procedure in Fig. \ref{fig:encoding_procedure} for $3$ time instances. The initial partition at the ground state is according to $p$, and the encoder transmits $'0'$ since the black-dot message falls within $[0,\bar{p})$. Upon a successful transmission, the encoder moves back to the ground state and a new procedure begins. In case of erasure, we move to $t=2$, and the interval that was labelled $'0'$ is partitioned according to $q=\frac{p}{1-p}$. The input constraint is preserved since the interval $[\bar{p},1)$, that was labelled $'1'$, is now flipped to $'0'$. The encoder transmits $'1'$ since the message falls within $[\bar{p}\bar{q},\bar{p})$. In case of another erasure, a partition of $q$ should be performed for the intervals that are labelled $'0'$. These intervals are $[0,\bar{p}\bar{q})$ and $[\bar{p},1)$, which are sum up to $1-p$. Since $q=\frac{p}{1-p}$, we simply change the label of $[\bar{p},1)$ (which has length of $p$) to $'1'$, and the label of $[0,\bar{p}\bar{q})$ remains $'0'$. The input-constraint is preserved since $[\bar{p}\bar{q},\bar{p})$ is re-labelled as $'0'$. Upon another erasures, the labelling will be exchanged between the ones presented in $t=2$ and $t=3$ until a successful transmission. Note that the labelling at $t=1$ and $t=3$ are essentially the same.}
\label{fig:encoding_example}
\vspace{-6mm}
\end{figure}
As can be seen in Fig. \ref{fig:encoding_example}, all the proposed partitions in Fig. \ref{fig:encoding_procedure} can be encapsulated into two possible labellings. We denote the labelling at $t=1$ as $L_1$, and the labelling at $t=2$ as $L_2$. The initial labelling at the ground state is chosen as $L_1$, and upon erasure, the current labelling will be replaced with the other labelling. Note that changing the labelling $L_i$ with $L_j$ for $i\neq j$ preserves the input constraint and can be done simply by exchanging the labels of $[\bar{p}\bar{q},\bar{p})$ and $[\bar{p},1)$, while the label of $[0,\bar{p}\bar{q})$ remains $'0'$.
To summarize at this point, at each time instant, we have two possible labellings (which depend on the value of $\epsilon$) of the unit interval which define uniquely the mapping from messages to the channel input. The current labelling is determined only by the output tuple, $y^{t-1}$, and therefore, the decoder and encoder both agree on the latter.
\subsection{Capacity-achieving Coding Scheme}\label{subsec:coding_scheme}
At time instance $t-1$, the \textit{set of possible messages} is defined as $\mathcal{M}_{t-1}=\{m\in\mathcal{M}:p(m|y^{t-1})>0\}$, with $\mathcal{M}_{0}=\mathcal{M}$. The conditional distribution $p(m|y^{t-1})$ is calculated using Bayes' rule, using the fact that the encoding procedure and both labellings are revealed to all parties before transmission begins. Note that the set of possible messages can also be calculated at the encoder, since the output tuple, $y^{t-1}$, is available from the feedback.
Any received symbol at the decoder might reduce the set of potential messages, and a \textit{successful transmission} is defined as a transmission where the size of the set of possible messages is changed, namely, $|\mathcal{M}_{t}|<|\mathcal{M}_{t-1}|$. Specifically, a successful transmission can occur in one of two scenarios; the first is $y_{t}=1$, and the second is where $y_{t}=0$ and $y_{t-1}\neq 1$. Upon a successful transmission, the set of possible messages is calculated and expanded uniformly to the unit interval. To be precise, the messages in the set $\mathcal{M}_t$ take values in $\{\frac{k}{|\mathcal{M}_t|}\}^{|\mathcal{M}_t|-1}_{k=0}$. This transmission procedure continues repeatedly until the set of possible messages contains one message. The detailed encoding and decoding procedures are described in Algorithms \ref{alg:encoding} and \ref{alg:decoding}.
\begin{algorithm}[h!]
\caption{Encoding Procedure}
\label{alg:encoding}
\begin{algorithmic}
\While {Set of possible messages contains more than one message}
\State Label the unit interval according to $L_1$.
\State Transmit the label of the sub-interval containing the message.
\While {Received symbol is an erasure}
\State Exchange the labels of $[\bar{p}\bar{q},\bar{p})$ and $[\bar{p},1)$.
\State Transmit the label of the sub-interval containing the message.
\EndWhile
\If {Received symbol is $'0'$}
\State Denote the messages within sub-intervals which are labelled $'0'$ as the set of possible messages.
\Else
\State Denote the messages within sub-intervals which are labelled $'1'$ as the set of possible messages
\State Transmit $'0'$.
\EndIf
\State Expand the set of possible messages to the unit interval.
\EndWhile
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Decoding Procedure}
\label{alg:decoding}
\begin{algorithmic}
\While {Set of possible messages contains more than one message}
\State Label the unit interval according to $L_1$.
\While {Received symbol is an erasure}
\State Exchange the labels of $[\bar{p}\bar{q},\bar{p})$ and $[\bar{p},1)$.
\EndWhile
\If {Received symbol is $'0'$}
\State Denote the messages within sub-intervals which are labelled $'0'$ as the set of possible messages.
\Else
\State Denote the messages within sub-intervals which are labelled $'1'$ as the set of possible messages.
\State Ignore the next received symbol.
\EndIf
\State Expand the set of possible messages to the unit interval.
\EndWhile
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\textbf{Rate Analysis:}
The main feature of this coding scheme is that the length of the sub-interval that is labelled by $'1'$ is $p$. This property is recorded as Lemma \ref{lemma:constant_amount}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:constant_amount}
At any step of the message transmission process, the lengths of the sub-intervals that are labelled by $'1'$ sum up to $p$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Throughout transmission, there are two possible labellings; for $L_1$, the interval $[\bar{p},1)$ that is labelled $'1'$ has length of $p$, while for $L_2$, the interval $[\bar{p}\bar{q},\bar{p})$ has length of $\bar{p}q=p$.
\end{proof}
From Lemma \ref{lemma:constant_amount}, we note that the encoder transmits $'1'$ if message falls within sub-interval that has length of $p$. However, the messages are discrete points and a partition might fall between two messages. This implies that the transmitted bit is distributed as $\text{Ber}(p+e_i)$, where $e_i$ is a correction factor. In Appendix \ref{app:analysis_accurate}, it is shown that the correction factor has a negligible effect on the rate of the coding scheme. To simplify the derivations here, with some loss of accuracy, we say that each transmitted bit is distributed according to $\text{Ber}(p)$.
In the next lemma, we show that each successful transmission reduces the expected number of bits that is required to describe the set of possible messages by $H_b(p)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:const_amount}
With each successful transmission, the expected number of bits that describe the set of possible messages is reduced by $H_b(p)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume that the set of possible messages is of size $k$; upon a successful transmission, if $'0'$ is received then the new set of possible messages has size $\bar{p}{k}$, and if $'1'$ is received then its new size is $p{k}$. The expected number of bits that is required to describe the new set of possible messages is $\bar{p}\log_2(\bar{p}{k}) + p \log_2( p{k})=\log_2 k-H_b(p)$.
\end{proof}
The next step is to calculate the expected number of channel uses for a \emph{complete procedure}. We define a complete procedure to consist of all transmissions by the encoder starting at some time $t$ at which it is in the ground state, and ending at the first time $t' > t$ at which it returns to the ground state. In other words, a procedure is completed when a $'0'$ or $'1'$ is received at the decoder, including one extra channel use in the case when a $'1'$ has been received and has to be followed by $'0'$.
Let $N$ be a random variable corresponding to the number of channel uses within a complete procedure. The expected value of $N$ will be calculated by the law of total expectation. Define an indicator function \begin{align*}
\theta = \begin{cases} 0 &\mbox{if the received bit is $'0'$} \\
1 & \mbox{if the received bit is $'1'$}, \end{cases} \end{align*}
and consider,
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{E}[N] &\stackrel{(a)}= \mathbb{E}[\mathbb{E}[N|\theta]] \\
&\stackrel{(b)}= \mathbb{E}[\frac{1}{1-\epsilon} + \theta] \\
&\stackrel{(c)}= \frac{1}{1-\epsilon} + p,
\end{align*}
where $(a)$ follows from the law of total expectation, $(b)$ follows from the fact that channel is memoryless and, therefore, $\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}$ is the expected value of time to receive a symbol which is not an erasure, and $(c)$ follows from $\mathbb{E}[\theta]=\Pr(\theta=1)$.
Finally, we prove the second part of Theorem \ref{theorem:main}, specifically, the rate of this coding scheme can be arbitrary close to the capacity expression, $C^{\text{fb}}_{\epsilon}$.
\begin{proof}
It follows from the law of large numbers that the rate of our coding scheme can be arbitrarily close to the expected number of received bits within a complete procedure divided by the expected number of channel uses within a complete procedure. In Lemma \ref{lemma:const_amount}, we showed that within a successful transmission, the expected number of received bits is $H_b(p)$. Moreover, the expected number of channel uses within a complete procedure is $\mathbb{E}[N]=\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}+p$. Therefore, the rate of the code can be arbitrarily close to $R=\frac{H_b(p)}{p + \frac{1}{1-\epsilon}}$.
\end{proof}
The above proof and Theorem \ref{theorem:sol_bellman} conclude the proof of our main result Theorem \ref{theorem:main}.
\section{Non-causal Capacity}\label{sec:upperbound}
In this section, we prove Theorem \ref{theorem:non_causal} by showing that $C_{\epsilon}^{\text{nc}}=\max_{0\leq p \leq \frac{1}{2}} \frac{H_{b}(p)}{p+{\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}}}$. Operational considerations of non-causal and feedback capacities reveal the trivial inequality $C^{\text{nc}}_{\epsilon}\geq C^{\text{fb}}_{\epsilon}$. Furthermore, we derive in this section an upper-bound on $C^{\text{nc}}_{\epsilon}$, which is equal to $C_{\epsilon}^{\text{fb}}$, and this concludes the proof of Theorem \ref{theorem:non_causal} with $C^{\text{nc}}_{\epsilon}= C^{\text{fb}}_{\epsilon}$.
The next lemma shows that it is sufficient to consider encoders which transmit $'0'$ if erasure occurs, i.e., $x_{i}=0$ if $\theta_{i}=1$. The intuition behind this lemma is that replacing erased ones with zeros does not effect the output sequence, while the input-constraint is not violated.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:strict_encoder}
For any $(1,2^{nR},(1,\infty))$ code $\mathcal{C}$ with probability of error $P_{e}^{(n)}$, there exists a $(n,2^{nR},(1,\infty))$ code $\mathcal{C}'$ with probability of error $P_{e}^{(n)}$, satisfying
\begin{equation*}
f_i(m,y^{i-1},\theta_i=1)=0, i=1,\dots,n \ \forall (m,y^{i-1}).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For any $(1,2^{nR},(1,\infty))$ code $\mathcal{C}$ consisting of encoding functions, $\{f_i(\cdot)\}_{i=1}^{n}$, and a decoding function $\Psi(\cdot)$ with probability of error $P_{e}^{(n)}$, define a new sequence of encoding functions as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:new_encoding}
\tilde{f}_{i}(m,y^{i-1},\theta_i)=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
f_{i}(m,y^{i-1},\theta_i) & \text{if } \theta_i=0, \\
0 & \text{if } \theta_i=1, \end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
for all $(m,y^{i-1})$ and $i=1,\dots,n$.
We argue that $\{\tilde{f}_i(\cdot)\}_{i=1}^{n}$ and the original decoding function $\Psi(\cdot)$ determine a new code with the same probability of error $P_{e}^{(n)}$.
First, the set of encoding functions, $\{\tilde{f}_i(\cdot)\}_{i=1}^{n}$, satisfies the input constraint, since we replaced ones with zeros. Further, the output sequence is not affected by our modification, since we replaced only bits that are erased, and therefore, our new code also has probability of error $P_{e}^{(n)}$.
\end{proof}
We introduce $(1,\infty,\text{Ber}(\epsilon))$-RLL \textit{encoder}, which outputs sequences $X^n$ that satisfies two constraints:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The $(1,\infty)$-RLL constraint.
\item $X_i=0$ if $\theta_i=1$ (the constraint induced by Lemma \ref{lemma:strict_encoder}).
\end{enumerate}
The second constraint can be viewed as a "random constraint" since $\theta_i\sim\text{Ber}(\epsilon)$, while the first constraint is a deterministic constraint. Thus, the $(1,\infty,\text{Ber}(\epsilon))$-RLL encoder combines both deterministic and random constraints.
The entropy rate of $(1,\infty,\text{Ber}(\epsilon))$-RLL encoder is measured by $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} \sum_{i=1}^n H(X_i|X^{i-1},\theta^i)$ since this is the available information at the encoder. The next lemma provides an upper bound on the entropy rate of sequences that can be generated by a $(1,\infty,\text{Ber}(\epsilon))$-RLL encoder.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:entropy_rate}
The entropy rate of sequences that are generated by a $(1,\infty,\text{Ber}(\epsilon))$-RLL encoder is upper bounded by
$\max_{0\leq p\leq \frac{1}{2}}\frac{H_{b}(p)}{p+\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that the encoder can choose its output bit, $x_i$, only if $x_{i-1}=\theta_i=0$; we parameterize this by $p(x_i=1|x_{i-1}=0,\theta_i=0)=p$, where $p\in[0,1]$. Now, consider the transition probability matrix of the chain $X^n$,
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{Q} =& \left[
\begin{array}{cc}
\epsilon + \bar{\epsilon}\bar{p} & \bar{\epsilon}p \\
1 & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right],
\end{align*}
where the transition probability $\epsilon + \bar{\epsilon}\bar{p}$ was calculated by
\begin{equation*}
p(x_i=0|x_{i-1}=0)=\sum_{\theta_i}p(x_i=0,\theta_i|x_{i-1}=0).
\end{equation*}
The stationary distribution of this chain is $[x^{\ast}(0) \ x^{\ast}(1)] = [\frac{1}{1+\bar{\epsilon}p} \ \frac{\bar{\epsilon}p}{1+\bar{\epsilon}p}]$.
Consider the next upper bound for some $i$,
\begin{align}\label{eq:lemma_non_proof}
H(X_i|X^{i-1},\theta^i)&\stackrel{(a)}\leq H(X_i|X_{i-1},\theta_i) \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(b)}= H(X_i|X_{i-1},\theta_i=0)\bar{\epsilon}\nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(c)}= H(X_i|x_{i-1}=0,\theta_i=0)p(x_{i-1}=0|\theta_i=0)\bar{\epsilon} \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(d)}= H_b(p)p(x_{i-1}=0)\bar{\epsilon}
\end{align}
where $(a)$ follows conditioning reduces entropy, $(b)$ follows from $H(X_i|X_{i-1},\theta_i=1)=0$, $(c)$ follows from $H(X_i|x_{i-1}=1,\theta_i=0)=0$, and $(d)$ follows from the fact that $X_{i-1}$ is independent of $\theta_i$ and substituting the parameter $p$.
By substituting the stationary distribution $p(x_{i-1}=0)=x^{\ast}(0)$ into \eqref{eq:lemma_non_proof}, we see that the entropy rate of the chain is upper bounded by $\frac{\bar{\epsilon}H_b(p)}{1+\bar{\epsilon}p}$, for some $p\in[0,1]$. This term can also be written as $\frac{H_b(p)}{\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}+p}$, and the parameter $p$ need be maximized only on $[0,0.5]$ from Lemma \ref{lemma:concave}.
\end{proof}
The rate of the message $M$ is upper bounded by the entropy rate of sequences that can be generated by a $(1,\infty,\text{Ber}(\epsilon))$-RLL encoder, and this concludes the proof of Theorem \ref{theorem:non_causal} with
\begin{align*}
C_{\epsilon}^{\text{nc}} &\leq \max_{0\leq p\leq \frac{1}{2}}\frac{H_{b}(p)}{p+\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}}\\
&= C_{\epsilon}^{\text{fb}}.
\end{align*}
\section{Conclusions}\label{sec:conclusions}
We considered the setup of an input-constrained erasure channel with feedback and found its capacity using equivalent DP. We then pursued the complementary derivation of a simple and error-free capacity-achieving coding scheme, which we found using the strong relation between optimal policies in DP and encoding procedures in channel coding. Moreover, we have shown that the capacity remains the same even if the erasure is known non-causally to the encoder.
Following the theorem that feedback does not increase the capacity of a memoryless channel \cite{shannon56}, Shannon also argued that this theorem can be extended to channels with memory if the channel state can be computed at the encoder. Our system setting falls into this criteria, since the previous input of the channel can be thought of as the channel state. The proof for Shannon's argument was omitted, although not trivial, and still stands as a conjecture.
Following Shannon's conjecture, it could be interesting to derive the capacity of the input-constrained erasure channel with delayed feedback, namely, when the input to the channel at time $i$ depends on the message and the tuple $Y^{i-\nu}$, where $\nu$ is the delay of the feedback. Dynamic programming formulation for the delayed-feedback capacity is feasible and could shed light on Shannon's conjecture and on the capacity of the input-constrained erasure channel without feedback. Furthermore, a model with arbitrary delayed feedback will provide a new upper bound for the capacity of the input-constrained BEC without feedback, a problem that is wide open.
\appendices
\section{Proof of Lemma }\label{app:lemma concave}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lemma:concave}]
\begin{itemize}
\item A sufficient condition for the concavity of a function $f(p)$ is that the second derivative is negative for any value of $p$. We denote $k=\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}$ and find a condition on $k$ such that the second derivative is negative. To simplify the derivations, we take $H_{b}(\cdot)$ to be the binary entropy with the natural logarithm base, since multiplication by a constant does not effect concavity. Calculation shows that
\begin{align}
\frac{d^2}{dp^2}\left(\frac{H_b(p)}{p+k}\right) &= \frac{\frac{(p+k)^2}{p(p-1)} -2k\ln\left(\frac{1-p}{p}\right) - 2 \ln (1-p)}{p^3}.
\end{align}
It suffices to examine the sign of the numerator, since $p^3\geq 0$. Define $g(p)\triangleq \frac{(p+k)^2}{p(p-1)} -2k\ln\left(\frac{1-p}{p}\right) - 2 \ln (1-p)$. Derivation of the maximum for $g(p)$ shows that it has only one maximum, which is at $p=\frac{1}{2}$. Substituting $g(\frac{1}{2})= -4(\frac{1}{2}+k)^2 + 2 \ln 2$. It then follows that $g(p)\leq 0, \forall p\in[0,1]$ if and only if $k\geq \sqrt{\frac{1}{2}\ln 2}- \frac{1}{2} \sim 0.088$.
\item Derivation of the first derivative of $f(p)$ shows that the derivative is equal to zero if and only if $p^{\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}=(1-p)^{1+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}$ holds. The uniqueness of the maximum point follows from the fact that $p^{\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}$ increases as $p$ grows, while $(1-p)^{1+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}$ decreases with a growing $p$.
Now, assume that the maximum is $p_m\in(\frac{1}{2},1]$. Symmetry of the binary entropy function implies $H_b(p_m) = H_b(\bar{p}_m)$, and therefore, it is sufficient to examine the denominator. Since both arguments $p_m,\bar{p}_m\in[0,1]$, it then follows that $f(p_m)<f(\bar{p}_m)$, which is a contradiction.
\item This property follows from substituting the relation $p^{\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}=(1-p)^{1+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}$ into the function $f(p)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{theorem:sol_bellman}}\label{app:proof_bellman}
The next lemma is technical and will be useful in the proof of Theorem \ref{theorem:sol_bellman}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:same_max}
The function $f_{\epsilon}(z)= \bar{\epsilon}H_b(z) -z\bar{\epsilon}\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}$ is concave on $[0,1]$ and its maximum is at $z=p_\epsilon$, where $p_\epsilon = \argmax_{0\leq p \leq \frac{1}{2}} \frac{H_b(p)}{p+\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lemma:same_max}]
The concavity of $f_{\epsilon}(z)$ on $z\in[0,1]$ follows from the concavity of the binary entropy function, and therefore, it suffices to show that the first derivative of $f_{\epsilon}(z)$ at $p_{\epsilon}$ is equal to zero.
The definition of $p_{\epsilon}$, \eqref{eq:rho_z_defintion}, and Lemma \ref{lemma:concave} imply the relation, $\frac{d}{dz}\left[ \frac{H_b(z)}{z+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}\right]\vline_{z=p_\epsilon}=0$, which is equivalent to
\begin{align}\label{relation}
H^{'}_{b}(p_\epsilon)(p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}) - H_{b}(p_\epsilon)=0.
\end{align}
The first derivative of $f_{\epsilon}(z)$ at the point $p_\epsilon$ is:
\begin{align*}
\frac{d}{dz}\left[\bar{\epsilon}H_b(z) - z\bar{\epsilon}\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}\right]\vline_{z=p_\epsilon}
&= \left(\bar{\epsilon}H^{'}_b(z) - \bar{\epsilon}\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}\right)\vline_{z=p_\epsilon} \\
&= \frac{\bar{\epsilon}H^{'}_b(z)(p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}) - \bar{\epsilon}H_{b}(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} \\
&\stackrel{(a)}= 0.
\end{align*}
where $(a)$ follows from \eqref{relation}.
\end{proof}
We proceed to the proof of Theorem \ref{theorem:sol_bellman}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{theorem:sol_bellman}]
Substituting $z=0$ into \eqref{eq_our_bellman} yields $\rho_{\epsilon} + h_{\epsilon}(0) = h_{\epsilon}(1)$. It can be shown that if $h_{\epsilon}(z)$ solves \eqref{eq_our_bellman}, then any function of the form $h_{\epsilon}(z) + constant $ also solves this equation. Therefore, we can fix $h_{\epsilon}(0)=0$, which implies that $h_{\epsilon}(1) = \rho_{\epsilon}$. It then follows that the DP operator with the function $h_{\epsilon}^{\ast}(z)$ is:
\begin{align*}
(Th_{\epsilon}^{\ast})(z)&=\sup_{0\leq\delta \leq z} \bar{\epsilon}H_{b}(\delta) + \bar{\epsilon}(1-\delta)\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} +\epsilon h_{\epsilon}^{\ast}(1-\delta).
\end{align*}
Now, the term $h_{\epsilon}^{\ast}(1-\delta)$ is calculated for two cases:
\begin{align}\label{eq:value_cases}
h_{\epsilon}^{\ast}(1-\delta) =
\begin{cases} \bar{\epsilon}H_b(\delta) - (1-\delta)\bar{\epsilon}\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} &\mbox{if } 1- \delta \leq p_\epsilon \\
\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} & \mbox{if } 1-\delta \geq p_\epsilon.
\end{cases}
\end{align}
To complete the proof, we have three cases for calculating the operator $(Th_{\epsilon}^{\ast})(z)$:
\begin{itemize}
\item
For $0\leq z < p_\epsilon$, the constraint $0\leq\delta\leq z$ implies that $0\leq\delta <p_\epsilon$, and from \eqref{eq:value_cases}, we have $h^{\ast}(1-\delta) = \frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}$.
Let us show that \eqref{eq_our_bellman} is satisfied:
\begin{align*}
(Th_{\epsilon}^{\ast})(z) &= \sup_{0\leq\delta \leq z} \bar{\epsilon}H_{b}(\delta) + \bar{\epsilon}(1-\delta)\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} +
\epsilon \frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}\\
&= \sup_{0\leq\delta \leq z} \bar{\epsilon}H_{b}(\delta) -\delta \bar{\epsilon}\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} +
\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} \\
&\stackrel{(a)}= \bar{\epsilon}H_{b}(z) -z \bar{\epsilon}\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} +
\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} \\
&= h_{\epsilon}^{\ast}(z) + \rho_{\epsilon}^{\ast},
\end{align*}
where $(a)$ follows from Lemma \ref{lemma:same_max}.
\item
For $p_{\epsilon} \leq z < 1 - p_{\epsilon}$, the same calculation as for the previous interval shows that $h^{\ast}(1-\delta) = \frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}$ for all $\delta\in[0,1 - p_{\epsilon}]$. Let us show that \eqref{eq_our_bellman} is satisfied:
\begin{align*}
(Th^{\ast})(z) &= \sup_{0\leq\delta \leq z} \bar{\epsilon}H_{b}(\delta) + \bar{\epsilon}(1-\delta)\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} +
\epsilon \frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}\\
&= \sup_{0\leq\delta \leq z} \bar{\epsilon}H_{b}(\delta) -\delta \bar{\epsilon}\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} +
\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} \\
&\stackrel{(a)}= \bar{\epsilon}H_{b}(p_\epsilon) - p_\epsilon \bar{\epsilon}\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} +
\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} \\
&= \frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} + \frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} \\
&= h_{\epsilon}^{\ast}(z) + \rho_{\epsilon}^{\ast},
\end{align*}
where $(a)$ follows from Lemma \ref{lemma:same_max}.
\item
For $1 - p_{\epsilon} \leq z \leq 1$, the function $h_{\epsilon}^{\ast}(1-\delta)$ can have different terms, and therefore, we separate:
\begin{align*}
(Th^{\ast})(z) &= \max\bigg( \sup_{0\leq\delta \leq 1-p_{\epsilon}} \bar{\epsilon}H_{b}(\delta) +\bar{\epsilon}(1-\delta)\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} +
\epsilon \frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}},\\
& \sup_{1 - p_\epsilon \leq \delta \leq z} \bar{\epsilon}H_{b}(\delta) + \bar{\epsilon}(1-\delta)\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} + \epsilon[\bar{\epsilon}H_b(\delta) - (1-\delta)\bar{\epsilon}\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}]
\bigg)\\
&\stackrel{(a)}= \max \bigg( \frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} + \frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}, \sup_{1 - p_\epsilon \leq \delta \leq z} \bar{\epsilon}(1+\epsilon)H_{b}(\delta) + \bar{\epsilon}\bar{\epsilon}(1-\delta)\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} \bigg)\\
&\stackrel{(b)}= 2\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}} \\
&= h_{\epsilon}^{\ast}(z) + \rho_{\epsilon}^{\ast},
\end{align*}
where $(a)$ follows from Lemma \ref{lemma:same_max}, and $(b)$ follows from
\begin{align*}
\sup_{1 - p_\epsilon \leq \delta \leq z} \bar{\epsilon}(1+\epsilon)H_{b}(\delta) + \bar{\epsilon}\bar{\epsilon}(1-\delta)\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}
& \leq \sup_{1 - p_\epsilon \leq \delta \leq z} \bar{\epsilon}(1+\epsilon)H_{b}(\delta) + \sup_{1 - p_\epsilon \leq \delta \leq z}
\bar{\epsilon}\bar{\epsilon}(1-\delta)\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}\\
&= \bar{\epsilon}(1+\epsilon)H_{b}(1 - p_\epsilon) + \bar{\epsilon}\bar{\epsilon}(1-(1 - p_\epsilon))\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}\\
&= \frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}\left[ 2\bar{\epsilon}p_{\epsilon}+1+\epsilon\right] \\
&\leq 2\frac{H_b(p_\epsilon)}{p_\epsilon+\frac{1}{\bar{\epsilon}}}.
\end{align*}
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
\section{Accurate rate analysis}\label{app:analysis_accurate}
The rate analysis in Section \ref{sec:relation_coding} was simplified by assuming that each transmitted bit is $\text{Ber}(p)$. Here, we show precisely that our coding scheme can be arbitrary close to $C_{\epsilon}^{\text{fb}}$. The idea is to separate the coding scheme into two parts using a parameter $\lambda$, which is a fixed constant. First, we use the coding scheme from Section \ref{subsec:coding_scheme} to transmit a large number, $nR-\lambda$, of message bits, while a different coding scheme will be used to transmit the remaining $\lambda$ bits. We show that the rate of the overall scheme is essentially determined by the rate of the first coding scheme.
The next lemma will be used for the rate analysis of the first coding scheme,
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:correction}
Each transmitted bit, $X_i$, can be chosen to be distributed as $\text{Ber}(p-e_i)$, where $0\leq e_i<\frac{1}{|\mathcal{M}_{i-1}|}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume that at time $i$, a procedure begins and its corresponding set of possible messages is $\mathcal{M}_{i-1}$. According to $L_1$, the number of messages that are labelled $'1'$ is $\floor{p|\mathcal{M}_{i-1}|}$, where $\floor{\cdot}$ is the floor operator. The resulting input distribution is $X_i\sim\text{Ber}(\frac{\floor{p|\mathcal{M}_{i-1}|}}{|\mathcal{M}_{i-1}|})$, which can be written also as $X_i\sim\text{Ber}(p-e_i)$ since $p-\frac{1}{|\mathcal{M}_{i-1}|}< \frac{\floor{p|\mathcal{M}_{i-1}|}}{|\mathcal{M}_{i-1}|}\leq p$.
In case of erasure at time $i$, recall that the number of messages that were labelled $'0'$ in $L_1$ is greater than the number of messages labelled $'1'$, and thus, we are able to construct the labelling $L_2$ as follows; $\floor{p|\mathcal{M}_{i-1}|}$ messages that were labelled $'0'$ at the previous transmission are flipped to $'1'$, and all the remaining messages are labelled $'0'$. It is clear that the input distribution is preserved in this case, and upon consecutive erasures, $L_1$ and $L_2$ are being exchanged and the input distribution is not changed. Note that the choices of labelling are made in advance and both encoder and decoder agree on current labelling.
\end{proof}
The encoding procedure occurs repeatedly and is over when the set of possible messages is less or equal than $2^\lambda$. Denote by $e_1,e_2,\dots, e_k$ the correction factors for the $k$ successful transmissions until the scheme is over. Following the same derivations in Section \ref{sec:relation_coding}, it follows that the rate is $\tilde{R} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^k H_b(p-e_i)}{k(\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}+p) - \sum_{i=1}^{k}e_i}$.
For the $\lambda$ remaining bits, we perform a code where a bit of message is followed by zero and this pair is transmitted repeatedly until a successful transmission. Thus, to send the message bit $'0'$, the pair $'00'$ is repeated until $'00'$ or $'0?'$ are received, and to send the message bit $'1'$, the bits $'10'$ are repeatedly transmitted until a $'1'$ is received. The decoding for this scheme is straightforward, and calculation of the rate gives that $\bar{R}=\frac{1-\epsilon}{2}$.
To summarize, the average rate for the overall coding scheme is
\begin{align*}
R&= \left(\frac{nR-\lambda}{nR}\right) \tilde{R} + \left(\frac{\lambda}{nR}\right)\bar{R}.
\end{align*}
Consider the next lower bound on $R$,
\begin{align*}\label{lower}
R&=\left(\frac{nR-\lambda}{nR}\right)\frac{\sum_{i=1}^k H_b(p-e_i)}{k(\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}+p) - \sum_{i=1}^{k}e_i} + \left(\frac{\lambda}{nR}\right)\frac{1-\epsilon}{2}\nonumber\\
&\geq \left(\frac{nR-\lambda}{nR}\right)\frac{k\min_i H_b(p-e_i)}{k(\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}+p) - k\min_i e_i} + \left(\frac{\lambda}{nR}\right)\frac{1-\epsilon}{2}\nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(a)}\geq \left(\frac{nR-\lambda}{nR}\right)\frac{H_b(p-2^{-\lambda})}{\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}+p} + \left(\frac{\lambda}{nR}\right)\frac{1-\epsilon}{2},
\end{align*}
where $(a)$ follows from Lemma \ref{lemma:correction}, namely, $e_i\in[0,2^{-\lambda})$ for $i=1,\dots,k$.
Letting $n\rightarrow\infty$, we see that $R^{\ast}= \frac{H_b(p-2^{-\lambda})}{\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}+p}$ is achievable. Thus, by choosing $\lambda$ to be arbitrarily large (but still finite), we can make $R^\ast$ arbitrarily close to the capacity $C_\epsilon^\text{fb}$.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The authors would like to thank Yonglong Li and Guangyue Han for providing us the data for the lower bound in plotted in Fig. \ref{fig:comparison}.
|
\section{Introduction}
In peripheral heavy ion collisions the
system has angular momentum.\cite{xnwang}
It has been shown in hydrodynamical computations that
the angular momentum leads to a large shear and vorticity \cite{CMW13}.
Furthermore when the Quark-Gluon Plasma
(QGP) is formed with low viscosity \cite{CKM},
interesting new phenomena may occur
like rotation \cite{hydro1}, or turbulence,
which shows up in form of a starting
Kelvin-Helmholtz instability (KHI) \cite{hydro2,WNC13}.
The deceleration of interpenetrating nuclei was observed and
analyzed early in Ref. \cite{CK85}. This leads to a rapid initial
equilibration and to the development of a compact initial system.
In peripheral collision this leads to considerable initial shear and
vorticity, as well as to an almost complete conservation of the
initial pre-collision angular momentum for the participants.
Based on Refs. \cite{CMW13,hydro2} we can extract some basic parameters
of the rotation obtained with numerical fluid dynamical model
PICR. These parameters are extracted from model calculation
of a Pb+Pb collision
at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 2.76$ TeV/nucl. and impact parameter
$b=0.7 b_{max}$, with high resolution and
thus small numerical viscosity. Thus, in this collision
the KHI occurs and enhances rotation at intermediate times,
because the turbulent rotation gains energy from the
original shear flow. The turbulent rotations leads to a
rotation profile where the rotation of the external regions
lags behind the rotation of the internal zones. This is
a typical growth of the KHI.
The time dependence of some characteristic parameters of the
fluid dynamical calculation \cite{hydro2} were analysed in
Ref. \cite{CWC2014}.
It was observed that
R, the average transverse radius, Y, the longitudinal
(rotation axis directed) length of the
participant system, $\theta$, the polar angle of the rotation
of the interior region of the system, are increasing with time.
$\dot{R}$ and $\dot{Y}$ the speeds of expansion in transverse and
axis directions are also increasing with time, while
$\omega$ the angular velocity of the
internal region of the matter during the collision is decreasing.
The initial angular momentum of the system is large,
$ L_y = - 1.05\times 10^4 \hbar$. As this is arising from the $z$
directed beam velocity, initially at the vertical, $x$, edges the
velocity difference is large, while horizontally the rotation
starts up delayed, because this is not a solid body rotation.
Here we considered the rotation measure versus the horizontal, $z$
axis which starts up slower and reaches a maximum around 5 fm/c
after the start of the fluid dynamical evolution, i.e. around
8 fm/c after the initial touch of the nuclear surfaces.
Exact models, see e.g. Ref. \cite{Hatta},
provide good insight into physical phenomena.
We want to use the above mentioned fluid dynamical
calculations to test a new family
of exact rotation solutions of fireball hydrodynamics
\cite{CMW13,CsNa13}. This model offers a few possible variations,
here we chose the version 1A to test.
We use the axis labeling of Refs. \cite{CMW13,CsNa13}, so that the
the axis of the rotation is $y$ while the transverse plane of the
rotation is the $[x,z]$ plane. Thus the values extracted from the
results of the fluid dynamical model \cite{hydro2}, should take
this into account. The initial radius parameter, $R$, corresponds
to the $x$ axis in hydro, and we assume an $x,z$ symmetry in the
exact model, The rotation axis is the $y$ axis in hydro.
The exact model assumes cylindrical
symmetry, so it cannot describe the beam directed elongation of
the system, but this is arising from the initial beam momentum,
and we intend to describe the rotation of the interior part
of the reaction plane and the rotation there.
For simplicity we also
assume that the Equation of State (EoS) is
\begin{equation}
\epsilon = \kappa p \ \ \ {\rm and} \ \ \ p = nT \ ,
\end{equation}
with a constant $\kappa$.
\section{From the Euler Equation to Scaling}
Now we calculate the equation of motion, (15) in
Ref.\cite{CsNa13}, and its solution
\begin{equation}
n\,m\, (\partial_t + \vec{v}\cdot\nabla) \vec{v} = - \nabla p
\label{Euler}
\end{equation}
For the variables of this equation we have:
\begin{eqnarray}
T &=&T_0\left(\frac{V_0}{V}\right)^{1/\kappa}\mathcal{T}(s)\ ,
\nonumber \\
n &=&n_0\frac{V_0}{V}\nu (s) ,
\nonumber \\
\nu(s) &=& \frac{1}{\mathcal{T}(s)}
e^{-\frac{1}{2}\int_0^s\frac{d u}{\mathcal{T}(u)}},
\label{defs}
\end{eqnarray}
and in addition in Ref. \cite{CsNa13} it is assumed that
the temperature and the density have time independent distributions
with respect to a scaling variable:
$$
s = r_x^2/R^2 + r_y^2/Y^2 + r_z^2/R^2 \ .
$$
If we asume cylindrical symmetry and
use the coresponding
cylindrical coordinates instead of $(x, y, z)$,
we can use the coordinates of length
dimension, $(r_\rho, r_\varphi, r_y)$,
so that
$$
r_\rho = \rho,\ \ r_\varphi= r_\rho \varphi,\ \ r_y = y \ .
$$
These are the "out, side, long" directions.
The characteristic values of these coordinates are then $(R, S, Y)$.
Then the scaling variables are introduced as
$$
s_\rho = r_\rho^2/R^2, \ \
s_\varphi = r_\varphi^2/S^2 \ \
s_y = r_y^2/Y^2 \ ,
$$
where $S$ is the roll-length on the outside circumference,
starting from $\varphi_{0} = 0$ and $S_0=0$ at $t_0$, \ \
$S = R \varphi$ and $\dot{\varphi}~=~\omega$ and this
displacement is orthogonal to the longitudinal and transverse
displacements. The internal roll-length
$r_\varphi = \varphi\, r_\rho $, the corresponding velocity is
$v_\varphi = \omega\, r_\rho $, and so
$v_\varphi^2 = \omega^2\, r_\rho^2 $. On the other hand from the
scaling of $r_\rho$, it follows that $ r_\rho^2 = R^2\, s_\rho$.
In case of these
scaling variables the distributions of density and temperature,
$n(s)$ and $T(t,s)$
should not depend on $s_\varphi$ or $r_\varphi$, just on the radius and the
longitudinal coordinates. Therefore just as in Ref. \cite{CWC2014}
we introduce another scaling variable:
$$
s \equiv s_\rho + s_y\ .
$$
Our reference frame is then spanned by the
directions $(r_\rho, r_\varphi, r_y)$.
In this case due to the cylindrical symmetry the derivatives,
$\partial s/\partial r_\varphi$ vanish.
In this coordinate system the volume is $V = \pi R^2 Y$.
\bigskip
Now following Ref. \cite{CWC2014},
for the {\bf right hand side} of Eq. (\ref{Euler}):
For the r.h.s. of this equation we have:
\begin{eqnarray}
-\nabla p &=& -\nabla n T \nonumber\\
&=& - n_0\frac{V_0}{V}T_0\left(\frac{V_0}{V}\right)^{1/\kappa}
\nabla e^{-\frac{1}{2}\int_0^s\frac{du}{\mathcal{T}(u)}}
\nonumber\\
&=& - n_0\frac{V_0}{V}T_0\left(\frac{V_0}{V}\right)^{1/\kappa}
e^{-\frac{1}{2}\int_0^s\frac{du}{\mathcal{T}(u)}}
(-\frac{1}{2})\frac{1}{\mathcal{T}(s)}\nabla s
\nonumber\\
&=&n m Q / V^\gamma
\left(\frac{r_\rho}{R^2}\vec{e}_\rho {+}\frac{r_z}{Y^2}\vec{e}_z \right)
\label{eul}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\gamma = 1/\kappa$ and $Q\equiv\frac{T_0 V_0^\gamma}{m}$.
\bigskip
Using the $\rho, \varphi, y$ coordinates, the rotation
would show up as an independent orthogonal term.
However, (as discussed in the Appendix)
the closed system has no external torque, and the
internal force from the gradient of the pressure is
radial, which does not contribute to tangential acceleration.
The change of the angular velocity arises from the angular momentum
conservation in the closed system as a constraint, so we do not have
to derive additional dynamical equations to describe the evolution
of the rotation.
Now for the {\bf left hand side} of Eq. (\ref{Euler}),
the velocity field scales as
\begin{equation}
\vec{v} =
v_\rho \vec{e}_\rho {-} v_\varphi \vec{e}_\varphi {+} v_z \vec{e}_z =
\frac{\dot{R}}{R} r_\rho \vec{e}_\rho {-}
\omega r_\rho \vec{e}_\varphi {+}
\frac{\dot{Y}}{Y} r_y \vec{e}_y \ .
\label{velocity}
\end{equation}
We first calculate the time derivatives for the components.
(See e.g. \cite{Stoecker_handbook}):
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial_t v_\rho &=& \left[ \left(
\frac{\ddot{R}}{R}{-}\frac{\dot{R}^2}{R^2}\right) - \omega^2 \right] r_\rho ,
\nonumber \\
\partial_t v_\varphi &=&
- \omega \frac{\dot{R}}{R} r_\rho , \ \ \
\partial_t v_z =
\left[ \frac{\ddot{Y}}{Y}{-}\frac{\dot{Y}^2}{Y^2}\right] r_y .
\label{partialtvx}
\end{eqnarray}
The other term of the comoving derivative includes
\begin{eqnarray}
\vec{v}\cdot\nabla =
v_\rho\frac{\partial}{\partial r_\rho}+
v_\varphi\frac{\partial}{\partial r_\varphi}+
v_y\frac{\partial}{\partial r_y}
\end{eqnarray}
and this term gives:
\begin{equation}
(\vec{v}\cdot\nabla) \vec{v} =
\frac{\dot{R}^2}{R^2}r_\rho \vec{e}_\rho +
\omega \frac{\dot{R}}{R} r_\rho \vec{e}_\varphi +
\frac{\dot{Y}^2}{Y^2}r_y \vec{e}_y
\label{vDeltvx}
\end{equation}
By adding Eq. (\ref{partialtvx}) and (\ref{vDeltvx}) we get:
\begin{eqnarray}
mn(\partial_t{+}\vec{v}\cdot\nabla)v_\rho
&=& mn\left[\left( \ddot{R}/R\right) - \omega^2 \right] r_\rho \ ,
\nonumber \\
mn(\partial_t{+}\vec{v}\cdot\nabla)v_y
&=& mn\left( \ddot{Y}/Y\right) r_y \ .
\end{eqnarray}
As a consequence
the {\bf equality} of the right hand side and left hand side
of the Euler equation (\ref{Euler}) leads
to the ordinary differential equations.
Multiplying the two non-vanishing equations with $R^2$ and $Y^2$ respectively
yields:
\begin{eqnarray}
R\ddot{R} - W/R^2 &=& Y\ddot{Y} =
\frac{Q}{(\pi R^2Y)^{\gamma}} \ ,
\label{e-2s}
\end{eqnarray}
where $W~\equiv~\omega_0^2~R_0^4$.
From the angular momentum conservation
$\omega=\omega_0R_0^2/R^2$, and the rotational
term, $R^2\omega^2$ that appears in the equation,
takes the form $W / R^2$.
Due to the EoS the pressure is proportional to the
baryon density $n$, just as the r.h.s. of the Euler equation,
therefore the equation of motion does not depend on $n$ or $n_0$.
\bigskip
\section{Conservation Laws}
\bigskip
Following Ref. \cite{CWC2014},
we want to calculate the total energy of the whole system,
then we should integrate it for the whole volume, $V$.
Thus, not only the scaling of
$\vec{v} = ( v_\rho, v_\varphi, v_z)$ but also the particle density
distribution, $n(s)$ will be considered.
\smallskip
At the {\bf surface} the rotational energy is
$\mathcal{E}_{Side} \equiv \frac{1}{2} m \dot{S}^2 =
\frac{1}{2} m R^2 \omega^2$,
and if we express $\omega$ via $\omega_0$ by the relation
$\omega = \omega_0 R_0^2 / R^2$, then
$\mathcal{E}_{Side} = W / R^2$, as before.
The expansion energy at the surface is
$\mathcal{E}_{Out} \equiv \frac{1}{2} m \dot{R}^2$, and for the
longitudinal direction we have,
$\mathcal{E}_{Long} \equiv \frac{1}{2} m \dot{Y}^2$.
\smallskip
We can calculate the radial and longitudinal
expansion velocities and the corresponding kinetic energies, and also
the kinetic energy of the rotation.
In the evaluation of the internal and kinetic
energies, the radial and longitudinal density profiles of the
system are taken into account.
Let us assume that the temperature
profile is flat, and thus that the density profiles are Gaussian and
separable.
Further if we assume that the system size is finite,
then the scaling variables, $s_\rho$ and $s_Y$, may extend from
0 to 1. In this case at the external boundary we have to apply the
necessary boundary conditions so that the solution of the Euler
equation (\ref{Euler}) remains valid.
With this approximation we calculated the different integrated energies
(and shown in Appendices \ref{A1}-\ref{A4}).
Summing up the kinetic energies yields
\begin{equation}
E_{kin} = \frac{1}{2} m N_B \left(
\alpha^2 \dot{R}^2 + \alpha^2 R^2 \omega^2 + \beta^2 \dot{Y}^2 \right) \ ,
\label{Etot-1}
\end{equation}
where in case of finite extent of the system\\
$
\alpha^2\! \equiv \!
4\sqrt{2}\,C_n I_B({\small \frac{1}{2}}s_{yM})
I_C({\small \frac{1}{2}}s_{\rho M})\,
{\rm and}\,
$\\
$
\beta^2\! \equiv\!
4\sqrt{2}\,C_n I_A({\small \frac{1}{2}}s_{\rho M})
I_D({\small \frac{1}{2}}s_{yM})$
where\\
$C_n = 1 \left/ \left[ 2\sqrt{2}\, I_A(s_{\rho M}/2)\,
I_B(s_{yM}/2) \right] \right.$,
see Ref. \cite{IGF}
\footnote{
$I_A(u) = 1 - \exp(-u)$,
$I_B(u) = \sqrt{\pi}\, \Phi(\sqrt{u}\,)$,
$I_C(u) = 1 - (1+u) \exp(-u)$,
$I_D(u) = \frac{\sqrt{\pi}}{2} \Phi(\sqrt{u}) - \sqrt{u} e^{-u}$,
where
$\Phi(u)= {\rm erf}(u) \equiv \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}} \int_0^u \exp(-x^2)\,dx.$
}
(in terms of the integrals evaluated in
Appendices \ref{A1}-\ref{A4} ).
Here with $(s_{\rho M}=(s_{yM}=1$, $\alpha^2$ and $\beta^2$ are clearly time independent, because
they depend on the scaling variable only, and we get the values
$\alpha^2 = 0.4585$ and
$\beta^2 = 0.2911$.
Alternatively one can assume that the system size is infinite so that the
scaling variables range from 0 to $\infty$. In this case the Radius, and
Length parameters, $R$ and $Y$, are considered as the width
of the Gaussian scaling distribution. Thus the parameters will be
\begin{equation}
I_A=I_B=1,\ I_C=2I_D=\sqrt{\pi}
\label{alternate}
\end{equation}
and consequently
$\alpha^2 = 2.0$ and
$\beta^2 = 1.0$. In the present case we follow this configuration.
If we divide this result by the conserved baryon charge,
$N_B$, we will get
\begin{equation}
\frac{E_{kin}}{N_B} = \frac{1}{2} m \left[
\alpha^2 \left( \dot{R}^2 {+} R^2 \omega^2 \right)
+ \beta^2\, \dot{Y}^2 \right]\ ,
\end{equation}
Based on the EoS, $\epsilon = \kappa p = \kappa n T$, we can
calculate the compression energy based on the
density profiles of $n(s)$ and $\epsilon(s) = \kappa\, n(s) T(s)$.
Let us make the same simplifying assumptions on the density profiles
as we did earlier.
Now we will have the same density profile, normalized to $N_B$, for
the volume integrated internal energy and the net baryon charge:
\begin{eqnarray}
E_{int} &=& \kappa \int p dV = \kappa \int n T dV
\nonumber \\
&=& \kappa N_B T_0 (V_0/V)^\gamma \, C_n \,
\frac{1}{V}\ \pi R^2\!\! \int_0^1 Y\!\! \int_{0}^1\!\!\!
\nu(s)\ ds_\rho\, \frac{ds_z}{\sqrt{s_z}}
\nonumber \\
&=& \kappa N_B T_0 (V_0/V)^\gamma \ = \
\kappa m Q \frac{1}{(\pi R^2Y)^\gamma} \ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $C_n$ is the normalization constant.
\section{Reduction to a Single Differential Equation}
\bigskip
Following the method of Ref. \cite{Akkelin01} ,
we study the following combination of variables:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal F} &=& {\small \frac{1}{2}} \partial_t^2
\left( \alpha^2 R^2 + \beta^2 Y^2 \right)
\nonumber\\
&=& \partial_t \left(
\alpha^2 R \dot{R} + \beta^2 Y \dot{Y} \right)
\nonumber\\
&=& \alpha^2 \dot{R}^2 + \beta^2 \dot{Y}^2 +
\alpha^2 R \ddot{R} + \beta^2 Y \ddot{Y} ,
\label{F16}
\end{eqnarray}
where we used the notation
$
\partial_t = \frac{\partial}{\partial t} \ \ {\rm and } \ \
\partial_t^2 = \frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2}.
$
We can replace the last two terms,
$ \alpha^2 R \ddot{R},\ \beta^2 Y \ddot{Y}$, by
using Eqs. (\ref{e-2s}), i.e. we use the Euler Eq. (\ref{Euler}). Then
we obtain:
\begin{equation}
{\cal F} =
\alpha^2 \dot{R}^2 + \beta^2 \dot{Y}^2 + \alpha^2 \frac{W}{R^2}
+ (\alpha^2{+}\beta^2) \frac{Q}{(\pi R^2Y)^\gamma} ,
\label{EC1}
\end{equation}
At the same time from the {\bf energy conservation},
$E_{tot} = E_{kin} + E_{int}$, we get that
\begin{equation}
\frac{E_{tot} }{N_B \, m} = \frac{1}{2}
\left[
\alpha^2 \dot{R}^2 {+} \beta^2 \dot{Y}^2 {+} \alpha^2 \frac{W}{R^2}
{+} \frac{2 \kappa Q}{(\pi R^2Y)^\gamma}
\right] ,
\label{EC2}
\end{equation}
where we used the EoS and the parameter $\kappa$ now appears
in the expression of the energy.
If our EoS is such that
\begin{equation}
\kappa = \frac{1}{2} (\alpha^2{+}\beta^2) =\frac{3}{2},
\end{equation}
then $ {\cal F} = 2 E_{tot} / (N_B \, m ) = $ const., and in the same type of calculation
as in Ref. \cite{Akkelin01}, we can introduce
\begin{equation}
U^2(t) \equiv \alpha^2 R^2(t) + \beta^2 Y^2(t) ,
\label{eu}
\end{equation}
which satisfies
\begin{equation}
\partial_t^2 \left( \alpha^2 R^2 + \beta^2 Y^2 \right) =
\partial_t^2 U^2(t) = 2 {\cal F} \ .
\label{u21}
\end{equation}
Thus, the solution of Eq. (\ref{u21}), we can be parameterized as:
\begin{equation}
U^2(t) = A (t-t_0)^2 + B (t-t_0) + C \ ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
A&=& \alpha^2 \dot{R}_0^2+\beta^2\dot{Y}_0^2+ \alpha^2 W/ R_0^2 +
(\alpha^2{+}\beta^2) \frac{T_0}{m}
\nonumber \\
B&=& 2\alpha^2 R_0 \dot{R}_0 + 2\beta^2 Y_0 \dot{Y}_0
\phantom{\frac{T_0}{m}}
\nonumber \\
C&=& \alpha^2 R_0^2 + \beta^2 Y_0^2 \phantom{\frac{T_0}{m}}\ .
\end{eqnarray}
Due to the difficulties described in Appendix \ref{A5}, we cannot use the
method described in \cite{Akkelin01}. Instead
let us take one of the Euler equations from Eq. (\ref{e-2s}),
\begin{equation}
\ddot{Y} = \frac{Q}{Y (\pi R^2 Y)^{\gamma}} \ ,
\label{e-4s}
\end{equation}
and express $R^2$ in terms of $U^2(t)$ which is known
based on the energy conservation:
\begin{equation}
R^2(t) = (U^2(t) - \beta^2 Y^2)/ \alpha^2 \ ,
\label{er}
\end{equation}
and this will lead to the second order differential equation
for $Y(t)$:
\begin{equation}
\ddot{Y} =
\frac {\alpha^{2\gamma}\, Q}
{ Y \left[ \pi Y (U^2(t) {-} \beta^2 Y^2)\right]^{\gamma}}
= f(Y,t)\ ,
\label{e-5s}
\end{equation}
which can be solved \\
Then $R(t)$ and $\dot{R}(t)$ are given
by Eqs. (\ref{er}) and (\ref{EC1}) respectively.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccc} \hline\hline \phantom{\Large $^|_|$}
$t$ & $Y$ & $\dot{Y}$ & $R$ & $\dot{R}$ & $\omega$ \\
(fm/c)&\ \ (fm)\ \ &\ \ (c)\ \ \ &\ \ \ (fm)\ \ &\ \ (c)\ \ \ &\ (c/fm)\ \\
\hline
0.0 & 4.000 & 0.400 & 2.500 & 0.250 & 0.150\\
1.0 & 4.440 & 0.469 & 2.859 & 0.704 & 0.115\\
2.0 & 4.922 & 0.490 & 3.405 & 0.834 & 0.081\\
3.0 & 5.415 & 0.495 & 4.079 & 0.877 & 0.056 \\
4.0 & 5.912 & 0.497 & 4.833 & 0.894 & 0.040 \\
5.0 & 6.409 & 0.497 & 5.636 & 0.902 & 0.030 \\
6.0 & 6.906 & 0.498 & 6.469 & 0.906 & 0.022 \\
7.0 & 7.404 & 0.498 & 7.322 & 0.909 & 0.017 \\
8.0 & 7.901 & 0.498 & 8.190 & 0.911 & 0.014 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{
Time dependence of characteristic parameters of the exact
fluid dynamical model \cite{CWC2014}.
R is the transverse radius, Y is the
(rotation axis directed) length of the
system, $\dot{R} ,\ \dot{Y}$ are the speed of expansion in transverse and
axis directions, and $\omega$ is the angular velocity of the
matter.
}
\label{t2}
\end{table}
The derivatives,
$\dot{R}(t_0)$ and $\dot{Y}(t_0)$ in this exact model do not
equal the ones obtained from the fluid dynamical model, because in the
more realistic fluid dynamical model the density and velocity profiles
do not agree with
the exact model's assumptions. Also initially in the realistic
fluid dynamical model the angular momentum increases in the
region due to the developing turbulence, while in the exact model
the angular velocity is monotonously decreasing
due to the scaling expansion.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.9\columnwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{Eall-vs1.pdf}}
\caption{
(Color online) The time dependence of the kinetic energy
of the expansion, $E_{kin}$,
the internal energy, $E_{int}$,
the rotational energy, $E_{rot}$, and
the total energy, $E_{tot}$
per nucleon in the exact model
with the initial conditions
$R_0$ = 3.5 fm, $Y_0$ = 5.0 fm,
$\dot R_0$ = 0.25 c, $\dot Y_0$ = 0.30 c,
$\omega_0$ = 0.1 c/fm,
$\kappa = 3/2$, $T_0$ = 400 MeV.
For this configuration $E_{tot}=816$ MeV/nucl.
The kinetic energy
of the expansion is increasing, at the cost of the decreasing
internal energy and the slower decreasing rotational
energy.
The rotational energy is decreasing to the half of the
initial one in 3.3 fm/c.
}
\label{F1-E-vs-t}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The Runge Kutta \cite{RungeKutta} method was used to solve this
differential equation. We chose the constants, $Q$ and $W$, as well
as the initial conditions for $R$ and $Y$.
Based on the fluid dynamical
model calculation results we chose the
parameters:
$
T_0 = 250\ {\rm MeV},\
m = 939.57 {\rm MeV}\
\omega_0 =0.15$ c/fm.
For the internal region we take the initial radius parameters as
$
R_0 = 2.5 {\rm fm\ and\ }
\dot{R} = 0.25 {\rm c}
$,
and we disregard the larger extension
in the beam direction, because our model is cylindrically
symmetric and because the beam directed large elongation is a consequence
of the initial beam directed momentum excess.
In this exact model the rotation axis, denoted by $Y$, corresponds to the
out of plane, $y$ direction in the fluid dynamical model
(and not to the beam direction!). Due to the eccentricity at finite
impact parameters, with an almond shape profile, the initial out of plane
size is larger the in plane transverse size, so we chose initially
$
Y_0 = 4.0 {\rm fm\ and\ }
\dot{Y} = 0.4 {\rm c}
$
just as in Ref. \cite{CWC2014}. (Table \ref{t2})
\begin{figure}[hb]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.49\columnwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{vyf1.pdf}}
\hfill
\resizebox{0.49\columnwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{Ryf1.pdf}}
\caption{
(Color online)
Left: The time dependence of the velocity of expansion in the
transverse radial direction, $v_R$ and in the direction of
the axis of the rotation, $v_Y$ for the configuration shown in Fig.
\ref{F1-E-vs-t}. The expansion velocity
is increasing in both directions. While in the axis direction
the velocity increases from 0.3 c to 0.6 c in 8 fm/c time, the
radial expansion increases faster, in part due to the centrifugal
force from the rotation.
Right: The time dependence of the Radial, $R$, and axis directed, $Y$,
size of the expanding system.
As the $Y$ directed velocity is initially larger its change
is relatively smaller.
}
\label{F1-v-vs-t}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
As the exact solution is able to describe the monotonic expansion,
and so the steady decrease of the rotation, we start from a higher
initial angular velocity than shown by the fluid dynamical model, PICR,
as the angular velocity, measured versus the horizontal plane,
starts from zero.
Applying these initial parameters the exact model yields a dynamical development
shown in Table \ref{t2}. According to expectations the radius, $R$, and the
axis directed size, $Y$, are increasing, the angular velocity, $\omega$
decreases, The total energy is conserved, while the kinetic
energy of expansion is increasing, and that of the rotation and
internal energy are decreasing.
See Fig. \ref{F1-E-vs-t}.
The change of the expansion velocity, $v_R=\dot{R}$, is shown in
Fig. \ref{F1-v-vs-t} left.
The more rapid velocity change arises partly from the centrifugal
acceleration of the rotation, but also from the fact that the
initially smaller transverse size increases faster in the direction
of equal sizes in both directions. See Fig. \ref{F1-v-vs-t} right.
The study of the rotation in an infinite system is. on the other hand,
problematic as we assume solid body rotation (i.e. the
angular momentum applies to the whole infinite system). So the
applicability of this infinite model to a heavy ion reaction
is highly approximate, and the external tails should be disregarded.
Other finite scaling expansion profiles can also be studied, based on
the given examples, and these may fit more detailed fluid dynamical
models better.
\section{The vorticity}
In the usual convention in heavy ion physics, the beam axis is
the $z$ axis, the impact parameter vector, $\vec b$, points in the
$x$ direction, and the projectile is at positive $x$ and moves in the
positive $z$ direction. Thus the rotation axis is the $y$ axis,
this is the axis of the cylindrical symmetry of the rotating
exact model system we discussed above. The reaction plane $x,z$ is spanned by the
cylindrical coordinates $r, \varphi$ in the discussion above.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.485\columnwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{F-22.pdf}}
\hfill
\resizebox{0.485\columnwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{F-44.pdf}}\\
\resizebox{0.485\columnwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{F-66.pdf}}
\hfill
\resizebox{0.485\columnwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{F-88.pdf}}
\caption{
(Color online)
The energy weighted vorticity in the classical rotating exact model
with Gaussian density profiles, with an EoS of $\kappa = 3/2$,
and with initial parameters:
3.5 fm mean radius,
5.0 fm mean length,
0.1 c/fm angular velocity,
0.25 c radial velocity,
0.3 c axis directed velocity ($v_{y}$).
The initial temperature of the matter is $T=400$ MeV.
The figures
show the configuration at different times.
At
$t = 2$ fm/c,
the mean radial (longitudinal) sizes and speeds are
4.27 fm (5.75 fm) and 0.494 c (0.437 c), and the
angular velocity is 0.07 c/fm.
The $v=c$-boundary is at
$Y_{max} = 11.0$ fm and $R_{max}= 6.3$ fm.
At
$t = 4$ fm/c,
the mean radial (longitudinal) sizes and speeds are
5.67 fm (6.76 fm) and 0.62 c (0.52 c), and
$\omega=0.04$ c/fm.
The $v=c$-boundary is at
$Y_{max} = 7.1 $ fm and $R_{max}= 11.1$ fm.
At
$t = 6$ fm/c,
the mean radial (longitudinal) sizes and speeds are
6.65 fm (7.91 fm) and 0.69 c (0.57 c), and $\omega= 0.0$ c/fm.
The $v=c$-boundary is at
$Y_{max} = 12.0$ fm and $R_{max}= 7.98$ fm.
At
$t = 8$ fm/c,
the mean radial (longitudinal) sizes and speeds are
8.04 fm (9.14 fm) and 0.73 c (0.60 c), and $\omega=0.02$ c/fm.
The $v=c$-boundary is at
$Y_{max} = 13.16$ fm and $R_{max}= 9.32$ fm.
}
\label{F1-t}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
For rotation around the y-axis the vorticity is defined
in terms of the velocity field as
$\omega_y=(\partial_z v_x-\partial_x v_z)/2$. We use the
conventions of the exact model here, so that we chose the rotation axis to be
the $y$ axis and the plane of the rotation is the $x,z$ plane, which
corresponds to the reaction plane. We assume that the rotating
system is symmetric, so we introduce cylindrical coordinates around
the rotation axis.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.9\columnwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{Eall-vs2.pdf}}
\caption{
(Color online) The time dependence of the kinetic energy
of the expansion, $E_{kin}$,
the internal energy, $E_{int}$,
the rotational energy, $E_{rot}$, and
the total energy, $E_{tot}$
per nucleon in the exact model
with the initial conditions
$R_0$ = 2.5 fm, $Y_0$ = 4.0 fm,
$\dot R_0$ = 0.20 c, $\dot Y_0$ = 0.25 c,
$\omega_0$ = 0.1 c/fm,
$\kappa = 3/2$, $T_0$ = 300 MeV.
For this configuration $E_{tot}=576$ MeV/nucl. The kinetic energy
of the expansion is increasing, at the cost of the decreasing
internal energy and the slower decreasing rotational
energy.
The rotational energy is decreasing to the half of the
initial one in 2.9 fm/c.
}
\label{F1-E-vs2-t}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
For this configuration in
cylindrical coordinates the vorticity is .
\begin{eqnarray}
\vec \omega &\equiv& {\rm rot} \vec{v}
\nonumber \\
&=& \left(\frac{1}{\rho}\frac{\partial v_y}{\partial\varphi}-
\frac{\partial v_{\varphi}}{\partial y}\right) \vec{e}_{\rho}+
\left(\frac{\partial v_\rho}{\partial y}-
\frac{\partial v_y}{\partial \rho}\right) \vec{e}_{\varphi} +
\left(\frac{1}{\rho}\frac{\partial (\rho v_\varphi )}{\partial\rho}-
\frac{1}{\rho}\frac{\partial v_{\rho}}{\partial \varphi}\right) \vec{e}_y
\nonumber \\
&=& -2\omega \vec{e}_y \, .
\end{eqnarray}
At the last step we use Eq. (\ref{velocity}), where
$v_y$ does not depend on $\varphi$,
$v_\varphi$ does not depend on $y$,
$v_\rho$ does not depend on $y$,
$v_y$ does not depend on $\rho$ and
$v_\rho$ does not depend on $\varphi$,
thus only one term contributes to the vorticity, which
is directed in the direction of $\vec e_y$.
Thus the vorticity in this model is spatially homogeneous, and depends
on the time only, $\omega = \omega(t)$. However, from the point
of view of observations, it is important what amount of energy or mass
is representing a given fluid element with the given vorticity.
In the solution we presented here we assumed a uniform temperature, which
led to a gaussian density and energy profile,
$\epsilon(\rho) = \kappa T n(\rho)$.
Following reference \cite{CMW13}, we define an
energy-density-weighted, average vorticity as
\begin{equation}
\Omega_{zx} \equiv w(r_\rho,r_\phi,r_y) \, \omega
\end{equation}
so that this weighting does not change the average circulation
of the layer, i.e., the sum of the average of the weights over all
fluid elements is unity, $ \langle w(z, x)\rangle = 1$.
This weighting does
not change the average vorticity value of the set; just the cells
will have larger weight with more energy content.
Let us fist calculate the internal energy for a finite system:
\begin{equation}
E_{int} =
\int_{-aY}^{+aY} \int_0^{bR} \epsilon(r_\rho,r_y)\
2 \pi r_\rho dr_\rho dr_y \ ,
\nonumber \\
\end{equation}
while the the energy at a given radius (at a given time) is
$ \epsilon(r_\rho,r_y) $.
Thus the weight density will be
\begin{equation}
w(r_\rho,r_\phi,r_y) = \frac{T^{00}(r_\rho,r_y)}{E_{tot}/V} \ ,
\end{equation}
where
$$
T^{00} = \epsilon \left[ (1+1/\kappa)\ \gamma^2 - 1/\kappa \right]
\ \ \ \ {\rm and}
$$
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon(r_\rho,r_y)
&=& \kappa n_0 \frac{V_0}{V}
T_0 \left(\frac{V_0}{V}\right)^{1/\kappa}\mathcal{T}(s)e^{-\frac{1}{2}\int_0^s
\frac{du}{\mathcal{T}(u)}}
\nonumber \\
&=& \kappa T_0 n_0 \left(\frac{V_0}{V}\right)^{1+1/\kappa} e^{-s_{y}/2} e^{-s_{\rho}/2} ,
\end{eqnarray}
while
$
\gamma^2 = \left[ 1 - \left(\frac{\dot{R}}{R}r_\rho \right)^2
- \left(\omega r_\rho \right)^2
- \left(\frac{\dot{Y}}{Y}r_y \right)^2 \right]^{-1}
$.
Here we assumed that $\mathcal{T}(s)=1$ and let
$C=\kappa n_0 \frac{V_0}{V}T_0\left(\frac{V_0}{V}\right)^{1/\kappa}$
to get
$ \epsilon(r_\rho,r_y)=Ce^{-s/2}$.
With $s=s_{\rho}+s_y$ where $s_\rho=r_\rho^2/R^2$ and $s_y=r_y^2/Y^2$.
We also get that
$$
E_{int}=C\int_{-aY}^{+aY} e^{-\frac{r_y^2}{2Y^2}}dr_y
\int_0^{bR} e^{-\frac{r_\rho^2}{2R^2}}2 \pi r_\rho dr_\rho \ .
$$
Using a change of variables to $s_y$ and $s_\rho$, so that
$dr_y=\frac{Y}{2\sqrt{s_y}}ds_y$ and
$2\pi r_\rho\, dr_\rho=R^2\pi ds_\rho$, the scaling
integration boundaries will be
$S_{yM} = a^2, \ \ $
$S_{\rho M} = b^2$
and we find
$$
E_{int}=C \pi R^2 Y \int_{-a^2}^{+a^2} e^{-s_y/2} \frac{ds_y}{\sqrt{s_y}}
\int_0^{b^2} e^{-s_\rho/2}\, ds_\rho \ .
$$
We can express the integrals as follows
$$
2\, I_A(b^2/2)\equiv \int_{0}^{b^2} e^{-s_\rho/2} ds_\rho=
2\int_{0}^{b^2/2} e^{-u} du
$$
and
\begin{equation}
2\sqrt 2\, I_B(a^2/2)\equiv
\int_{-a^2}^{a^2} e^{-s_y/2} \frac{ds_y}{\sqrt{s_y}} =
2\int_{0}^{a^2} e^{-s_y/2} \frac{ds_y}{\sqrt{s_y}} =
2\sqrt 2\int_{0}^{a^2/2} e^{-u} \frac{du}{\sqrt{u}} \ ,
\nonumber
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
I_A(u) = 1-e^{-u} , \ \ \ {\rm and} \ \ \
I_B(u) = \sqrt \pi \Phi (\sqrt u)\ .
\nonumber
\end{equation}
Thus
\begin{eqnarray}
E_{int}&=&C \pi R^2 Y 2 I_A(b^2/2)2\sqrt 2 I_B(a^2/2)
\nonumber\\
&=& C \pi R^2 Y 4 \sqrt 2 \left(1{-}e^{-b^2/2}\right)
\sqrt \pi \ \Phi \left(a/\sqrt 2 \right). \
\end{eqnarray}
Similarly we can calculate the Kinetic energies, $E_{kin}$,
for the rotation and radial and longitudinal expansions
as in
\cite{CWC2014}
(and see the Appendix).
Then, using Eq. (\ref{Etot-1}) or (\ref{EC2}),
the total energy of the system is
\begin{equation}
E_{tot} = E_{int} + E_{kin} \ ,
\end{equation}
which we can use in the calculation of the weighted
vorticity.
In the present study we assumed an infinite system
with scaling gaussian density profile, Eq. (\ref{alternate}),
so that the integrals are evaluated up to infinity.
\begin{figure}[hb]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.49\columnwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{vyf2.pdf}}
\hfill
\resizebox{0.49\columnwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{Ryf2.pdf}}
\caption{
(Color online)
Left: The time dependence of the velocity of expansion in the
transverse radial direction, $v_R$ and in the direction of
the axis of the rotation, $v_Y$, for the configuration presented in
Fig. \ref{F1-E-vs2-t}. The expansion velocity
is increasing in both directions. While in the axis direction
the velocity increases from 0.25 c to 0.5 c in 8 fm/c time, the
radial expansion increases faster.
Right: The time dependence of the Radial, $R$, and axis directed, $Y$,
size of the expanding system.
}
\label{F2-v-vs-t}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Results and Discussion}
We performed a set of calculations to study the applicability
of the model to heavy ion reactions. This presented non-relativistic model
leads to super-luminous velocities at late times and at the
external surface of the system. We used a parametrization
where the peripheral energy density is cut off exponentially,
and took initial conditions such that the vast majority of the
system is in the non-relativistic applicable domain of the
model.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.485\columnwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{F-B2.pdf}}
\hfill
\resizebox{0.485\columnwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{F-B4.pdf}}\\
\resizebox{0.485\columnwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{F-B6.pdf}}
\hfill
\resizebox{0.485\columnwidth}{!}
{\includegraphics{F-B8.pdf}}
\caption{
(Color online)
The energy weighted vorticity in the classical rotating exact model
with Gaussian density profiles, with initial parameters as given in
Fig. \ref{F1-E-vs2-t}.
The figure
shows the configuration at
$t = 2$ fm/c, when
the mean radial (longitudinal) sizes and speeds are
3.16 fm (4.64 fm) and 0.43 c (0.38 c), and the
angular velocity is 0.06 c/fm.
The boundary is at the position where the velocity of matter reaches
the speed of light, c. This happens at
$Y_{max} > 9.0$ fm and $R_{max}= 5.68$ fm.
At $t = 4$ fm/c,
the mean radial (longitudinal) sizes and speeds are
4.11 fm (5.51 fm) and 0.54 c (0.45 c), and
$\omega = 0.04$ c/fm.
The $v = c$-boundary is at
$Y_{max} = 10.58$ fm and $R_{max}= 6.24$ fm.
At $t = 6$ fm/c,
the mean radial (longitudinal) sizes and speeds are
5.25 fm (6.45 fm) and 0.59 c (0.48 c), and
$\omega = 0.02$ c/fm.
The $v = c$-boundary is at
$Y_{max} = 11.34 $ fm and $R_{max}= 7.56$ fm.
At
$t = 8$ fm/c,
the mean radial (longitudinal) sizes and speeds are
6.44 fm (7.49 fm) and 0.62 c (0.51 c), and
$\omega = 0.02$ c/fm.
The $v = c$-boundary is at
$Y_{max} = 12.58$ fm and $R_{max}= 8.75$ fm.
}
\label{F5-t}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
A first series of calculations is presented in Figs.
\ref{F1-t}.
With the parameters as defined in Figs. \ref{F1-t} when we reach
$t = 8$ fm/c the surface speed reaches the speed of light
already when the Energy weighted vorticity drops to 40\% of the
top central value. Thus, a substantial amount of matter is
outside the range of physical applicability of the model.
The evaluation of polarization would not be realistic with
these sets of parameters. Therefore we modified our initial
conditions such that the applicability of the non-relativistic model
holds up to the final, freeze out time of about 8 fm/c.
The time development of the change of the different forms
of energy are presented in Fig. \ref{F1-E-vs2-t}, for the modified initial
state, While the sizes $R$ and $Y$, and the expansion velocities
in these directions are shown in Fig. \ref{F2-v-vs-t}.
Now the total energy of the system is about 70\% of the previous example,
and the initial rotational energy is 60\% of the previous one.
We also performed another test series with this more compressed
initial state configuration
\ref{F5-t}.
While up to $t = 6$ fm/c the majority of the energy weighted
vorticity is in the applicable domain (where the velocity does not
exceed the velocity of light), at $t = 8$ fm/c roughly 95\% of the
energy content is still in the applicability domain of the
non-relativistic exact model (see Fig. \ref{F5-t}).
We may estimate that about 50-70\%
of the initial energy of a peripheral collision will
contribute to the expansion
of an symmetric solution of our participant system.
Thus the model is applicable at
lower energies, FAIR and NICA, energies, while at the top energies
of RHIC or LHC the reliability of this model is qualitative, and
may provide estimates with 15 - 20 \% accuracy.
\section{Conclusions}
The effect of QGP formation on the directed flow and the arising
3rd flow component or antiflow was first observed in fluid dynamical
calculation at energies above 10 GeV per nucleon in Ref. \cite{BA94}.
The nuclear EoS has to satisfy strong constraints from
the observed Neutron and Hybrid Star masses \cite{RS92}
Spin-orbit interaction and the momentum dependence of the
nuclear interaction \cite{CF92}, influence the nuclear EoS and
developing rotation and polarization of the participant matter.
The nuclear EoS has a strong effect on the collective motion.
Transverse flow and collectivity was observed early both in
fluid dynamical, nuclear cascade and molecular dynamics models
\cite{AS91}.
In conclusion, the exact model can be well realized with
parameters extracted from detailed, high resolution, 3+1D
relativistic fluid dynamical model calculations with the
PICR code. It provides an estimate of the rate of decrease
of angular speed and rotational energy due to the
expansion in an explosively expanding system. This indicates
that the effects of rotation can be observable in case of
rapid freeze out and hadronization, although the Kelvin
Helmholtz Instability is not present in this model and this
reduces the rotation at later times.
This indicates that the presence of the KHI is essential
for an observable effect of the rotation, and thus the observation
of the rotation is strongly connected to the evolving
turbulent instability in low viscosity Quark-gluon plasma.
\bigskip
\section*{Acknowledgements}
Enlightening discussions with
Marcus Bleicher, Tam\'as Cs\"org\H o, Dariusz Miskowiec,
Horst St\"ocker, Sindre Velle and Dujuan Wang, are gratefully acknowledged.
\bigskip
\section*{References}
|
\section{Introduction}
Often, combinatorial objects that on the surface seem quite different
nevertheless exhibit a deeper, somewhat hidden, connection. This is,
for instance, the case for
tilings of $3 \times (k-1)$-rectangles with $1 \times 1$ and $2\times 2$-squares~\cite{Heu99},
certain meets in lattices~\cite{Day_Kleit_West79},
and
the number of walks of length~$k$ between adjacent vertices in a triangle~\cite{Barry07}:
in all three cases the cardinality is equal to the $k$th \emph{Jacobsthal number}.
Their sequence
\[
0,1,1,3,5,11,21,43,85,171,341\ldots
\]
is defined by the recurrence relation $J(k)= J(k-1) + 2 J(k-2)$
and initial values $J(0)=0$ and $J(1)=1$. Jacobsthal numbers also appear in the context
of
alternating sign matrices~\cite{Frey_Sel00},
the Collatz problem and in the study of
necktie knots~\cite{FM00};
see~\cite[A001045]{oeis} for much more.
In this article, we add to this list by describing a relationship to
certain \emph{generalised Petersen graphs} $GP(3k,k)$.
These graphs arise from matching $k$ disjoint triangles to
triples of equidistant vertices on a cycle of $3k$ vertices;
see below for a precise definition
and Figure~\ref{duererfig} for two examples.
\begin{theorem} \label{Thm_Number_1fact}
For odd $k$,
the number of $1$-factorisations of the generalised Petersen graph $GP(3k,k)$ equals the Jacobsthal number $J(k)$; for even $k$, the number is equal to~$4J(k)$.
\end{theorem}
A \emph{$1$-factorisation} of a graph $G=(V,E)$ is a partition of the edge set into
perfect matchings.
(A \emph{perfect matching} is a
set of $^{|V|}/_2$ edges, no two of which share an endvertex.)
Such factorisations are closely linked to edge colourings: indeed, a $d$-regular graph $G$
has a $1$-factorisation if and only if its edge set can be coloured with $d$ colours.
That is, the \emph{chromatic index}, the minimal number of colours needed to colour
all the edges, is equal to~$d$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\def\drawGP{
\def360/\vxnumber{360/\vxnumber}
\foreach \i in {1,...,\vxnumber}{
\draw[hedge] (360/\vxnumber*\i+90:1.6cm) -- (360/\vxnumber*\i+360/\vxnumber+90:1.6cm);
\draw[hedge] (360/\vxnumber*\i+90:1.6cm) -- (360/\vxnumber*\i+90:1cm);
\draw[hedge] (360/\vxnumber*\i+90:1cm) -- (360/\vxnumber*\i+360/\vxnumber*\jumpnumber+90:1cm);
}
\foreach \i in {1,...,\vxnumber}{
\node[hvertex] (v\i) at (360/\vxnumber*\i+90:1.6cm) {};
\node[hvertex] (ui\i) at (360/\vxnumber*\i+90:1cm) {};
}
}
\begin{tikzpicture}[every edge quotes/.style={},scale=1]
\tikzstyle{hvertex}=[thick,circle,inner sep=0.cm, minimum size=2.5mm, fill=white, draw=black]
\tikzstyle{hedge}=[ultra thick]
\begin{scope}
\def\vxnumber{6}
\def\jumpnumber{2}
\def1.6cm{1.8cm}
\def1cm{1cm}
\drawGP
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(5,0)}]
\def\vxnumber{9}
\def\jumpnumber{3}
\def1.6cm{1.8cm}
\def1cm{1cm}
\drawGP
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The D\"urer graph $GP(6,2)$ and the generalised Petersen graph $GP(9,3)$}
\label{duererfig}
\end{figure}
\emph{List edge-colourings} generalise edge colourings.
Given lists $L_e$ of allowed colours at every edge $e \in E$,
the task consists in colouring the edges so that every edge $e$ receives a colour
from its list $L_e$.
The \emph{choice index} of $G$ is the smallest number $\ell$
so that any collection of lists $L_e$ of size~$\ell$ each
allows a list colouring.
The choice index is at least as large as the chromatic index.
The famous \emph{list-colouring conjecture} asserts that the two indices never differ:
\newtheorem*{lcc}{List-colouring conjecture}
\begin{lcc}
The chromatic index of every simple graph equals its choice index.
\end{lcc}
While the conjecture has been verified for some graph classes,
bipartite graphs~\cite{Gal95} and regular planar graphs~\cite{EG96}
for instance,
the conjecture remains wide open for most
graph classes, among them cubic graphs.
We prove:
\begin{theorem} \label{Thm_LECC_proved}
The list-colouring conjecture is true for generalised Petersen graphs $GP(3k,k)$.\sloppy
\end{theorem}
Our proof is based on the algebraic colouring criterion of Alon and Tarsi~\cite{A_Tar92}.
In our setting, it suffices to check that, for a suitable definition of
a sign, the number of positive $1$-factorisations differs from the number
of negative $1$-factorisations. In this respect our second topic ties in
quite nicely with our first, and we will be able to re-use some of
the observations leading to Theorem~\ref{Thm_Number_1fact}.
Generalised Petersen graphs were first studied by Coxeter~\cite{Cox50}.
For $k, n \in \Nz$ with $k < \tfrac{n}{2}$,
the graph $GP(n,k)$ is defined as the graph on vertex set $\{ u_i, v_i \, : \, i \in \Zz_{n} \}$
with edge set $\{ u_iu_{i+1}, u_iv_i, v_iv_{i+k} \, : \, i~\in~\Zz_{n} \}$.
Generalised Petersen graphs are cubic graphs. All of them, except the Petersen graph
itself, have chromatic index~$3$; see Watkins~\cite{Watkins69}, and
Castagna and Prins~\cite{Cas_Prins72}. In particular, this means that
the list colouring conjecture for them does not follow from the list version
of Brooks' theorem.
We focus in this article on the graphs $GP(3k,k)$, the smallest
of which, $GP(6,2)$, is called the \emph{Dürer graph}.
\smallskip
We follow standard graph theory notation as can be found, for instance, in
the book of Diestel~\cite{diestelBook10}.
\section{Counting $1$-factorisations}\label{Section_Counting_1-fact}
In the rest of the article we consider a fixed generalised Petersen graph $GP=GP(3k,k)$.
The \emph{outer cycle} $C_O$ of $GP$, the cycle $u_0u_1\ldots u_{3k-1}u_{0}$, will play a
key role. Its edges we call \emph{outer edges}, while the edges $u_iv_i$ for $i\in\mathbb Z_{3k}$ are called \emph{spokes}. See Figure~\ref{Fig_Vertices_V_i} for an illustration.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.8,auto]
\tikzstyle{hvertex}=[thick,circle,inner sep=0.cm, minimum size=2.5mm, fill=white, draw=black]
\tikzstyle{hedge}=[ultra thick]
\def0.8cm{0.8cm}
\def1.9cm{1.9cm}
\foreach \i in {0,1,2}{
\draw[hedge] (90+\i*120:0.8cm) -- (210+\i*120:0.8cm);
\draw[hedge] (90+\i*120:0.8cm) -- (90+\i*120:1.9cm);
\draw[hedge,red] (60+\i*120:1.9cm) -- (90+\i*120:1.9cm);
\draw[hedge] (90+\i*120:1.9cm) -- (120+\i*120:1.9cm);
}
\foreach \i in {0,1,2}{
\coordinate (v\i) at (90+\i*120:0.8cm);
\coordinate (u\i) at (90+\i*120:1.9cm);
\coordinate (r\i) at (60+\i*120:1.9cm);
\coordinate (l\i) at (120+\i*120:1.9cm);
}
\node[hvertex,label=above:$u_{i}$] at (u0) {};
\node[hvertex,label=left:$u_{2k+i}$] at (u1) {};
\node[hvertex,label=right:$u_{k+i}$] at (u2) {};
\node[hvertex,label=right:$v_{i}$] at (v0) {};
\node[hvertex,label=below:$\,\,v_{2k+i}$] at (v1) {};
\node[hvertex,label=below:$v_{k+i}$] at (v2) {};
\foreach \i in {1,2}{
\node[hvertex] at (l\i){};
\node[hvertex] at (r\i){};
}
\node[hvertex,label=above:$u_{i-1}$] at (l0){};
\node[hvertex,label=above:$u_{i+1}$] at (r0){};
\end{tikzpicture}
\label{Fig_Vertices_V_i}
\caption{A small part of $GP(3k,k)$; the colours of the red edges make up $\phi_i$}
\end{figure}
Our objective is to count
the number of $1$-factorisations of $GP$. Rather than counting them directly, we will consider edge colourings,
and here we will see that it suffices to focus on certain edge colourings of the outer cycle.
Let $\phi$ be an edge colouring with colours $\{ \mathsf{1,2,3}\}$ of either the whole
graph $GP$ or only of the outer cycle $C_O$.
We split $\phi$
into $k$ triples
\[
\phi_i=
\left(
\phi\left( u_{i}u_{i+1} \right) ,
\phi\left( u_{k+i}u_{k+i+1}\right) ,
\phi\left( u_{2k+i}u_{2k+i+1}\right)
\right) \text{ for }i=1,\ldots, k.
\]
To keep notation simple, we will omit the parentheses and commas, and only
write $\phi_i=\mathsf{123}$ to mean $\phi_i=(\mathsf{1,2,3})$.
We, furthermore, define also $\phi_{k+1}=
\left(
\phi\left( u_{k+1}u_{k+2} \right) ,
\phi\left( u_{2k+1}u_{2k+2}\right) ,
\phi\left( u_{1}u_{2}\right)
\right)
$, and note that $\phi_{k+1}$ is obtained from $\phi_1$ by a cyclic shift.
It turns out that the colours on the outer cycle already uniquely determine
the edge colouring on the whole graph. Moreover, it is easy to describe
which colourings of the outer cycle extend to the rest of the graph:
\begin{lemma} \label{Lem_Comb_colourTriples}
Let $\phi:E(C_O)\to\{\mathsf{1,2,3}\}$ be an edge colouring of $C_O$. Then the following two statements
are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}[\rm (i)]
\item
there is an edge colouring $\gamma$ of
$GP$ with $\gamma|_{C_O}=\phi$; \label{Enum_ExistsGamma}
and
\item there is a permutation $(\mathsf a,\mathsf b,\mathsf c)$ of $(\mathsf{1,2,3})$
so that $\phi_{i}$ and $\phi_{i+1}$ are for all $i=1,\ldots, k$ adjacent vertices
in one of the graphs $T$ and $H$ in Figure~\ref{Fig_T_and_H}. \label{Enum_AdjacentVert}
\end{enumerate}
Furthermore, if there is an edge colouring $\gamma$ of $GP$ as in \eqref{Enum_ExistsGamma} then it is unique.
\end{lemma}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[every edge quotes/.style={},scale=1]
\tikzstyle{hvertex}=[thick,circle,inner sep=0.05cm, minimum size=2.5mm, fill=white, draw=black]
\tikzstyle{hedge}=[ultra thick]
\begin{scope}
\def1.6cm{1.cm}
\foreach \i in {1,2,3}{
\draw[hedge] (90+\i*120:1.6cm)
to node {} (210+\i*120:1.6cm);
}
\node[hvertex] (123) at (90:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{abc}$};
\node[hvertex] (312) at (90+120:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{bca}$};
\node[hvertex] (231) at (90+240:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{cab}$};
\node at (-1,1.5) {$T$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(5,0.3)}]
\def1.6cm{1.2cm}
\foreach \i in {0,...,5}{
\draw[hedge] (\i*60:1.6cm)
to node {} (60+\i*60:1.6cm);
}
\node[hvertex] (211) at (0:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{aba}$};
\node[hvertex] (323) at (60:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{bcc}$};
\node[hvertex] (112) at (120:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{aab}$};
\node[hvertex] (233) at (180:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{cbc}$};
\node[hvertex] (121) at (240:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{baa}$};
\node[hvertex] (332) at (300:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{ccb}$};
\node at (-1.6,1.2) {$H$};
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The graphs $T$ and $H$ capture the possible combinations of consecutive colour triples}
\label{Fig_T_and_H}
\end{figure}
\begin{proof}
First assume \eqref{Enum_ExistsGamma}, that is, that there is an edge colouring $\gamma$ of $GP$
with $\gamma|_{C_O}=\phi$. Note that for all $i\in\mathbb Z_{3k}$
\begin{equation}\label{spokeeq}
\emtext{the spokes $u_iv_i$, $u_{i+k}v_{i+k}$ and $u_{i+2k}v_{i+2k}$
receive distinct colours.
}
\end{equation}
Indeed, the three edges of the triangle $v_iv_{i+k}v_{i+2k}v_i$
need to be assigned three different colours, which then also must be the
case for the corresponding spokes.
From~\eqref{spokeeq} follows that no $\phi_i$ is monochromatic,
i.e.,that $\phi_i\notin\{ \mathsf{111,222,333}\}$. If there was such an $\phi_i$, say
$\phi_i=\mathsf{111}$, then
none of the spokes $u_iv_i$, $u_{i+k}v_{i+k}$ and $u_{i+2k}v_{i+2k}$
could be coloured with~$\mathsf 1$ under $\gamma$.
In particular, $\phi_1$ will contain at least two distinct colours
and we can choose distinct $\mathsf a$, $\mathsf b$ and $\mathsf c$ so
that $\phi_1\in\{\mathsf{abc},\mathsf{aab},\mathsf{aba},\mathsf{baa}\}$.
Then $\phi_1$ is a vertex of either $T$ or $H$.
Consider inductively $\phi_i$ to be such a vertex as well.
By rotational symmetry of $GP$ and permutation of colours, we may assume
that $\phi_i\in\{\mathsf{abc},\mathsf{aab}\}$.
If $\phi_i=\{\mathsf{abc}\}$ then, by~\eqref{spokeeq}, the spokes
$u_iv_i$, $u_{i+k}v_{i+k}$ and $u_{i+2k}v_{i+2k}$ can only be coloured
$\mathsf b,\mathsf c,\mathsf a$ (in that order) or
$\mathsf c,\mathsf a,\mathsf b$. In the first case, the colour of the edge
$u_{i+1}u_{i+2}$ needs to be $\mathsf c$, and so on, resulting in $\phi_{i+1}=\mathsf{cab}$.
In the other case, we get $\phi_{i+1}=\mathsf{bca}$. Both of these
colour triples are adjacent to $\phi_i$ in~$T$.
The proof for $\phi_i=\mathsf{aab}$ is similar.
\medskip
For the converse direction suppose now that \eqref{Enum_AdjacentVert} holds. Consider a pair
of colour triples $\phi_i$ and $\phi_{i+1}$. By rotation symmetry
of $GP$ and by symmetry of the three colours, we only need to check the cases that
\begin{equation*}
(\phi_i,\phi_{i+1})=(\mathsf{abc},\mathsf{bca})\text{ and }
(\phi_i,\phi_{i+1})=(\mathsf{aab},\mathsf{cbc}).
\end{equation*}
In the first case, the spokes $u_iv_i$, $u_{i+k}v_{i+k}$ and $u_{i+2k}v_{i+2k}$
can be coloured with $\mathsf c$, $\mathsf a$ and $\mathsf b$ (in that order),
which then permits to colour the triangle $v_iv_{i+k}v_{i+2k}v_i$ with
$\mathsf{abc}$. Observe that neither for the spokes nor for the triangle
there was an alternative colouring. For the other case, colour the spokes
with $\mathsf{bca}$ and then the triangle accordingly. Again, all the colours
are forced. Extending the colouring $\phi$ in this way for all $i$ yields
an edge colouring $\gamma$ of all of $GP$, and as all colours are forced,
$\gamma$ is uniquely determined by $\phi$.
\end{proof}
The lemma implies that any edge colouring $\gamma$ of $GP$ corresponds
to a walk $\gamma_1\gamma_2\ldots\gamma_{k+1}$
of length~$k$ in either $T$ or in $H$. Where does such a walk start
and end? By symmetry, we may assume that the walk starts at $\gamma_1=\mathsf{abc}$
or $\gamma_1=\mathsf{aab}$.
It then ends in $\gamma_{k+1}$, which is either
$\mathsf{bca}$ or $\mathsf{aba}$. Conversely, all such walks define edge colourings
of $GP$.
To count the number of these walks, consider two vertices $x,y$ of $T$, respectively
of $H$, that are at distance~$\ell$ from each other in $T$ (resp.\ in $H$).
We define
\begin{align*}
t_k(\ell) &\coloneqq \sharp \left\lbrace \text{walks of length } k \text{ between $x$ and $y$ in $T$}
\right\rbrace \\
h_k(\ell) &\coloneqq \sharp \left\lbrace \text{walks of length } k \text{ between } x \text{ and } y \text{ in } H \right\rbrace
\end{align*}
Then every edge colouring of $GP$ corresponds to a walk that is either counted in $t_k(1)$
(as $\mathsf{abc}$ and $\mathsf{bca}$ have distance~$1$ in $T$) or counted in $h_k(2)$.
\begin{lemma} \label{Lemma_Number_1factors_walks}
The number of $1$-factorisations of $GP(3k,k)$ equals $t_k(1) + 3 h_k(2)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, we note that there is a bijection between the $1$-factorisations and
the edge colourings $\gamma:E\to\{\mathsf{1,2,3}\}$, where $u_1u_2$ is coloured with~$\mathsf{1}$,
$u_{1+k}u_{2+k}$ coloured with~$\mathsf{1}$ or~$\mathsf{2}$, and $u_{1+2k}u_{2+2k}$ is only coloured
with~$\mathsf{3}$ if $u_{1+k}u_{2+k}$ was coloured with~$\mathsf{2}$.
By Lemma~\ref{Lem_Comb_colourTriples}, the number of such $\gamma$ is equal to the
number of edge colourings $\phi:E(C_O)\to\{\mathsf{1,2,3}\}$ satisfying~\eqref{Enum_AdjacentVert} of Lemma~\ref{Lem_Comb_colourTriples} and for which $\phi_1\in\{\mathsf{123,112,121,211}\}$.
How many such edge colourings $\phi$ are there with $\phi_1=\mathsf{123}$?
Since $\phi_{k+1}=\mathsf{231}$, Lemma~\ref{Lem_Comb_colourTriples} implies that this number
is $t_k(1)$. Each of the numbers of edge colourings $\phi$ with $\phi_1\in\{\mathsf{112,121,211}\}$
is equal to $h_2(2)$, which means that, in total, we get $t_k(1)+3h_k(2)$ edge colourings.
\end{proof}
We need the closed expression of the Jacobsthal numbers:
\begin{align} \label{Eq_Jacob_Recur}
J(k)&=\tfrac{1}{3} \left(2^{k} +(-1)^{k+1}\right) &\text{ for every } k\geq 0.
\end{align}
\begin{lemma} \label{Lemma_Number_walks_C3}
For any $k$
\[
t_k(0)= \tfrac{1}{3}( 2^k + 2 (-1)^k)
\text{ and }
t_k(1) = J(k)
\]
\end{lemma}
The second equation can be found in \cite{Barry07}. Since it follows directly from the first one,
we will still include a proof.
\begin{proof}
A classic question in algebraic graph theory is to count the number of
pairs $(W,v)$ for a graph $G$, where $W$ is a closed walk of length~$k$ in a graph~$G$ and $v$
the first vertex of $W$. It turns out, see for instance~\cite[Section 1.4]{BeiWil},
that this number is equal to $\lambda_1^k + \cdots + \lambda_n^k$,
where $\lambda_1,\ldots, \lambda_n$ are the eigenvalues of
the adjacency matrix of $G$. For the triangle
these eigenvalues are $2$ and twice $-1$ (see e.g.\ \cite[Section 1.2]{BeiWil}).
Our aim, however, is to count the number of closed walks of length~$k$ that start
at a specific vertex, which means that we have to divide by $3$.
This gives $t_k(0)= \tfrac{1}{3}( 2^k + 2 (-1)^k)$
for every $k$, and thus the first assertion of the lemma.
Since every walk on $k+1$ edges has to visit a vertex adjacent to the end vertex after the $k$-th step,
for which there are two possibilities, we obtain $t_{k+1}(0)= 2t_k(1)$ and thus
\begin{align*}
2t_k(1) =t_{k+1}(0)= \tfrac{1}{3} \left(2^{k+1} +2 (-1)^{k+1}\right)
\end{align*}
By~\eqref{Eq_Jacob_Recur}, we get $2t_k(1)=2J(k)$ for every $k$.
\end{proof}
For the next lemma, we label the vertices of $T$ as $x_0, x_1, x_2$ in clockwise order.
The vertices of $H$ are $y_0, y_1, y_2, z_0, z_1, z_2$ in clockwise order.
\begin{lemma} \label{Lemma_Bijection_undir_walks}
If $k$ is even, there is a bijection between the set of walks of length $k$ from $x_0$ to $x_2$ in $T$ and the set of walks from $y_0$ to $y_2$ in $H$.
Moreover,
the $\ell$th edge of the walk in $T$ is traversed in clockwise direction if and only if
this is also the case for $\ell$th edge of the corresponding walk in $H$.
\end{lemma}
The projection of the set $\lbrace y_i, z_i \rbrace$ in $H$ to the set $\lbrace x_i \rbrace$ in $T$ for $i \in \Zz_3$ yields a covering map. The bijection between the considered walks of length $k$ in $T$ and $H$ follows immediately by the path lifting property for covering spaces (see e.g.\ \cite[Section 1.3]{Hatcher}).
We give, nevertheless, an elementary proof of the lemma.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{Lemma_Bijection_undir_walks}]
In $H$, every vertex with index $i \in \Zz_3$ in $H$ is adjacent to exactly one vertex with index $i+1$ in clockwise direction and one with index $i-1$ in counter-clockwise direction. Therefore, the following rule translates a walk $W=w_0\ldots w_k$ in $T$ starting in $x_0$
to a walk $W'=w'_0\ldots w'_k$ in $H$ starting in $y_0$ while maintaining the directions of edge traversals:
let $w'_0=y_0$;
for $\ell=1,\ldots,k$,
if $w_{\ell}=x_i$ then pick $w'_\ell$ to be the neighbour
of $w'_{\ell-1}$ among $y_i,z_i$.
As $w_{k+1}=x_2$, the last vertex $w'_{k+1}$ of $W'$ has to be one of $y_2, z_2$.
Since $k$ is even and the distance between $y_0$ and $z_2$ in $H$ is odd, $W'$ must terminate in~$y_2$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{Thm_Number_1fact}]
By Lemma~\ref{Lemma_Number_1factors_walks} the number of $1$-factorisations of $GP(3k,k)$ is $t_k(1) +3 h_k(2)$.
Lemma~\ref{Lemma_Bijection_undir_walks} yields that $h_k(2)$ equals $t_k(1)$ for even $k$. Since there is no walk of odd length in $H$ that connects two vertices of even distance, $h_k(2)$ is zero for odd $k$. By Lemma~\ref{Lemma_Number_walks_C3} the number of $1$-factorisations now equals $J(k) + 3J(k)$ if $k$ is even and $J(k) +3\cdot 0$ otherwise.
\end{proof}
\section{List edge colouring}
In order to show the list edge conjecture for $GP=GP(3k,k)$, we will
use the method of Alon and Tarsi \cite{A_Tar92},
or rather its specialisation to regular graphs \cite{EG96}.
To define a local rotation, we consider $GP(3k,k)$ always to be drawn as in Figure~\ref{duererfig}:
the vertices $u_i$ for $i=1, \ldots, 3k$ are placed on an outer circle in clockwise order,
the vertices $v_i$ for $i=1, \ldots, 3k$ on a smaller concentric circle in such a way
that $u_i$ and $v_i$ match up, and all edges are straight.
We define the sign of $\gamma$ at a vertex $w$ as $+$ if the colours $\mathsf{1}, \mathsf{2}, \mathsf{3}$ appear in clockwise order on the incident edges; otherwise the sign is $-$.
More formally,
\begin{align*}
\sign_{\gamma}(u_i) &=
\begin{cases}
+ & \text{ if }\left( \gamma(u_{i-1}u_i), \gamma(u_i u_{i+1}), \gamma(u_iv_i) \right) \in \lbrace \mathsf{123} , \mathsf{231} , \mathsf{312} \rbrace \\
- & \text{ otherwise}.
\end{cases} \\
\sign_{\gamma}(v_i) &=
\begin{cases}
+ & \text{ if }\left( \gamma(v_{k+i}v_i), \gamma(v_{i}v_{2k+i}), \gamma(v_iu_i) \right) \in \lbrace \mathsf{123} , \mathsf{231}, \mathsf{312} \rbrace \\
- & \text{ otherwise}
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
The sign of the colouring $\gamma$ is then
\begin{equation*}
\sign(\gamma) \coloneqq \prod\limits_{v \in V(GP)} \sign_{\gamma}(v).
\end{equation*}
Permuting colours in our context does not change the
sign of an edge colouring. This is true in all regular graphs, see for instance~\cite{EG96}:
\begin{lemma}\label{colourpermlem}
Let $G$ be a $d$-regular graph, and let $\gamma$ be an edge colouring of $G$ with
$d$ colours. If $\gamma'$ is obtained from $\gamma$ by exchanging two colours,
then $\sign(\gamma)=\sign(\gamma')$.
\end{lemma}
For $d$-regular graphs with odd $d$, such as cubic graphs,
Lemma~\ref{colourpermlem} is easy to see: the signs of $\gamma$ and $\gamma'$ differ at every vertex of $G$,
and there is an even number of vertices in total.
Lemma~\ref{colourpermlem} allows to define a sign $\sign f$ for any $1$-factorisation $f$
by fixing it to the sign
of any edge colouring that induces $f$. The Alon-Tarsi colouring criterion now takes a particularly simple form in $d$-regular graphs; see Ellingham and Goddyn~\cite{EG96} or Alon~\cite{Alo93}.
\begin{theorem} \label{Thm_ElGo}
Let $G$ be a $d$-regular graph with
\begin{equation*}
\sum\limits_{f \, 1\text{-factor of }G} \sign(f) \not= 0.
\end{equation*}
Then, $G$ is $d$-list-edge-colourable.
\end{theorem}
Applying Theorem~\ref{Thm_ElGo} to $GP(3k,k)$ with odd $k$,
we can now see that the list edge-colouring conjecture holds:
\begin{corollary} \label{Cor_Number_pos_neg_1F_k_odd}
For odd $k$, the graph $GP(3k,k)$ has choice index $3$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem~\ref{Thm_Number_1fact}, $GP(3k,k)$ has $J(k)= \tfrac{2^k +1}{3}$ distinct $1$-factorisations,
if $k$ is odd.
Since this number is odd, the sum of the signs of all $1$-factorisations cannot be zero. Theorem~\ref{Thm_ElGo} finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
Unfortunately, for even $k$
the number of $1$-factorisations is even.
That means, we have to put a bit more effort into showing that the sum of the signs of all $1$-factorisations is not zero. In particular, we will need to count the
positive and negative $1$-factorisations separately.
As a first step, we refine the colour triple graphs $T$ and $H$, and endow
them with signs on the edges. Figure~\ref{Fig_Tpm_and_Hpm}
shows the graphs $T_\pm$ and $H_\pm$, which we obtain from $T$ and $H$ by
replacing each edge by two inverse directed edges, each having a sign.
Note that in $T_\pm$ all edges in clockwise direction are positive,
while clockwise edges in $H_\pm$ are negative.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[every edge quotes/.style={},scale=1]
\tikzstyle{hvertex}=[thick,circle,inner sep=0.05cm, minimum size=2.5mm, fill=white, draw=black]
\tikzstyle{hedge}=[ultra thick]
\begin{scope}
\def1.6cm{1.4cm}
\def1.9cm{1.6cm}
\def0.8cm{1.2cm}
\node[hvertex] (123) at (90:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{abc}$};
\node[hvertex] (312) at (90+120:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{bca}$};
\node[hvertex] (231) at (90+240:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{cab}$};
\foreach \i in {1,2,3}{
\draw[hedge,->,shorten <=15pt, shorten >=15pt,bend right,auto,swap] (90+\i*120:1.9cm)
to node {$\mathbf{-}$} (210+\i*120:1.9cm);
\draw[hedge,<-,shorten <=10pt, shorten >=10pt,bend right,auto] (90+\i*120:0.8cm)
to node {$\mathbf{+}$} (210+\i*120:0.8cm);
}
\node at (-1.4,1.8) {$T_\pm$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(5,0)}]
\def1.6cm{1.6cm}
\def1.9cm{1.7cm}
\def0.8cm{1.5cm}
\node[hvertex] (211) at (0:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{aba}$};
\node[hvertex] (323) at (60:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{bcc}$};
\node[hvertex] (112) at (120:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{aab}$};
\node[hvertex] (233) at (180:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{cbc}$};
\node[hvertex] (121) at (240:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{baa}$};
\node[hvertex] (332) at (300:1.6cm) {$\mathsf{ccb}$};
\foreach \i in {0,...,5}{
\draw[hedge,->,shorten <=13pt, shorten >=13pt,bend right,auto,swap] (\i*60:1.9cm)
to node {$\mathbf{+}$} (60+\i*60:1.9cm);
\draw[hedge,<-,shorten <=12pt, shorten >=12pt,bend right,auto] (\i*60:0.8cm)
to node {$\mathbf{-}$} (60+\i*60:0.8cm);
}
\node at (-1.8,1.8) {$H_\pm$};
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Signs of the possible combinations of consecutive colour triples}
\label{Fig_Tpm_and_Hpm}
\end{figure}
Let $x,y$ be two adjacent vertices in $T_\pm$ or in $H_\pm$. We denote
the \emph{sign of the edge} pointing from $x$ to $y$ by $\sign(x,y)$.
The next lemma shows that the signs on the edges capture the signs of
edge colourings.
\begin{lemma} \label{Lemma_signs_sigma_i}
Let $\gamma:E(GP)\to \{\mathsf{1,2,3}\}$ be an edge colouring of $GP$,
and let $(\mathsf a,\mathsf b,\mathsf c)$ be a
permutation of $(\mathsf{1,2,3})$ so that $\gamma_1$ is a vertex in $T_\pm$
or in $H_\pm$. Then
\[
\sign(\gamma)=\prod_{i=1}^k \sign(\gamma_i,\gamma_{i+1}).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We partition the vertices of $GP$ into $k$ parts, namely into the sets
\begin{equation*}
V_{i-1} \coloneqq \lbrace u_{i},v_{i}, u_{k+i},v_{k+i}, u_{2k+i},v_{2k+i} \rbrace \text{ for } i \in \Zz_k.
\end{equation*}
See Figure~\ref{Fig_Vertices_V_i} for the vertices in $V_{i-1}$.
Factorising
\begin{equation*}
\sign(\gamma)
= \prod\limits_{w \in V} \sign_{\gamma}(w)
= \prod\limits_{i \in \Zz_k} \prod\limits_{w \in V_i} \sign_{\gamma}(w),
\end{equation*}
we see that the lemma is proved if
\begin{equation}\label{Viclaim}
\prod\limits_{w \in V_i} \sign_{\gamma}(w)=\sign(\gamma_i,\gamma_{i+1})
\end{equation}
holds true for all~$i=1, \ldots, k$.
That the total sign on $V_i$ depends only on $\gamma_i$ and $\gamma_{i+1}$ is clear
from Lemma~\ref{Lem_Comb_colourTriples}: $\gamma_i$ and $\gamma_{i+1}$
determine the colours of the edges incident with vertices in $V_i$.
Therefore, there is a function $f$ on the edges of $T_\pm\cup H_\pm$
to $\{-,+\}$
so that
\[
\prod\limits_{w \in V_i} \sign_{\gamma}(w)=f(\gamma_i,\gamma_{i+1})
\]
Our task reduces to verifying that $f(\gamma_i,\gamma_{i+1})=\sign(\gamma_i,\gamma_{i+1})$.
In principle, we could now check all edges in $T_\pm$ and $H_\pm$, one by one,
to see whether the signs are correct.
Instead, we exploit the fact that all vertices in $T_\pm$ (or in $H_\pm$) are in
some sense the same.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.8,auto]
\tikzstyle{hvertex}=[thick,circle,inner sep=0.cm, minimum size=2.5mm, fill=white, draw=black]
\tikzstyle{hedge}=[ultra thick]
\tikzstyle{redge}=[ultra thick,red]
\tikzstyle{bedge}=[ultra thick,blue]
\def0.8cm{0.8cm}
\def1.9cm{1.9cm}
\def270:1.1*\orad{150:1.5*1.9cm}
\node[hvertex] (v1) at (90:0.8cm) {$-$};
\node[hvertex] (v3) at (90+120:0.8cm) {$-$};
\node[hvertex] (v2) at (90+240:0.8cm) {$-$};
\node[hvertex] (u1) at (90:1.9cm) {$+$};
\node[hvertex] (u3) at (90+120:1.9cm) {$+$};
\node[hvertex] (u2) at (90+240:1.9cm) {$+$};
\draw[hedge] (v1) to node[pos=0.6]{$\mathsf b$} (v2);
\draw[hedge] (v2) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf c$} (v3);
\draw[hedge] (v3) to node[pos=0.4]{$\mathsf a$} (v1);
\draw[hedge] (v1) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf c$} (u1);
\draw[hedge] (v2) to node[pos=0.5,swap]{$\mathsf a$} (u2);
\draw[hedge] (v3) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf b$} (u3);
\coordinate (r1) at (60:1.9cm);
\coordinate (l1) at (120:1.9cm);
\coordinate (r3) at (60+120:1.9cm);
\coordinate (l3) at (120+120:1.9cm);
\coordinate (r2) at (60+240:1.9cm);
\coordinate (l2) at (120+240:1.9cm);
\draw[redge] (l1) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf a$} (u1);
\draw[bedge] (u1) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf b$} (r1);
\draw[redge] (l2) to node[pos=0.3]{$\mathsf b$} (u2);
\draw[bedge] (u2) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf c$} (r2);
\draw[redge] (l3) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf c$} (u3);
\draw[bedge] (u3) to node[pos=0.7]{$\mathsf a$} (r3);
\node at (270:1.1*\orad){$\mathsf{abc\to bca}$};
\begin{scope}[shift={(6.5,0)}]
\def0.8cm{0.8cm}
\def1.9cm{1.9cm}
\node[hvertex] (v1) at (90:0.8cm) {$-$};
\node[hvertex] (v3) at (90+120:0.8cm) {$-$};
\node[hvertex] (v2) at (90+240:0.8cm) {$-$};
\node[hvertex] (u1) at (90:1.9cm) {$-$};
\node[hvertex] (u3) at (90+120:1.9cm) {$-$};
\node[hvertex] (u2) at (90+240:1.9cm) {$-$};
\draw[hedge] (v1) to node[pos=0.6]{$\mathsf b$} (v2);
\draw[hedge] (v2) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf c$} (v3);
\draw[hedge] (v3) to node[pos=0.4]{$\mathsf a$} (v1);
\draw[hedge] (v1) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf c$} (u1);
\draw[hedge] (v2) to node[pos=0.5,swap]{$\mathsf a$} (u2);
\draw[hedge] (v3) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf b$} (u3);
\coordinate (r1) at (60:1.9cm);
\coordinate (l1) at (120:1.9cm);
\coordinate (r3) at (60+120:1.9cm);
\coordinate (l3) at (120+120:1.9cm);
\coordinate (r2) at (60+240:1.9cm);
\coordinate (l2) at (120+240:1.9cm);
\draw[redge] (l1) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf b$} (u1);
\draw[bedge] (u1) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf a$} (r1);
\draw[redge] (l2) to node[pos=0.3]{$\mathsf c$} (u2);
\draw[bedge] (u2) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf b$} (r2);
\draw[redge] (l3) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf a$} (u3);
\draw[bedge] (u3) to node[pos=0.7]{$\mathsf c$} (r3);
\node at (270:1.1*\orad){$\mathsf{bca\to abc}$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(0,-4.7)}]
\node[hvertex] (v1) at (90:0.8cm) {$+$};
\node[hvertex] (v3) at (90+120:0.8cm) {$+$};
\node[hvertex] (v2) at (90+240:0.8cm) {$+$};
\node[hvertex] (u1) at (90:1.9cm) {$+$};
\node[hvertex] (u3) at (90+120:1.9cm) {$+$};
\node[hvertex] (u2) at (90+240:1.9cm) {$-$};
\draw[hedge] (v1) to node[pos=0.6]{$\mathsf a$} (v2);
\draw[hedge] (v2) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf c$} (v3);
\draw[hedge] (v3) to node[pos=0.4]{$\mathsf b$} (v1);
\draw[hedge] (v1) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf c$} (u1);
\draw[hedge] (v2) to node[pos=0.5,swap]{$\mathsf b$} (u2);
\draw[hedge] (v3) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf a$} (u3);
\coordinate (r1) at (60:1.9cm);
\coordinate (l1) at (120:1.9cm);
\coordinate (r3) at (60+120:1.9cm);
\coordinate (l3) at (120+120:1.9cm);
\coordinate (r2) at (60+240:1.9cm);
\coordinate (l2) at (120+240:1.9cm);
\draw[redge] (l1) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf a$} (u1);
\draw[bedge] (u1) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf b$} (r1);
\draw[redge] (l2) to node[pos=0.3]{$\mathsf a$} (u2);
\draw[bedge] (u2) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf c$} (r2);
\draw[redge] (l3) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf b$} (u3);
\draw[bedge] (u3) to node[pos=0.7]{$\mathsf c$} (r3);
\node at (270:1.1*\orad){$\mathsf{aab\to bcc}$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(6.5,-4.7)}]
\def0.8cm{0.8cm}
\def1.9cm{1.9cm}
\node[hvertex] (v1) at (90:0.8cm) {$+$};
\node[hvertex] (v3) at (90+120:0.8cm) {$+$};
\node[hvertex] (v2) at (90+240:0.8cm) {$+$};
\node[hvertex] (u1) at (90:1.9cm) {$-$};
\node[hvertex] (u3) at (90+120:1.9cm) {$-$};
\node[hvertex] (u2) at (90+240:1.9cm) {$+$};
\draw[hedge] (v1) to node[pos=0.6]{$\mathsf a$} (v2);
\draw[hedge] (v2) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf c$} (v3);
\draw[hedge] (v3) to node[pos=0.4]{$\mathsf b$} (v1);
\draw[hedge] (v1) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf c$} (u1);
\draw[hedge] (v2) to node[pos=0.5,swap]{$\mathsf b$} (u2);
\draw[hedge] (v3) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf a$} (u3);
\coordinate (r1) at (60:1.9cm);
\coordinate (l1) at (120:1.9cm);
\coordinate (r3) at (60+120:1.9cm);
\coordinate (l3) at (120+120:1.9cm);
\coordinate (r2) at (60+240:1.9cm);
\coordinate (l2) at (120+240:1.9cm);
\draw[redge] (l1) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf b$} (u1);
\draw[bedge] (u1) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf a$} (r1);
\draw[redge] (l2) to node[pos=0.3]{$\mathsf c$} (u2);
\draw[bedge] (u2) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf a$} (r2);
\draw[redge] (l3) to node[pos=0.5]{$\mathsf c$} (u3);
\draw[bedge] (u3) to node[pos=0.7]{$\mathsf b$} (r3);
\node at (270:1.1*\orad){$\mathsf{bcc\to aab}$};
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Signs of the vertices in $V_i$ for some consecutive colour triples}\label{signsfig}
\end{figure}
A clockwise rotation of $GP$ by $k$ vertices induces a shift in a colour triple
$\gamma_i$ from $(\gamma_{i1},\gamma_{i2},\gamma_{i3})$ to $(\gamma_{i2},\gamma_{i3},\gamma_{i1})$.
Note that a rotation of $GP$ obviously does not change the sign of $\gamma$.
Moreover, permutation of colours preserves the total sign of $V_i$
since swapping two colours changes the sign at all six vertices.
Therefore we may assume that $\{\gamma_i,\gamma_{i+1}\}=\{\mathsf{abc}, \mathsf{bca}\}$
(if $\gamma_1\in T_\pm$) or that $\{\gamma_i,\gamma_{i+1}\}=\{\mathsf{aab}, \mathsf{bcc}\}$
(if $\gamma_1\in H_\pm$).
This gives four constellations to check, as the sign can (and does) depend on the direction
of the edge from $\gamma_i$ to $\gamma_{i+1}$. The four constellations are shown
in Figure~\ref{signsfig}, where we can see, for instance, that the edge from $\mathsf{abc}$
to $\mathsf{bca}$ has a net negative sign under~$f$, while the inverse edge is positive.
Since, on these four constellations, $f$ coincides with the edge signs of $T_\pm$ and $H_\pm$,
it coincides everywhere, which proves~\eqref{Viclaim}.
\end{proof}
Lemmas~\ref{Lem_Comb_colourTriples} and~\ref{Lemma_signs_sigma_i}
imply that every positive $1$-factorisation corresponds to a walk in either $T_{\pm}$ or $H_{\pm}$ whose edge signs multiply to $+$.
We call such a walk \emph{positive}; whereas a walk whose signs multiply to $-$ is \emph{negative}.
To count such walks, we observe that a walk and its reverse walk might have different signs. Not only the distance between two vertices has an influence, but also the rotational direction of the shortest path.
For two vertices $x$ and $y$ for which
the clockwise path from $x$ to $y$ is of length $\ell$, we define
\begin{align*}
t_k^{+}(\ell) &\coloneqq \sharp \left\lbrace \text{ positive walks of length } k \text{ from } x \text{ to } y \text{ in } T_\pm \right\rbrace \\
h_k^{+}(\ell) &\coloneqq \sharp \left\lbrace \text{ positive walks of length } k \text{ from } x \text{ to } y \text{ in } H_\pm \right\rbrace
\end{align*}
and $t_k^-(\ell)$ and $ h_k^-(\ell)$ analogously.
Similarly as in Section~\ref{Section_Counting_1-fact} for unsigned colourings, every positive edge colouring of $GP$ now corresponds to a positive walk in $T_{\pm}$ or in $H_{\pm}$. Since all edge colourings with the same associated $1$-factorisation have the same sign, we thus have
a way to count positive and negative $1$-factorisations via walks in signed graphs:
\begin{lemma} \label{Lem_Number_pos_neg_1F_walks}
The number of positive/negative $1$-factorisations of $GP(3k,k)$
is equal to $t^{\pm}_k(2) + 3 h^{\pm}_k(2)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
As before, in order to count $1$-factorisations it suffices to
count edge colourings $\gamma$ with $\gamma_1\in\{\mathsf{123},\mathsf{112}, \mathsf{121}, \mathsf{211}\}$.
Lemma~\ref{Lemma_signs_sigma_i} in conjunction with Lemma~\ref{Lem_Comb_colourTriples}
shows that there is a one-to-one correspondence between positive (resp.\ negative) edge colourings
and certain positive (resp.\ negative) walks of length $k$ in $T_{\pm}$ and in $H_{\pm}$.
Namely, these are the $t^{\pm}_k(2)$ walks in $T_{\pm}$ from $\mathsf{123}$ to $\mathsf{231}$
plus the $3h_k^{\pm}(2)$ walks in $H_{\pm}$ with starting
point $\mathsf{112}, \mathsf{121}, \mathsf{211}$, and respective
end point $\mathsf{121}, \mathsf{211}, \mathsf{112}$.
\end{proof}
As in Lemma~\ref{Lemma_Bijection_undir_walks} we can state a connection between walks in $T_{\pm}$ and $H_{\pm}$.
\begin{lemma} \label{Lemma_Bijection_signed_walks}
$h^{\pm}_{k}(2)=t^{\pm}_{k}(2)$ for even $k$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We can canonically extend the map of Lemma~\ref{Lemma_Bijection_undir_walks} to a bijection between walks in $T_{\pm}$ and $H_{\pm}$. Then the bijection maps walks counted by $t_k(1)=t_k⁺(2)+t_k^-(2)$ to walks counted by $h_k(2)=h_k^+(2)+ h_k^-(2)$.
Since the signs of the clockwise (resp.\ anti-clockwise) arcs are different
in $T_\pm$ and $H_\pm$, any arc in a walk in $T_\pm$ has a different sign
from its image in $H_\pm$. However, as we consider walks of even length~$k$,
the total sign of the walks is preserved by the bijection, and the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
In order to show that the numbers of positive and negative $1$-factorisations differ, it remains to compute $t_k^+$ and $t_k^-$:
\begin{lemma} \label{Lem_Number_pos_neg_walks_T}
For any integer $k \geq 1$
\begin{align*}
t^+_{k}(2) &= \tfrac{1}{6} \left( 2^k - (-1)^{k}\left(1+ (-3)^{\left\lceil \frac{k}{2} \right\rceil }\right)\right)\\
t^-_{k}(2) &= \tfrac{1}{6} \left( 2^k - (-1)^{k}\left(1- (-3)^{\left\lceil \frac{k}{2} \right\rceil }\right)\right)
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Every walk in $T^{\pm}$ from a vertex $v$ to a vertex $v'$ induces a reflected walk from $v'$ to $v$. In that walk, every arc is replaced by its reversed arc, which has opposite sign. Furthermore, the shortest path from $v$ to $v'$ in clockwise direction is of length $1$ if and only if the shortest path from $v'$ to $v$ in clockwise direction has length $2$. Therefore
\begin{equation}
t_k^{\pm}(1)=
\begin{cases}
t_k^{\pm}(2) & \text{ if } k \text{ is even } \\
t_k^{\mp}(2) & \text{ if } k \text{ is odd }
\end{cases}
\label{Eq_Indexswap}
\end{equation}
Note that the signs swap for odd $k$.
In the same way follows for odd $k$ that $t_k^{+}(0)= t_k^{-}(0 )$.
Since $t_k^{+}(0) + t_k^{-}(0)=t_k(0)$ we get
$t_k^\pm(0)=\tfrac{1}{2}t_k(0)$ and thus
with
Lemma~\ref{Lemma_Number_walks_C3} that
\begin{equation}\label{tk0eq}
t_k^\pm(0) = \tfrac{1}{3}(2^{k-1}-1)\quad\text{ for odd }k.
\end{equation}
We use Lemma~\ref{Lemma_Number_walks_C3} together with \eqref{Eq_Jacob_Recur} and note for later that
\begin{equation}
t_k^{+}(\ell) + t_k^{-}(\ell)= t_k(\ell)=
J(k) = \tfrac{1}{3}\left(2^k - (-1)^k\right) \quad\text{ for } \ell \in \{ 1,2 \}
\label{Eq_Sum_+-}
\end{equation}
Trivially, a walk of length $k$ must visit a neighbour of
its last vertex in the $(k-1)$th step,
and a vertex adjacent to its penultimate vertex in the $(k-2)$th step. Therefore
\[
\begin{array}{ll}
t_k^{\pm}(2) = t_{k-1}^{\mp}(0) + t_{k-1}^{\pm}(1) &\text{for all } k \geq 1\\[3pt]
t_k^{\pm}(2) = 2 t_{k-2}^{\mp}(2) + t_{k-2}^{\pm}(0) + t_{k-2}^{\pm}(1) &\text{for all } k \geq 2.
\end{array}
\]
Applying~\eqref{Eq_Indexswap} and~\eqref{tk0eq},
we obtain
\begin{align}
t_k^{\pm}(2)
&= t_{k-1}^{\mp}(0) + t_{k-1}^{\pm}(1)
\nonumber \\
&= \tfrac{1}{3}\left(2^{k-2} -1\right) + t_{k-1}^{\mp}(2) \quad &\text{ if } k \text{ is even.} \label{Eq_even_k}
\end{align}
For odd $k$ we get a recurrence relation by
using again~\eqref{Eq_Indexswap},~\eqref{tk0eq} and additionally~\eqref{Eq_Sum_+-}
\begin{align}
t_k^{\pm}(2)
&= 2 t_{k-2}^{\mp}(2) + t_{k-2}^{\pm}(0) + t_{k-2}^{\pm}(1) \nonumber\\
&= 3 t_{k-2}^{\mp}(2) + \tfrac{1}{6} \left( 2^{k-2} -2 \right) \nonumber\\
&= -3 t_{k-2}^{\pm}(2) + \tfrac{1}{6} \left( 6 \left( 2^{k-2} +1 \right) + 2^{k-2} -2\right) \nonumber\\
&= - 3 t_{k-2}^{\pm}(2) + \tfrac{1}{6} \left( 7 \cdot 2^{k-2} + 4 \right) \quad &\text{ if } k \text{ is odd.} \label{Eq_odd_k}
\end{align}
It straightforward to check that
\begin{equation*}
t^+_{k}(2)
= \tfrac{1}{6} \left( (-3)^{\tfrac{k+1}{2}} + 2^{k} +1\right) \quad\text{ for odd } k
\end{equation*}
satisfies the recurrence relation~\eqref{Eq_odd_k} and the initial condition $t^+_1(2)=0$.
Therefore, we deduce with~\eqref{Eq_Sum_+-} that
\begin{align}
t^-_{k}(2)
&= \tfrac{1}{6}\left(2^{k+1} +2\right) - \tfrac{1}{6} \left( (-3)^{\tfrac{k+1}{2}} + 2^{k} +1\right) \nonumber\\
&= \tfrac{1}{6} \left( - (-3)^{\tfrac{k+1}{2}} + 2^{k} +1 \right)& \text{ if } k \text{ is odd}. \nonumber
\intertext{The transition to even $k$ is now made by using~\eqref{Eq_even_k}. We obtain }
t_k^{+}(2)
&= \tfrac{1}{3}\left(2^{k-2} -1\right) + t_{k-1}^{-}(2) \nonumber \\
&= \tfrac{1}{6}\left(2^{k-1} -2\right) + \tfrac{1}{6} \left(- (-3)^{\tfrac{k}{2}} + 2^{k-1} +1 \right) \nonumber\\
&= \tfrac{1}{6} \left( - (-3)^{\tfrac{k}{2}} + 2^{k} -1 \right) &\text{ if } k \geq 2 \text{ is even } \nonumber\\
t_k^{-}(2)
&= \tfrac{1}{3}\left(2^{k-2} -1\right) + t_{k-1}^{+}(2) \nonumber\\
&= \tfrac{1}{6}\left(2^{k-1} -2\right) + \tfrac{1}{6} \left( (-3)^{\tfrac{k}{2}} + 2^{k-1} +1\right)\nonumber\\
&= \tfrac{1}{6} \left( (-3)^{\tfrac{k}{2}} + 2^{k} -1 \right) &\text{ if } k\geq 2 \text{ is even}. \nonumber
\end{align}
The different values of $(-1)^k$ and $\left\lceil \tfrac{k}{2} \right\rceil $ for odd and even $k$ yield the formulas for $t_k^{+}$ and $t_k^{-}$.
\end{proof}
We have finally collected all necessary facts to finish the proof of Theorem~\ref{Thm_LECC_proved}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{Thm_LECC_proved}]
By Corollary~\ref{Cor_Number_pos_neg_1F_k_odd}, it remains to consider the case of even $k$.
By Lemma~\ref{Lem_Number_pos_neg_1F_walks}, the number of positive/negative of $1$-factorisations is equal to $t^{\pm}_{k}(2) + 3 c^{\pm}_{k}(2)$,
which is the same as $4t^{\pm}_{k}(2)$, by
Lemma~\ref{Lemma_Bijection_signed_walks}.
Applying Lemma~\ref{Lem_Number_pos_neg_walks_T}, we see that $t_k^+(2)\neq t_k^-(2)$,
which shows that the sum of the signs of all $1$-factorisations
is not zero. Thus, the Alon-Tarsi criterion, Theorem~\ref{Thm_ElGo},
concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
|
\section{Introduction}
What is the maximum number of $\Fq$-rational points that a hypersurface of degree $d$ in $m$-space over the finite field $\Fq$ with $q$ elements can have? An intuitive approach could be to project the $m$-space onto an $(m-1)$-space. If this projection map from
the hypersurface to the $(m-1)$-space is flat, then a point below has at most $d$ points above on the hypersurface. This suggests that $d$ times the number of $\Fq$-rational points in the $(m-1)$-space is a natural upper bound. More precisely, if $f\in \Fq[x_1, \dots , x_m]$ is
of degree $d$ and $Z(f):=\{P\in \AA^m(\Fq): f(P)=0\}$ the corresponding affine hypersurface or if $F\in \Fq[x_0, x_1, \dots , x_m]$ is a (nonzero) homogeneous polynomial of degree $d$ and $V(F):=\{P\in \PP^m(\Fq): F(P)=0\}$ the corresponding projective hypersurface, then
\begin{equation}
\label{BasicBound}
|Z(f)| \le dq^{m-1} \quad \text{ and } \quad |V(F)| \le dp_{m-1},
\end{equation}
where for any $j\in \Z$, we have set
\begin{equation}
\label{pm}
p_j := |\PP^j(\Fq)| = q^j + q^{j-1} + \dots + q + 1 \text{ if $j\ge 0$ and $p_j := 0$ if $j<0$.}
\end{equation}
The bounds in \eqref{BasicBound} are true and a precise proof can be easily given using double induction on $d$ and $m$; see, e.g., \cite[pp. 275--276]{LN}. Variants of the bound in \eqref{BasicBound} for $|Z(f)|$ are also known in the literature as Schwarz-Zippel Lemma or more elaborately, as Schwarz-Zippel-DeMillo-Lipton Lemma, although it can be traced more than 50 years earlier to the work of O. Ore in 1922; see, e.g., \cite[p. 320]{LN}.
If $d>q$, the bound $dq^{m-1}$ exceeds $|\AA^m(\Fq)|$ and is hence uninteresting, whereas if $d\le q$, then it is attained as can be seen readily by considering the polynomial $g_d(x_1, \dots , x_m) = (x_1-a_1) \cdots (x_1 - a_d)$, where $a_1, \dots , a_d$ are distinct elements of $\Fq$. Thus $dq^{m-1}$ is the maximum value for $|Z(f)|$ when $d\le q$.
Likewise in the projective case, if $d\ge q+1$,
the bound $d p_{m-1}$ exceeds $|\PP^m(\Fq)|$ and so it is uninteresting in that case.
However, if $d\le q$ and $a_1, \dots , a_d$ are as before, then it is easy to see that the analogous homogeneous
polynomial $G_d(x_0,x_1, \dots , x_m) = (x_1-a_1x_0) \cdots (x_1 - a_dx_0)$ has exactly $dq^{m-1} + p_{m-2}$ zeros in $\PP^m(\Fq)$. Also if $d=q+1$, then $G_{q+1}:= x_0G_q$ has exactly $dq^{m-1} + p_{m-2}$
zeros in $\PP^m(\Fq)$. But $dq^{m-1} + p_{m-2} < dp_{m-1}$ if $d> 1$ and $m>1$. Moreover, an example of a homogeneous polynomial of degree $d\le q$ with exactly $dp_{m-1}$ zeros is difficult to come by. Motivated perhaps by this, M. A. Tsfasman made a conjecture, in the late 80's, that $dq^{m-1} + p_{m-2}$ is the ``true upper bound''. In other words,
\begin{equation}
\label{SerreIneq}
|V(F)| \le dq^{m-1} + p_{m-2} \ \text{ and hence } \ \max_F |V(F)| = dq^{m-1} + p_{m-2} \ \text{ if } d\le q+1,
\end{equation}
where $F$ varies over homogeneous polynomials of degree $d$ in $\Fq[x_0, x_1, \dots , x_m]$.
This conjecture was soon proved in the affirmative by J.-P. Serre \cite{Se}, and thus we will refer to the inequality in \eqref{SerreIneq} as Serre's inequality.
An alternative proof of \eqref{SerreIneq} was also given later by S{\o}rensen \cite{So}.
Some years later, Tsfasman and Boguslavsky \cite{Bog} formulated more general conjectures for the maximum number of points in $\PP^m(\Fq)$ of systems of polynomials equations of the form
\begin{equation}
\label{Fr}
\left\{ \begin{array}{l} F_1(x_0, x_1, \dots , x_m) = 0 \\
\vdots \\
F_r(x_0, x_1, \dots , x_m) = 0 \end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
A quantitative version of their conjecture essentially states that if $d < q-1$, then
\begin{equation}
\label{TBr}
\max_{F_1, \dots , F_r} |V(F_1, \dots , F_r) | = \displaystyle{ p_{m-2j} + \sum_{i=j}^m} \nu_i (p_{m-i} - p_{m-i-j}),
\end{equation}
where $F_1, \dots , F_r$ vary over linearly independent homogeneous polynomials of degree $d$ in
$\Fq[x_0, x_1, \dots , x_m]$, and
where $(\nu_1, \dots, \nu_{m+1})$ is the $r$th element of the set
$$
\Lambda(d,m):=\left\{(\alpha_1, \dots , \alpha_{m+1}) \in \Z^{m+1} : \alpha_1, \dots , \alpha_{m+1} \ge 0 \text{ and } \alpha_1+ \cdots + \alpha_{m+1} = d\right\}
$$
ordered in descending lexicographic order,
and where $j := \min\{i : \nu_i \ne 0\}$.
Observe that $(d,0,\dots , 0)$ is lexicographically the first element of $\Lambda(d,m)$
and so
\eqref{TBr} reduces to
\eqref{SerreIneq} in the case $r=1$, and is thus true, thanks to Serre \cite{Se} and S{\o}rensen \cite{So}. The conjecture was proved in the affirmative in the next case of $r=2$ by Boguslavsky in 1997. Also
\eqref{TBr} holds trivially when $d=1$. But the general case appears to have been open for almost two decades. Moreover, some auxiliary conjectures given in \cite{Bog} (see also Remark \ref{ThreeConj} in Section~\ref{sec3} below) that would imply the Tsfasman-Boguslavsky Conjecture have also been open.
We are now ready to describe the main results of this paper. In Section \ref{sec2} below, we give a very short proof of Serre's inequality.
Serre's original proof is quite elegant and S{\o}rensen's proof has its merits and applications.
Both the proofs involve some clever double counting argument, which are avoided in the short proof
given here,
thus making it comparable to the elementary proofs of \eqref{BasicBound} that one can find
in textbooks \cite[Theorems 6.13, 6.15]{LN}. Next, we consider the Tsfasman-Boguslavsky Conjecture (TBC) stated above and show that while it
is true if
$d=2$ and $r\le m+1$, it is false, in general, when $d=2$ and $r\ge m+2$. In a forthcoming paper \cite{DG2} it is shown that the TBC
is true for any positive integer $d$, provided $r \le m+1$. In the last section, we outline connections with coding theory and show that the TBC and in particular, our results are intimately related to the explicit determination of generalized hamming weights of projective Reed-Muller codes. We also compare the TBC with a recent result of Couvreur \cite{C} on an upper bound for the number of $\Fq$-rational points of arbitrary projective varieties defined over $\Fq$.
A key ingredient for us is the work of Zanella \cite{Z} on the number of $\Fq$-rational points on intersections of quadrics or equivalently, on linear sections of the
variety defined by the quadratic Veronese embedding $\PP^m \hookrightarrow \PP^M$, where $M= {\binom{m+2}{2}} - 1$.
\section{Serre's Inequality}
\label{sec2}
Throughout this paper, $m$ denotes a positive integer, $q$ a prime power, $\Fq$ the field with $q$ elements. Also for any nonnegative integer $j$, we will denote by $\PP^j$ the $j$-dimensional projective space over $\Fq$, and by $\dP^j$ its dual, consisting of all hyperplanes in $\PP^j$. Note that $|\PP^j (\Fq)| = |\dP^j (\Fq)| = p_j$, where $p_j$ is as in \eqref{pm}.
The following lemma is due to Zanella \cite[Lemma 3.3]{Z}. A proof is included for the sake of completeness. Alternative proofs are indicated in Remark \ref{rem:ZanellaLemma} below.
\begin{lemma}
\label{Zanella}
Let
$X \subseteq \mathbb{P}^{m}$ and
$a:=\max\{ |X \cap H| : H \in \dP^m\}$. Then
$|X| \le a q + 1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Induct on $m$.
The case $m=1$ being trivial, assume that $m>1$ and that the result holds for smaller values of $m$.
Let $H^* \in \dP^m$ be such that $|H^* \cap X| = a.$ Let $Y:= H^* \cap X$ and let
$H'$ be a hyperplane of $H^*$ such that $b := |H' \cap Y|$ is the maximum among the cardinalities of all hyperplane sections of $Y$ in $H^*\simeq \PP^{m-1}$. By induction hypothesis, $a \le bq+1$. Now we write
$|X| = |H' \cap X| + |X \setminus (H' \cap X)|$ and observe that on the one hand $|H' \cap X| = |H' \cap Y| \le b$, whereas on the other hand, every $P\in X \setminus (H' \cap X)$ is contained in a unique
$H \in \dP^m$ with $H \supset H'$. Thus
$$
\left |X \setminus (H' \cap X) \right| \le \left| \bigcup_{H \supset H'} (H \cap X) \setminus (H'\cap X) \right| \le
(q+1) (a-b),
$$
where the last inequality follows by noting that the number of $H \in \dP^m$ containing a fixed codimension $2$ linear subspace $H'$ of $\PP^{m}$ is $q+1$ and also noting that $\left| H \cap X\right| - \left| H'\cap X \right| \le a- |H' \cap Y| = a-b$ for any such $H$. Since $a \le bq+1$, it follows that
$|X| \le b+ (q + 1)(a - b) = aq + a - bq \le aq+ 1$, as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}[Serre]
\label{Serre}
If $F\in \Fq[x_0, x_1, \dots , x_m]$ is homogeneous of degree $d$, then
$ |V(F)| \le dq^{m-1} + p_{m-2}$. Consequently, $\displaystyle{ \max_F |V(F)| = dq^{m-1} + p_{m-2}}$ if $d\le q+1$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof
We use induction on $m$. The case $m=1$ is trivial. Thus we assume $m>1$ and
consider the following two cases.
\noindent
{\bf Case 1:} $V(F)$ does not contain any hyperplane in $\PP^m$.
In this case $F|_H \neq 0$ for
all $H \in \dP^{m}$. So the validity of the result
with $m$ replaced by $m-1$ implies
$|V(F) \cap H| \le dq^{m-2} + p_{m-3}$ for
all $H \in \dP^{m}$.
Hence by Lemma~\ref{Zanella}, $|V(F)| \le dq^{m-1} + p_{m-2}$.
Thus the desired inequality follows by induction on $m$.
\noindent
{\bf Case 2:} $V(F)$ contains a hyperplane in $\PP^m$, say $H = V(h)$.
In this case $|V(F) \cap H| = |H| = p_{m-1}$. We will now estimate $|V(F) \cap H^c|$. First, by a suitable linear change of coordinates in $\PP^m$ assume that $h = x_0$. Since $F_{|H}=0$, we can write $F = x_0G$
for some homogeneous $G\in \Fq[x_0, \dots ,x_m]$ of degree ${d-1}$. Moreover $V(F) \cap H^c$
corresponds to the zeros in $\AA^m(\Fq)$ of the polynomial $G(1, x_1, \dots , x_m)$. Hence
$|V(F) \cap H^c| \le (d-1)q^{m-1}$, thanks to \eqref{BasicBound}. Consequently,
$$
|V(F)| = |V(F) \cap H^c| + |V(F) \cap H| \le (d-1)q^{m-1} + p_{m-1} =dq^{m-1} + p_{m-2} .
$$
The assertion about $\displaystyle{ \max_F |V(F)| }$ follows from the example of $G_d$ given earlier.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:ZanellaLemma}
Variants of Lemma \ref{Zanella} are seen elsewhere in the literature. For example, with notation as in Lemma \ref{Zanella}, Homma \cite[Prop. 2.2]{H} has proved the following:
$$
|X| \le (a-1)q + 1 + \left\lfloor \frac{a-1}{p_{m-2}} \right\rfloor.
$$
To see that this implies $|X|\le aq+1$,
observe that $a\le p_{m-1} = qp_{m-2}+1$ and thus
$ \left\lfloor {(a-1)}/{p_{m-2}} \right\rfloor \le q$. We can also deduce Lemma \ref{Zanella} from the Plotkin bound \cite[Thm. 1.1.45]{TVN} of coding theory. Indeed,
we may assume without loss of generality that $X$ is not contained in a hyperplane of $\PP^m$ (for otherwise, $|X| = a < aq+1$). Now by \cite[Thm. 1.1.6]{TVN}, $X \subset \PP^m$ corresponds to a nondegenerate linear $[n,k,d]_q$-code $C$
with $n= |X|$, $k= m+1$ and $d = n - a$.
The Plotkin bound gives
$$
d \le \frac{nq^k(q-1)}{(q^k-1)q} = \frac{nq^{m}}{p_{m}}, \quad \text{which implies} \quad n \frac{p_{m-1}}{p_{m}} \le a, \text{ that is, } n \le \frac{ap_{m}}{p_{m-1}} \le aq+1.
$$
In our proofs of Lemma \ref{Zanella} and Theorem \ref{Serre}, we have avoided any double counting argument. But if we were to permit it,
then Lemma \ref{Zanella} can be proved more easily by
counting the set
$
\{ (P, H) \in X \times \dP^m : P \in H \}
$
in two ways using the first and the second projections, which yields $|X| p_{m-1} \le a p_m$,
and hence $|X|\le aq+1$.
\end{remark}
\section{Tsfasman-Boguslavsky Conjecture for Quadrics}
\label{sec3}
In this section, we will consider the conjectural formula \eqref{TBr} for systems \eqref{Fr} where each $F_i$ is homogeneous of degree $2$. In other words, we consider intersections of quadrics.
To begin with, observe that the maximum
number of linearly independent homogeneous polynomials in $\Fq[x_0, \dots , x_m]$ of degree $2$ is $\delta_{m}$, where
\begin{equation}
\label{delta}
\delta_{j} : = \binom{j+2}{2} = 1+ 2 + \cdots + (j+1) \quad \text{ for any $j\in \Z$ with } j \ge -1.
\end{equation}
Note that $0= \delta_{-1} < 1 = \delta_0 < \delta_1 < \dots < \delta_m$.
The following result is a restatement of \cite[Thm. 3.4]{Z}.
As usual, $ \lfloor c \rfloor$ denotes the integer part of a real number $c$.
\begin{theorem}[Zanella]
\label{ZanellaThm}
Let $r$ be a positive integer $\le \delta_m$, and let $F_1, \dots , F_r$ be linearly independent homogeneous polynomials in $\Fq[x_0, \dots , x_m]$ of degree $2$. If $k$ is the unique integer such that
$-1\le k < m$ and $\delta_m - \delta_{k+1} < r \le \delta_{m} - \delta_{k}$, then
\begin{equation}
\label{Zr}
|V(F_1, \dots , F_r) | \le p_k + \lfloor q^{\epsilon -1} \rfloor, \quad \text{ where } \quad \epsilon: = \delta_{m} - \delta_{k} - r.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
We shall
deduce from Theorem \ref{ZanellaThm} that if $d=2$, then the TBC
is true when $r \le m+1$ and false, in general, when $r > m+1$ and $m>2$.
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor1}
Suppose $d=2$ and
$1\le r \le m+1$. Then \eqref{TBr} holds. In particular,
$$
\max_{F_1, \dots , F_r} |V(F_1, \dots , F_r) | = p_{m-1} + \lfloor q^{m -r} \rfloor = \begin{cases} p_{m-1} + q^{m-r} & \text{ if } r=1, \dots , m, \\ p_{m-1} & \text{ if } r= m+1. \end{cases}
$$
where the maximum is over linearly independent homogeneous polynomials $F_1, \dots , F_r$ of degree $d$ in
$\Fq[x_0, x_1, \dots , x_m]$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
For $1 \le i \le m+1$, denote by $e_i$ the $(m+1)$-tuple with $1$ in $i$th place and $0$ elsewhere.
Lexicographically, the first $m+1$ exponent vectors of monomials of degree $2$ in $m+1$ variables are
$e_1+e_i$ for $i=1, 2, \dots , m+1$. Thus if $1\le r \le m$, then the corresponding Tsfasman-Boguslavsky bound in \eqref{TBr} is given by
$$
T_r = p_{m-2} + \left( p_{m-1} - p_{m-2} \right) + \left( p_{m-r} - p_{m-r-1} \right) = p_{m-1} + q^{m-r} ,
$$
whereas if $r=m+1$, then $T_r = p_{m-1} = p_{m-1} + \lfloor q^{m -r} \rfloor$. On the other hand, if $r\le m+1$, then the unique $k\in \Z$ satisfying $-1\le k < m$ and $\delta_m - \delta_{k+1} < r \le \delta_{m} - \delta_{k}$ is clearly $k = m-1$, and hence the corresponding Zanella bound in \eqref{Zr} is
$$
Z_r = p_{m-1} + \lfloor q^{\delta_{m} - \delta_{m-1} - r -1} \rfloor = p_{m-1} + \lfloor q^{m -r} \rfloor = T_r.
$$
Thus
Theorem \ref{ZanellaThm} implies that $|V(F_1, \dots , F_r) | \le T_r$ for $1\le r \le m+1$. It remains to show that the bound $T_r$ is attained if $r \le m+1$.
To this end, consider
$$
Q_i = x_0 x_i \; \text{ for } \; i =1, \dots , m \quad \text{ and } \quad Q_{m+1}:= x_0^2.
$$
For any $r\le m+1$, it is clear that $Q_1, \dots , Q_r$ are linearly independent homogeneous polynomials of degree~$2$ in $\Fq[x_0, \dots , x_m]$.
If $r\le m$, then the common zeros in $\PP^m$ of $Q_1, \dots , Q_r$ have homogeneous coordinates
of the type $(a_0:a_1: \dots : a_m)$, where either (i) $a_0=0$ or (ii) $a_0 \ne 0$ and $a_1 = \dots = a_r=0$. Hence
$$
|V(Q_1, \dots , Q_r) | = p_{m-1} + q^{m-r} = T_r \quad \text{ if } 1\le r \le m.
$$
In case $r=m+1$, the common zeros of $Q_1, \dots , Q_r$ are only of the first type
and so $|V(Q_1, \dots , Q_{m+1}) | = p_{m-1} = T_{m+1}$. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
\label{lastwt}
Roughly speaking, Corollary \ref{cor1} shows that \eqref{TBr} holds for small values of $r$. It is not difficult to show that it also holds for a few large values of $r$. For instance, when $r= \delta_m$, the intersection of $r$ linearly independent quadrics in $\PP^m$
is empty and thus has $0$ elements, quite in accordance with \eqref{TBr}. A little
more generally, if $m\ge 2$, then one can see that the last $5$ exponent vectors of monomials of degree $2$ in $m+1$ variables are $(0, \dots , 0, 0, 2), \; (0, \dots , 0, 1, 1), \; (0, \dots , 0, 2, 0), \;
(0, \dots , 1, 0, 1)$, and $(0, \dots , 1, 1, 0)$. The corresponding Tsfasman-Boguslavsky bound in \eqref{TBr} is given, respectively, by
$$
0, \quad 1, \quad 2, \quad q+1, \quad \text{and} \quad q+2.
$$
One can check that these coincide with the corresponding Zanella bounds in \eqref{Zr}. Moreover, it is easy to see that the bounds are attained by taking in the first case the set, say $\mathscr{Q}$ of all monomials of degree $2$ in $\Fq[x_0,x_1, \dots , x_m]$ and in the remaining four cases, taking the set obtained from $\mathscr{Q}$ by successively dropping $x_m^2$, $x_{m-1}^2$, $x_{m-1}x_m$, and $x_{m-2}^2$. Using these observations together with Corollary \ref{cor1} we see as a special case that the
TBC
is true for quadrics in $\PP^2$, i.e., \eqref{TBr} holds if $d=2$ and $m=2$.
\end{remark}
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor2}
If $d=2$ and $m > 2$, then \eqref{TBr} does not hold in general. In fact, \eqref{TBr} is false for at least $\binom{m-1}{2}$ values of
positive integers $r$ with $m+1 < r \le \delta_m$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Let $e_i$ ($1 \le i \le m+1$) be as in the proof of Corollary \ref{cor1}. Also let $k$ be the
unique integer such that $-1\le k < m$ and $\delta_m - \delta_{k+1} < r \le \delta_{m} - \delta_{k}$.
Write $r = \delta_m - \delta_{k+1} + i$ so that $1\le i \le k + 2$. Observe that the $r$th element, in descending lexicographic order, among the exponent vectors of monomials of degree $2$ in $m+1$ variables, is precisely $e_{m-k} + e_{m-k + i-1}$. In particular its first nonzero coordinate is in the position $j:=m-k$, and thus, with notation as in \eqref{pm}, the corresponding Tsfasman-Boguslavsky bound in \eqref{TBr} is given by
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
T_r &= p_{m - 2j} + (p_{m- j} - p_{m - 2j}) + (p_{m - (j + i - 1)} - p_{m - j - (j+ i - 1)}) \\
&= p_{m-j} + p_{m - i - j + 1} - p_{m - i - 2j + 1} \\
& = p_k + p_{k - i + 1} - p_{2k - m - i + 1}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
On the other hand, the corresponding Zanella bound in \eqref{Zr} is given by
$$
Z_r = p_k + \lfloor q^{\epsilon -1} \rfloor, \ \text{ where }\; \epsilon = \delta_m - \delta_k - (\delta_m - \delta_{k+1} + i) = \delta_{k+1} - \delta_k - i = k + 2 - i.
$$
It follows that if $0 \le k < m -1$ and $1\le i \le k$, then
$$
T_r - Z_r = p_{k-i} - p_{2k - m - i + 1} \ge q^{k-i} > 0,
$$
and so
$Z_r < T_r$. Thus Theorem \ref{ZanellaThm} implies that $T_r$ can not be the maximum of
$|V(F_1, \dots , F_r)|$ for arbitrary sets of $r$ linear independent homogeneous polynomials of degree~$2$ in $\Fq[x_0, \dots , x_m]$. The number of such values of $r = \delta_m - \delta_{k+1} + i$ is
$$
\sum_{k=0}^{m-2} \sum_{i=1}^k 1 = \sum_{k=0}^{m-2} k = \frac{(m-1)(m-2)}{2} = \binom{m-1}{2}.
$$
Evidently this is positive if $m>2$. This proves the corollary.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}
The simplest case where the TBC
is false seems to be that of intersections of 5 linearly independent quadrics in $\PP^3$. One can see in this case that Tsfasman-Boguslavsky bound is $T_5 = 2(1+q)$, whereas the Zanella bound is $Z_5 = 1+ 2q$, which is strictly smaller.
\end{example}
\begin{remark}
\label{ThreeConj}
The Tsfasman-Boguslavsky Conjecture stated in the Introduction (and abbreviated as TBC) is, in fact, a culmination of several conjectures that can be found in the paper of Boguslavsky \cite{Bog}, with at least one of the conjectures ascribed to Tsfasman. More precisely, the TBC is Corollary~5 of \cite{Bog} whose hypothesis is that Conjecture~3 of \cite{Bog} holds and whose ``proof" uses Lemma~4 of \cite{Bog}.
For ease of reference, we state below
Conjectures 1, 2 and 3 of \cite{Bog}.
To this end, let us first
introduce some
terminology. A projective variety $X$ in $\PP^m$ over $\Fq$ is said to be
\textit{linear} if
its $\Fq$-rational points lie on the linear components of $X$,
An $m$-tuple $(\a_1, \a_2, \dots, \a_m) \in \mathbb{Z}^{m}$ is said to be the \textit{dim-type} of a projective variety $X$ in $\PP^m$ if $X$ has
$\a_i$ irreducible components of codimension $i$ for $i = 1, 2, \dots, m$.
Given a finite family $\mathscr{X}$ of projective varieties in $\PP^m$,
an element $X$ of $\mathscr{X}$
is said to be:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] \textit{maximal} in $\mathscr{X}$ if $|X (\Fq)| = \max \{ |Y(\Fq)| : Y \in \mathscr{X} \}$, and
\item[(ii)] \textit{dim-maximal} in $\mathscr{X}$ if the dim-type of $X$ is maximal (among the dim-types of all the elements of $\mathscr{X}$) with respect to the lexicographic order on $\Z^m$.
\end{enumerate}
The
conjectures in \cite{Bog} concern the family, say $\mathscr{X}_r$, of projective varieties in $\PP^m$ defined by $r$ linearly independent homogeneous polynomials in $\Fq[x_0, x_1, \dots, x_m]$ of degree $d$, and are as follows. Here $\Lambda(d, m)$ is as in the Introduction.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[1.]
There exists a maximal family in $\mathscr{X}_r$ which is linear.
\item[2.]
If $(\nu_1, \dots, \nu_{m+1})$ is the $r$-th element of $\Lambda(d, m)$ in descending lexicographic order, then the dim-type of a dim-maximal element of $\mathscr{X}_r$ is $(\nu_1, \dots, \nu_m)$.
\item[3.]
There exists a maximal family in $\mathscr{X}_r$ which is dim-maximal.
\end{enumerate}
We remark that our positive result Corollary \ref{cor1} and its proof (especially the examples therein) imply immediately that Conjectures 1 and 3 above
hold in the affirmative
when $d=2$ and $r\le m+1$. Moreover, it is not difficult to also deduce Conjecture~2
in this case. On the other hand, the negative result in Corollary \ref{cor2} does not necessarily imply that Conjectures 1, 2, and 3 above
are false.
It should also be remarked that the Tsfasman-Boguslavsky Conjecture stated in the Introduction has two aspects: (i) the expression on the right hand side of the equality in \eqref{TBr} is an upper bound for the number of common zeros of a system of $r$ linearly independent homogeneous polynomials of degree $d$ in $\Fq[x_0, x_1, \dots , x_m]$, and (ii) this upper bound is attained. Our negative result in Corollary \ref{cor2} shows only that
(ii) is false, but does not rule out the possibility that
(i) holds, in general.
\end{remark}
\section{Applications and Supplements}
\label{sec:codes}
In this first subsection below, we outline the relevance of TBC
to coding theory, and in the second subsection, we provide a comparison with an older conjecture of Lachaud
\cite[Conj. 12.2]{GL} that is also stated, albeit with much too general hypothesis, by Boguslavsky \cite[Conj. 4]{Bog}, and
settled recently by Couvreur \cite{C}.
\subsection{Projective Reed Muller Codes}
Fix positive integers $m$, $d$ and let $n:= p_m$. Each point of $\PP^m(\Fq)$ admits a unique representative in $\Fq^{m+1}$ in which the first nonzero coordinate is $1$. Let
$P_1, \dots, P_{n}$ be an ordered listing of such representatives in $\Fq^{m+1}$ of points of $\PP^m(\Fq)$.
Denote by $\Fq[x_0, \dots , x_m]_d$ the space of homogeneous polynomials in $\Fq[x_0, \dots , x_m]$
of degree $d$ together with the zero polynomial. Define
$$
\PRM_q(d,m):=\{ \left( f(P_1), \dots , f(P_n)\right) : f\in \Fq[x_0, \dots , x_m]_d\}.
$$
Evidently, this is a linear subspace of $\Fq^n$, and hence a $q$-ary (linear) code of length $n$. It is called the projective Reed-Muller code. This code is analogous to a more widely studied class of codes called (affine or generalized) Reed-Muller code $\RM_q(d,m)$. See, for example, \cite{DGM, HP} for more on
Reed-Muller codes and \cite[Prop. 4]{BGH2} for a summary of several of its basic properties. The study of projective Reed-Muller codes was pioneered by Lachaud \cite{L1, L2} and S{\o}rensen \cite{So}. The relation with the TBC
is through the notion of generalized Hamming weights, also known as higher weights, that goes back at least to Wei \cite{W}. In general, for any $q$-ary linear code $C$ of length $n$ and dimension $k$,
and any $D\subseteq C$, one defines
$$
\w (D):= \left| \left\{i\in\{1, \dots , n\} : c_i\ne 0 \text{ for some } c\in D\right\} \right|.
$$
Now for $r=1, \dots ,k$, the
$r$th \emph{higher weight} of $C$ is
defined by
$$
d_r (C) = \min \{ \w( D) : D \mbox{ is a subspace of $C$ with }
\dim D = r\},
$$
It may be remarked that $d_1(C)$ is what is called the minimum distance of $C$. The relationship of $\PRM_q(d,m)$ with \eqref{TBr} is as follows: if $d< q$, then for
$1\le r \le \binom{m+d}{d}$,
\begin{equation}
\label{drTBC}
d_r\left(\PRM_q(d,m) \right) = p_m - \max_{F_1, \dots , F_r} |V(F_1, \dots , F_r) | ,
\end{equation}
where
the maximum is
over linearly independent $F_1, \dots , F_r$ in $\Fq[x_0, x_1, \dots , x_m]_d$.
To see \eqref{drTBC} it suffices to use the relationship between linear codes and projective systems as described in \cite[Thm. 1.1.14]{TVN} and to note that when $d< q$, the code $\PRM_q(d,m)$ corresponds to the projective system given by the $\Fq$-rational points of the Veronese variety corresponding to the Veronese embedding of $\PP^m$ of degree $d$. Thus it is clear that the
TBC
admits an equivalent statement in terms of an explicit formula for the higher weights of projective Reed-Muller codes. In particular, \eqref{drTBC} and Corollary \ref{cor1}
imply that
\begin{equation}
\label{drtwo}
d_r\left(\PRM_q(2,m) \right) = q^m - \lfloor q^{m-r} \rfloor \quad \text{ for } r=1, \dots , m+1
\end{equation}
whereas Remark \ref{lastwt} shows that
$$
d_{\delta_m - r}\left(\PRM_q(2,m) \right) = \begin{cases} p_m - r & \text{ if } r=0, 1, 2, \\
p_m - (q+r -2) & \text{ if } r = 3, 4. \end{cases}
$$
It may be noted that \eqref{drtwo} can be viewed as a generalization of the last theorem in \cite{L1}. We end this subsection by remarking that an affine analogue of the Tsfasman-Boguslavsky Conjecture is true, in general for $1< d < q$, thanks to
the complete determination of all higher weights of the Reed-Muller code $\RM_q(d,m)$ by
Heijnen and Pelikaan \cite[Thm. 5.10]{HP}.
\subsection{Comparison with a Theorem of Couvreur}
In a recent preprint \cite{C}, Couvreur has proved the following result, answering as a special case a conjecture that goes back to Lachaud and stated in \cite[Conj. 12.2]{GL} (see also \cite[Conj. 5.3]{LR}).
\begin{theorem}[Couvreur]
\label{Couv}
Let $X$ be a nondegenerate projective variety
in $\PP^m$ defined over $\Fq$. Suppose the irreducible components of $X$ have
dimensions $n_1, \dots , n_t$ and degrees ${\delta}_1, \dots , \delta_t$, respectively. If
$n_i < m $ for all $i=1, \dots , t$,
then
\begin{equation}
\label{c1}
|X(\Fq)| \le p_{2n - m} + \sum_{i=1}^t \delta_i \left( p_{n_i} - p_{2n_i -m} \right) \quad \text{where} \quad n:= \max\{n_1, \dots , n_t\}.
\end{equation}
In particular, if $X$
is equidimensional
of dimension $n$ and degree $\delta$,
then
\begin{equation}
\label{c2}
|X(\Fq)| \le {\delta} p_n - ({\delta}-1) p_{2n - m} = {\delta}(p_n - p_{2n - m}) + p_{2n - m}.
\end{equation}
Moreover, the upper bound is optimal for equidimensional varieties.
\end{theorem}
The original conjecture by Lachaud assumed $X$ be a complete intersection (and hence equidimensional)
of degree $\delta \le q+1$ and
had an additional hypothesis that $2n \ge m$, lest the bound in \eqref{c2} reduces to a known inequality (cf. \cite[Thm. 3]{Bog}, \cite[Prop. 12.1]{GL}).
Just like the TBC,
the conjecture by Lachaud reduces to Serre's
inequality \eqref{SerreIneq} when codim $X = m - n =1$. But for codim$X > 1$, the relation between two conjectures above may not appear sufficiently clear and it may be worthwhile to try to make it clearer. First, it should be noted that the hypothesis of TBC is amenable to an easy verification---one just have to check that the defining equations have the same degree and are linearly independent. On the other hand, determining the dimensions and degrees of irreducible components from a given set of equations defining the variety can be quite difficult. In fact, even when the variety is known to be irreducible, determining the degree may not be easy, unless of course it is a hypersurface. One basic case where
the hypotheses of the TBC and Theorem \ref{Couv} coincide and are easily checked
is when $X \subseteq \PP^m$ is defined by the vanishing of $r$ linearly independent homogeneous polynomials in $m+1$ variables, each of the same degree $d$, and $n = \dim X = m-r$ so that $X$ is a complete intersection. In this case $X$ is equidimensional and has degree
$\delta = d^r$. Assume, for simplicity, that $n\ge 0$, i.e., $r \le m$ and that $d> 1$ and $\delta \le q+1$.
Then $(d-1, 0, \dots, 0, 1, 0, \dots, 0)$, with $1$ is in the $r$-th place,
is the $r$th element of $\Lambda(d,m)$.
Consequently,
the Tsfasman-Boguslavsky bound, say $T_r(d)$,
on $|X(\Fq)|$ is equal to
$$
p_{m-2}+ (d-1)(p_{m-1} - p_{m-2}) + (p_{m-r} - p_{m-r-1}) = (d-1)q^{m-1} + q^{m-r} + p_{m-2}.
$$
Also since $d - 1 \ge 1$, putting $ p_{m-2} = (q^{m-1} -1)/(q-1)$, we see that
\begin{equation}
\label{Trdge}
T_r(d) \ge \frac{q^m + q^{m-r+1} - q^{m-r} -1}{q-1}.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, the Couvreur bound in \eqref{c2}, say $C_r(d)$,
in this situation is
$$
d^r (p_{m-r} - p_{m-2r}) + p_{m -2r} = (d^r -1) (p_{m-r} - p_{m-2r}) + p_{m-r}.
$$
Since
$d^r \le q+ 1$, i.e., $d^r-1 \le q$, we easily see that
$$
C_r(d) \le \frac{q^{m - 2r+2} \left( q^{r} - 1 \right) +\left( q^{m - r+1} - 1\right) }{q-1}
= \frac{ q^{m - r+2} + q^{m - r+1} - q^{m -2 r+2} - 1 }{q-1} .
$$
Comparing the right hand side of the above equation with \eqref{Trdge}, we see that $C_r(d) \le T_r(d)$ if $r\ge 2$.
It follows that the Couvreur bound is sharper, especially when $d>2$ and $r>2$. Of course, this, by itself, does not contradict the TBC since the projective varieties
where the Tsfasman-Boguslavsky bounds are attained are seldom equidimensional (that is to say, having all its irreducible components of the same dimension), let alone complete intersections.
Indeed, in the commonly applicable situation considered above, projective varieties
attaining the Tsfasman-Boguslavsky bound is expected to have $d-1$ common components of codimension $1$ and one of codimension $r$. As Couvreur \cite[\S 5.2]{C} has remarked, his bound in the non-equidimensional case might not be optimal. This is, in fact, true, and to see
this, one can consider $d=2$, $r\le m$, and the example of quadrics $Q_1, \dots , Q_r$ in the proof of Corollary \ref{cor1}. As we have seen, the projective variety, say $X$, cut out by these quadrics has $p_{m-1} + q^{m-r}$
points. Also it is clear that $X$ has two irreducible components, the hyperplane $x_0=0$ and the linear subspace $x_1 = \dots = x_r =0$. Both the components are linear and are complete intersections. Thus in the notation of Theorem \ref{Couv}, we have $t=2$ and $n_1=m-1$, $n_2 = m-r$, while $\delta_1 = 1 = \delta_2$. It follows that the upper bound of Couvreur in \eqref{c1} in this case is
$$
p_{2(m-1) -m} + \left( p_{m-1} - p_{2(m-1) -m} \right)
+ \left( p_{m-r} - p_{2(m-r) -m} \right),
$$
or in other words,
$$
p_{m-1} + q^{m-r} + q^{m-r-1} + \dots + q^{m-2r+1}.
$$
So if $r\ge 2$, then the Tsfasman-Boguslavsky bound is sharper than the Couvreur bound in this case.
It is thus seen that the two bounds compliment each other and neither implies the other, in general.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We are grateful to: (i) Masaaki Homma for bringing \cite{H} to our attention and also outlining the double counting argument given in Remark \ref{rem:ZanellaLemma} to prove Lemma \ref{Zanella}, (ii) Michael Tsfasman for some helpful discussions and suggesting that Lemma \ref{Zanella} could follow from the Plotkin bound, (iii) Olav Geil for pointing out that the bound for $|Z(f)|$ in \eqref{BasicBound} is also known as Schwartz-Zippel bound, and (iv) the anonymous referee for many useful comments on an earlier version of this article.
|
\section{Introduction}
\subsection{Schmidt's game and the Banach--Mazur game}
\label{subsectiongames}
The Banach--Mazur game, dating back to 1935, is arguably the prototype for all infinite mathematical games. This game has been extensively studied and we refer the interested reader to \cite{Telgarsky, Revalski} for a thorough historical overview and recent developments. One of the most interesting aspects of the game is its connection to topology, namely that one of the players has a winning strategy if and only if the target set is comeager.
In 1966, W. M. Schmidt \cite{Schmidt1} introduced a two-player game referred to thereafter as Schmidt's game. This game may be considered in a sense as a variant of the Banach--Mazur game. Schmidt invented the game primarily as a tool for studying certain sets which arise in number theory and Diophantine approximation theory. These sets are often exceptional with respect to both measure and category. The most significant example is the following. Let $\Q$ denote the set of rational numbers. A real number $x$ is said to be \emph{badly approximable} if there exists a positive constant $c = c(x)$ such that $\left|x-\frac{p}{q}\right| > \frac{c}{q^2}$ for all $\frac{p}{q}\in \Q$. We denote the set of badly approximable numbers by $\BA$. This set plays a major role in Diophantine approximation theory, and is well-known to be both meager and Lebesgue null. Nonetheless, using his game, Schmidt was able to prove the following remarkable result:
\begin{theorem}[Schmidt \cite{Schmidt1}]
Let $(f_n)_{n=1}^{\infty}$ be a sequence of $\CC^1$ diffeomorphisms of $\R$. Then the Hausdorff dimension of the set $\bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty}f^{-1}_n(\BA)$ is $1$. In particular, $\bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty}f^{-1}_n(\BA)$ is uncountable.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
We shall describe the games in the context of complete metric spaces. One could consider a more general framework of topological games, but as all of our applications and results are in this more restricted context, we prefer not to follow the most general presentation.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Description of games}
Let $(X,\dist)$ be a complete metric space. In what follows, we denote by $B(x,r)$ and $B^\circ(x,r)$ the closed and open balls in the metric space $(X,\dist)$ centered at $x$ of radius $r$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\label{ballsdef}
B(x,r) \df \{ y \in X : d(x,y) \leq r\}, \;\; B^\circ(x,r) \df \{ y \in X : d(x,y) < r\}.
\end{equation}
Let $\Omega \df X \times \R_+$ be the set of formal balls in $X$, and define a partial ordering on $\Omega$ by letting
\[
(x_2,r_2)\leq_s(x_1,r_1) \text{ if } r_2+d(x_1,x_2)\le r_1.
\]
We associate to each pair $(x,r)$ a closed ball and an open ball in $(X,\dist)$ via the `ball' functions $B(\cdot ,\cdot)$ and $B^\circ(\cdot,\cdot)$ as in (\ref{ballsdef}).
Note that the inequality $(x_2,r_2)\leq_s (x_1,r_1)$ clearly implies (but is not necessarily implied by\Footnote{For example, if $X = \{x_0\}$ is a singleton then $B(x_0,r_2)\subset B(x_0,r_1)$ for all $r_1,r_2 > 0$, but the inequality $(x_0,r_2)\leq_s (x_0,r_1)$ only holds if $r_2 \leq r_1$.}) the inclusion $B(x_2,r_2) \subset B(x_1,r_1)$. Nevertheless, the two conditions are equivalent when $(X,\dist)$ is a Banach space.
For Schmidt's game, fix $\alpha,\beta\in (0,1)$ and $S\subset X$. The set $S$ will be called the \emph{target set}. Schmidt's $(\alpha,\beta,S)$-game is played by two players, whom we shall call Alice and Bob. The game starts with Bob choosing a pair $\omega_1 = (x_1,r_1) \in \Omega$. Alice and Bob then take turns choosing pairs $\omega'_n = (x'_n,r'_n)\leq_s\omega_n$ and $\omega_{n+1}= (x_{n+1},r_{n+1})\leq_s\omega'_n$, respectively. These pairs are required to satisfy
\begin{equation}
\label{Schmidt_rules}
r_n' = \alpha r_n\text{ and }r_{n+1} = \beta r_n'\,.
\end{equation}
Since the game is played on a complete metric space and since the diameters of the nested balls
\begin{equation}
\label{nestedballs}
B(\omega_1) \supset \ldots\supset B(\omega_n) \supset B(\omega'_n) \supset B(\omega_{n + 1}) \supset \ldots
\end{equation}
tend to zero as $n\rightarrow\infty$, the intersection of these balls is a singleton $\{x_\infty\}$. Call Alice the winner if $x_\infty\in S$; otherwise Bob is declared the winner. A \emph{strategy} consists of a description of how one of the players should act based on the opponent's previous moves. A strategy is \emph{winning} if it guarantees the player a win regardless of the opponent's moves. If Alice has a winning strategy for Schmidt's $(\alpha,\beta,S)$-game, we say that $S$ is an $(\alpha,\beta)$-\emph{winning} set. If $S$ is $(\alpha,\beta)$-winning for all (equiv. for all sufficiently small) $\beta\in (0,1)$, we say that $S$ is an \emph{$\alpha$-winning} set. If $S$ is $\alpha$-winning for some (equiv. for all sufficiently small) $\alpha\in (0,1)$, we say that $S$ is \emph{winning}. (To see that ``for all'' and ``for some'' may be replaced by ``for all sufficiently small'', cf. \cite[Lemmas 8 and 9]{Schmidt1}.)
In what follows we shall need a variation of Schmidt's game introduced by C. T. McMullen \cite{McMullen_absolute_winning}, the \emph{absolute winning} game.\Footnote{Technically, the game we describe below was not defined by McMullen, who only considered the special case $X = \R^d$. The version of the absolute winning game described below appeared first in \cite[\64]{FSU4}.}
Given $\beta\in (0,1)$ and $S\subset X$, the \emph{$(\beta,S)$-absolute game} is played as follows: As before the game starts with Bob choosing a pair $\omega_1 = (x_1,r_1) \in \Omega$, and Alice and Bob then take turns choosing pairs $\omega_n$ and $\omega'_n$. However, instead of requiring $\omega_{n + 1} \leq_s \omega'_n \leq_s \omega_n$, now there is no restriction on Alice's choice $\omega'_n = (x'_n,r'_n)$, and Bob's choice $\omega_{n + 1} = (x_{n + 1},r_{n + 1})$ must be chosen to satisfy
\begin{equation}
\label{absolutewinningcontainment}
\omega_{n + 1} \leq_s \omega_n \text{ and } \dist(x'_n,x_{n + 1}) \geq r_n' + r_{n + 1}.
\end{equation}
The second condition states that the balls $\omega'_n$ and $\omega_{n + 1}$ are ``formally disjoint'', so we can think of Alice has having ``deleted'' the ball $B(\omega'_n)$. The restrictions on the radii in the absolute game are
\begin{equation}
\label{absolute_winning_rules}
r_n' \leq \beta r_n\text{ and }r_{n+1} \geq \beta r_n.
\end{equation}
However, since \eqref{absolute_winning_rules} is insufficient to ensure that the diameters of the nested balls \eqref{nestedballs} tend to zero, it may happen that the intersection $I \df \bigcap_n B(\omega_n)$ is not a singleton. If this occurs, we call Alice the winner if $I\cap S\neq\emptyset$; otherwise Bob is declared the winner. It may also happen that Bob has no legal moves, and for technical reasons in this case it is better to declare Alice the winner (cf. \cite[comments before Lemma 2.1]{BFS1}). However, for sufficiently nice spaces (i.e. uniformly perfect spaces; cf. \cite[Lemma 4.3]{FSU4}) and for sufficiently small $\beta$, such a situation cannot arise. If Alice has a winning strategy for the $\beta$-absolute game with a given target set $S$, then $S$ is called \emph{$\beta$-absolute winning}, and if this is true for every $\beta > 0$, then $S$ is called \emph{absolute winning}. Every absolute winning set on a uniformly perfect set is winning \cite[Proposition 4.4(ii)]{FSU4}.
The Banach--Mazur game's rules are the same as for Schmidt's game except for the fact that no restricting parameters are given, i.e., at each of the player's turns, they may choose as small a radius as they please, and just like in the absolute winning game, if the intersection of the players' balls is not a singleton, we declare Alice the winner if this intersection with the target set is nonempty. It is well-known that Alice has a winning strategy if and only if the target set is comeager \cite{Oxtoby2}.
{\bf Acknowledgements.} The first-named author was supported in part by the Simons Foundation grant \#245708. The third-named author was supported in part by the EPSRC Programme Grant EP/J018260/1. The authors thank the anonymous referee for helpful comments.
\section{The Banach--Mazur--Schmidt and Banach--Mazur--McMullen games}
We now define two new games: the Banach--Mazur--Schmidt (BMS) game and the Banach--Mazur--McMullen (BMM) game. In the BMS (resp. BMM) game, Bob starts, playing according to the Banach--Mazur game rules, while Alice is dealt a parameter $\beta \in (0,1)$ and follows the rules for Schmidt's game (resp. the absolute winning game). More precisely: in the $\beta$-BMS game, Bob and Alice take turns choosing pairs $\omega_n$ and $\omega'_n$ satisfying $\omega_{n + 1} \leq_s \omega'_n \leq_s \omega_n$, while Alice's choices are additionally required to satisfy \eqref{Schmidt_rules}. And in the $\beta$-BMM game, Bob and Alice take turns choosing pairs $\omega_n$ and $\omega'_n$ satisfying \eqref{absolutewinningcontainment}, but Bob's moves are not required to satisfy \eqref{absolute_winning_rules} even though Alice's are.
If Alice has a winning strategy for the $\beta$-BMS (resp. $\beta$-BMM) game, then we call the target set \emph{$\beta$-BMS (resp. $\beta$-BMM) winning}, and if a set it $\beta$-BMS (resp. $\beta$-BMM) winning for all sufficiently small $\beta \in (0,1)$, then we call it \emph{BMS-winning (resp. BMM-winning)}.
Our first theorem geometrically characterizes the $\beta$-BMS and $\beta$-BMM winning sets, but first we need the following definition:
\begin{definition}
\label{definitionporous}
Fix $\beta > 0$. A set $E \subset X$ is said to be \emph{uniformly $\beta$-porous} if there exists $r_0 > 0$ such that for every ball $B(x,r)\subset X$ with $r \leq r_0$, there exists $B^\circ(y,\beta r) \subset B(x,r)$ such that $B^\circ(y,\beta r) \cap E = \emptyset$.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}
\label{theoremcharacterization}
Let $(X,d)$ be a separable complete metric space and fix $\beta \in (0,1)$. Then a Borel set $T \subset X$ is $\beta$-BMS winning if and only if $X\butnot T$ can be written as the countable union of uniformly $\beta$-porous sets. Moreover, $T$ is $\beta$-BMM winning if and only if $X\butnot T$ is countable.
\end{theorem}
\begin{example}
The Cantor set $C\subset\R$ is uniformly $1/5$-porous,\Footnote{Let $B(x,r)\subset\R$ be a ball, and we will show that there exists $B^\circ(y,r/5)\subset B(x,r)$ such that $B^\circ(y,r/5) \cap C = \emptyset$. By a zooming argument, we can without loss of generality assume that $B(x,r)\cap [0,1/3]\neq \emptyset$ and $B(x,r)\cap [2/3,1]\neq \emptyset$. By a symmetry argument, we can without loss of generality assume that $x\geq 1/2$. If $r/5\leq 1/6$, then we let $y = 1/2$, and if $3r/5 \geq 1/2$, then we let $y = 1/2 + 4r/5$. Either way we get $B^\circ(y,r/5)\subset [1/3,x + r] \subset B(x,r)$ and $B^\circ(y,r/5) \cap C = \emptyset$.} so by Theorem \ref{theoremcharacterization}, $\R\butnot C$ is $1/5$-BMS winning.
\end{example}
A slightly more general example:
\begin{example}
Given $s\geq 0$, a closed set $K$ is called \emph{Ahlfors $s$-regular} if there exists a measure $\mu$ whose support equals $K$ and a constant $C > 0$ such that for all $x\in K$ and $0 < r \leq 1$,
\[
C^{-1} r^s \leq \mu(B(x,r)) \leq C r^s.
\]
If $K\subset \R^d$ is an Ahlfors $s$-regular set with $s < d$, or more generally if $K\subset X$ is Ahlfors $s$-regular, $X$ is Ahlfors $\delta$-regular, and $s < \delta$, then a simple calculation shows that $K$ is uniformly porous,\Footnote{Suppose otherwise, and let $\beta > 0$ be small. Then there exists a ball $B(x,r)$ such that every ball $B^\circ(y,\beta r) \subset B(x,r)$ intersects $K$. Let $A\subset B(x,r/2)$ be a maximal $3\beta r$-separated set. Since $X$ is Ahlfors $\delta$-regular, $\#(A) \geq C_1 \beta^{-\delta}$ for some constant $C_1 > 0$. For each $x\in A$ let $f(x)\in K$ be chosen so that $f(x)\in B^\circ(x,\beta r)$. Then $B = \{f(x) : x\in A\}$ is a $\beta r$-separated subset of $B(x,r)\cap K$, so since $K$ is Ahlfors $s$-regular, we have $\#(B) \leq C_2 \beta^{-s}$ for some constant $C_2 > 0$. Since $\#(A) = \#(B)$, this is a contradiction for sufficiently small $\beta$. Thus $K$ is uniformly porous. An alternate proof of this fact may be found in \cite[Lemma 3.12]{BHR}.} so by Theorem \ref{theoremcharacterization}, $T = X\butnot K$ is BMS-winning.
\end{example}
If $X$ is Ahlfors $\delta$-regular, then for every $\beta$ there exists $s_\beta < \delta$ such that every uniformly $\beta$-porous set $T$ has upper box-counting dimension $\leq s_\beta$ \cite[Theorem 4.7]{JJKRRS}. Since the Hausdorff and packing dimensions of a set are bounded above by its upper box dimension, we get the following corollary of Theorem \ref{theoremcharacterization}:
\begin{corollary}
If $X$ is Ahlfors $\delta$-regular and $T\subset X$ is BMS-winning, then the Hausdorff and packing dimensions of $X\butnot T$ are $<\delta$.
\end{corollary}
The following can be proven either using Theorem \ref{theoremcharacterization} or by a method similar to \cite[Theorem 2]{Schmidt1}.
\begin{corollary}
The intersection of countably many $\beta$-BMS (resp. $\beta$-BMM) winning sets is $\beta$-BMS (resp. $\beta$-BMM) winning.
\end{corollary}
~
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{theoremcharacterization}]~
($\Rightarrow$): Suppose Alice has a winning strategy. By \cite[Theorem 7]{Schmidt1}, she has a \emph{positional} winning strategy, i.e. a map $f$ which inputs a move of Bob and tells her what she should do next. Let $\BB$ denote the set of balls in $X$, so that $f:\BB\to\BB$ and if $f(B(x,r)) = B(y,s)$, then $s = \beta r$. Let
\[
g(B(x,r)) = \begin{cases}
B^\circ(y,s) & \text{BMS game}\\
B^\circ(x,r)\butnot B(y,s) & \text{BMM game}
\end{cases}.
\]
For each $m\in\N$, let
\[
K_m = X \butnot \bigcup_{\substack{B = B(x,r)\in\BB \\ 0 < r \leq 1/m}} g(B).
\]
\begin{claim}
$X\butnot T\subset \bigcup_{m\in\N} K_m$.
\end{claim}
\begin{subproof}
By contradiction, suppose $p\in (X\butnot T)\butnot\bigcup_{m\in\N} K_m$.
We claim that Bob can beat Alice's strategy by using the following counter-strategy: always choose a ball $B\in\BB$ such that $p\in g(B)$.
Obviously, if he can successfully apply this strategy then this is a contradiction, since then the intersection point will be $p\in X\butnot T$, a win for Bob, but Alice's strategy was supposed to be a winning strategy.
We prove by induction that he can apply the strategy.
If he applied it to choose his previous move $B_n$, then $p\in g(B_n)$, and from the definition of $g$, this guarantees the existence of a neighborhood $B(p,2/m)$ of $p$ such that any ball contained in $B(p,2/m)$ constitutes a legal move for Bob.
Such a neighborhood also exists if it is the first turn and no one has made a move.
Now since $p\notin K_m$, there exists $B = B(x,r)\in\BB$ with $0 < r \leq 1/m$ and $p\in g(B)$.
Then $B$ constitutes a legal move for Bob, since $p\in g(B) \subset B$ and thus $B \subset B(p,2/m)$.
\end{subproof}
Now if Alice and Bob are playing the BMS game, then for every $B = B(x,r)\in\BB$ such that $0 < r\leq 1/m$, we have $g(B) \cap K_m = \emptyset$, so by definition, $K_m$ is uniformly $\beta$-porous, completing the proof.
On the other hand, suppose that Alice and Bob are playing the BMM game.
Then for every $B = B(x,r)\in\BB$ such that $0 < r\leq \beta^{1/2}/m$, we have $g(B(x,\beta^{-1/2}r)) \cap K_m = \emptyset$, so $B\cap K_m = B(x_2,\beta^{1/2}r)\cap K_m$ for some $x_2\in X$. Continuing this process we get a sequence $(x_k)_1^\infty$ with $x_1 = x$ such that
\[
B\cap K_m = B(x_2,\beta^{1/2}r)\cap K_m = B(x_3,\beta r)\cap K_m = \cdots
\]
So $\diam(B\cap K_m) = 0$ and thus $B\cap K_m$ is either empty or a singleton. Since $X$ is separable, this implies that $K_m$ is countable, completing the proof.
($\Leftarrow$): Suppose that Alice and Bob are playing the BMS game and that $X\butnot T = \bigcup_1^\infty E_n$, where each $E_n$ is uniformly $\beta$-porous. For each $n$, Alice can avoid the set $E_n$ in a finite number of moves as follows: make dummy moves until Bob's radius is smaller than the $r_0$ which occurs in Definition \ref{definitionporous}, then make the move $B(y,\beta r) \subset B(x,r)$, where $x$, $y$, and $r$ are as in Definition \ref{definitionporous}, then make one more move to avoid the set $B(y,\beta r)\butnot B^\circ(y,\beta r)$. By avoiding each set $E_n$ in turn, Alice can ensure that the intersection point is in $T$.
On the other hand, suppose that Alice and Bob are playing the BMM game and that $X\butnot T$ is countable. If $(x'_n)_1^\infty$ is an enumeration of $X\butnot T$, then let Alice's $n$th move be $\omega'_n = (x'_n,r'_n)$ for some legal $r'_n$. This ensures that the intersection point is in $T$.
\end{proof}
\section{Application to Diophantine approximation}
Recall that the \emph{exponent of irrationality} of a vector $\xx\in\R^d$ is the number
\[
\omega(\xx) = \limsup_{\pp/q\in\Q^d} \frac{-\log\|\xx - \pp/q\|}{\log(q)},
\]
where the limsup is taken along any enumeration of $\Q^d$. The set
\[
\{\xx\in\R^d : \omega(\xx) = 1 + 1/d\}
\]
is of full Lebesgue measure and is winning for Schmidt's game, while the set
\[
\{\xx\in\R^d : \omega(\xx) = \infty\}
\]
is comeager, so it is winning for the Banach--Mazur game. A natural question is whether their union is winning for the BMS game. The following result shows that the answer is no:
\begin{theorem}
Let $\psi:\N\to (0,\infty)$ be a decreasing function such that $q^{1 + 1/d}\psi(q) \to 0$, and let
\begin{equation}
\label{liminf}
S = \left\{\xx\in\R^d : 0 < \liminf_{\pp/q\in\Q^d} \frac{\|\xx - \pp/q\|}{\psi(q)} < \infty\right\}.
\end{equation}
Then for every $\beta$, Bob has a strategy to ensure that the intersection point is in $S$. In particular, $X\butnot S$ is not BMS-winning.
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary}
The set \eqref{liminf} cannot be written as the union of countably many uniformly $\beta$-porous sets for any $0 < \beta < 1$.
\end{corollary}
Note that for any $c > 1 + 1/d$, the set $\{\xx\in\R^d : \omega(\xx) = c\}$ contains a set of the form \eqref{liminf}, so it also cannot be written as the union of countably many uniformly $\beta$-porous sets.
\begin{proof}
Fix $0 < \beta < 1$. For each $\pp/q\in\Q^d$, write
\[
B(\pp/q) = B(\pp/q,\psi(q)), \;\; B'(\pp/q) = B(\pp/q,(1 + 6\beta^{-1})\psi(q)).
\]
We will give a strategy for Bob to force the intersection point to lie in infinitely many of the sets $B'(\pp/q)$, but only finitely many of the sets $B(\pp/q)$. Accordingly, we fix $Q_0\in\N$ large to be determined, and we call a ball $A = B(\xx,r)\subset\R^d$ \emph{good} if for every $\pp/q\in\Q^d$ such that $A\cap B(\pp/q)\neq\emptyset$ and $q\geq Q_0$, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{psiqbound}
\psi(q) \leq r/3.
\end{equation}
Intuitively, if $A$ is a good ball then Bob should still be able to win and avoid all of the sets $B(\pp/q)$, after Alice has just played $A$.
\begin{claim}
\label{claimgood}
If $A = B(\xx,r)$ is a good ball, then there exists a ball $B = B(\yy,s)\subset A$ such that $B\subset B'(\pp_0/q_0)$ for some $\pp_0/q_0\in\Q^d$ with $\psi(q_0) < r$, and such that for every $\pp/q\in\Q^d$ such that $B\cap B(\pp/q)\neq\emptyset$ and $q\geq Q_0$, we have
\[
\psi(q) \leq \beta s/3.
\]
\end{claim}
In other words, if Alice's previous choice was good, then Bob can move so that Alice's next choice must be good, while at the same time moving sufficiently close to a rational point.
\begin{subproof}
By the Simplex Lemma \cite[Lemma 4]{KTV}, there exists an affine hyperplane $\LL\subset\R^d$ such that for all $\pp/q\in\Q^d\cap B(\xx,2r)\butnot\LL$, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{simplex}
q \geq c_d r^{-d/(d + 1)}
\end{equation}
where $c_d > 0$ is a constant depending on $d$. Choose a ball $\w A = B(\w\xx,r/3)\subset A\butnot\thickvar\LL{r/3}$, where $\thickvar\LL t = \{\xx\in\R^d : \dist(\xx,\LL) \leq t\}$ is the closed $t$-thickening of $\LL$. Note that for all $\pp/q\in\Q^d$, if $\w A\cap B(\pp/q)\neq\emptyset$ and $q\geq Q_0$, then $A\cap B(\pp/q)\neq\emptyset$, so by \eqref{psiqbound}, $\dist(\pp/q,\w A) \leq \psi(q) \leq r/3$. Thus $\pp/q\in \thickvar{\w A}{r/3} \subset B(\xx,2r)\butnot \LL$, so \eqref{simplex} holds.
Let $\pp_0/q_0\in\Q^d$ be chosen to minimize $q_0$, subject to the conditions $\w A\cap B(\pp_0/q_0)\neq\emptyset$ and $q_0\geq Q$. Let $s = 3\beta^{-1}\psi(q_0)$. Since $q^{1 + 1/d} \psi(q) \to 0$, if $Q_0$ is sufficiently large then \eqref{simplex} implies $s < r/3$. Thus there exists a ball $B = B(\yy,s) \subset \w B$ such that $B\cap B(\pp_0/q_0) \neq \emptyset$ and thus $B\subset B'(\pp_0/q_0)$. Now if $\pp/q\in\Q^d$ satisfies $B\cap B(\pp/q)\neq\emptyset$ and $q\geq Q_0$, then $q\geq q_0$, so
\[
\psi(q) \leq \psi(q_0) = \beta s/3.
\varqedhere\]
\end{subproof}
By choosing $Q_0$ sufficiently large, we can guarantee that the ball $B(\0,1)$ is good. Let Bob's strategy consist of responding to Alice's moves $A$ with the balls $B$ given in Claim \ref{claimgood}, letting $A = B(\0,1)$ for the first move. Then by induction, Alice's moves will always be good, which implies that the intersection point $\zz$ is not contained in any of the balls $B(\pp/q)$. But by construction, $\zz$ is contained in infinitely many balls $B(\pp_0/q_0)$. Thus $\zz\in S$, where $S$ is as in \eqref{liminf}.
\end{proof}
A natural point of comparison for the exponent of irrationality function is the \emph{Lagrange spectrum function}
\[
L(\xx) = \liminf_{\pp/q\in\Q^d} \frac{\|\xx - \pp/q\|}{q^{1 + 1/d}}\cdot
\]
While the condition $\omega(\xx) > 1 + 1/d$ is equivalent to $\xx$'s being very well approximable, the condition $L(\xx) > 0$ is equivalent to $\xx$'s being badly approximable. We have shown above that the levelsets of the exponent of irrationality function cannot be written as the countable union of uniformly $\beta$-porous sets for any $0 < \beta < 1$. To contrast this we prove:
\begin{theorem}
For all $d\in\N$ and $0 < \epsilon < 1$, the set $\WA_d(\epsilon) := \{\xx\in\R^d : L(\xx) \leq \epsilon\}$ is $\beta$-BMS winning, where $\beta = (\epsilon/3)^{d + 1} \in (0,1/2)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary}
The set $\BA_d(\epsilon) = \R^d\butnot\WA_d(\epsilon)$ can be written as the union of countably many uniformly $\beta$-porous sets.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Alice's strategy will be as follows: move near a rational point $\pp_n/q_n$, then make a move disjoint from $\pp_n/q_n$, then wait long enough so that Bob's move $B_n = B(\xx_n,r_n)$ satisfies
\[
r_n < 2(3/\epsilon)^3 (q_n \dist(B_n,\pp_n/q_n))^{d + 1},
\]
then repeat. So suppose that Bob has just made the move $B = B(\xx,r) = B(\xx_n,r_n)$, and we will show how Alice can move near a new rational point $\pp_{n + 1}/q_{n + 1}$. Let $Q$ be the unique number such that $r = 2(3/\epsilon)^d/Q^{1 + 1/d}$. By Dirichlet's theorem, there exists $\pp/q = \pp_{n + 1}/q_{n + 1}$ with $q\leq Q$ such that
\begin{equation}
\label{dirichlet}
\left\|\xx - \frac{\pp}{q}\right\| \leq \frac{1}{q Q^{1/d}}\cdot
\end{equation}
Note that this inequality implies that $\pp_{n + 1}/q_{n + 1} \neq \pp_m/q_m$ for all $m\leq n$.
\noindent {\it Case 1.} $\left\|\xx - \frac{\pp}{q}\right\| \leq r/2$. In this case, we have $B(\pp/q,\beta r)\subset B$. On the other hand,
\[
\beta r = \frac{2(3/\epsilon)^d\beta}{Q^{1 + 1/d}} \leq \frac{2(3/\epsilon)^d\beta}{q^{1 + 1/d}} \leq \frac{\epsilon}{q^{1 + 1/d}}\cdot
\]
So the move $B(\pp/q,\beta r)$ will bring Alice sufficiently close to the rational point $\pp/q$.
\noindent {\it Case 2.} $\left\|\xx - \frac{\pp}{q}\right\| \geq r/2$. In this case, by \eqref{dirichlet} we have
\[
\frac{1}{q Q^{1/d}} \geq \frac{r}{2} = \frac{(3/\epsilon)^d}{Q^{1 + 1/d}},
\]
and rearranging gives
\[
q \leq (\epsilon/3)^d Q.
\]
Thus
\[
\frac{r}{2}\leq \left\|\xx - \frac{\pp}{q}\right\| \leq \frac{\epsilon}{3q^{1 + 1/d}},
\]
and in particular
\[
\left\|\xx - \frac{\pp}{q}\right\| + r \leq \frac{\epsilon}{q^{1 + 1/d}}\cdot
\]
It follows that $B\subset B(\pp/q,\epsilon/q^{1 + 1/d})$, so any move Alice makes will bring her sufficiently close to the rational point $\pp/q$.
\end{proof}
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Interval exchange transformations have been extensively studied since the works on their ergodic aspects by Sinai~\cite{Sinai}, Keane~\cite{Keane}, Veech~\cite{Veech2}, Rauzy~\cite{Rauzy}, and others. For an overview, see~\cite{Veech} and references therein.
Among general dynamical systems, interval exchanges have the interesting property that the Poincar\'e first return map is again a mapping of the same type, i.e.\ an exchange of (possibly different number of) intervals.
Rauzy~\cite{Rauzy2} used this fact to present a generalization of the classical continued fractions expansion.
It is commonly known that interval exchange transformations provide a very useful framework for the study of infinite words arising by coding of rotations, in particular Sturmian words. These are usually defined as aperiodic infinite words with lowest factor complexity. Equivalently, one obtains Sturmian words by binary coding of the trajectory under exchange $T$ of two intervals $[0,\alpha)$, $[\alpha,1)$ with $\alpha$ irrational. Given a subinterval $I\subset[0,1)$, the first return map $T_I$ to $I$ is an exchange of at most three intervals, although the return itineraries of points can take up to four values. The set of these itineraries can be used to describe certain characteristics of Sturmian words, namely the return words, see~\cite{VuillonSturm}, or abelian return words~\cite{RiSaVa}, and invariance under morphisms~\cite{Yasutomi}.
Infinite words coding exchange of $k$-intervals, $k\geq 3$, are also in focus for several decades~\cite{FeHoZa,ferenczi} and, here too, one finds a close relation between their combinatorial features and the properties of the induced map, see for example~\cite{vuillon} for a result on return words or~\cite{Adamczewski} about substitutivity of interval exchange words.
A generalized version of the Poincar\'e first return map was used in~\cite{BlBrLaVu11} for description of palindromic complexity in codings of rotations.
These words are in intimate relation with three interval exchange words.
In this paper we focus on codings of a non-degenerate symmetric exchange $T:J\to J$ of three intervals. First we describe the return times to a general interval $I\subset J$ and provide an insight on the structure of the set of $I$-itineraries. These results are given as Theorem~\ref{t:returntime} and then interpreted as analogues of the well known three gap and three distance theorems.
A particular attention is paid to the special cases when the set of $I$-itineraries has only three elements. These cases belong to the most interesting from the combinatorial point of view, since they provide information about return words to factors, and about the morphisms preserving three interval exchange words. For mutually conjugated morphisms, we describe in Theorem~\ref{t:interceptconjug} the relation between intercepts of their fixed points, as was done for Sturmian morphisms in~\cite{Peng}.
We also show that morphisms conjugated only to themselves do not have a non-degenerated fixed point.
The most important application of our results is a contribution to the solution of the question stated by Hof, Knill and Simon~\cite{HoKnSi} for palindromic words.
We refer to it as the HKS conjecture and adopt its reformulation by Tan~\cite{BoTan} who showed its validity for binary words. Labb\'e~\cite{La2013} presented a counterexample for the conjecture on ternary alphabet; the ternary word not satisfying the hypothesis turns out to be a degenerate three interval exchange word. In fact, degenerate three interval exchange words are just morphic images of binary, in fact Sturmian, words.
In this paper we show that for non-degenerated words coding exchange of three intervals the HKS conjecture holds. Let us mention that the latter result has been announced at the DLT conference~\cite{DLT}. Here we provide a full proof.
This paper is organized as follows.
Section~\ref{sec:prelim} contains the necessary notions from combinatorics on words.
Symmetric $k$-interval exchange transformations and their properties with respect to the first return map are treated in Section~\ref{sec:iet}.
Section~\ref{sec:3iet} focuses on specific properties when $k=3$. The main theorem about return times in three interval exchanges is given in
Section~\ref{sec:returntimes}.
In Section~\ref{sec:Gap} we put our results into context of three gaps and three distance theorems.
The specific case when the set of $I$-itineraries has only three elements is studied in Section~\ref{sec:3}. This allows us to describe the return words to palindromic bispecial factors.
In Section~\ref{sec:substitutions} we focus on substitution invariance of words coding interval exchange transformations.
The key lemma for the demonstration of our Theorem~\ref{thm:hks} on HKS conjecture requires some knowledge about
the relation of substitutions fixing words coding three interval exchange and Sturmian morphisms. This topic
is treated in Section~\ref{sec:ternarizace}. The proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:hks} is then provided in Section~\ref{sec:HKS} together with some other comments.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:prelim}
Let us recall necessary notions and notation from combinatorics on words. For a basic overview we
refer to~\cite{Lo2}. An \textit{alphabet} is a finite set of symbols, called \textit{letters}.
A \textit{finite word} $w$ over an alphabet $\A$ of length $|w|=n$ is a concatenation $w=w_0\cdots w_{n-1}$
of letters $w_i\in\A$. The set of all finite words over $\A$ equipped with the operation of concatenation
and the empty word $\epsilon$ is a monoid denoted by $\A^*$. For a fixed letter $a\in\A$, the number of
occurrences of $a$ in $w$, i.e., the number of indices $i$ such that $w_i=a$, is denoted by $|w|_a$.
The \textit{reversal} or \textit{mirror image} of the word $w$ is the word $\overline{w}=w_{n-1}\cdots w_0$.
A word $w$ for which $w=\overline{w}$ is called a \textit{palindrome}.
An \textit{infinite word} ${\bf u}$ is an infinite concatenation ${\bf u}=u_0u_1u_2\ldots \in\A^\N$. An
infinite word ${\bf u}=wvvv\ldots$ with $w,v\in\A^*$ is said to be \textit{eventually periodic}; it is
said to be \textit{aperiodic} if it is not of such form. We say that $w\in\A^*$ is a \textit{factor} of
$v\in\A^*\cup\A^\N$ if $v=w'ww''$ for some $w'\in\A^*$ and $w''\in\A^*\cup\A^\N$. If $w'=\epsilon$ or
$w''=\epsilon$, then $w$ is a \textit{prefix} or \textit{suffix} of $v$, respectively.
If $v=wu$, then we write $u=w^{-1}v$ and $w=vu^{-1}$.
The set ${\mathcal L}({\bf u})$ of all finite factors of an infinite word ${\bf u}$ is called the
\textit{language of ${\bf u}$}. If for any factor $w\in {\mathcal L}({\bf u})$
there exist at least two indices $i$ such that
$w$ is a prefix of the infinite word $u_iu_{i+1}u_{i+2}\cdots$, the word ${\bf u}$ is {\it recurrent}.
Given a factor $w\in {\mathcal L}({\bf u})$, a finite word $v$ such that $vw$ belongs
to ${\mathcal L}({\bf u})$ and the word $w$ occurs in $vw$ exactly twice, once as a prefix and once as a suffix of
$vw$, is called a \textit{return word of $w$}. If any factor $w$ of an infinite recurrent word ${\bf u}$ has only finitely many return words, the word ${\bf u}$
is called {\it uniformly recurrent}.
The \textit{factor complexity} ${\mathcal C}_{\bf u}$ is the function $\N\to\N$ counting the number of factors of ${\bf u}$ of length $n$.
It is known that the factor complexity of an aperiodic infinite word ${\bf u}$ satisfies ${\mathcal C}_{\bf u}(n)\geq n+1$ for
all $n$. Aperiodic infinite words having the minimal complexity ${\mathcal C}_{\bf u}(n)= n+1$ for all $n$ are called
\textit{Sturmian words}. Since ${\mathcal C}_{\bf u}(1)=2$, they are binary words.
Sturmian words can be equivalently defined in many different frameworks, one of them is coding of an exchange of two
intervals.
Let $\A$ and $\B$ be alphabets. Let $\varphi:\A^*\to\B^*$ be a \textit{morphism}, i.e., $\varphi(wv)=\varphi(w)\varphi(v)$
for all $w,v\in\A^*$. We say that $\varphi$ is \textit{non-erasing} if $\varphi(b)\neq \epsilon$ for every $b\in\A$.
The action of $\varphi$ can be naturally extended to infinite words ${\bf u}\in\A^\N$ by setting
$\varphi({\bf u})=\varphi(u_0)\varphi(u_1)\varphi(u_2)\ldots$. If $\A=\B$ and $\varphi({\bf u})={\bf u}$,
then ${\bf u}$ is said to be a \textit{fixed point} of $\varphi$.
A non-erasing morphism $\varphi:\A^*\to\A^*$ such that there is a letter $a\in\A$ satisfying
$\varphi(a)=aw$ for some non-empty word $w$ is called a \textit{substitution}. Obviously, a substitution has
always a fixed point, namely $\lim_{n\to\infty}\varphi^n(a)$ where the limit
is taken over the product topology.
An infinite word which is a fixed point of a substitution is called a \textit{pure morphic} word.
Let $\A = \{a_1, \ldots, a_k\}$ and $\B = \{b_1, \ldots , b_\ell \}$.
One associates to every morphism $\varphi: \A \to \B$ its \textit{incidence matrix} $M_\varphi\in\N^{k\times \ell}$ defined by
\[
(M_\varphi)_{ij}=|\varphi(a_i)|_{b_j}\,,\quad \text{ for }1\leq i\leq k,\ 1\leq j\leq \ell.
\]
A morphism $\varphi:\A^*\to\A^*$ is said to be \textit{primitive} if all elements of some power of its
incidence matrix $M_\varphi\in\N^{k\times k}$ are positive.
A specific class of morphisms is formed by the so-called \textit{Sturmian morphisms} which are
defined over the binary alphabet $\{0,1\}$ and for which there exists a Sturmian word ${\bf u}$ such that $\varphi({\bf u})$ is also Sturmian.
For an overview about properties of Sturmian morphisms see~\cite{Lo2}.
\section{Itineraries in symmetric exchange of intervals}\label{sec:iet}
For disjoint intervals $K$ and $K'$ we write $K<K'$ if for $x\in K$ and $x'\in K'$ we have $x<x'$.
Let $J$ be a semi-closed interval. Consider a partition $J=J_0\cup\dots\cup J_{k-1}$ of $J$ into a
disjoint union of semi-closed subintervals $J_0<J_1<\cdots <J_{k-1}$. A bijection $T:J\to J$ is
called an \textit{exchange of $k$ intervals with permutation $\pi$}
if there exist numbers $c_0,\dots,c_{k-1}$ such that for $0\leq i<k$ one has
\begin{equation}\label{eq:obecIET}
T(x)=x+c_i \text{ for } x\in J_i\,,
\end{equation}
where $\pi$ is a permutation of $\{0,1,\dots,k-1\}$ such that $T(J_i)<T(J_j)$
for $\pi(i)<\pi(j)$. In other words, the permutation $\pi$ determines the order of intervals $T(J_i)$.
If $\pi$ is the permutation $i\mapsto k-i+1$, then $T$ is called a \textit{symmetric} interval exchange.
The orbit of a given point $\rho$ is the infinite sequence $\rho$,
$T(\rho)$, $T^2(\rho)$, $T^3(\rho)$, \dots. It can be coded by an
infinite word ${\bf u}_\rho=u_0u_1u_2\ldots$ over the alphabet $\{0,1,\dots,k-1\}$ given by
\[
u_n=X \quad \text{if } T^n({\rho}) \in J_X \quad \text{ for } X \in \{0,1,\dots,k-1\}.
\]
The point $\rho$ is called the \textit{intercept} of $\bf{u}_\rho$.
An exchange of intervals satisfies the \textit{minimality condition} if the orbit of any given $\rho\in[0,1)$ is
dense in $J$.
In this case, the word ${\bf u}_\rho$ is aperiodic, uniformly recurrent, and the language of ${\bf u}_\rho$ depends
only on the parameters of the transformation $T$ and not on the intercept $\rho$ itself.
The complexity of an infinite word ${\bf{u}_\rho}$ is known to satisfy ${\mathcal C}_{\bf{u}_\rho}(n)\leq (k-1)n+1$
(see \cite{FeHoZa}). If for every $n\in\N$ we have ${\mathcal C}_{\bf{u}_\rho}(n)= (k-1)n+1$, then the transformation
$T$ and the word $\bf{u}_\rho$ are said to be \textit{non-degenerate}. A sufficient and necessary condition on $T$ to
be non-degenerate is that the orbits of the discontinuity points of $T$ are
infinite and disjoint. This condition is known under the abbreviation i.d.o.c.
\begin{definition}
Let $T$ be an exchange of $k$ intervals satisfying the minimality condition.
Given a subinterval $I\subset J$, we define the mapping $r_I: I\to \Z^+=\{1,2,3,\dots\}$ by
\[
r_I(x)=\min \{n\in\Z^+ \colon T^n(x)\in I\}\,,
\]
the so-called \textit{return time} to $I$. The prefix of length $r_I(x)$ of the word
${\bf u}_x$ coding the orbit of a point $x\in I$
is called the \textit{$I$-itinerary} of $x$ and denoted $R_I(x)$. The set of all $I$-itineraries is
denoted by ${\rm It}_I=\{R_I(x) \colon x\in I\}$.
The mapping $T_I:I\to I$ defined by
\[
T_I(x) = T^{r_I(x)}(x)
\]
is said to be the \textit{first return map of $T$ to $I$}, or \textit{induced map of $T$ on $I$}.
\end{definition}
Throughout the paper, when it is clear from the context, we sometimes omit the index $I$ in $r_I$ or $R_I$.
It is known from Keane~\cite{Keane} that if $T$ is an exchange of $k$ intervals and $I\subset J$,
then $\mathit{It}_I$ has at most $k+2$ elements, and, consequently, $T_I$ is an exchange of at most $k+2$ intervals.
\begin{remark}\label{pozn:skakani}
Let $X\in\{0,1,\ldots, k-1\}$.
If $I\subset J_X$, then $T(I)$ is an interval and we have
\[
R \text{ is an $I$-itinerary }\ \Leftrightarrow \ X^{-1}RX \text{ is a $T(I)$-itinerary}.
\]
Similarly, if $I\subset T(J_X)$, then $T^{-1}(I)$ is an interval and we have
\[
R\text{ is an $I$-itinerary }\ \Leftrightarrow \ XRX^{-1} \text{ is a $T^{-1}(I)$-itinerary}.
\]
\end{remark}
We will use another fact about itineraries of an interval exchange. Without loss of generality,
we consider $J=[0,1)$.
The intervals $J_X$ are left-closed right-open for all $X\in\{0,1\dots,k-1\}$.
Such interval exchange $T$ is right-continuous.
Therefore, if $I=[\gamma,\delta)$, then every word $w\in{\rm It}_I=\{R(x) \colon x\in I\}$ is an
$I$-itinerary $R(x)$ for infinitely many $x\in I$, which form an interval, again left-closed right-open.
\begin{proposition}\label{p:spojitost}
Let $T$ be a $k$-interval exchange satisfying the minimality condition and let $I=[\gamma,\delta)\subset[0,1)$.
There exist neighbourhoods $H_\gamma$ and $H_\delta$ of $\gamma$ and $\delta$, respectively, such that
for every $\tilde{\gamma}\in H_\gamma$ and $\tilde{\delta}\in H_\delta$ with $0\leq \tilde{\gamma}<\tilde{\delta}\leq 1$ one has
\[
\mathit{It}_{\tilde{I}} \supseteq \mathit{It}_{{I}}\,,\quad \text{where } \tilde{I}=[\tilde{\gamma},\tilde{\delta}).
\]
In particular, if $\#\mathit{It}_{I}=k+2$, then $\mathit{It}_{\tilde{I}} = \mathit{It}_{{I}}$.
\end{proposition}
\pfz
Let $\mathit{It}_I=\{R_1,\dots,R_m\}$, $m\in\N$, and $I_i = \{ x \in I \colon R_I(x) = R_i\}$ for $1\leq i\leq m$. As already mentioned,
$m\leq k+2$.
For every $i=1,\dots,m$, consider arbitrary $x_i$ in the interior of $I_i$.
Such $x_i$ satisfies that $T^j(x_i)\notin\{\gamma,\delta\}$ for $0 \leq j \leq r_I(x_i)=|R_I(x_i)|$.
The reason is simple: if $T^j(x_i)$ were equal to $\gamma$ (or $\delta$), then a point $x$ in $I_i$ with $x< x_i$ (or $x> x_i$) would have a longer return time than $x_i$ itself, which is a contradiction.
Denote $M = \{T^j(x_i) \colon 0\leq j\leq r_I(x_i),\ i=1,\dots,m\}$ and
\[
\varepsilon:=\min\big\{|y-z| \colon y\in M,z\in \{\gamma,\delta\}\big\}\,.
\]
Let $H_\gamma=(\gamma-\varepsilon,\gamma+\varepsilon)$ and $H_\delta=(\delta-\varepsilon,\delta+\varepsilon)$ be
neighbourhoods of $\gamma$ and $\delta$, respectively.
If $\tilde{\gamma}\in H_\gamma$ and $\tilde{\delta}\in H_\delta$ with $0\leq \tilde{\gamma}<\tilde{\delta}\leq 1$
and $\tilde{I}=[\tilde{\gamma},\tilde{\delta})$, then clearly
for every $i=1,\dots,m$ we have $x_i \in {\tilde{I}}$ and
\[
T^j(x_i)\in I \quad\Leftrightarrow\quad T^j(x_i)\in \tilde{I} \qquad \text{ for } 0\leq j\leq r_I(x_i)\,.
\]
Therefore the point $x_i$ has the same return time with respect to $I$ as to
$\tilde{I}$. Consequently, the $\tilde{I}$-itinerary of $x_i$ coincides with the $I$-itinerary of $x_i$.
Thus $\mathit{It}_{{I}} \subseteq \mathit{It}_{\tilde{I}}$.
\pfk
For the rest of the section, we consider only symmetric interval exchange. In order to state a property of such interval exchanges, for an interval
$K=[c,d)\subset [0,1)$ we set $\overline{K}=[1-d,1-c)$. In this notation
\begin{equation}\label{zaTabuli}
T(J_X)=\overline{J_X} \ \text{ for any letter $X\in\{0,1,\dots,k-1\}$\,.}
\end{equation}
\begin{proposition}\label{p:symetrie}
Let $T:[0,1)\to[0,1)$ be a symmetric exchange of $k$ intervals
satisfying the minimality condition. Let $I\subset[0,1)$ and let
$R_1,\dots,R_m$ be the $I$-itineraries. The
$\overline{I}$-itineraries are the mirror images of the
$I$-itineraries, namely $\overline{R_1},\dots,\overline{R_m}$.
Moreover, if
\[
[\gamma_j,\delta_j):=\{x\in I \colon R_I(x)=R_j\}\quad\text{ and }\quad [\gamma'_j,\delta'_j):=T_I[\gamma_j,\delta_j)\,,
\]
for $j=1,\dots,m$, then
\[
\{x\in \overline{I} \colon R_{\overline{I}}(x)=\overline{R_j}\} = [1-\delta'_j,1-\gamma'_j)\,.
\]
\end{proposition}
\pfz
Consider the restriction of the transformation $T$ to the set
\[
S=[0,1)\setminus\{T^j(\alpha)\colon j\in\Z,\ \alpha\text{ is a discontinuity of }T\}\,.
\]
Such a restriction is a bijection $S\to S$.
We will show by induction that for any $i\geq 1$ and $y\in S$
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ramec1}
T^{-i}(y) = 1-T^{i}(1-y)\,.
\end{equation}
Let $y \in S$ and $j \in \{0,\ldots, k-1\}$ such that $y \in I_j$.
Since $T$ is symmetric, we have
\[
1 - y \in I_j \ \Leftrightarrow \ y \in T(I_j).
\]
The last equivalence and the definition of $T$ imply
\begin{align*}
T(1 - y) &= 1 - y+c_j \qquad \qquad \text{ and } \\
T^{-1}(y) &= y - c_j.
\end{align*}
Summing the last two equalities we obtain
\[
T^{-1}(y) = 1-T(1-y).
\]
Then, using the induction hypothesis, we have for $y\in S$ that
\[
T^{-(i+1)}(y) = T^{-1}\big(T^{-i}(y)\big)=1-T\big(1-T^{-i}(y)\big) = 1- T\big(T^i(1-y)\big) = 1-T^{i+1}(1-y)\,,
\]
which proves~\eqref{eq:ramec1}.
Using \eqref{zaTabuli} we can write for $y\in S$
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ramec3}
T^{-1}(y)\in J_X \ \Leftrightarrow \ y\in T(J_X) \ \Leftrightarrow \ 1-y\in J_X\,.
\end{equation}
More generally,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ramec2}
T^{-i}(y) = T^{-1}\big(T^{-(i-1)}(y)\big)\in J_X \ \Leftrightarrow \ 1-T^{-(i-1)}(y)=T^{i-1}(1-y)\in J_X\,,
\end{equation}
where we have first used~\eqref{eq:ramec3} and then~\eqref{eq:ramec1}.
Now we show that if $R_j$ is an $I$-itinerary, then its mirror image $\overline{R_j}$ is an $\overline{I}$-itinerary.
Consider $\rho\in (\gamma_j,\delta_j) \cap S$ and let $R_I(\rho)=a_0a_1\cdots a_{n-1}$ be
its $I$-itinerary, i.e., $a_i=X$ if and only if $T^i(\rho)\in J_X$. Moreover, $T^i(\rho)\notin I$ for $1\leq i<n$, \ and $T^n(\rho)\in I$. Let
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hruzasymetrie}
\rho':=1-T^n(\rho) = 1-T_I(\rho) \in (1-\delta'_j,1-\gamma'_j)\cap S\subset \overline{I}\,.
\end{equation}
By~\eqref{eq:ramec1}, we have $\rho'=T^{-n}(1-\rho)$, and therefore again by~\eqref{eq:ramec1},
$T^i(\rho')=T^{-(n-i)}(1-\rho)=1-T^{n-i}(\rho)\notin \overline{I}$ for $0<i<n$. On the other hand, $T^n({\rho'})=1-\rho\in \overline{I}$.
By~\eqref{eq:ramec2}, we have for $i=0,1,\dots,n-1$ that
\[
J_X\ni T^i({\rho'}) = T^{-(n-i)}(1-\rho)\ \Leftrightarrow \ T^{n-i-1}(\rho)\in J_X\,,
\]
which implies that the $\overline{I}$-itinerary of $\rho'$ is $R_{\overline{I}}({\rho'})=a_{n-1}a_{n-2}\cdots a_0$, as we wanted to show.
By right continuity of $T$, all points from $[1-\delta'_j,1-\gamma'_j)$ have the same $\overline{I}$-itinerary as $\rho'\in(1-\delta'_j,1-\gamma'_j)\cap S$.
\pfk
The above auxiliary statements will be used in Section~\ref{sec:returntimes} for the description of $I$-itineraries in exchanges of three intervals.
Analogous result for exchange of two intervals was given in~\cite{MaPeItineraries}.
The claim of the last proposition also partially follows from the work done in \cite{FeHoZa}.
\section{Exchange of three intervals}\label{sec:3iet}
We will be particularly interested in exchange of three intervals. For reasons that will
appear later, we prefer to use for its coding the ternary alphabet $\{A,B,C\}$
instead of $\{0,1,2\}$. Without loss of generality let $0<\alpha<\beta<1$. Let $T:[0,1)\to[0,1)$ be given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3IET}
T(x)=\begin{cases}
x+1-\alpha & \text{if } x\in[0,\alpha)=: J_A\,,\\
x+1-\alpha-\beta & \text{if } x\in[\alpha,\beta)=: J_B\,,\\
x-\beta & \text{if } x\in[\beta,1)=: J_C\,.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
The transformation $T$ is an exchange of three intervals with the permutation (321). It is often called a \textit{3iet} for short.
The infinite word ${\bf u}_\rho$ coding the orbit of a point $\rho\in[0,1)$ under a 3iet is called a \textit{3iet word}.
We require that $1-\alpha$ and $\beta$ be linearly independent over $\Q$, which is known to be a necessary and sufficient condition for minimality of
the 3iet $T$.
Non-degeneracy of $T$ is equivalent to the condition of minimality together with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:nondeg}
1\notin (1-\alpha)\Z + \beta\Z\,,
\end{equation}
see \cite{FeHoZa}.
This means that the 3iet word ${\bf u}$ has complexity ${\mathcal C}_{\bf u}(n)=2n+1$
if and only if the parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$ of the corresponding 3iet $T$ satisfy~\eqref{eq:nondeg}.
For a given subinterval $I\subset [0,1)$ there exist at most five $I$-itineraries under a 3iet $T$.
In particular, from the paper of Keane~\cite{Keane}, one can deduce what are the intervals of
points with the same itinerary. We summarize it as the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:keane}
Let $T$ be a 3iet defined by~\eqref{eq:3IET} and let $I=[\gamma,\delta)\subset[0,1)$ such that $\delta<1$. Denote
\[
\begin{aligned}
k_\alpha &:=\min\big\{k\in\Z,\, k\geq 0 \colon T^{-k}(\alpha)\in (\gamma,\delta)\big\}\,,\\
k_\beta &:=\min\big\{k\in\Z,\, k\geq 0 \colon T^{-k}(\beta)\in(\gamma,\delta) \big\}\,,\\
k_\gamma &:=\min\big\{k\in\Z,\, k\geq 1 \colon T^{-k}(\gamma)\in(\gamma,\delta)\big\}\,,\\
k_\delta &:=\min\big\{k\in\Z,\, k\geq 1 \colon T^{-k}(\delta)\in(\gamma,\delta)\big\}\,,
\end{aligned}
\]
and further
\[
\a:= T^{-k_\alpha}(\alpha),\ \b:= T^{-k_\beta}(\beta),\ \c:= T^{-k_\gamma}(\gamma),\ \d:= T^{-k_\delta}(\delta).
\]
For $x\in I$, let $K_x$ be a maximal interval such that for every $y\in K_x$, we have $R(y)=R(x)$. Then $K_x$ is of the form $[c,d)$ with
$c,d \in \{ \gamma,\delta,\a,\b,\c,\d \}$. Consequently, $\#{\rm It}_I\leq 5$.
\end{lemma}
For a 3iet $T$, Lemma~\ref{l:keane} implies the already mentioned result that $T_I$ is an exchange of at most 5 intervals. Consequently,
the transformation $T_I$ has at most four discontinuity points. In fact, the following result of~\cite{BaMaPe}
says that independently of the number of $I$-itineraries,
the induced map $T_I$ has always at most two discontinuity points.
\begin{proposition}[\cite{BaMaPe}]\label{p:bamape3iet}
Let $T:J\to J$ be a 3iet with the permutation $(321)$ and satisfying the minimality condition, and let $I\subset J$
be an interval. The first return map $T_I$ is either a 3iet with permutation $(321)$ or a 2iet with permutation $(21)$.
In particular, in the notation of Lemma~\ref{l:keane}, we have $\d\leq \c$.
\end{proposition}
\noindent{\bf Convention:} For the rest of the paper, let $T$ be a non-degenerate exchange of three intervals with permutation (321) given by~\eqref{eq:3IET}.
\section{Return time in a 3iet}\label{sec:returntimes}
The aim of this section is to describe the possible return times of a non-degenerate $3$iet $T$ to a general subinterval $I\subset[0,1)$.
Our aim is to prove the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{t:returntime}
Let $T$ be a non-degenerate 3iet and let $I\subset[0,1)$. There exist positive integers $r_1,r_2$ such that the
return time of any $x\in I$ takes value in the set
$\{r_1,r_1+1,r_2,r_1+r_2,r_1+r_2+1\}$ or $\{r_1,r_1+1,r_2,r_2+1,r_1+r_2+1\}$.
\end{theorem}
First, we will formulate an important lemma, which needs the following notation. Given letters $X,Y,Z\in\{A,B,C\}$ and a finite word $w\in\{A,B,C\}^*$,
Let $\omega_{XY\to Z}(w)$ be the set of words obtained from $w$ replacing one factor $XY$ by the letter $Z$, i.e.
\[
\omega_{XY\to Z}(w) = \{w_1Zw_2 \colon w=w_1XYw_2\}\,.
\]
Similarly,
\[
\omega_{Z\to XY}(w) = \{w_1XYw_2 \colon w=w_1Zw_2\}\,.
\]
Clearly,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:iff}
v\in\omega_{XY\to Z}(w) \ \Leftrightarrow\ w\in\omega_{Z\to XY}(v).
\end{equation}
By abuse of notation, we write $v=\omega_{XY\to Z}(w)$ instead of $v\in \omega_{XY\to Z}(w)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:jakitiner}
Assume that the orbits of points $\alpha, \beta, \gamma$ and $\delta$ are mutually disjoint.
For sufficiently small $\varepsilon>0$, we have the following relations between $I$-itineraries of points in $I$
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item \label{l:jakitiner_1} $R(\a-\varepsilon) = \omega_{B\to AC}\big(R(\a+\varepsilon)\big)$, \label{enum:A-}
\item \label{l:jakitiner_2} $R(\a+\varepsilon) = \omega_{AC\to B}\big(R(\a-\varepsilon)\big)$, \label{enum:A+}
\item \label{l:jakitiner_3} $R(\b-\varepsilon) = \omega_{CA\to B}\big(R(\b+\varepsilon)\big)$, \label{enum:B-}
\item \label{l:jakitiner_4} $R(\b+\varepsilon) = \omega_{B\to CA}\big(R(\b-\varepsilon)\big)$, \label{enum:B+}
\item \label{l:jakitiner_5} $R(\d+\varepsilon) = R(\d-\varepsilon)R(\delta-\varepsilon)$, \label{enum:D+}
\item \label{l:jakitiner_6} $R(\c-\varepsilon) = R(\c+\varepsilon)R(\gamma+\varepsilon)$, \label{enum:C-}
\end{enumerate}
where $\a,\b,\c,\d$ are given in Lemma~\ref{l:keane}.
\end{lemma}
\pfz
We will first demonstrate the proof of the case \ref{l:jakitiner_1}.
Let $K = [\a-\varepsilon, \a+\varepsilon]$ with $\varepsilon$ chosen such that $K\subset I$ and
\begin{equation}\label{l:j_d2}
\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta \not \in T^i(K) \text{ for all }0 \leq i \leq k_\alpha
\text{ with the only exception of } T^{k_\alpha}(\a) = \alpha.
\end{equation}
For simplicity, denote $t=\max\{r_I(x) \colon x\in K\}$ the maximal return time.
The existence of such $\varepsilon$ follows trivially from the definition of the interval exchange transformation and the assumptions of the lemma.
Let $K_- = [\a - \varepsilon,\a)$ and $K_+ = [\a,\a+\varepsilon]$.
It follows from the definition of $\a$ and condition \eqref{l:j_d2} that for all $i$ such that $0 < i \leq k_\alpha$ we have $T^i(K) \cap I = \emptyset$.
Moreover, condition \eqref{l:j_d2} implies that all such $T^i(K)$ are intervals.
It implies that for any $x,y \in K$, the prefixes of $R(x)$ and $R(y)$ of length $k_\alpha+1$ are the same.
Denote this prefix by $w$.
The definition of $k_\alpha$ implies that $\alpha \in T^{k_\alpha}(K)$.
Since $T^{k_\alpha}(K_+) = [\alpha,\alpha+\varepsilon] \subset J_B$, we obtain
\[
T^{k_\alpha+1}(K_+) = \big[T(\alpha),T(\alpha)+\varepsilon\big)\,.
\]
Furthermore, since $T^{k_\alpha}(K_-) = [\alpha-\varepsilon,\alpha) \subset J_A$, we obtain
\[
T^{k_\alpha+1}(K_-) = [1-\varepsilon,1)\subset J_C\,,
\]
and thus
\[
T^{k_\alpha+2}(K_-) = \big[T(\alpha)-\varepsilon,T(\alpha)\big)\,.
\]
This implies that the set $K'=T^{k_\alpha+2}(K_-) \cup T^{k_\alpha+1}(K_+) = [T(\alpha)-\varepsilon,T(\alpha)+\varepsilon]$ is an interval.
As above, condition \eqref{l:j_d2} implies that the set $T^i(K')$ is an interval for all $i$ such that $0 \leq i \leq t - k_\alpha - 1$.
It follows that $\min \{ i \colon T^i(K') \cap K \neq \emptyset \} = t - k_\alpha - 2$ and condition \eqref{l:j_d2} moreover implies that $T^{t-k_\alpha-2}(K') \subset K$.
Thus, the iterations $x,T(x),\dots,T^{t-k_\alpha-2}(x)$ of every $x \in K'$ are coded be the same word, say $v$.
\newcommand\ietpoint[5][pos=1,below]{
\draw[style=#2] (#3,0.12) -- (#3,-0.12) node[#1]{#4};
\node[ietinvisible] (#5) at (#3,0){};
}
\tikzset{ietinvisible/.style={outer sep=4,inner sep=0,minimum size=0}}
\newcommand\ietbasic[6][]{
\begin{scope}[every path/.style={very thick},#1]
\node(start)[at={(0,0)},label=below:{$0$}]{};
\node(end)[at={(100,0)},label=below:{$1$}]{};
\draw[[-)] (start.center) -- (end.center);
\ietpoint{discoAl}{#2}{$\alpha$}{alpha}
\ietpoint{discoBe}{#3}{$\beta$}{beta}
\node(startI)[at={(#4,0)},label=below:{$\gamma$}]{};
\node(endI)[at={(#5,0)},label=below:{$\delta$}]{};
\draw[[-),thick] (startI.center) -- (endI.center);
\fill[opacity = 0.1, black,rounded corners=5] (#4,-0.2) -- (#5, -0.2) -- (#5, 0.2) -- (#4, 0.2) -- cycle;
#6
\end{scope}
}
\newcounter{ietstep}
\newcounter{ietstepP}
\newcounter{ietstepPP}
\newcommand\ietstepcounters{ \stepcounter{ietstep} \stepcounter{ietstepP} \stepcounter{ietstepPP}}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[]
\newcommand*\ietalpha{44}
\newcommand*\ietbeta{90}
\newcommand*\ietgamma{17}
\newcommand*\ietdelta{30}
\newcommand*\ietA{25}
\newcommand*\ietsdist{3}
\newcommand*\ietpad{0.2}
\newcommand*\ietepsstep{1.5}
\setcounter{ietstep}{1}
\setcounter{ietstepP}{0}
\setcounter{ietstepPP}{-1}
\tikzset{disco/.style={color=gray}}
\tikzset{discoAl/.style={style=disco}}
\tikzset{discoBe/.style={style=disco}}
\tikzset{hlpo/.style={very thick}}
\tikzset{hlpoA/.style={yscale=1.2}}
\tikzset{tmap/.style={ultra thick,}}
\tikzset{tmapG/.style={thick,dashed,color=gray}}
\begin{scope}[font=\footnotesize,scale=0.75,x=0.008\textwidth,inner xsep=0,inner ysep=3.5]
\ietbasic[yshift={(1-\number\value{ietstep})*\ietsdist cm}]{\ietalpha}{\ietbeta}{\ietgamma}{\ietdelta}{
\ietpoint[pos=0.3,above]{hlpoA}{\ietA}{$\a$}{pointA\arabic{ietstep}}
\ietpoint[at={(\ietA-\ietepsstep-4,0.5)},anchor=south,inner ysep=0,inner xsep=0]{hlpo}{\ietA-\ietepsstep}{$\a-\varepsilon$}{pointAm\arabic{ietstep}}
\draw[dotted,color=gray] (\ietA-\ietepsstep,0) -- (\ietA-\ietepsstep-4,0.5);
\ietpoint[at={(\ietA+\ietepsstep+4,0.5)},anchor=south,inner ysep=0,inner xsep=0]{hlpo}{\ietA+\ietepsstep}{$\a+\varepsilon$}{pointAp\arabic{ietstep}}
\draw[dotted,color=gray] (\ietA+\ietepsstep,0) -- (\ietA+\ietepsstep+4,0.5);
}
\ietstepcounters
\tikzset{discoAl/.style={color=white}}
\ietbasic[yshift={(1-\number\value{ietstep})*\ietsdist cm}]{\ietalpha}{\ietbeta}{\ietgamma}{\ietdelta}{
\ietpoint[at={(\ietalpha+15,1)},inner ysep=0,inner xsep=0]{hlpoA}{\ietalpha}{$T^{k_\alpha}(\a) = \alpha$}{pointA\arabic{ietstep}}
\draw[dotted,color=gray] (\ietalpha,0) -- (\ietalpha+15,1);
\ietpoint[at={(\ietalpha-\ietepsstep,0)},anchor=south east]{hlpo}{\ietalpha-\ietepsstep}{$T^{k_\alpha}(\a-\varepsilon)$}{pointAm\arabic{ietstep}}
\ietpoint[at={(\ietalpha+\ietepsstep,0)},anchor=north west]{hlpo}{\ietalpha+\ietepsstep}{$T^{k_\alpha}(\a+\varepsilon)$}{pointAp\arabic{ietstep}}
}
\draw[->,tmap] (pointAm\arabic{ietstepP}) to[out=-100,in=80] node[pos=0.55,left,inner xsep=5] {$T^{k_\alpha}$} (pointAm\arabic{ietstep});
\draw[->,tmap] (pointAp\arabic{ietstepP}) to[out=-100,in=80] node[pos=0.4,right,inner xsep=10] {$T^{k_\alpha}$} (pointAp\arabic{ietstep});
\ietstepcounters
\tikzset{discoAl/.style={style=disco}}
\ietbasic[yshift={(1-\number\value{ietstep})*\ietsdist cm},xshift=185]{\ietalpha}{\ietbeta}{\ietgamma}{\ietdelta}{
\ietpoint[at={(100-\ietepsstep,0)},anchor=south east]{hlpo}{100-\ietepsstep}{$T^{k_\alpha+1}(\a-\varepsilon)$}{pointAm\arabic{ietstep}}
}
\draw[->,tmap] (pointAm\arabic{ietstepP}) to[out=-90,in=190] ($(pointAm\arabic{ietstepP})!0.5!(pointAm\arabic{ietstep})$) to[out=10,in=70] node[pos=0.1,above] {$T$} (pointAm\arabic{ietstep});
\ietstepcounters
\ietbasic[yshift={(1-\number\value{ietstep})*\ietsdist cm},xshift=0]{\ietalpha}{\ietbeta}{\ietgamma}{\ietdelta}{
\ietpoint[at={(100-\ietbeta-\ietepsstep,0)},anchor=south east]{hlpo}{100-\ietbeta-\ietepsstep}{$T^{k_\alpha+2}(\a-\varepsilon)$}{pointAm\arabic{ietstep}}
\ietpoint[at={(100-\ietbeta+\ietepsstep,0)},anchor=south west]{hlpo}{100-\ietbeta+\ietepsstep}{$T^{k_\alpha+1}(\a+\varepsilon)$}{pointAp\arabic{ietstep}}
}
\draw[->,tmap] (pointAm\arabic{ietstepP}) to[out=-100,in=-10] ($(pointAm\arabic{ietstepP})!0.55!(pointAm\arabic{ietstep})$) to[out=170,in=90] node[pos=0.1,above] {$T$} (pointAm\arabic{ietstep});
\draw[->,tmap] (pointAp\arabic{ietstepPP}) to[out=-90,in=30] ($(pointAp\arabic{ietstepPP})!0.5!(pointAp\arabic{ietstep})$) to[out=-150,in=90] node[pos=0.1,above] {$T$} (pointAp\arabic{ietstep});
\ietstepcounters
\ietbasic[yshift={(1-\number\value{ietstep})*\ietsdist cm},xshift=0]{\ietalpha}{\ietbeta}{\ietgamma}{\ietdelta}{
\ietpoint[at={(\ietgamma+\ietdelta-\ietA-\ietepsstep,0)},anchor=south east]{hlpo}{\ietgamma+\ietdelta-\ietA-\ietepsstep}{$T^{t}(\a-\varepsilon)$}{pointAm\arabic{ietstep}}
\ietpoint[at={(\ietgamma+\ietdelta-\ietA+\ietepsstep,0)},anchor=south west]{hlpo}{\ietgamma+\ietdelta-\ietA+\ietepsstep}{$T^{t-1}(\a+\varepsilon)$}{pointAp\arabic{ietstep}}
}
\draw[->,tmap] (pointAm\arabic{ietstepP}) to[out=-90,in=90] node[pos=0.55,left,inner xsep=5] {$T^{t-k_\alpha-2}$} (pointAm\arabic{ietstep});
\draw[->,tmap] (pointAp\arabic{ietstepP}) to[out=-90,in=90] node[pos=0.45,right,inner xsep=5] {$T^{t-k_\alpha-2}$} (pointAp\arabic{ietstep});
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Situation in the proof of Lemma~\ref{l:jakitiner}, case \ref{l:jakitiner_1}.}
\label{fig:jakitiner_1}.
\end{figure}
The whole situation is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:jakitiner_1}.
From what is said above, we can write down the $I$-itineraries of points from $K$,
\[
R(x) = \begin{cases} wACv & \text { if } x \in K_- ,\\
wBv & \text{ if } x \in K_+.\end{cases}
\]
This finishes the proof of \eqref{l:jakitiner_1}.
The claim in item \eqref{l:jakitiner_3} is analogous to \eqref{l:jakitiner_1}. Cases \eqref{l:jakitiner_2} and \eqref{l:jakitiner_4}
are derived from \eqref{l:jakitiner_1} and \eqref{l:jakitiner_3} by the use of equivalence~\eqref{eq:iff}.
\vspace{\baselineskip}
Let us now demonstrate the proof of the case \eqref{l:jakitiner_5}. Denote $s = \min\{n\in\Z^+ \colon T^n(\delta)\in I\}$.
Let $K = [\d-\varepsilon, \d+\varepsilon]$ with $\varepsilon$ chosen such that $K \subset I$ and
\begin{equation}\label{l:j_d1}
\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta \not \in T^i(K) \text{ for all }0 \leq i \leq k_\delta+s \text{ with the only exception of }T^{k_\delta}(\d) = \delta\,.
\end{equation}
The existence of such $\varepsilon$ follows trivially from the definition of the interval exchange transformation and the assumptions of the lemma.
Condition \eqref{l:j_d1} implies that $T^i(K)$ is an interval for all $i$ such that $0 < i \leq k_\delta+s$.
Moreover, $T^i(K) \cap I = \emptyset$ for all $i$ such that $0 < i <k_\delta$.
We obtain $T^{k_\delta}(K) \cap I = [\delta-\varepsilon,\delta)$.
In other words, the $I$-itineraries of all points of $K$ start with a prefix of length $k_\delta$ which is equal to $R(\d-\varepsilon)$.
Condition \eqref{l:j_d1} and the definition of $s$ implies that for all $i$ such that $k_\delta < i < s+k_\delta$ we have
$T^i(K)\subset J_X$ for some $X\in\{A,B,C\}$ and $T^i(K) \cap I = \emptyset$. Moreover, $T^{i}(K) \subset I$ for $i=k_\delta+s$.
Thus, the iterations of points of $T^{k_\delta}(K)=[\delta-\varepsilon,\delta)\cup T^{k_\delta}[\d,\d+\varepsilon]$
are coded by the same word of length $s$, namely $R(\delta-\varepsilon)$. Altogether, we can conclude that the $I$-itinerary of points
in the interval $[\d, \d+\varepsilon]$ is equal to $R(\d-\varepsilon)R(\delta-\varepsilon)$.
The situation is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:jakitiner_4}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[]
\newcommand*\ietalpha{25}
\newcommand*\ietbeta{85}
\newcommand*\ietgamma{33}
\newcommand*\ietdelta{52}
\newcommand*\ietA{41}
\newcommand*\ietsdist{3}
\newcommand*\ietpad{0.2}
\newcommand*\ietepsstep{1.5}
\setcounter{ietstep}{1}
\setcounter{ietstepP}{0}
\setcounter{ietstepPP}{-1}
\tikzset{disco/.style={color=gray}}
\tikzset{discoAl/.style={style=disco}}
\tikzset{discoBe/.style={style=disco}}
\tikzset{hlpo/.style={very thick}}
\tikzset{hlpoA/.style={yscale=1.2}}
\tikzset{tmap/.style={ultra thick,}}
\tikzset{tmapG/.style={thick,dashed,color=gray}}
\begin{scope}[font=\footnotesize,scale=0.75,x=0.008\textwidth,inner xsep=0,inner ysep=3.5]
\ietbasic[yshift={(1-\number\value{ietstep})*\ietsdist cm}]{\ietalpha}{\ietbeta}{\ietgamma}{\ietdelta}{
\ietpoint[pos=0.3,above]{hlpoA}{\ietA}{$\d$}{pointA\arabic{ietstep}}
\ietpoint[at={(\ietA-\ietepsstep-4,0.5)},anchor=south,inner ysep=0,inner xsep=0]{hlpo}{\ietA-\ietepsstep}{$\d-\varepsilon$}{pointAm\arabic{ietstep}}
\draw[dotted,color=gray] (\ietA-\ietepsstep,0) -- (\ietA-\ietepsstep-4,0.5);
\ietpoint[at={(\ietA+\ietepsstep+4,0.5)},anchor=south,inner ysep=0,inner xsep=0]{hlpo}{\ietA+\ietepsstep}{$\d+\varepsilon$}{pointAp\arabic{ietstep}}
\draw[dotted,color=gray] (\ietA+\ietepsstep,0) -- (\ietA+\ietepsstep+4,0.5);
}
\ietstepcounters
\ietbasic[yshift={(1-\number\value{ietstep})*\ietsdist cm}]{\ietalpha}{\ietbeta}{\ietgamma}{\ietdelta}{
\ietpoint[at={(\ietdelta-\ietepsstep,0)},anchor=south east]{hlpo}{\ietdelta-\ietepsstep}{$T^{k_\delta}(\d-\varepsilon)$}{pointAm\arabic{ietstep}}
\ietpoint[at={(\ietdelta+\ietepsstep,0)},anchor=north west]{hlpo}{\ietdelta+\ietepsstep}{$T^{k_\delta}(\d+\varepsilon)$}{pointAp\arabic{ietstep}}
}
\draw[->,tmap] (pointAm\arabic{ietstepP}) to[out=-100,in=80] node[pos=0.55,left,inner xsep=5] {$T^{k_\delta}$} (pointAm\arabic{ietstep});
\draw[->,tmap] (pointAp\arabic{ietstepP}) to[out=-100,in=80] node[pos=0.4,right,inner xsep=10] {$T^{k_\delta}$} (pointAp\arabic{ietstep});
\ietstepcounters
\ietbasic[yshift={(1-\number\value{ietstep})*\ietsdist cm},xshift=0]{\ietalpha}{\ietbeta}{\ietgamma}{\ietdelta}{
\ietpoint[at={(\ietgamma+\ietdelta-\ietA-\ietepsstep,0)},anchor=south east]{hlpo}{\ietgamma+\ietdelta-\ietA-\ietepsstep}{$T^{t}(\delta-\varepsilon)$}{pointAm\arabic{ietstep}}
\ietpoint[at={(\ietgamma+\ietdelta-\ietA+\ietepsstep,0)},anchor=south west]{hlpo}{\ietgamma+\ietdelta-\ietA+\ietepsstep}{$T^{t}(\delta+\varepsilon)$}{pointAp\arabic{ietstep}}
}
\draw[->,tmap] (pointAm\arabic{ietstepP}) to[out=-90,in=90] node[pos=0.55,left,inner xsep=5] {$T^{t}$} (pointAm\arabic{ietstep});
\draw[->,tmap] (pointAp\arabic{ietstepP}) to[out=-90,in=90] node[pos=0.45,right,inner xsep=5] {$T^{t}$} (pointAp\arabic{ietstep});
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Situation in the proof of Lemma~\ref{l:jakitiner}, case \ref{l:jakitiner_4}.}
\label{fig:jakitiner_4}.
\end{figure}
Case \eqref{l:jakitiner_6} can be treated in a way analogous to case \eqref{l:jakitiner_5}.
\pfk
Now we are in the state to prove the main theorem describing the return times in 3iet.
In the proof, it is sufficient to focus on the case when $\#{\rm It}_I=5$, since, as we have seen from
Proposition~\ref{p:spojitost}, the set of $I$-itineraries, and thus also their return times, for the other
cases is only a subset of ${\rm It}_{\tilde{I}}$ for some ``close enough'' generic subinterval $\tilde{I}\subset[0,1)$.
So throughout the rest of this section, suppose that $\#{\rm It}_I=5$. This means by Lemma~\ref{l:keane} that points $\a, \b, \c, \d$ lie in the interior
of the interval $I=[\gamma, \delta)$ and are mutually distinct, moreover, by Proposition~\ref{p:bamape3iet}, we have $\d<\c$.
Such conditions imply 12 possible orderings of $\a,\b,\c,\d$ which give rise to 12 cases in the study of return times.
We will describe them in the proof of Theorem~\ref{t:returntime}
as cases (i)--(xii) and then show in Example~\ref{ex:vsech12} that all 12 cases may occur.
\begin{remark} \label{re:sedi_na_kraji}
Note that if $\gamma=0$, i.e.\ we induce on an interval $I=[0,\delta)$, we have $T^{-1}(\gamma)=\beta$ and therefore necessarily $\b=\c$.
Thus there are at most four $I$-itineraries.
Due to Proposition~\ref{p:symetrie}, similar situation happens if $\delta=1$.
\end{remark}
\pfz[Proof of Theorem~\ref{t:returntime}]
We will discuss the 12 possibilities of ordering of points $\a,\b,\c,\d$ in the interior of the interval $[\gamma,\delta)$ with the condition $\d<\c$.
The structure of the set of $I$-itineraries will be best shown in terms of $I$-itineraries of points in the left neighbourhood of the point $\d$
and right neighbourhood of the point $\c$. For simplicity, we thus denote for sufficiently small positive~$\varepsilon$
\[
R_1=R(\d-\varepsilon),\ R_2=R(\c+\varepsilon)\quad\text{ and }\quad |R_1|=t_1, |R_2|=t_2.
\]
In order to be allowed to use Lemma~\ref{l:jakitiner}, we will assume that
the orbits of points $\alpha, \beta, \gamma$ and $\delta$ are mutually disjoint. Otherwise, we use
Proposition~\ref{p:spojitost} to find a modified interval $\tilde{I}$ where this is satisfied and ${\rm It}_{\tilde{I}}= {\rm It}_I$.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item Let $\a<\b<\d<\c$. We know that $R(x)$ is constant on the intervals $[\gamma,\a)$, $[\a,\b)$, $[\b,\d)$, $[\d,\c)$, and $[\c,\delta)$.
By definition $R(x)=R_2$ for $x\in [\c,\delta)$ and $R(x)=R_1$ for
$x\in[\b,\d)$. We can derive from rule (\ref{enum:D+}) of
Lemma~\ref{l:jakitiner} that if $x\in[\d,\c)$, then $R(x)=R_1R_2$.
Further, we use rule (\ref{enum:B-}) to show that
$R(x)=\omega_{CA\to B}(R_1)$ for $x\in[\a,\b)$ and further by
applying rule (\ref{enum:A-}), we obtain that $R(x)=\omega_{B\to
AC}\big(\omega_{CA\to B}(R_1)\big)$ for $x\in[\gamma,\a)$.
Summarized,
\[
R(x)=
\begin{cases}
\omega_{B\to AC}\big(\omega_{CA\to B}(R_1)\big) &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\a)\\
\omega_{CA\to B}(R_1) &\text{ for }x\in[\a,\b)\\
R_1&\text{ for }x\in[\b,\d)\\
R_1R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\d,\c)\\
R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\c,\delta).
\end{cases}
\]
It is easy to show that the lengths of the above $I$-itineraries are $t_1$, $t_1-1$, $t_1$, $t_1+t_2$, $t_2$, respectively.
Setting $r_1=t_1-1$ and $r_2=t_2$, we obtain the desired return times.
The proofs of the other cases are analogous, we state the results in terms of $R_1$ and $R_2$.
\item Let $\d<\c<\a<\b$. We obtain
\[
R(x)=
\begin{cases}
R_1 &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\d)\\
R_2R_1&\text{ for }x\in[\d,\c)\\
R_2&\text{ for }x\in[\c,\a)\\
\omega_{AC\to B}(R_2) &\text{ for }x\in[\a,\b)\\
\omega_{B\to CA}\big(\omega_{AC\to B}(R_2)\big) &\text{ for }x\in[\b,\delta),
\end{cases}
\]
with lengths $t_1$, $t_1+t_2$, $t_2$, $t_2-1$, $t_2$, respectively. We set $r_1=t_1$ and $r_2=t_2-1$.
\item Let $\b<\a<\d<\c$. A discussion as above leads to
\[
R(x)=
\begin{cases}
\omega_{CA\to B}\big(\omega_{B\to AC}(R_1)\big) &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\b)\\
\omega_{B\to AC}(R_1) &\text{ for }x\in[\b,\a)\\
R_1&\text{ for }x\in[\a,\d)\\
R_1R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\d,\c)\\
R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\c,\delta),
\end{cases}
\]
with the corresponding lengths $t_1$, $t_1+1$, $t_1$, $t_1+t_2$, $t_2$, respectively. We set $r_1=t_1$ and $r_2=t_2$.
\item Let $\d<\c<\b<\a$. We obtain
\[
R(x)=
\begin{cases}
R_1 &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\d)\\
R_2R_1&\text{ for }x\in[\d,\c)\\
R_2&\text{ for }x\in[\c,\b)\\
\omega_{B\to CA}(R_2) &\text{ for }x\in[\b,\a)\\
\omega_{AC\to B}\big(\omega_{B\to CA}(R_2)\big) &\text{ for }x\in[\a,\delta),
\end{cases}
\]
with lengths $t_1$, $t_1+t_2$, $t_2$, $t_2+1$, $t_2$, respectively. We set $r_1=t_1$ and $r_2=t_2$.
\item Let $\a<\d<\b<\c$. We obtain
\[
R(x)=
\begin{cases}
\omega_{B\to AC}(R_1) &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\a)\\
R_1&\text{ for }x\in[\a,\d)\\
R_1R_2&\text{ for }x\in[\d,\b)\\
R_2\omega_{B\to AC}(R_1) &\text{ for }x\in[\b,\c)\\
R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\c,\delta),
\end{cases}
\]
with lengths $t_1+1$, $t_1$, $t_1+t_2$, $t_1+t_2+1$, $t_2$, respectively. We set $r_1=t_1$ and $r_2=t_2$.
\item Let $\d<\a<\c<\b$. We obtain
\[
R(x)=
\begin{cases}
R_1 &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\d)\\
R_1\omega_{B\to CA}(R_2)&\text{ for }x\in[\d,\a)\\
R_2R_1&\text{ for }x\in[\a,\c)\\
R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\c,\b)\\
\omega_{B\to CA}(R_2) &\text{ for }x\in[\b,\delta),
\end{cases}
\]
with lengths $t_1$, $t_1+t_2+1$, $t_1+t_2$, $t_2$, $t_2+1$, respectively. We set $r_1=t_1$ and $r_2=t_2$.
\item Let $\b<\d<\a<\c$. We obtain
\[
R(x)=
\begin{cases}
\omega_{CA\to B}(R_1) &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\b)\\
R_1&\text{ for }x\in[\b,\d)\\
R_1R_2&\text{ for }x\in[\d,\a)\\
R_2\omega_{CA\to B}(R_1) &\text{ for }x\in[\a,\c)\\
R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\c,\delta),
\end{cases}
\]
with lengths $t_1-1$, $t_1$, $t_1+t_2$, $t_1+t_2-1$, $t_2$, respectively. We set $r_1=t_1-1$ and $r_2=t_2$.
\item Let $\d<\b<\c<\a$. We obtain
\[
R(x)=
\begin{cases}
R_1 &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\d)\\
R_1\omega_{AC\to B}(R_2)&\text{ for }x\in[\d,\b)\\
R_2R_1&\text{ for }x\in[\b,\c)\\
R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\c,\a)\\
\omega_{AC\to B}(R_2) &\text{ for }x\in[\a,\delta),
\end{cases}
\]
with lengths $t_1$, $t_1+t_2-1$, $t_1+t_2$, $t_2$, $t_2-1$, respectively. We set $r_1=t_1$ and $r_2=t_2-1$.
\item Let $\a<\d<\c<\b$. We obtain
\[
R(x)=
\begin{cases}
\omega_{B\to AC}(R_1) &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\a)\\
R_1&\text{ for }x\in[\a,\d)\\
R_1\omega_{B\to CA}(R_2)&\text{ for }x\in[\d,\c)\\
R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\c,\b)\\
\omega_{B\to CA}(R_2) &\text{ for }x\in[\b,\delta),
\end{cases}
\]
with lengths $t_1+1$, $t_1$, $t_1+t_2+1$, $t_2$, $t_2+1$, respectively. We set $r_1=t_1$ and $r_2=t_2$.
\item \label{t12:bdca} Let $\b<\d<\c<\a$. We obtain
\[
R(x)=
\begin{cases}
\omega_{CA\to B}(R_1) &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\b)\\
R_1&\text{ for }x\in[\b,\d)\\
R_1\omega_{AC\to B}(R_2)&\text{ for }x\in[\d,\c)\\
R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\c,\a)\\
\omega_{AC\to B}(R_2) &\text{ for }x\in[\a,\delta),
\end{cases}
\]
with lengths $t_1-1$, $t_1$, $t_1+t_2-1$, $t_2$, $t_2-1$, respectively. We set $r_1=t_1-1$ and $r_2=t_2-1$.
\item Let $\d<\a<\b<\c$. We obtain
\[
R(x)=
\begin{cases}
R_1 &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\d)\\
R_1R_2&\text{ for }x\in[\d,\a)\\
\omega_{CA\to B}(R_2R_1)&\text{ for }x\in[\a,\b)\\
R_2R_1&\text{ for }x\in[\b,\c)\\
R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\c,\delta),
\end{cases}
\]
with lengths $t_1$, $t_1+t_2$, $t_1+t_2-1$, $t_1+t_2$, $t_2$, respectively. We set $r_1=t_1-1$ and $r_2=t_2$.
\item Let $\d<\b<\a<\c$. We obtain
\[
R(x)=
\begin{cases}
R_1 &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\d)\\
R_1R_2&\text{ for }x\in[\d,\b)\\
\omega_{B\to AC}(R_2R_1)&\text{ for }x\in[\b,\a)\\
R_2R_1&\text{ for }x\in[\a,\c)\\
R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\c,\delta),
\end{cases}
\]
with lengths $t_1$, $t_1+t_2$, $t_1+t_2+1$, $t_1+t_2$, $t_2$, respectively. We set $r_1=t_1$ and $r_2=t_2$.
\end{enumerate}
\pfk
\begin{remark}
When describing the $I$-itineraries using the words $R_1$, $R_2$, we could apply the rules of Lemma~\ref{l:jakitiner} in a different order.
By doing so, we would obtain the itineraries expressed differently, which yields interesting relations between words $R_1,R_2$.
For example, in the case (ix), we derive that the $I$-itinerary of $x\in[\d,\c)$ is $R(x)=R_1\omega_{B\to CA}(R_2)=R_2\omega_{B\to AC}(R_1)$.
Note also the symmetries between the cases (i) and (ii), (iii) and (iv), (v) and (vi), (vii) and (viii), in
consequence of Proposition \ref{p:symetrie}. Indeed, if
we exchange pair of points $ \d \leftrightarrow\c$, $ \b \leftrightarrow\a$, letters
$A \leftrightarrow C $, and finally the inequalities $<$ and $>$, we obtain a symmetric
situation in the list of cases we discussed in the proof. In this sense, each of cases (ix) up to (xii) is symmetric to itself.
\end{remark}
\begin{example} \label{ex:vsech12}
Set $\alpha = \frac{1}{5} \sqrt{5} - \frac{1}{5}$ and $\beta = -\frac{1}{6} \sqrt{5} + \frac{2}{3}$.
Table~\ref{tab:vsech12} shows $12$ choices of $I = [\gamma, \delta)$ which produce $12$ distinct orders
of the points $\a$, $\b$, $\c$ and $\d$, shown in the third column. The last column contains the respective lengths of the $5$ distinct $I$-itineraries.
\vspace{\baselineskip}
\renewcommand*{\arraystretch}{1.5}
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c}
$\gamma$ & $\delta$ & type & lengths \\ \hline
$ \frac{6}{25} $ & $ \frac{99}{100} $ &
$ \a < \b < \d < \c $ & $ \left[2, 1, 2, 3, 1\right] $ \\
$ \frac{29}{100} $ & $ \frac{71}{100} $ &
$ \d < \c < \a < \b $ & $ \left[1, 15, 14, 13, 14\right] $ \\
$ \frac{77}{100} $ & $ \frac{4}{5} $ &
$ \b < \a < \d < \c $ & $ \left[88, 89, 88, 109, 21\right] $ \\
$ \frac{7}{25} $ & $ \frac{3}{4} $ &
$ \d < \c < \b < \a $ & $ \left[1, 13, 12, 13, 12\right] $ \\
$ \frac{1}{100} $ & $ \frac{3}{4} $ &
$ \a < \d < \b < \c $ & $ \left[2, 1, 2, 3, 1\right] $ \\
$ \frac{1}{100} $ & $ \frac{29}{100} $ &
$ \d < \a < \c < \b $ & $ \left[2, 14, 13, 11, 12\right] $ \\
$ \frac{1}{4} $ & $ \frac{99}{100} $ &
$ \b < \d < \a < \c $ & $ \left[1, 2, 3, 2, 1\right] $ \\
$ \frac{71}{100} $ & $ \frac{99}{100} $ &
$ \d < \b < \c < \a $ & $ \left[2, 13, 14, 12, 11\right] $ \\
$ \frac{1}{25} $ & $ \frac{37}{50} $ &
$ \a < \d < \c < \b $ & $ \left[2, 1, 4, 2, 3\right] $ \\
$ \frac{29}{100} $ & $ \frac{99}{100} $ &
$ \b < \d < \c < \a $ & $ \left[1, 2, 4, 3, 2\right] $ \\
$ \frac{1}{100} $ & $ \frac{99}{100} $ &
$ \d < \a < \b < \c $ & $ \left[1, 2, 1, 2, 1\right] $ \\
$ \frac{1}{4} $ & $ \frac{3}{4} $ &
$ \d < \b < \a < \c $ & $ \left[1, 12, 13, 12, 11\right] $ \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{The cases (i)--(xii) from the proof of Theorem~\ref{t:returntime} for $\alpha = \frac{1}{5} \sqrt{5} - \frac{1}{5}$, $\beta = -\frac{1}{6} \sqrt{5} + \frac{2}{3}$ as in Example~\ref{ex:vsech12}.
The endpoints of the interval $I=[\gamma,\delta)$ are in the first and second column.
The last column contains a list of lengths of $I$-itineraries of all $5$ subintervals of $I$ starting from the leftmost one.
}
\label{tab:vsech12}
\end{table}
Let us describe in detail one of the cases, namely the case $\b < \d < \c < \a$.
The induced interval is determined by setting $\gamma = \frac{29}{100}$ and $\delta = \frac{99}{100}$.
One can verify that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\b = T^{-0}(\beta) = \frac{1}{6} \sqrt{5} + \frac{1}{3} \approx 0.706011329583298; \\
\d = T^{-2}(\delta) \frac{11}{30} \sqrt{5} + \frac{37}{300} \approx 0.943224925083256; \\
\c = T^{-3}(\gamma) = \frac{8}{15} \sqrt{5} - \frac{73}{300} \approx 0.949236254666554; \\
\a = T^{-1}(\alpha) = \frac{11}{30} \sqrt{5} + \frac{2}{15} \approx 0.953224925083256.
\end{eqnarray*}
It corresponds to the case {\rm (\ref{t12:bdca})} in the proof of Theorem~\ref{t:returntime} with $R_1 = CA$ and $R_2 = CAC$.
The $I$-itinerary of a point $x \in I = [\gamma,\delta)$ is
\[
R(x)=
\begin{cases}
B &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\b)\\
CA &\text{ for }x\in[\b,\d)\\
CACB &\text{ for }x\in[\d,\c)\\
CAC &\text{ for }x\in[\c,\a)\\
CB &\text{ for }x\in[\a,\delta)
\end{cases}
\]
\end{example}
\section{Gaps and distance theorems}\label{sec:Gap}
Let us reinterpret the statement of
Theorem \ref{t:returntime} in point of view of three gap and three distance theorems which are narrowly connected with exchange of two
intervals. Under the name three gap theorem one usually refers to the
description of gaps between neighbouring elements of the set
\[
{\mathcal G}(\alpha,\delta) := \big\{n\in\N \colon \{n\alpha\} < \delta \big\} \subset \N\,,
\]
where $\alpha\in \R\setminus\Q$, $\delta\in(0,1)$ and
$\{x\}=x-\lfloor x\rfloor$ stands for the fractional part of $x$,
see~\cite{3gap}. Sometimes one uses a more general formulation, namely
the set
\[
{\mathcal G}(\alpha,\rho,\gamma,\delta) := \big\{n\in\N : \gamma \leq \{n\alpha+\rho\} < \delta \big\} \subset \N\,,
\]
where moreover $\rho\in\N$, $0\leq \gamma<\delta< 1$. The three gap
theorem states that there exist integers
$r_1, r_2$ such that gaps between
neighbours in ${\mathcal G}(\alpha,\rho,\gamma,\delta)$ take at most
three values, namely in the set $\{r_1,r_2,r_1+r_2\}$.
Let us interpret the three gap theorem in the frame of exchange of two
intervals $J_0=[0,1-\alpha)$, $J_1=[1-\alpha,1)$. The transformation
$T:[0,1)\to[0,1)$ is of the form
\[
T(x) = \begin{cases}
x+\alpha & \text{ for }x\in[0,1-\alpha)\,,\\
x+\alpha-1 & \text{ for }x\in[1-\alpha,1)\,,
\end{cases}
\quad\text{i.e. }\quad
T(x) = \{x+\alpha\}\,.
\]
Therefore we can write
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3gapsturmian}
{\mathcal G}(\alpha,\rho,\gamma,\delta) := \big\{n\in\N \colon T^n(\rho)\in[\gamma,\delta)\big\}\,,
\end{equation}
and the gaps in this set correspond to return times to the interval $[\gamma,\delta)$ under the transformation $T$.
Our Theorem~\ref{t:returntime} is an analogue of the three gap
theorem in the form~\eqref{eq:3gapsturmian} generalized for the case
when the transformation $T$ is a non-degenerate 3iet. We see that
there are 5 gaps, but still expressed using two basic values
$r_1,r_2$.
The so-called three distance theorem focuses on distances between neighbours of the set
\[
{\mathcal D}(\alpha,\rho,N):=\big\{ \{\alpha n + \rho\} \colon n\in\N,\ n<N \big\} \subset [0,1)\,.
\]
The three distance theorem ensures existence of $\Delta_1,\Delta_2>0$
such that distances between neighbours in ${\mathcal
D}(\alpha,\rho,N)$ take at most three values, namely in
$\{\Delta_1,\Delta_2,\Delta_1+\Delta_2\}$.
In the framework of 2iet $T$, we can write for the distances
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3distancesturmian}
{\mathcal D}(\alpha,\rho,N):=\big\{ T^n(\rho) \colon n\in\N,\ n<N \big\} \subset [0,1)\,.
\end{equation}
We could try to study the analogue of the three distance theorem in
the form~\eqref{eq:3distancesturmian} for exchanges of three intervals. In fact, it can be derived
from the results of~\cite{GuMaPeBordeaux} that if $T$ is a 3iet with
discontinuity points $\alpha,\beta$, then
\begin{equation*}
{\mathcal D}(\alpha,\beta,\rho,N):=\big\{ T^n(\rho) \colon n\in\N,\ n<N \big\}
\end{equation*}
has again at most three distances $\Delta_1$, $\Delta_2$, and $\Delta_1+\Delta_2$ for some positive $\Delta_1,\Delta_2$.
The three distance theorem can also be used to derive that the frequencies of factors of length $n$ in a Sturmian word take at most three values.
Recall that the frequency of a factor $w$ in the infinite word ${\bf u}= u_0u_1u_2\ldots$ is given by
\[
{\rm freq}(w):=\lim_{N\to\infty}\frac1N\big(\#\{0\leq i< N \colon w \text{ is a prefix of } u_iu_{i+1}\ldots \}\big)\,,
\]
if the limit exists.
It is a well known fact that the frequencies of factors of length
$n$ in a coding of an exchange of intervals are given by the lengths
of cylinders corresponding to the factors.
The boundary points of these cylinders are $T^{-j}(1-\alpha)$, for
$j=0,\dots,n-1$. Consequently, the
distances in the set ${\mathcal D}(\alpha,1-\alpha,N)$ are precisely
the frequencies of factors, and the three distance theorem implies the
well known fact that Sturmian words have for each $n$ only three
values of frequencies of factors of length $n$, namely
$\varrho_1,\varrho_2,\varrho_1+\varrho_2$.
The frequencies of factors of length $n$ in 3iet words are given by
distances between neighbours of the set
\begin{equation*}
\big\{ T^{-n}(\alpha) \colon n\in\N,\ n<N \big\}\cup \big\{ T^{-n}(\beta) \colon n\in\N,\ n<N \big\}\,.
\end{equation*}
In~\cite{BaPe} it is shown, based on the study of Rauzy graphs, that
the number of distinct values of frequencies in infinite words with
reversal closed language satisfies
\[
\#\{{\rm freq}(w) \colon w\in{\mathcal L}({\bf u}), |w|=n\} \leq 2 \Bigl({\mathcal C}_{\bf u}(n) - {\mathcal C}_{\bf u}(n-1)\Bigr) + 1\,,
\]
which in case of 3iet words reduces to $\leq 5$.
Paper~\cite{ferenczi} shows, that the set of integers $n$ for which
this bound is achieved, is of density 1 in $\N$.
\section{Description of the case of three $I$-itineraries} \label{sec:3}
The cases (i) -- (xii) in the proof of Theorem~\ref{t:returntime} correspond to the generic
instances of a subinterval $I$ in a non-degenerate 3iet which lead to
5 different $I$-itineraries. Let us focus on the cases where, on the contrary, the set of
$I$-itineraries has only 3 elements.
First we recall two reasons why such cases are interesting.
For a factor $w$ from the language of a non-degenerate 3iet transformation $T$, denote
\[
[w]=\{\rho \in [0,1 ) \colon w \text{ is a prefix of } {\bf u_\rho}\}\,.
\]
It is easy to see that $[w]$ -- usually called the cylinder of $w$ -- is a semi-closed interval and its
boundaries belong to the set $ \{ T^{-i}(z) \colon 0 \leq i < n, z \in
\{\alpha, \beta\}\}$. Clearly, a factor $v$ is a return word to the factor $w$ if and only if
$v$ is a $[w]$-itinerary. It is well known \cite{vuillon} that any factor of an infinite word coding a
non-degenerate 3iet has exactly three return words and thus the set $It_{[w]}$ has three elements.
The second reason why to study intervals $I$ yielding
three $I$-itineraries is that any morphism fixing a non-degenerate 3iet word corresponds
to such an interval $I$. Details of this correspondence will be explained in Section~\ref{sec:substitutions}.
\begin{proposition}\label{p:3itinerare}
Let $T$ be a non-degenerate 3iet and let $I=[\gamma,\delta)\subset [0,1)$ be such that $\#{\rm It}_I = 3$. One of the following cases occurs:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item \label{l:jakitiner_3rw_1} $\b = \d < \a=\c$ and
\[
R(x) =
\begin{cases}
R_1 &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\b)\\
\omega_{B\to CA}(R_1R_2) = \omega_{B\to AC}(R_2R_1) & \text{ for } x\in[\b,\a)\\
R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\a,\delta)
\end{cases}
\]
\item \label{l:jakitiner_3rw_2} $\a = \d < \b=\c$ and
\[
R(x) =
\begin{cases}
R_1 &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\a)\\
\omega_{AC\to B}(R_1R_2) = \omega_{CA\to B}(R_2R_1) & \text{ for } x\in[\a,\b)\\
R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\b,\delta)
\end{cases}
\]
\item \label{l:jakitiner_3rw_3} $\b < \a=\c=\d$ and
\[
R(x) =
\begin{cases}
\omega_{CA\to B}(R_1) &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\b)\\
R_1 & \text{ for } x\in[\b,\a)\\
R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\a,\delta)
\end{cases}
\]
\item \label{l:jakitiner_3rw_6} $\b=\c=\d < \a$ and
\[
R(x) =
\begin{cases}
R_1 &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\a)\\
R_2 & \text{ for } x\in[\a,\b)\\
\omega_{AC\to B}(R_2) &\text{ for }x\in[\b,\delta)
\end{cases}
\]
\item \label{l:jakitiner_3rw_4} $\a=\c=\d < \b$ and
\[
R(x) =
\begin{cases}
R_1 &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\a)\\
R_2 & \text{ for } x\in[\a,\b)\\
\omega_{B\to CA}(R_2) &\text{ for }x\in[\b,\delta)
\end{cases}
\]
\item \label{l:jakitiner_3rw_5} $\a < \b=\c=\d$ and
\[
R(x) =
\begin{cases}
\omega_{B\to AC}(R_1) &\text{ for }x\in[\gamma,\a)\\
R_1 & \text{ for } x\in[\a,\b)\\
R_2 &\text{ for }x\in[\b,\delta)
\end{cases}
\]
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}[Sketch of a proof]
Since by Lemma~\ref{l:keane} the subintervals
of $I$ corresponding to the same itinerary are delimited by the points $\a,\b,\c$ and $\d$,
we may have $\#{\rm It}_I=3$ only if some of these points coincide, more precisely if $\# \{\a,\b,\c,\d\} = 2$.
The non-degeneracy of the considered 3iet implies that always $\a\neq\b$, which further limits the discussion.
The six cases listed in the statement are the possibilities of how this may happen,
respecting the condition $\d < \c$ or $\d = \c$.
In order to describe the itineraries, denote again
\[
R_1=R(\d-\varepsilon) \ \text{ and } \ R_2=R(\c+\varepsilon)
\]
for $\varepsilon>0$ sufficiently small.
One can then follow the ideas of the proof of Lemma~\ref{l:jakitiner}.
\end{proof}
Let us apply Proposition~\ref{p:3itinerare} in order to provide the description of
return words to factors of a non-degenerate 3iet word. If a factor $w$ has a unique right prolongation in the language $\mathcal{L}(T)$,
i.e. there exists only one letter $a \in \mathcal{A}$ such that $wa \in\mathcal{L}(T)$, then the set of
return words to $w$ and the set of return words to $wa$ coincide. And (almost) analogously, if a
factor $w$ has a unique left prolongation in the language $ \mathcal{L}(T)$, say $aw$ for some $a \in \mathcal{A}$,
then a word $v$ is a return word to $w$ if and only if $ava^{-1}$ is a return word to $aw$. Consequently,
to describe the structure of return words to a given factor $w$, we can restrict to factors which have at
least two right and at least two left prolongations. Such factors are called {\it bispecial}. It is readily
seen that the language of an aperiodic recurrent infinite word ${\bf u}$ contains infinitely many bispecial factors.
Before giving the description of return words to bispecial factors, we state the following lemma.
\begin{lemma} \label{l:zrcadlovy_cylindr}
Let $w$ belong to language of a non-degenerate 3iet $T$. Denote $n=|w|$. For the cylinder of its reversal $\overline{w}$, one has
\[
[\overline{w}] = \overline{T^{n}\left( [w]\right)}\,.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} According to definition of $[w]$, for each $[w]$-itinerary $r$, the word $rw$ belongs to the language
and $w$ occurs in $rw$ exactly twice, as a prefix and as a suffix. In other words $r$ is a return word to $w$.
Moreover, $[w]$ is the maximal (with respect to inclusion) interval with this property.
According to Remark~\ref{pozn:skakani}, if $r$ is an $[w]$-itinerary, then the word $w^{-1}rw$ is an $T^{n}([w])$-itinerary.
Applying Proposition~\ref{p:symetrie} to the interval $T^{n}([w])$ we obtain that $s:=\overline{ w^{-1}rw}$ is an
$\overline{T^{n}([w])}$-itinerary. Since the word $s \overline{w} = \overline{rw}$ has a prefix $\overline{w}$ and
a suffix $\overline{w}$, with no other occurrences of $\overline{w}$, the word $s$ is a return word to
$\overline{w}$ and thus by definition of the cylinder, $s=\overline{ w^{-1}rw}$ belongs to
$ [\overline{w}]$-itinerary for any $\overline{T^{n}([w])}$-itinerary $s$. From the maximality of
the cylinder we have $\overline{T^{n}([w])}\subset [\overline{w}]$. Since lengths of the intervals
$[w]$ and $T^{n}([w])$ coincide we have, in particular, that the length of interval $[w]$ is
less or equal to the length of the interval $[\overline{w}]$. But from the symmetry of the role
$w$ and $\overline{w}$, their length must be equal and thus $\overline{T^{n}([w])}=[\overline{w}]$.
\end{proof}
The language of $T$ contains two types of bispecial factors:
palindromic and non-palindromic. In \cite{FeHoZa}, Ferenczi,
Holton and Zamboni studied the structure of return words to
non-palindromic bispecial factors. The following proposition
completes this description.
\begin{proposition}
Let $w$ be a bispecial factor.
If $w$ is a palindrome, then its return words are described by the cases (\ref{l:jakitiner_3rw_1}) and (\ref{l:jakitiner_3rw_2}) of Proposition~\ref{p:3itinerare}.
If $w$ is not a palindrome, then its return words are described by the cases (\ref{l:jakitiner_3rw_3}) -- (\ref{l:jakitiner_3rw_6}) of Proposition~\ref{p:3itinerare}.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $w$ be a bispecial factor.
If $w$ is not a palindrome, the claim follows from Theorem 4.6 of \cite{FeHoZa}.
Assume $w$ is a palindrome and let $[w] = [T^{-\ell}(L) , T^{-r}(R) )$ with $L,R \in \{\alpha, \beta\}$ and $0 \leq \ell,r < |w|$.
By Lemma~\ref{l:zrcadlovy_cylindr} we have $[\overline{w}] = \overline{T^{|w|}\left([ w]\right)}$.
Since $w=\overline{w}$, we have $I_{w} = I_{\overline{w}}$, and thus
\[
I_w = [T^{-\ell}(L), T^{-r}(R)) = [1-T^{n-r}(R), 1- T^{n-\ell}(L)) = I_{\overline{w}}.
\]
Since the considered 3iet is non-degenerate,
the parameters $\alpha, \beta$ satisfy \eqref{eq:nondeg}. Consequently, the equation $T^{-\ell}(L) = 1-T^{n-r}(R)$ has a solution if and only if $R \neq L$.
Thus, we have neither $\a = \c = \d$ nor $\b = \c = \d$ and we are in the case (\ref{l:jakitiner_3rw_1})
or (\ref{l:jakitiner_3rw_2}) of Proposition~\ref{p:3itinerare}.
\end{proof}
\section{Substitution invariance and conjugation of substitutions}\label{sec:substitutions}
Let us recall the relation of induction to a subinterval $I$ to substitution invariance of 3iet words.
Let $I$ be an interval $I\subset[0,1)$ such that the set ${\rm It}_I$ of $I$-itineraries has three elements, say $R_A$, $R_B$ and $R_C$.
For every $\rho\in I$, the infinite word ${\bf u}_\rho$ can be written as a concatenation of words $R_A$, $R_B$ and $R_C$.
For a letter $Y\in\{A,B,C\}$ denote $I_Y=\{x\in I \colon R(x)=R_Y\}$. Obviously, $I=I_A\cup I_B\cup I_C$, and the induced mapping $T_I$ is an exchange of these three intervals.
The order of the words $R_A, R_B$ and $R_C$ in the concatenation is determined by the iterations of $T_I(\rho)$.
Suppose that $T_I$ is homothetic to $T$. Recall that mappings $f:I_f\to I_f$ and $g:I_g\to I_g$ are homothetic
if there exists an affine bijection $\Phi:I_f\to I_g$ with $\Phi(x) = \lambda x+\mu$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:afbij}
\Phi f(x) = g \Phi(x)\quad \text{ for all } x\in I_f\,.
\end{equation}
This means that $f$ and $g$ behave in the same way, up to a scaling factor $\lambda$ and a shift $\mu$ of
the domains $I_f$ and $I_g$. In other words, the graphs of the mappings
$f$ and $g$ are the same, up to their scale and placing.
The homothety of $T$ and $T_I$ implies that $\Phi(J_Y)=I_Y$ for all
$Y \in \{A,B,C\}$. From~\eqref{eq:afbij}, we derive for every
$k\in\N$ that $\Phi T^k(x)=T^k_I\Phi(x)$ for $x\in[0,1)$, and thus
$\Phi T^k(\rho)=T^k_I(\rho)$ whenever
\begin{equation}\label{eq:homofixesintercept}
\Phi(\rho)=\rho\,,
\end{equation}
i.e., $\rho$ is the homothety center. From the relation
$\Phi(J_Y)=I_Y$ it follows that the $k$-th element in the
concatenation of itineraries $R_A$, $R_B$ and $R_C$ is equal to
$R_Y$ if and only if the $k$-th letter in the infinite word ${\bf
u}_\rho$ is equal to $Y$. This is equivalent to saying that the
infinite word ${\bf u}_\rho$ is invariant under the substitution
$\eta$ given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:rabc}
\eta(A)=R_A,\ \eta(B)=R_B,\ \eta (C)=R_C\,.
\end{equation}
We conclude that the existence of an interval $I$ with three
itineraries and $T_I$ homothetic to $T$ leads to a substitution
fixing a 3iet word whose intercept is the homothety center $\rho$.
In fact, the converse holds, too, as shown in~\cite{ArBeMaPe}. We
summarize both statements as follows.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{ArBeMaPe}]\label{thm:invhom}
Let $\xi$ be a primitive substitution over $\{A,B,C\}$ with
incidence matrix $M$ and let $T$ be a non-degenerate 3iet. The
substitution $\xi$ fixes the word ${\bf u}_\rho$ coding the orbit of
a point $\rho\in[0,1)$ under $T$ if and only if there exists an
interval $I\subset[0,1)$ with $I$-itineraries
$\mathit{It}_I=\{R_A,R_B,R_C\}$ such that $T_I$ is homothetic to
$T$, $\rho$ is the homothety center, and the substitution $\eta$
given by
\[
\eta=
\begin{cases}
\xi &\text{if no eigenvalue of $M$ belongs to }(-1,0),\\
\xi^2 &\text{otherwise,}
\end{cases}
\]
satisfies $\eta(A)=R_A$, $\eta(B)=R_B$ and $\eta (C)=R_C$.
\end{theorem}
Let us mention that the scaling factor $\lambda\in(0,1)$ in the
homothety mapping
$\Phi (x) =\lambda x+\mu$ is equal to the length of
the interval $I=[\gamma,\delta)$, i.e., $\lambda=\delta-\gamma$, and
the shift $\mu$ is equal to the left end-point of the interval $I$,
namely $\gamma$. Moreover, it is related to the intercept $\rho$ of
an infinite word ${\bf u}_\rho$ in the following way: one has
$\mu=\gamma=\rho(1-\lambda)$, as follows
from~\eqref{eq:homofixesintercept}. In fact, $\lambda$ is an
eigenvalue of the incidence matrix of $\eta$. It follows
from~\cite{ArBeMaPe} that if $\xi$ has such an eigenvalue, then the
choice $\eta=\xi$ is sufficient. Otherwise, the incidence matrix of
$\xi^2$ has such an eigenvalue.
By Theorem~\ref{thm:invhom}, if ${\bf u}_\rho$ is invariant under a
substitution, we find an interval $I$ such that $T_I$ is homothetic
to $T$. If $I'=T(I)$ is again an interval, then $T_{I'}$ is also
homothetic to $T$, and the $I'$-itineraries change with respect to
the $I$-itineraries, as described in Remark~\ref{pozn:skakani}. To
show the relation of the corresponding substitutions, we need the
following definition.
\begin{definition}\label{d:conjugmorf}
Let $\varphi$ and $\psi$ be morphisms over $\A^*$ and let $w\in\A^*$
be a word such that $w\varphi(a) = \psi(a)w$ for every letter
$a\in\A$. The morphism $\varphi$ is said to be a \textit{left
conjugate} of $\psi$ and $\psi$ is said to be a \textit{right
conjugate} of $\varphi$. We write $\varphi\vartriangleleft\psi$. If
$\varphi$ is a left or right conjugate of $\psi$, then we say
$\varphi$ is \textit{conjugate} to $\psi$. If the only left
conjugate of $\varphi$ is $\varphi$ itself, then $\varphi$ is called
the \textit{leftmost conjugate} of $\psi$ and we write
$\varphi=\psi_L$. If the only right conjugate of $\psi$ is $\psi$
itself, then $\psi$ is called the \textit{rightmost conjugate} of
$\varphi$ and we write $\psi=\varphi_R$.
\end{definition}
Note that given a substitution $\xi$, its leftmost and rightmost conjugates $\xi_L$ and $\xi_R$ may not exist.
If this happens, it can be shown that its fixed point is a periodic word.
All the substitutions considered here thus possess their leftmost and rightmost conjugates.
\begin{proposition}\label{p:conjug}
Let ${\bf u}_\rho$ be a 3iet word coding the orbit of the point
$\rho \in [0,1)$ under a non-degenerate 3iet $T$. Moreover, assume
that ${\bf u}_\rho$ is a fixed point of a primitive substitution
$\eta$ such that the corresponding interval $I$ of
Theorem~\ref{thm:invhom} is of length $\lambda$. Let $\eta'$ be a
left conjugate of $\eta$, i.e., $\eta(a)w = w\eta'(a)$ for some word
$w\in\A^*$. The morphism $\eta'$ fixes the infinite word ${\bf
u}_{\rho'}$ with $\rho'$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{eq:conjugintercept}
(1-\lambda)\rho' = T^{n}\big((1-\lambda)\rho\big)\,,\quad\text{ where } n=|w|.
\end{equation}
Moreover, the interval $I'$ corresponding to $\eta'$ by Theorem~\ref{thm:invhom} satisfies $I'=T^n(I)$.
\end{proposition}
\pfz Suppose that $w$ is a letter, i.e., $w=X\in\A$. Necessarily,
the words $\eta(a)$ start with the letter $X$ for all $a\in\A$. This
means for the interval $I$ that $I\subset J_X$. According to
Remark~\ref{pozn:skakani}, the interval $I'=T(I)$ has three
$I'$-itineraries. Moreover, the induced mapping $T_{I'}$ is also
homothetic to $T$. Denote $I=[\gamma,\delta)$. The homothety between
the transformations $T$ and $T_I$ is achieved by the map
$\Phi(x)=\lambda x + \gamma$. The homothety between $T$ and $T_{I'}$
is the map $\Phi'(x)=\lambda x + T(\gamma)$. Since the intercepts
$\rho$ and $\rho'$ are by~\eqref{eq:homofixesintercept} fixed by the
homotheties $\Phi$ and $\Phi'$, respectively, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cislo}
\Phi(\rho)=\lambda\rho + \gamma = \rho\, \quad\text{ and }\quad \Phi'(\rho')=\lambda\rho' + T(\gamma) = \rho'\,.
\end{equation}
Eliminating $\gamma$, we obtain
\[
(1-\lambda)\rho' = T(\gamma) = T\big((1-\lambda)\rho\big)\,.
\]
Since conjugation by any word $w$ can be performed letter by letter, the proof is finished.
\pfk
\begin{remark}\label{pozn:intercept}
Note that the first of equalities in~\eqref{eq:cislo} implies for the left boundary point $\gamma$ of the interval $I$ that
$\gamma=(1-\lambda)\rho$. If $w$ is as in Proposition~\ref{p:conjug}, then for for $0\leq k< n=|w|$, the iterations $T^k(I)$ are all intervals, and hence the
coding ${\bf u}_x$ of every point $x\in I$ starts with the same prefix $w$.
\end{remark}
In the following, we will also need to see the relation of the substitution $\eta$
corresponding to the interval $I=[\gamma,\delta)$ with the
substitution corresponding to the interval
$\overline{I}=[1-\delta,1-\gamma)$. It turns out that it is the
mirror substitution of $\eta$, defined in general as follows. For a
morphism $\xi: \A \to \A$, we define the morphism $\overline{\xi}:
\A \to \A$ by $\overline{\xi}(a)=\overline{\xi(a)}$ for $a\in\A$.
\begin{proposition}\label{p:mirror}
Let $I\subset[0,1)$ be a left-closed right-open interval such that
$\#\mathit{It}_I=3$ and $T_I$ is an exchange of three intervals with
the permutation $(321)$. The interval $\overline{I}$ satisfies
$\#\mathit{It}_{\overline{I}}=3$ and the induced map
$T_{\overline{I}}$ is homothetic to $T_I$. If, moreover, $T_I$ is
homothetic to $T$ and the substitution $\eta$ corresponding to $I$
fixes the infinite word ${\bf u}_\rho$, then the substitution
corresponding to $\overline{I}$ is $\overline{\eta}$ and fixes the
infinite word ${\bf u}_{\overline{\rho}}$, where
$\overline{\rho}=1-\rho$.
\end{proposition}
\pfz
Denote $\mathit{It}_I=\{R_1,R_2,R_3\}$ and $I_j=\{x\in I \colon R_I(x)=R_j\} = [\gamma_j,\delta_j)$ for $j=1,2,3$ so that $I_1<I_2<I_3$.
By Proposition~\ref{p:symetrie}, the $\overline{I}$-itineraries are $\overline{R_1},\overline{R_2}$ and $\overline{R_3}$, where
\[
I'_j=\{x\in \overline{I} \colon R_{\overline{I}}(x)=\overline{R_j}\} = [1-\delta'_j,1-\gamma'_j)\,,
\]
where $[\gamma'_j,\delta'_j)=T_I[\gamma_j,\delta_j)$. Since $T_I$ is an exchange of three intervals with the permutation $(321)$ we have
\[
T_I[\gamma_1,\delta_1)>T_I[\gamma_2,\delta_2)>T_I[\gamma_3,\delta_3)\,,
\]
and therefore $I'_1<I'_2<I'_3$. The induced map $T_{\overline{I}}$
is therefore an exchange of three intervals $I'_1,I'_2$ and $I'_3$
with the permutation $(321)$ and since $|I'_j|=|I_j|$ for $j=1,2,3$,
the transformation $T_{\overline{I}}$ is homothetic to $T_I$.
Suppose that $T_I$ is homothetic to the original 3iet $T$. By
Theorem~\ref{thm:invhom}, there is a substitution $\eta$
corresponding to the interval $I$ and satisfying $\eta(A)=R_1$,
$\eta(B)=R_2$ and $\eta(C)=R_3$. The mapping $T_{\overline{I}}$ is
homothetic to $T_I$ and thus also to $T$, the corresponding
substitution $\eta'$ satisfies $\eta'(A)=\overline{R_1}$,
$\eta'(B)=\overline{R_2}$ and $\eta'(C)=\overline{R_3}$. We can see
that $\eta'=\overline{\eta}$.
Let $\rho$ be the intercept of the infinite word which is fixed by
the substitution $\eta$. It is the center of homothety between $T_I$
and $T$, i.e., it is the fixed point of the mapping
$\Phi(x)=(\delta-\gamma)x+\gamma$. We have
$\rho=(\delta-\gamma)\rho+\gamma$, which implies
\[
\rho=\frac{\gamma}{1-\delta+\gamma}\,.
\]
Similarly, the intercept $\overline{\rho}$ of the substitution $\overline{\eta}$ satisfies $\overline{\rho}=(\delta-\gamma)\overline{\rho}+1-\delta$, whence
\begin{equation*}
\overline{\rho}=\frac{1-\delta}{1-\delta+\gamma}=1-\rho\,. \eqno{\qedhere}
\end{equation*}
\pfkNoQed
For a finite word $w$, ${\rm Fst}(w)$ and ${\rm Lst}(w)$ denote the first and last letters of $w$, respectively.
\begin{remark}\label{pozn:uspor}
Let $\eta$ be a primitive substitution given by
Theorem~\ref{thm:invhom} fixing a 3iet word. Necessarily, the first
and the last letters of $\eta(A)$, $\eta(B)$ and $\eta(C)$ satisfy
\[
\begin{aligned}
{\rm Fst}\big(\eta(A)\big) \leq {\rm Fst}\big(\eta(B)\big) \leq {\rm Fst}\big(\eta(C)\big) \text{ and }
{\rm Lst}\big(\eta(A)\big) \leq {\rm Lst}\big(\eta(B)\big) \leq {\rm Lst}\big(\eta(C)\big),
\end{aligned}
\]
where we consider the order $A < B < C$. The inequalities for the
first letters follow from the definition of an exchange of
intervals, namely from the fact that the words $\eta(A)$, $\eta(B)$
and $\eta(C)$ are given as $I$-itineraries. By
Proposition~\ref{p:mirror}, the last letters of the words $\eta(A)$,
$\eta(B)$ and $\eta(C)$ are the first letters of the words
$\overline{\eta(A)}$, $\overline{\eta(B)}$ and $\overline{\eta(C)}$
which proves the second set of inequalities.
\end{remark}
\section{Ternarization} \label{sec:ternarizace}
A characterization of 3iet words over the alphabet $\{A,B,C\}$ by morphic images of Sturmian words over $\{0,1\}$ is derived in~\cite{ArBeMaPe}.
Let $\sigma_{01}$ and $\sigma_{10}$ be morphisms $\{A,B,C\}\to\{0,1\}$ defined by
\[
\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{01}(A)&=\sigma_{10}(A)=0\,,\\
\sigma_{01}(B)&=01,\ \sigma_{10}(B)=10\,,\\
\sigma_{01}(C)&=\sigma_{10}(C)=1\,.
\end{aligned}
\]
\begin{theorem}[\cite{ArBeMaPe}]
An infinite word ${\bf u}\in\{A,B,C\}^{\N}$ is a 3iet word if and only if $\sigma_{01}({\bf u})$ and $\sigma_{10}({\bf u})$ are Sturmian words.
\end{theorem}
This theorem was an important tool in~\cite{AmMaPe} for the description of substitutions $\eta$ from Theorem~\ref{thm:invhom} fixing a 3iet word.
Since this result is important for our further considerations, we cite it as Theorem~\ref{thm:ternarizace}, but first, we need some definitions.
\begin{definition}\label{d:amicablewords}
Let $u$ and $v$ be finite or infinite words over the alphabet $\{0,1\}$. We say that $u$ is \textit{amicable} to
$v$, and denote it by $u\propto v$, if there exists a ternary word $w$ over $\{A,B,C\}$ such that
$u=\sigma_{01}(w)$ and $v=\sigma_{10}(w)$.
In such case, we set $w:=\mathrm{ter}(u,v)$ and say that $w$ is the
\textit{ternarization} of $u$ and $v$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}\label{d:amicablemorphisms}
Let $\varphi,\psi:\{0,1\}^*\rightarrow\{0,1\}^*$ be two morphisms.
We say that $\varphi$ is \textit{amicable} to $\psi$, and denote it by
$\varphi\propto\psi$, if the three following
relations hold
\begin{equation}\label{eq:amicmorf}
\begin{split}
\varphi(0)&\propto\psi(0)\,,\\
\varphi(1)&\propto\psi(1)\,,\\
\varphi(01)&\propto\psi(10)\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The morphism $\eta:\{A,B,C\}^*\to\{A,B,C\}^*$ given by
\begin{align*}
\eta(A) & :=\mathrm{ter}(\varphi(0),\psi(0))\,, \\
\eta(B) & :=\mathrm{ter}(\varphi(01),\psi(10))\,, \\
\eta(C) & :=\mathrm{ter}(\varphi(1),\psi(1))\,,
\end{align*}
is called the ternarization of $\varphi$ and $\psi$ and denoted by
$\eta:=\mathrm{ter}(\varphi,\psi)$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}\label{pozn:amicstejnamatice}
If $u$ and $v$ is a pair of amicable words over $\{0,1\}$, then
$|u|_0=|v|_0$ and $|u|_1=|v|_1$. Consequently, if $\varphi$ and
$\psi$ are two amicable morphisms, then they have the same incidence
matrix.
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem}[\cite{AmMaPe}]\label{thm:ternarizace}
Let $\eta$ be a primitive substitution from Theorem~\ref{thm:invhom}
fixing a non-degenerate 3iet word ${\bf u}$. There exist Sturmian
morphisms $\varphi$ and $\psi$ having fixed points such that
$\varphi\propto\psi$ and $\eta={\rm ter}(\varphi,\psi)$. On the
other hand, if $\varphi$ and $\psi$ are Sturmian morphisms with
fixed points such that $\varphi\propto\psi$, then the morphism
$\eta={\rm ter}(\varphi,\psi)$ has a 3iet fixed point.
\end{theorem}
\begin{example}\label{ex:ternarizacesubst}
Consider the following Sturmian morphisms $\varphi,\psi:\{0,1\}^*\to\{0,1\}^*$,
\[
\begin{aligned}
\varphi(0)&=0110101\\
\varphi(1)&=01101
\end{aligned}\,,
\qquad
\begin{aligned}
\psi(0)&=1010101\\
\psi(1)&=10101
\end{aligned}\,.
\]
We verify the condition given in~\eqref{eq:amicmorf} and in the same time construct the ternarization $\eta=\mathrm{ter}(\varphi,\psi)$.
We check that $\varphi(0)\propto\psi(0)$,
\[
\begin{gathered}
\varphi(0) = \quad\\ \psi(0) =\quad \\[1mm] \eta(A) =\quad
\end{gathered}
\bAC\ \bC\ \bA\ \bC\ \bA\ \bC\,,
\]
and $\varphi(1)\propto\psi(1)$
\[
\begin{gathered}
\varphi(1) = \quad\\ \psi(1) =\quad \\[1mm] \eta(C) =\quad
\end{gathered}
\bAC\ \bC\ \bA\ \bC\,,
\]
and lastly that $\varphi(01)\propto\psi(10)$
\[
\begin{gathered}
\varphi(01) = \quad\\ \psi(10) =\quad \\[1mm] \eta(B) =\quad
\end{gathered}
\bAC\ \bC\ \bA\ \bC\ \bAC\ \bAC\ \bC\ \bA\ \bC\,.
\]
We obtained a ternarization of a pair of amicable Sturmian morphisms. By Theorem~\ref{thm:ternarizace}, $\eta$ fixes a 3iet word.
\end{example}
Theorem~\ref{thm:ternarizace} expresses the relation between
substitutions fixing 3iet words and Sturmian morphisms. Recall that
by a result of~\cite{seebold}, all Sturmian morphisms with the same
incidence matrix
$M=\big(\begin{smallmatrix}a&b\\c&d\end{smallmatrix}\big)$ can be
ordered by the relation $\vartriangleleft$ of conjugation into a
chain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sturmorf}
\xi_1 \vartriangleleft \xi_2 \vartriangleleft \cdots \vartriangleleft \xi_N\,,\quad\text{ where } N=a+b+c+d-1\,.
\end{equation}
This implies that for every $i$ and $j$ such that $1\leq i<j\leq N$,
there exists a word $u\in\{0,1\}^*$ of length $j-i$ such that
$u\xi_i(a)=\xi_j(a)u$ for $a\in\{0,1\}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:sturmconjug}
Let $\eta={\rm ter}(\varphi,\psi)$, $\eta'={\rm ter}(\varphi',\psi')$, where $\varphi,\psi$ and $\varphi',\psi'$ are pairs
of amicable Sturmian morphisms over the alphabet $\{0,1\}$.
If $\eta\vartriangleleft\eta'$, then $\varphi\vartriangleleft\varphi'$ and $\psi\vartriangleleft\psi'$, and, moreover,
$\varphi=\xi_i$, $\psi=\xi_j$, $\varphi'=\xi_{i'}$, $\psi'=\xi_{j'}$ where $j-i=j'-i'$.
\end{lemma}
\pfz Since $\eta\vartriangleleft\eta'$, there exists a word
$w\in\{A,B,C\}^*$ such that $w\eta_1(X) = \eta_2(X)w$ for every
$X\in\{A,B,C\}$. We will show that then there exists an amicable
pair of words $u,v\in\{0,1\}^*$ with $|u|=|v|$ such that $w={\rm
ter}(u,v)$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sturmconjug}
\begin{aligned}
u\varphi(b)&=\varphi'(b)u\\
v\psi(b)&=\psi'(b)v
\end{aligned}
\quad \text{for $b\in\{0,1\}$.}
\end{equation}
It suffices to prove this statement for $w$ of length 1, i.e., ${\rm
Fst} \left( \eta'(X) \right )=w$ for $X\in\{A,B,C\}$. If $w=A$, then
necessarily ${\rm Fst}\big(\varphi'(b)\big)={\rm
Fst}\big(\psi'(b)\big)={\rm Lst}\big(\varphi(b)\big)={\rm
Lst}\big(\psi(b)\big)=0$ for $b\in\{0,1\}$. Therefore $u=v=0$. If
$w=C$, then similarly, ${\rm Fst}\big(\varphi'(b)\big)={\rm
Fst}\big(\psi'(b)\big)={\rm Lst}\big(\varphi(b)\big)={\rm
Lst}\big(\psi(b)\big)=1$ for $b\in\{0,1\}$, and thus $u=v=1$. If
$w=B$, then $\varphi'(0)$ and $\varphi'(1)$ have prefix $01$, and
$\psi'(0)$ and $\psi'(1)$ have prefix $10$. Thus $u=01$, $v=10$ and
clearly, $w={\rm ter}(u,v)$.
Now $\varphi$ and $\psi$ are amicable Sturmian morphisms with the
same incidence matrix $M$, and since $\varphi',\psi'$ are their
conjugates, they also have the same incidence matrix, thus
$\varphi=\xi_i$, $\psi=\xi_j$, $\varphi'=\xi_{i'}$, $\psi'=\xi_{j'}$
for some $1\leq i,j,i',j'\leq N$. The relation $|u|=j-i=j'-i'$
follows from~\eqref{eq:sturmconjug}. \pfk
\begin{lemma}\label{l:sedispravne}
Let $\eta$ be a primitive substitution given by Theorem~\ref{thm:invhom} fixing a 3iet word. We have
\begin{equation*}\label{eq:abb}
\begin{split}
\Big({\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(A)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(B)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(C)\big)\Big) & = \\
\Big({\rm Lst}\big(\eta_R(A)\big),{\rm Lst}\big(\eta_R(B)\big),{\rm Lst}\big(\eta_R(C)\big)\Big) &= (A,B,B)\,,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
or
\begin{equation*}\label{eq:bbc}
\begin{split}
\Big({\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(A)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(B)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(C)\big)\Big) &= \\
\Big({\rm Lst}\big(\eta_R(A)\big),{\rm Lst}\big(\eta_R(B)\big),{\rm Lst}\big(\eta_R(C)\big)\Big) &= (B,B,C)\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\pfz Since the words $\eta(A)$, $\eta(B)$ and $\eta(C)$ are
$I$-itineraries for some interval $I$, the first letters of
$\eta(A)$, $\eta(B)$ and $\eta(C)$ cannot all be distinct. On the
contrary, suppose that the discontinuity points $\alpha$ and $\beta$
of the transformation $T$ belong to the interval $I$.
It implies that these points coincide with the discontinuity points $\d$ and $\c$ of the induced map $T_I$.
But this means that $T_I$ is not homothetic to $T$, which is a contradiction.
By Remark~\ref{pozn:uspor}, the only possibilities for the triple of letters
\[
\Big({\rm Fst}\big(\eta(A)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta(B)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta(C)\big)\Big)\quad\text{ and }\quad
\Big({\rm Lst}\big(\eta(A)\big),{\rm Lst}\big(\eta(B)\big),{\rm Lst}\big(\eta(C)\big)\Big)
\]
are $(A,A,B)$, $(A,B,B)$, $(B,B,C)$, and $(B,C,C)$.
We will prove the following claim: Let $\varphi,\psi$ be the pair of
amicable Sturmian morphisms over the alphabet $\{0,1\}$ such that
$\eta={\rm ter}(\varphi,\psi)$.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)]
If $\eta=\eta_L$, i.e., $\eta$ is the leftmost conjugate of itself, then either
\[
\begin{aligned}
\psi&=\psi_L\quad\text{and}\quad
\Big({\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(A)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(B)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(C)\big)\Big)=(A,B,B)\,,\quad\text{or}\\
\varphi&=\varphi_L\quad\text{and}\quad
\Big({\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(A)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(B)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(C)\big)\Big)=(B,B,C)\,.
\end{aligned}
\]
\item[(ii)]
If $\eta=\eta_R$, i.e., $\eta$ is the rightmost conjugate of itself, then either
\[
\begin{aligned}
\varphi&=\varphi_R\quad\text{and}\quad
\Big({\rm Lst}\big(\eta_L(A)\big),{\rm Lst}\big(\eta_L(B)\big),{\rm Lst}\big(\eta_L(C)\big)\Big)=(A,B,B)\,,\quad\text{or}\\
\psi&=\psi_R\quad\text{and}\quad
\Big({\rm Lst}\big(\eta_L(A)\big),{\rm Lst}\big(\eta_L(B)\big),{\rm Lst}\big(\eta_L(C)\big)\Big)=(B,B,C)\,.
\end{aligned}
\]
\end{itemize}
In order to prove (i), let us discuss the case $\eta=\eta_L$ and
${\rm Fst}\big(\eta(A)\big)=A$, ${\rm Fst}\big(\eta(C)\big)=B$.
Since $\eta(A)={\rm ter}\big(\varphi(0),\psi(0)\big)$, necessarily
${\rm Fst}\big(\varphi(0)\big)={\rm Fst}\big(\psi(0)\big)=0$. As,
$\eta(C)={\rm ter}\big(\varphi(1),\psi(1)\big)$, necessarily ${\rm
Fst}\big(\varphi(1)\big)=0$ and ${\rm Fst}\big(\psi(1)\big)=1$.
Thus, the first letter of $\eta(B)={\rm
ter}\big(\varphi(01),\psi(10)\big)$ is $B$. Therefore the triple
$(A,A,B)$ is excluded. Moreover, we see that $\psi=\psi_L$. By the
same reasoning, we proceed in the case that ${\rm
Fst}\big(\eta(A)\big)=B$, ${\rm Fst}\big(\eta(C)\big)=C$ to exclude
the triple $(B,C,C)$ and prove $\varphi=\varphi_L$. The proof of
(ii), i.e., the case $\eta=\eta_R$ is analogous.
Consider $\big({\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(A)\big),{\rm
Fst}\big(\eta_L(B)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(C)\big)\big) = (A,B,B)$
and $\psi=\psi_L$. If $\xi_1\triangleleft\cdots\triangleleft\xi_N$
are Sturmian morphisms of~\eqref{eq:sturmorf} with the same
incidence matrix, then we have $\psi=\xi_1$, and $\varphi=\xi_j$ for
some $1<j\leq N$. Consider now the substitution $\eta_R$ and denote
$\varphi'$, $\psi'$ the amicable Sturmian morphisms such that
$\eta_R = {\rm ter}\big(\varphi',\psi'\big)$. By item (ii), either
$\varphi'$ or $\psi'$ is equal to $\xi_N$. Due to
Lemma~\ref{l:sturmconjug}, we know that $\varphi'=\xi_N$, whence by
item (ii), the substitution $\eta_R$ satisfies $\big({\rm
Lst}\big(\eta_R(A)\big),{\rm Lst}\big(\eta_R(B)\big),{\rm
Lst}\big(\eta_R(C)\big)\big)=(A,B,B)$.
The case $\big({\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(A)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(B)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(C)\big)\big) = (B,B,C)$ is treated similarly.
\pfk
\begin{corollary}\label{c:intercepty}
Let $\eta$ be a primitive substitution given by Theorem~\ref{thm:invhom} fixing a 3iet word ${\bf u}_\rho$.
If $\eta$ satisfies $\big({\rm Fst}\big(\eta(A)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta(B)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta(C)\big)\big) = (A,B,B)$, then $\rho=\alpha$, and if it satisfies
$\big({\rm Fst}\big(\eta(A)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta(B)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta(C)\big)\big) = (B,B,C)$, then $\rho=\beta$.
\end{corollary}
\pfz Let $I$ be the interval corresponding to $\eta$ such that $T_I$
is homothetic to $T$.
Denote $I_X=\{x\in I \colon R_I(x)=X\}$. If $\big({\rm
Fst}\big(\eta(A)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta(B)\big),{\rm
Fst}\big(\eta(C)\big)\big) = (A,B,B)$, then the boundary between
intervals $I_A$ and $I_B$, i.e., the discontinuity point of $T_I$,
is equal to the point $\alpha$. Since $T_I$ is homothetic to $T$,
the homothety map $\Phi$ maps the discontinuity points of $T$ to the
discontinuity points of $T_I$, i.e., $\Phi(\alpha)=\alpha$. Since
the fixed point of the homothety is equal to the intercept of the
infinite word coded by $\eta$, we have $\rho=\alpha$. The second
implication is analogous. \pfk
As a byproduct of our results, it is possible, for a given substitution $\xi$ admitting a non-degenerate 3iet word ${\bf u}$ as a fixed point, to give a formula allowing to determine the parameters of ${\bf u}$, i.e., the parameters $\alpha, \beta$ of the transformation $T$ and
the intercept $\rho$ such that ${\bf u}={\bf u}_\rho$ is a coding of $\rho$ under $T$.
Similar formula for Sturmian morphisms, i.e., those having some word coding an exchange of two intervals as a fixed point, has been given in~\cite{Peng}.
The identification of the parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$ of the 3iet
$T$ is a straightforward task: The values $\alpha$, $\beta -\alpha$, and
$1-\beta$ are frequencies of the letters $A$, $B$ and $C$, respectively, in any infinite word coding some orbit of $T$.
Moreover, the frequencies of letters of a fixed point of a primitive substitution form can be easily determined from the eigenvector corresponding to the dominant eigenvalue of the incidence matrix of the substitution, see \cite{queffelec}.
Therefore, the only nontrivial task is to determine the intercept $\rho$.
For this purpose we use the substitution $\eta$ assigned to the substitution $\xi$ by Theorem \ref{thm:invhom} and its leftmost conjugate $\eta_L$.
The substitution $\eta$ has exactly one eigenvalue belonging to the interval $(0,1)$, see comments below Theorem \ref{thm:invhom}.
Let this eigenvalue be denoted by $\lambda$.
Let $w$ be the word of conjugacy between $\eta$ and $\eta_L$, i.e., $\eta(a)w=w\eta_L(a)$ for any $a \in \{A,B,C\}$.
Recall that symbols $|w|_A$, $|w|_B$, and $|w|_C$ stand for the number of the letters $A$, $B$, and $C$ occuring in $w$.
\begin{theorem}\label{t:interceptconjug}
Let $\xi:\{A,B,C\}^*\to\{A,B,C\}^*$ be a primitive substitution such that it has a fixed point ${\bf u}$.
Suppose that ${\bf u} $ is a coding of an orbit of a point, say $\rho$, under a non-degenerate 3iet $T$ with parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$. Let $\lambda$, $\eta$, $\eta_L$ and $w$ be as above.
We have
\[
\rho = \rho_L + \frac1{1-\lambda}(1-\alpha,1-\alpha-\beta,-\beta)\left(\begin{smallmatrix}|w|_A\\|w|_B\\|w|_C\end{smallmatrix}\right)\,,
\]
where
$\rho_L=\alpha$ if $\eta_L(A)$ starts with $A$ and $\rho_L=\beta$ if $\eta_L(A)$ starts with $B$.
\end{theorem}
\pfz
According to Lemma~\ref{l:sedispravne}, $\eta_L(A)$ starts in $A$ or $B$. Denote by $\rho_L$ the intercept of the 3iet word fixed by $\eta_L$. By Corollary~\ref{c:intercepty},
$\rho_L$ is equal to $\alpha$ if $\eta_L(A)$ starts in $A$ and it is equal to $\beta$ if $\eta_L(A)$ starts in $B$.
We can use Proposition~\ref{p:conjug} to derive
\[
(1-\lambda)\rho_L = T^{n}\big((1-\lambda)\rho\big)\,,\quad\text{ where } n=|w|.
\]
The definition of the transformation $T$ implies the following observation:
If $w$ of lenght $n$ is a prefix of ${\bf u}_{x}$, then ${\bf u}_{x}=w{\bf u}_{T^n(x)}$ and
\[
T^n(x)=x+(1-\alpha,1-\alpha-\beta,-\beta)\left(\begin{smallmatrix}|w|_A\\|w|_B\\|w|_C\end{smallmatrix}\right)\,.
\]
Combining these two facts with Remark~\ref{pozn:intercept}, we get
\[
(1-\lambda)\rho = (1-\lambda)\rho_L + (1-\alpha,1-\alpha-\beta,-\beta)\left(\begin{smallmatrix}|w|_A\\|w|_B\\|w|_C\end{smallmatrix}\right)\,.
\]
The statement follows.
\pfk
\section{Applications}\label{sec:HKS}
\subsection{Class $P$ conjecture for non-degenerate 3iet}
This subsection is devoted to a question coming from another field, namely mathematical physics, where notions from combinatorics on words appear naturally in the study of the spectra of Schr\"{o}dinger operators associated to infinite sequences.
The question is stated in an article of Hof, Knill and Simon \cite{HoKnSi} and concerns infinite sequences generated by a substitution over a finite alphabet.
The authors show in their paper that if a sequence contains infinitely many palindromic factors (such sequences are called \textit{palindromic}), then the associated operator has a purely singular continuous spectrum.
In the same paper, the following class of substitutions is defined.
\begin{definition}
Let $\varphi$ be a substitution over an alphabet $\A$. We say that $\varphi$ belongs to the \textit{class $P$} if there exists a palindrome
$p$ such that for every $a\in\A$ one has $\varphi(a)=pp_a$ where $p_a$ is a palindrome.
We say that $\varphi$ is of \textit{class $P'$} if it is conjugate to some morphism in class $P$.
\end{definition}
Hof, Knill and Simon ask the following question: ``Are there
(minimal) sequences containing arbitrarily long palindromes that
arise from substitutions none of which belongs to class $P$?'' A
discussion on how to transform this question into a mathematical
formalism can be found in \cite{LaPe14}.
The first result concerning class $P$ was given by Tan in
\cite{BoTan}. The author extended class $P$ by morphisms conjugated
to the elements of class $P$, since it is well-known that fixed
points of conjugated morphisms have the same set of factors. This
extended class is denoted by $P'$.
The conjecture, stemming from the question of Hof, Knill and Simon, states that every pure morphic (uniformly recurrent) palindromic sequence is a fixed point of a morphism of class $P'$.
It is referred to as `class $P$ conjecture'.
In~\cite{BoTan}, it is shown that
if a fixed point of a primitive substitution $\varphi$ over a binary
alphabet is palindromic, then
the substitution $\varphi$ or $\varphi^2$ belongs to class $P'$.
In \cite{La2013}, Labb\'e shows that the assumption of a binary alphabet in the theorem of Tan is essential.
He shows that the fixed point of the substitution
\[
A\mapsto ABA,\ B\mapsto C,\ C\mapsto BAC,
\]
is palindromic. The substitution clearly does not belong to class $P'$. Moreover, no other substitution fixing the same infinite word belongs to class $P'$. Is is easy to see that Labb\'e's substitution fixes a degenerate 3iet word, namely 3iet word coding
the orbit of $\rho=\frac{2-\sqrt{2}}{4}$ under the 3iet with parameters $\alpha =\frac12$ and $\beta=\frac{3-\sqrt{2}}{2}$.
We show that a ternary analogue of the theorem of Tan holds in the
context of codings of non-degenerate 3iet with the permutation $(321)$. The following
lemma is a generalization of a result obtained for binary alphabets
by Tan~\cite{BoTan}, also shown in \cite{LaPe14}. We provide a
different proof.
\begin{proposition}\label{p:P'}
Let $\varphi: \A \to \A$ be a non-erasing morphism. The morphism $\varphi$ is conjugate to $\overline{\varphi}$ if and only if $\varphi$ is of class $P'$.
\end{proposition}
\pfz
$(\Leftarrow)$:
Since $\varphi$ is of class $P'$, there exists a morphism $\varphi'$ of class $P$ which is conjugate to $\varphi$, i.e., there exists a word $w$ such that
$w\varphi(a) = \varphi'(a)w$ or $\varphi(a)w = w\varphi'(a)$ for every letter $a$.
We can suppose that $w\varphi(a) = \varphi'(a)w$ for every letter $a$ as the other case is analogous.
It implies $\varphi(a) = w^{-1}pp_aw$ for some palindromes $p_a$ and $p$.
Thus, $\overline{\varphi(a)} = \overline{w} p_a p (\overline{w})^{-1}$ for every letter $a$.
In other words, the morphism $\overline{\varphi}$ is conjugate to $\overline{\varphi'}$.
Since $\overline{\varphi'}$ is clearly conjugate to $\varphi$, we conclude that $\varphi$ is conjugate to $\overline{\varphi}$.
$(\Rightarrow)$:
Since $\varphi$ is conjugate to $\overline{\varphi}$, there exists a word $w \in \B^*$ such that for every $a \in \A$, we have
\[
\varphi(a)w = w\overline{\varphi(a)} \quad \text{ or } \quad w\varphi(a) = \overline{\varphi(a)}w\,.
\]
Suppose first that $\varphi(a)w = w\overline{\varphi(a)}$ holds.
By Lemma~1 in~\cite{BlBrLa}, this implies that $w$ is a palindrome.
Let $u \in \A^*$ and $c \in \{\varepsilon\} \cup \A$ be such that $w = uc\overline{u}$.
We can thus write
\[
\varphi(a)uc\overline{u} = uc\overline{u}\overline{\varphi(a)}\,.
\]
By applying $(uc)^{-1}$ from the left and $(c\overline{u})^{-1}$ from the right, we obtain for any $a\in\A$
\[
c^{-1}u^{-1}\varphi(a)u = \overline{u}\overline{\varphi(a)}\overline{u}^{-1}c^{-1} = \overline{c^{-1}u^{-1}\varphi(a)u}\,.
\]
This means that the word $p_a:= c^{-1}u^{-1}\varphi(a)u$ is a palindrome.
Set $p:=c$.
Denote by $\varphi'$ the morphism defined for all $a \in \A$ by $\varphi'(a)=pp_a = u^{-1}\varphi(a)u$.
Obviously, $\varphi$ is conjugate to $\varphi'$ which is of class $P$. Therefore $\varphi\in P'$.
The case $w\varphi(a) = \overline{\varphi(a)}w$ is analogous.
\pfk
We are now in position to complete the proof the main theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:hks}
If $\xi$ is a primitive substitution fixing a non-degenerate 3iet word, then $\xi$ or $\xi^2$ belongs to class $P'$.
\end{theorem}
\pfz
Denote by $\eta\in\{\xi,\xi^2\}$ the substitution from Theorem~\ref{thm:invhom}.
There exist intervals $I_L$ and $I_R\subset[0,1)$ such that $\eta_L(A),\eta_L(B)$ and $\eta_L(C)$ are the $I_L$-itineraries,
$\eta_R(A),\eta_R(B)$ and $\eta_R(C)$ are the $I_R$-itineraries, and such that $T_{I_L}$ and $T_{I_R}$ are 3iets homothetic to $T$.
Lemma~\ref{l:sedispravne} implies that
\[
\Big({\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(A)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(B)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(C)\big)\Big) \! \! = \! \! \Big({\rm Lst}\big(\eta_R(A)\big),{\rm Lst}\big(\eta_R(B)\big),{\rm Lst}\big(\eta_R(C)\big)\Big)
\]
and this triple of letters equals $(A,B,B)$ or $(B,B,C)$.
Suppose it is equal to $(A,B,B)$.
Note that by Corollary~\ref{c:intercepty}, $\eta_L$ fixes the infinite word ${\bf u}_\alpha$.
According to Proposition~\ref{p:mirror}, the induced transformation
$T_{\overline{I_R}}$ is again homothetic to $T$ and the
corresponding substitution is $\overline{\eta_R}$. Since it is the
mirror substitution to $\eta_R$, we have $\Big({\rm
Fst}\big(\overline{\eta_R}(A)\big),{\rm
Fst}\big(\overline{\eta_R}(B)\big),{\rm
Fst}\big(\overline{\eta_R}(C)\big)\Big)=(A,B,B)$. By
Corollary~\ref{c:intercepty}, the substitution $\overline{\eta_R}$
also fixes the infinite word ${\bf u}_\alpha$. Since the intervals
$I_L$ and $\overline{I_R}$ are of the same length and are homothetic
to the interval $[0,1)$ with the same homothety center $\alpha$,
necessarily $I_L=\overline{I_R}$ and thus
$\overline{\eta_R}=\eta_L$. Consequently, $\eta_R$ is conjugate to
its mirror image. We apply Proposition~\ref{p:P'} to finish the
proof.
In case that $\left({\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(A)\big),{\rm
Fst}\big(\eta_L(B)\big),{\rm Fst}\big(\eta_L(C)\big)\right) =
(B,B,C)$, we proceed in a similar way. In this case, the center of
the homothety of the intervals $I_L = \overline{I_R}$ and $[0,1)$ is
$\beta$. \pfk
Let us mention that another analogue of Tan's result is already known for marked morphisms.
Recall that a substitution $\xi$ over an alphabet $\A$ is called \textit{marked} if its leftmost conjugate $\xi_L$ and its rightmost conjugate $\xi_R$ satisfy
\[
{\rm Fst}\big(\xi_L(a)\big)\neq {\rm Fst}\big(\xi_L(b)\big) \quad \text{ and } \quad {\rm Lst}\big(\xi_R(a)\big)\neq {\rm Lst}\big(\xi_R(b)\big)
\]
for distinct $a,b\in\A$. It can be shown that if $\xi$ is marked,
then all its powers are marked. In \cite{LaPe14}, it is shown that
for a marked morphism $\xi$ with fixed point ${\bf u}$ having
infinitely many palindromes, some power $\xi^k$ belongs to class
$P'$.
Our Lemma~\ref{l:sedispravne} shows that a substitution fixing a non-degenerated 3iet word cannot be marked. Theorem~\ref{thm:hks} thus
provides a new family of substitutions satisfying class $P$ conjecture.
\subsection{Properties of 3iet preserving substitutions}
A morphism which maps a 3iet word
to a 3iet word is called 3iet preserving. Morphisms which preserve
2iet words, i.e. Sturmian words, are called Sturmian and they have been
extensively studied for many years. Sturmian morphisms form a
monoid which is generated by three morphisms only \cite{MiSeSturmianMorphisms}. In
contrary to Sturmian morphisms, the class of 3iet preserving
morphisms is not completely described. Only partial results are
known. For example, the monoid of 3iet preserving morphisms is
not finitely generated \cite{AmHaPe} and contains the ternarizations we
defined in Section~\ref{sec:ternarizace}, see
\cite{AmMaPe}. Our previous considerations lead to some comments on
properties of 3iet preserving substitution.
\begin{itemize}
\item
Our results of Sections~\ref{sec:3} and~\ref{sec:substitutions} allow us to say more about the structure of substitutions fixing 3iet words.
\begin{corollary} \label{c:strukturamorfizmu}
Let $\eta$ be a primitive substitution of Theorem~\ref{thm:invhom} fixing a non-degenerate 3iet word over the alphabet $\{A,B,C\}$. We have
\[
\eta(B)=\omega_{AC\to B}\big(\eta(AC)\big)=\omega_{CA\to B}\big(\eta(CA)\big)
\quad\text{or}\quad
\eta(B)=\omega_{B\to CA}\big(\eta(AC)\big)=\omega_{B\to AC}\big(\eta(CA)\big)\,.
\]
\end{corollary}
\pfz By Theorem~\ref{thm:invhom}, $\eta$ corresponds to an interval
$I$ such that $T_I$ is homothetic to $T$. Since $T$ is
non-degenerate, also $T_I$ is non-degenerate, and therefore its
discontinuity points $\c,\d$ are distinct. By
Proposition~\ref{p:3itinerare}, the three $I$-itineraries are of the
form given by cases (i) or (ii). \pfk
\begin{example}
We can illustrate the above corollary on substitutions from Example~\ref{ex:ternarizacesubst}.
We have
\[
\begin{aligned}
\varphi(0)&=0110101\\
\varphi(1)&=01101
\end{aligned}\,,
\qquad
\begin{aligned}
\psi(0)&=1010101\\
\psi(1)&=10101
\end{aligned}\,,
\]
and
\[
\eta(A)=BCACAC,\quad \eta(B)=BCACBBCAC,\quad \eta(C)=BCAC.
\]
We can check that $\eta$ satisfies the property given in Corollary~\ref{c:strukturamorfizmu}, namely that
\[
\begin{aligned}
\eta(B)=BCACBBCAC&=\omega_{AC\to B}\big(\eta(AC)\big)=\omega_{AC\to B}\big(BCACACBCAC\big) = \\
&= \omega_{CA\to B}\big(\eta(CA)\big) = \omega_{CA\to B}\big(BCACBCACAC\big)\,.
\end{aligned}
\]
\end{example}
The above corollary implies a relation of numbers of occurrences of letters in letter images of $\eta$ which may be used to get the following relation:
\[
M_\eta\left(\begin{smallmatrix}~1\\-1\\~1\end{smallmatrix}\right) =
\left(\begin{smallmatrix}|\eta(A)|_A\\|\eta(A)|_B\\|\eta(A)|_C\\\end{smallmatrix}\right)
-
\left(\begin{smallmatrix}|\eta(B)|_A\\|\eta(B)|_B\\|\eta(B)|_C\end{smallmatrix}\right)
+
\left(\begin{smallmatrix}|\eta(C)|_A\\|\eta(C)|_B\\|\eta(C)|_C\end{smallmatrix}\right)
= \pm
\left(\begin{smallmatrix}~1\\-1\\~1\end{smallmatrix}\right)\,.
\]
Thus, $(1,-1,1)^\top$ is an eigenvector of the incidence matrix of $\eta$ corresponding to the eigenvalue $1$ and $-1$, respectively.
This fact has been already derived in~\cite{AmMaPeMatice} by other methods.
\item
One can ask whether a substitution $\eta$ fixing a 3iet word can be
in the same time the leftmost and rightmost conjugate of itself,
i.e. $\eta=\eta_L=\eta_R$. It can be easily seen that such a
situation never occurs for non-degenerate 3iets. Indeed, the proof
of Theorem~\ref{thm:hks} implies that for any primitive substitution
$\eta$ fixing a non-degenerate 3iet, $\eta_L$ and
$\overline{\eta_R}$ fix the same infinite word ${\bf u}_\rho$, where
$\rho\in\{\alpha,\beta\}$. If, moreover, $\eta_R=\overline{\eta_R}$,
then by Proposition~\ref{p:mirror} we have $1-\rho=\rho$. This
implies that $\rho=\frac12\in\{\alpha,\beta\}$. However, this cannot
happen for a non-degenerate 3iet $T$.
\item
It can be observed from Lemma~\ref{l:sedispravne} that given a
substitution $\eta$ fixing a 3iet word, its leftmost conjugate
$\eta_L$ has always two fixed points, namely either
$\lim_{n\to\infty}\eta_L^n(A)$ and $\lim_{n\to\infty}\eta_L^n(B)$,
or $\lim_{n\to\infty}\eta_L^n(B)$ and
$\lim_{n\to\infty}\eta_L^n(C)$. One can show that one of these fixed
points is a coding of the point $\rho=\alpha$ or $\beta$,
respectively, under a 3iet $T$. The other fixed point is a coding of
the same point, but under an exchange of three intervals defined
over $(0,1]$, where all the intervals are of the form
$(\cdot,\cdot]$.
\begin{example}
Consider the substitution $\eta$ from Example~\ref{ex:ternarizacesubst}. We have
\[
\eta_L(A)=ACBCAC,\quad \eta_L(B)=BBCACBCAC,\quad \eta_L(C)=BCAC.
\]
This substitution has two fixed points, namely
\[
\begin{aligned}
\lim_{n\to\infty}\eta_L^n(A) &= ACBCACBCACBBCACBCACBCACACBCACBCAC\cdots,\\
\lim_{n\to\infty}\eta_L^n(B) &= BBCACBCACBBCACBCACBCACACBCACBCAC\cdots.
\end{aligned}
\]
It can be verified that the two infinite words differ only by the
prefix $AC$ vs. $B$. The infinite word ${\bf u}_\alpha$, coding
$\alpha$ under the 3iet $T$ is equal to the fixed point
$\lim_{n\to\infty}\eta_L^n(B)$.
\end{example}
\end{itemize}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
\small Z.M. and E.P. acknowledge financial support by the Czech Science
Foundation grant GA\v CR 13-03538S, \v S.S. acknowledges financial support by the Czech Science
Foundation grant GA\v CR 13-35273P.
\bibliographystyle{siam}
\IfFileExists{biblio.bib}{ |
\section{introduction}
According to the fundamental theory of strong interactions, the Quantum Chromo Dynamics (QCD) \cite{lQCD}, matter changes its phase at high
temperature and density and bound (colorless) hadrons dissolve to interacting (colored) quarks and gluons -- Quark-Gluon-Plasma (QGP).
Such extreme conditions have existed in the early expansion of the universe and now can be realized in the laboratory by collisions of
heavy-ions at ultra-relativistic energies. The study of the phase boundary and the properties of the QGP are the main goal of several
present and future heavy-ion experiments at SPS (Super Proton Synchrotron), RHIC (Relativistic Heavy-Ion Collider), LHC (Large Hadron
Collider) and the future FAIR (Facility for Antiproton and Ion Research) and NICA (Nuclotron-based Ion Collider fAcility)
\cite{QM2014}. Since the QGP is created only for a short time (of a couple of fm/c) it is quite challenging to study its properties and to
find the most sensible probes. In order to study the full complexity of the underling problem, one needs to obtain comprehensive information by
the measurement of the 'bulk' light hadrons, electromagnetic probes (dileptons and photons), heavy mesons and jets. The advantage of
the 'hard probes' such as the mesons containing heavy quarks (charm and beauty) is, firstly, that due to the heavy masses they are
dominantly produced in the very early stages of the reactions with large energy-momentum transfer, contrary to the light hadrons and
electromagnetic probes. Secondly, they are not in an equilibrium with the surrounding matter due to smaller interaction cross sections
relative to the light quarks and, thus, may provide an information on their creation mechanisms. Moreover, due to the hard scale,
perturbative QCD (pQCD) should be applicable for the calculation of heavy quark production. As shown in Ref. \cite{Vogt}, the FONLL calculations
are in good agreement with the experimental observables on charm meson spectra in p+p collisions. This
provides a solid reference frame for studying the heavy-meson production in heavy-ion collisions.
The collective properties of open charm mesons have been addressed experimentally by measuring the nuclear modification factor $\rm R_{AA}$,
which is the ratio of the transverse momentum distribution in $A+A$ collisions relative to p+p collisions scaled by the number of binary
collisions, as well as the collective elliptic flow $v_2$. These two observables are comprehensive since the high $p_T$ part of $\rm R_{AA}$ is
very sensitive to the energy loss of charm quarks (or mesons) during their propagation through the partonic (or hadronic) medium due to the
interaction processes. The low $p_T$ part is more sensitive to the hadronization mechanism and, thus, provides constraints on the relative
scale for the transition from partonic to hadronic degrees-of-freedom.
Moreover, the elliptic flow $v_2$ of charm quarks characterizes the collectivity of the system developed from the very early stage to the freeze-out time
thereby including interactions from the partonic and hadronic phase. Thus, the final momentum distribution of the heavy mesons is sensitive
to the details of the expansion of the plasma itself as well as to the strength of the interaction of the heavy quark with the partons and the
formed $D$-mesons with the hadronic environment. It depends on the density of partons (and their properties) present in the QGP and hence
on whether the plasma is in equilibrium during the expansion.
The first charm measurements at RHIC energies by the PHENIX\cite{eePHENIX} and STAR \cite{eeSTAR} collaborations were
related to the single non-photonic electrons emitted from the decay of charm mesons. However, recently the STAR Collaboration measured
directly the nuclear modification factor and the elliptic flow of $D^0$ mesons in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=$200
GeV~\cite{Adamczyk:2014uip,Tlusty:2012ix} which allows for a straight forward comparison with the theoretical model calculations. It has been
observed that the $\rm R_{AA}$ and $v_2$ of charm mesons show a similar behavior as in case of light hadrons contrary to expectations from pQCD. Similar observations have been made at LHC energies, too \cite{expLHC}.
It still remains a challenge for the theory to reproduce the experimental data and to explain simultaneously the large energy loss
of charm quarks ($\rm R_{AA}$) and the strong collectivity ($v_2$) -- cf. e.g. Refs.
\cite{GolamMustafa:1997id,Moore:2004tg,Zhang:2005ni,Molnar:2006ci,
vanHees:2005wb,Gossiaux:2010yx,Gossiaux:2012ya,Ozvenchuk:2014rpa,Cao:2013ita,
Alberico:2011zy,Sharma:2009hn,He:2011qa,Akamatsu:2008ge,BAMPS,
Lang:2012yf,Das:2013kea,Das:2015ana}.
The interactions of charm quarks with the partonic medium are commonly based on pQCD with massless light quarks and a fixed or running coupling. The time
evolution of the charm-quark distribution in the expanding fireball is approximated by the Fokker-Plank equation where the response of the
partonic (or hadronic) medium is expressed in terms of temperature- and momentum-dependent drag and diffusion coefficients. The modeling of the
temperature profile is often done in a fireball model or by hydrodynamic calculations (ideal or viscous) which start with some
initial conditions and follow the dynamical evolution according to the chosen Equation-of-State (EoS) under the assumption of local
equilibrium. In partonic cascade models one solves the Boltzmann equation for massless quarks/gluons with the pQCD cross sections for
some fixed coupling $\alpha_s$. The hadronization of charm quarks is done assuming coalescence at low $p_T$ and fragmentation at high
$p_T$. In spite that many models may describe the $\rm R_{AA}$, it is still difficult to obtain simultaneously a consistent description of
the elliptic flow $v_2$ using the same assumptions and model parameters \cite{Das:2015ana}, e.g. the choice of the running coupling, the
K-factor to scale the pQCD cross sections, the time evolution profile,
etc. Moreover, the conclusions on the amount of suppression due to collisional energy loss by means of the elastic interactions of charm
quarks with the QGP partons versus the radiative energy loss due to the emission of soft gluons (i.e. gluon bremsstrahlung) are still far from
being robust. Also the influence of hadronization and especially hadronic rescattering is not yet settled, too. Moreover, the results
turned out to be also sensitive to the time evolution models involved.
Our goal here is to study the charm dynamics based on a consistent microscopic transport approach for the charm production, hadronization
and rescattering with the partonic and hadronic medium. In this study we will confront our calculations within the
Parton-Hadron-String Dynamics (PHSD) approach to the experimental data on charm at RHIC energies and discuss the perspectives/problems of
using the charm quarks for the tomography of the QGP. To achieve this goal we embed the heavy-quark physics in the existing PHSD transport
approach \cite{PHSD} which incorporates explicit partonic degrees-of-freedom in terms of strongly interacting quasiparticles
(quarks and gluons) in line with an equation-of-state from lattice QCD (lQCD)
as well as dynamical hadronization and hadronic elastic and inelastic collisions in
the final reaction phase. Since PHSD has been successfully applied to
describe the final distribution of mesons (with light quark content)
from lower SPS up to LHC energies \cite{PHSD,PHSDrhic,Volo,Linnyk}, it
provides a solid framework for the description of the creation,
expansion and hadronization of the QGP as well as the hadronic
expansion with which the heavy quarks interact either as quarks or as
bound states such as $D$-mesons.
Thus, the principle differences of our approach to the previous
dynamical models (including earlier HSD \cite{HSD} studies on the charm
dynamics \cite{review}) are: \\
\noindent (i) the degrees-of-freedom for the QGP are massive and strongly
interacting quasiparticles contrary to massless and weakly interacting
pQCD partons; \\
\noindent (ii) a non-equilibrium off-shell microscopic transport approach is
employed for the QGP dynamics, hadronization and the hadronic phase instead of
simplified descriptions of the parton dynamics in terms of Fokker-Planck
equations + QGP hydrodynamics (assuming local equilibration) or
Boltzmann-type partonic cascades with massless light quarks; \\
\noindent (iii) rescattering of $D$-mesons in the hadronic phase
in line with an up-to-date effective Lagrangian approach from Ref. \cite{Tolos:2013kva}.\\
This paper is organized as follows:
In Sec. \ref{PHSD} we recall the basic ideas of the PHSD approach while in
Sec.~\ref{initial} we describe
the production of initial charm quark pairs in hard binary
nucleon-nucleon collisions and their implementation in PHSD. In
Sec.~\ref{QGP} we present the interactions of charm quarks with
off-shell partons in the QGP calculated earlier in Refs.
\cite{Berrehrah:2013mua,Berrehrah:2014kba,Hamza14}, the hadronization of charm
quarks in Sec.~\ref{tc}, and the $D$ meson interactions with hadrons in
Sec.~\ref{HG2} that are based on the cross sections from Ref.
\cite{Tolos:2013kva}. Finally, the nuclear modification factor $\rm R_{AA}$
and the elliptic flow $v_2$ of $D$ mesons from PHSD are presented in
Sec.~\ref{results} and compared to the available data. A summary
completes this work in Sec.~\ref{summary}.
\section{The PHSD transport approach}\label{PHSD}
The Parton-Hadron-String Dynamics (PHSD) transport
approach~\cite{PHSD,PHSDrhic} is a microscopic covariant dynamical model
for strongly interacting systems formulated on the basis of
Kadanoff-Baym equations \cite{Kadanoff1,Kadanoff2} for
Green's functions in phase-space
representation (in first order gradient expansion beyond the
quasiparticle approximation). The approach consistently describes
the full evolution of a relativistic heavy-ion collision from the
initial hard scatterings and string formation through the dynamical
deconfinement phase transition to the strongly-interacting
quark-gluon plasma (sQGP) as well as hadronization and the
subsequent interactions in the expanding hadronic phase as in
the Hadron-String-Dynamics (HSD) transport approach \cite{HSD}.
The transport theoretical description of quarks and gluons
in the PHSD is based on the Dynamical Quasi-Particle Model
(DQPM) for partons that is constructed to reproduce lQCD results for a quark-gluon plasma in thermodynamic
equilibrium~\cite{Cassing:2008nn} on the basis of effective propagators for quarks and gluons.
The DQPM is thermodynamically consistent and the effective parton propagators
incorporate finite masses (scalar mean-fields) for
gluons/quarks as well as a finite width that describes the medium dependent reaction rate.
For fixed thermodynamic parameters $(T, \mu_q)$ the partonic width's $\Gamma_i(T,\mu_q)$ fix the effective two-body interactions that are presently implemented in the PHSD~\cite{Vitaly}. The PHSD differs
from conventional Boltzmann approaches in a couple of essential aspects: i) it incorporates dynamical
quasi-particles due to the finite width of the spectral functions (imaginary part of the propagators);
ii) it involves scalar mean-fields that substantially drive the collective flow
in the partonic phase; iii) it is based on a realistic equation of state from lattice QCD and thus
describes the speed of sound $c_s(T)$ reliably; iv) the hadronization is described by the fusion of off-shell
partons to off-shell hadronic states (resonances or strings) and does not violate the second law of thermodynamics;
v) all conservation laws (energy-momentum, flavor currents etc.) are fulfilled in the hadronization
contrary to coalescence models; vi) the effective partonic cross sections no longer are given by pQCD and are 'defined' by the DQPM in a consistent fashion and probed by transport coefficients (correlators) in thermodynamic equilibrium by performing PHSD calculations in a finite box with periodic boundary conditions (shear- and bulk viscosity,
electric conductivity, magnetic susceptibility etc. \cite{Vitaly2,Ca13}).
In the beginning of relativistic heavy-ion collisions color-neutral
strings (described by the FRITIOF LUND model~\cite{FRITIOF})
are produced in hard scatterings of nucleons from
the impinging nuclei. These strings are dissolved into
'pre-hadrons' with a formation time of $\sim$ 0.8 fm/c in their rest
frame, except for the 'leading hadrons', i.e. the fastest residues of the
string ends, which can re-interact (practically instantly) with hadrons with a reduced
cross sections in line with quark counting rules.
If, however, the local energy density is larger than the
critical value for the phase transition, which is taken to be $\sim$
0.5 ${\rm GeV/ fm^3}$, the pre-hadrons melt into (colored) effective quarks
and antiquarks in their self generated repulsive
mean-field as defined by the DQPM~\cite{Cassing:2008nn}.
In the DQPM the quarks, antiquarks and gluons are dressed quasiparticles
and have temperature-dependent effective masses and widths
which have been fitted to lattice thermal
quantities such as energy density, pressure and entropy density.
The nonzero width of the quasiparticles implies the off-shellness of partons, which is taken
into account in the scattering and propagation of partons in the QGP on
the same footing (i.e. propagators and couplings).
We point out that the DQPM does not
provide effective propagators for the $c-$ and ${\bar c}-$-quarks since the latter degrees-of-freedom
are subdominant in the entropy density for temperatures of 1 - 3 $T_c$ due to their large mass
and thus cannot be determined properly by the entropy from the lattice. Nevertheless, the interactions
of the charm quarks with the light ($u,d,s)$ quarks can be computed on the basis of the running coupling $g^2(T/T_c)$ in the DQPM and the effective propagotors for the light quarks. As demonstrated in Ref. \cite{Berrehrah:2013mua} the resulting
differential cross sections of $c, {\bar c}$ quarks only very slightly depend on the spectral width of the charm
quarks such that even the on-shell limit for these degrees-of-freedom with a mass
of $\sim$ 1.5 GeV provides a very reasonable approximation \cite{Berrehrah:2013mua,Berrehrah:2014kba}.
The transition from the partonic to hadronic degrees-of-freedom (for light quarks/antiquarks)
is described by covariant transition rates
for the fusion of quark-antiquark pairs to mesonic resonances or three quarks (antiquarks) to baryonic states,
i.e. by the dynamical hadronization. We already mention here that this hadronization process is restricted to 'bulk'
transverse momenta $p_T$ up to $\sim $ 2 GeV and has to be replaced by fragmentation for high $p_T$. Note that due
to the off-shell nature of both partons and hadrons, the
hadronization process described above obeys all conservation laws (i.e.
four-momentum conservation and flavor current conservation) in each event, the detailed balance relations
and the increase in the total entropy $S$. In the hadronic phase PHSD is equivalent to the
hadron-strings dynamics (HSD) model \cite{HSD} that has been employed in the past from SchwerIonen-Synchrotron (SIS)
to SPS energies. On the other hand the PHSD approach has been applied to p+p, p+A and relativistic heavy-ion collisions from lower SPS to LHC
energies and been successful in describing a large number of
experimental data including single-particle spectra, collective flow as well as electromagnetic probes~\cite{PHSD,PHSDrhic,Volo,Linnyk}.
In this study we use the Pythia event generator~\cite{Sjostrand:2006za} for nucleon-nucleon binary collisions
to produce charm-quark pairs in relativistic heavy-ion collisions and
evolve the dynamics of the charm quarks within PHSD in order to
understand the dominant mechanisms in comparison to the recent
experimental data on $D^0$ mesons from STAR. Whereas the dynamics of the charm quarks
is essentially Boltzmann-like, i.e. without mean-fields and dynamical width, their interactions
with the dynamical partons (light quarks and gluons) is based on the effective coupling from the DQPM and the DQPM propagators \cite{Berrehrah:2013mua,Berrehrah:2014kba}.
\section{Initial charm quark production}\label{initial}
Before studying the charm production in relativistic heavy-ion
collisions, we discuss the charm production in p+p collisions at the
top RHIC energy of $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The charm production in
p+p collisions also plays the role as a reference for the nuclear
modification factor $\rm R_{AA}$ in heavy-ion collisions.
We use the Pythia event generator to produce charm and anticharm quarks
in p+p collisions with the parameters PARP(91)=1.0 GeV/c and
PARP(67)=1.0 as in Ref.~\cite{Sjostrand:2006za,Adamczyk:2012af}. The
former parameter is the Gaussian width of the primordial transverse
momentum of a parton which initiates a shower in
hadrons and the latter the parton shower level parameter. We note that
by an additional suppression of the transverse momenta of charm and
anticharm quarks by 10 \% and a suppression of rapidities by 16 \% the
transverse momentum spectrum as well as rapidity distribution of charm
and anticharm quarks from the Pythia event generator are very similar
to those from the FONLL calculations in p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm
NN}}=$200 GeV as shown in Fig.~\ref{pp1}. Here the
red dot-dashed lines are from
the Pythia event generator (after tuning) and the blue dotted lines from the
FONLL calculations, respectively.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{pp1a.eps}}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{pp1b.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) Transverse momentum (upper) and rapidity (lower)
distributions of charm quarks in p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=$200 GeV from FONLL (dotted lines) and the tuned Pythia event generator (dot-dashed lines); in the upper part the transverse momentum spectrum of $D^0$ mesons which are
fragmented from charm quarks with the contribution from $D^*$ decay included (solid line) and that of $D^{*+}$ after scaling are compared with the experimental data from the STAR Collaboration~\cite{Adamczyk:2012af}.}
\label{pp1}
\end{figure}
The produced charm and anticharm quarks hadronize by emitting soft
gluons. The probabilities for a charm quark to hadronize into
$D^0,~D^+,~D^{*0},~D^{*+},~D_s^+$, and $\Lambda_c$ are, respectively, taken to be 0.2, 0.174, 0.213, 0.224, 0.08, and 0.094 ~\cite{Amsler:2008zzb}. The momentum of the hadronized $D$ meson
or $\Lambda_c$ is given by the fragmentation function~\cite{Peterson:1982ak},
\begin{eqnarray}
D_Q^H(z)\sim \frac{1}{z[1-1/z-\epsilon_Q/(1-z)]^2},
\end{eqnarray}
where $z$ is the momentum fraction of the hadron $H$ fragmented from
the heavy quark $Q$ while $\epsilon_Q$ is a fitting parameter which is
taken to be $\epsilon_Q$ = 0.01 in our study. We note that the
parameter $\epsilon_Q$ used here is smaller than the usual value
because the transverse momentum of charm quarks is reduced in our
study. The solid line in Fig.~\ref{pp1} (upper part) shows the transverse momentum
spectrum of $D^0$ mesons after charm quark fragmentation including the
contribution from the decay of $D^{*0}$ and $D^{*+}$. We can see that
our results reproduce the experimental data from the STAR
Collaboration \cite{Adamczyk:2012af} reasonably well.
In heavy-ion collisions, the nucleons in the target and projectile
nuclei are distributed in coordinate space according to the nuclear density
distribution given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho(r)\sim\frac{1}{1+\exp[(r-r_0)/a]},
\end{eqnarray}
where $r_0=1.124 A^{1/3}$ and $a=0.02444 A^{1/3}+0.2864$ with $A$
being the mass number of the target or projectile nucleus.
Each nucleon has Fermi motion depending on the local nucleon density
which is chosen randomly by Monte Carlo. Although the Fermi momentum
is small in the rest frame of each nucleus, the component along the
beam direction becomes large in the laboratory frame due to the Lorentz
transformation ($\gamma_{cm} \approx$ 100 at the top RHIC energy).
Accordingly, the Fermi motions smears the energy of nucleon-nucleon
binary collisions in relativistic heavy-ion collisions. The lower part
of Fig.~\ref{pp2} shows the distribution of binary nucleon-nucleon
collision energies in 0-10 \% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=$200 GeV from PHSD. We mention
that this Fermi smearing is usually neglected in theoretical models for
charm production and propagation which is not crucial at RHIC energies but becomes important
close to threshold energies for charm production.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{pp2a.eps}}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{pp2b.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) The total cross section for charm production in
p+p collisions (as parameterized in the PHSD) is compared with the
experimental data at various collision
energies~\cite{Adamczyk:2012af,delValle:2011ex} (upper panel); the
distribution of binary nucleon-nucleon collision energies in 0-10 \%
central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=$200 GeV from PHSD
including Fermi smearing (lower panel).}
\label{pp2}
\end{figure}
Since charm-quark production requires a high energy-momentum transfer,
the number of produced charm quark pairs in relativistic heavy-ion
collisions is proportional to the number of binary nucleon-nucleon
collisions $N_{bin}$. Since the probability to produce a charm quark
pair depends on invariant energy and is less than that for primary hard
collision in the PHSD, the binary nucleon-nucleon collisions producing
charm quark pairs are chosen by Monte Carlo from the ratio
of the cross section for charm production in nucleon-nucleon collision, $\sigma_{c\bar{c}}^{pp}(\sqrt{s})$, to the inelastic nucleon-nucleon cross section. The total cross
section in PHSD for charm production in nucleon-nucleon collisions is
parameterized by
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma_{c\bar{c}}^{pp}(\sqrt{s})=A[1-\sqrt{(s_0/s})]^\alpha(s/s_0)^\beta,
\end{eqnarray}
where $A$, $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are fit parameters.
We use two different parameter sets, one for $\sqrt{s}\le $200 GeV and the other for $\sqrt{s} > $200 GeV to fit the experimental data covering a wide range of collision energies as shown in the upper part of Fig.~\ref{pp2}; both parameterizations are smoothly connected at $\sqrt{s}= $200 GeV.
The energy-momenta of the produced charm and anticharm quarks in each
collision event are given by the Pythia event generator as in p+p
collisions but for the actual (smeared) collision energy. In the
Pythia event generator, the charm and anticharm quarks are produced in
the center-of-mass frame of two colliding nucleons with the incident
nucleons being aligned along the $z$-direction. Therefore in PHSD we
rotate the momenta of the generated charm and anticharm quark to the
original orientation of the two incident nucleons in their
center-of-mass frame and then boost to the calculational frame. We assume
that the two nucleons, which produce the charm quark pair, keep their
transverse momentum and loose only longitudinal momentum such that the
total energy (including the produced charm quark pair) is conserved and
the two nucleons are still on-shell after the hard collision. Although
this prescription seems to violate spatial momentum conservation,
we have to mention that this violation is very small since the charm quark pair is produced
together with several (plenty) light hadrons in the same event which balance the spatial momentum.
\section{Charm-quark scattering in the QGP}\label{QGP}
\subsection{$q+c$ and $g+c$ elastic scattering cross sections}
Quarks, antiquarks, and gluons are dressed in the QGP and have temperature-dependent effective masses and widths. In the DQPM, the mass and width of the light partons are given by thermal quantum-field theory assuming leading order diagrams but the strong coupling $g^2(T)$ is fitted to lattice data on energy and entropy densities, etc.~\cite{Cassing:2008nn}. Note that a nonzero width of a parton reflects the off-shell nature as well as the strong interaction of the quasi-particle and finite life-time.
The charm and anticharm quarks produced in early hard collisions interact with the dressed off-shell partons in the QGP. The cross sections for the charm quark scattering with massive off-shell partons are calculated considering the mass spectra of final state particles~\cite{Berrehrah:2013mua,Berrehrah:2014kba}. In the current study the charm quark mass is taken to be 1.5 GeV and its mass spectrum is neglected for simplicity. Since the charm quark is heavy, the off-shell effect is small contrary to the light quarks and gluons (see Refs. \cite{Berrehrah:2013mua,Berrehrah:2014kba} for a quantitative study of this effect). Moreover, the off-shell effects from parton spectral functions are small, except for reducing the kinematic threshold.
In the current study we consider only elastic scattering of charm quarks by light quarks and gluons. We do not consider yet the radiative processes which generate radiative energy loss because we expect that, due to the large gluon mass in the DQPM, the radiative processes are sub-dominant as compared to the collisional ones, especially for low charm-quark momenta $(p_T)$. We expect the radiative energy loss to contribute at very high $p_T$ as accessible experimentally at the LHC~\cite{Younus:2013rja}.
The elastic scattering of charm quarks in the QGP is treated in our study by including the non-perturbative effects of the strongly interacting quark-gluon plasma (sQGP) constituents, i.e. the large coupling, the multiple scattering etc. The multiple strong interactions of quarks and gluons in the sQGP are encoded in their effective propagators with broad spectral functions. As pointed out above the effective propagators, which can be interpreted as resummed propagators in a hot and dense QCD environment, have been extracted from lattice data in the scope of the DQPM \cite{Cassing:2008nn}. Furthermore, in Refs. \cite{Berrehrah:2013mua,Berrehrah:2014kba} we have evaluated, to the lowest order in the perturbation expansion, the transition amplitudes of the processes $q+c \rightarrow q+c$ and $g+c \rightarrow g+c$ as shown in Fig.~\ref{qgQFeynman}. Contrary to the case of massless gluons where the ``Transverse gauge'' is used, we use the ``Lorentz covariance'' for the case of massive gluons since a finite mass in the gluon propagator allows to fix the 0'th components of the gluon fields $A_a^0 (a=1; \dots ; 8)$ by the spatial degrees of freedom $A_a^k (k =1;2;3)$. Furthermore, the divergence encountered in the $t$-channel – when calculating the total cross sections $(\sigma^{\textrm{qc}})$ and $(\sigma^{\textrm{gc}})$ – is cured self-consistently in our computation since the infrared regulator is given by the finite DQPM gluon mass (and width).
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=3.45 cm, height=3.25 cm]{qQFeynman.eps}}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=8.6 cm, height=3.3 cm]{gQFeynman.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) Feynman diagrams for the scattering of $q+c \rightarrow q+c$ and $g+c \rightarrow g+c$. Latin (Greek) subscripts denote colour (spin) indices. $k_i$ and $p_i$ ($k_f$ and $p_f$) denote the initial (final) 4-momentum of the light quark or the gluon and the heavy quark, respectively.}
\label{qgQFeynman}
\end{figure}
For the scattering of charm quark by the light quark and gluon with finite masses and widths, we take into account the spectral functions of the light quark and gluon, and the temperature-dependent running coupling, $g^2(T)$. The propagators of massive vector gluons with finite lifetime and of charm quark with zero life time are, respectively, given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{equ:EqPropag}
G^{\mu \nu} (q) &=& - i \frac{g^{\mu \nu} - q^{\mu} q^{\nu}/m_g^2}{q^2 - m_g^2 + i 2 \gamma_g q_0},\nonumber\\
S (p) &=& \frac{p \!\! / + m_c}{p^2 - m_c^2},
\end{eqnarray}
where $m_g$, $\gamma_g$ are ,respectively, gluon mass and width at finite temperature, and the charm quark mass $m_c$ is taken to be 1.5 GeV.
Fig.~\ref{SigmacuOffTs} shows the elastic cross section of an on-shell charm quark with off-shell $u$-quarks $(\sigma^{\textrm{uc}})$ as a function of the temperature and $\sqrt{s}$, the energy available in the center-of-mass frame. Apart from the threshold region the cross section is rather independent of $\sqrt{s}$, and decreases with increasing temperature mainly due to a smaller coupling strength at high temperature. The large cross section near the critical temperature $T_c = 0.158$ GeV is related to the infrared enhancement of the coupling $\alpha_s (T)$ in the DQPM. The cross section for charm quark and gluon elastic scattering is about twice (9/4 which is the ratio of the different color Casimir operators squared) that for charm quark and light quark scattering.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=8.0 cm, height=7 cm]{SigmacuTs.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) Elastic cross section
for $u+c \rightarrow u+c$ scattering as a
function of the temperature $T$ and the invariant energy
$\sqrt{s}$ where the $u$-quark is off-shell and the
charm quark has a constant mass of 1.5 GeV
\cite{Berrehrah:2013mua,Berrehrah:2014kba}.} \label{SigmacuOffTs}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=8.0 cm]{dSigmacu.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) Differential elastic cross section for
the scattering of an on-shell
charm quark and off-shell $u$-quarks at $\sqrt{s} = 3$ GeV (orange
lines) and 4 GeV (black lines) for temperatures of 1.2 $T_c$, 2
$T_c$ and 3 $T_c$, with $T_c = 0.158$ GeV. We take 1.5 GeV for the
charm quark mass and DQPM spectral functions (propagators) for the
light off-shell partonic degrees-of-freedom
\cite{Berrehrah:2013mua}.} \label{dSigmacu}
\end{figure}
Our cross sections also depend on the scattering angle besides collision energy $\sqrt{s}$ and temperature $T$. Fig.~\ref{dSigmacu} presents the differential cross sections $d \sigma/d \cos \theta$ for on-shell charm quark scattering with off-shell $u$-quarks at $\sqrt{s} = 3$ GeV (orange lines) and 4 GeV (black lines) for temperatures of 1.2 $T_c$, 2 $T_c$ and 3 $T_c$. Different from the pQCD-inspired models, $d \sigma/d \cos \theta$ in our 'non-perturbative' model is not so much forward peaked (large enhancement for small angles or small momentum transfers $t$) \cite{Berrehrah:2013mua}. Therefore, efficient momentum transfers more often occur in our partonic scattering as compared to the usual pQCD $2 \rightarrow 2$ scattering \cite{Berrehrah:2014kba}.
\subsection{Charm spatial diffusion coefficient}
Using the transition amplitudes for the elastic scattering of charm
quarks by the partons in medium,
one can calculate the charm spatial diffusion
coefficient $D_s$ from the drag coefficient, $A = \frac{d<\textbf{p}_c>}{d t}$ through $\eta_D =
A/p_c$:
\begin{eqnarray}
D_s =\lim_{p_c\to 0} \frac{T}{m_c \eta_D},
\end{eqnarray}
or from the diffusion coefficient $\kappa = \frac{1}{3} \frac{d<(\textbf{p}_c - \textbf{p}'_c)^2>}{d t}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{equ:Ds}
\hspace{0.5cm} D_s = \lim_{p_c\to 0} \frac{\kappa}{2 m_c^2 \eta_D^2}.
\end{eqnarray}
Both definitions agree with each other if the Einstein relation is valid \cite{Berrehrah:2014kba,Hamza14}.
Using Eq.~(\ref{equ:Ds}), we show in Fig.\ref{fig:cDs}
the spatial diffusion coefficient $D_s$ as a function of $T$
for $\mu_q = 0$. Our results are compared to the
lattice calculations, which have recently been
confirmed by the Bielefeld collaboration~\cite{Banerjee:2011ra},
for temperatures above $T_c\approx$ 160 MeV and with
the spatial diffusion coefficient of a heavy meson in hadronic
matter~\cite{Tolos:2013kva} for temperatures below 180 MeV. We observe that the spatial diffusion coefficients in hadronic
and partonic matters meet each
other and have a pronounced minimum around $T_c$.
Fig.~\ref{fig:cDs} shows that our results agree with those from
the lattice QCD. The smooth transition of the
heavy-quark transport coefficients from the hadronic to the partonic
medium corresponds to a crossover in line with lattice calculations,
and differs substantially from perturbative QCD (pQCD) calculations
which show a large discontinuity of $D_s$ close to $T_c$
\cite{Berrehrah:2014kba,Hamza14}.
We emphasize that the transport coefficient $D_s$ extracted from our microscopic calculations and its agreement with the lQCD results (within errors) and the corresponding $D$ meson $D_s$ in hadronic medium validate our description for the coupling of charm with the QGP matter.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7.7 cm]{2piTDs.eps}
\caption{(Color online) Spatial diffusion coefficient
of heavy quark, $D_s$, as a function of $T$
for $\mu_q=0$. The black solid line
below $T=180$ MeV is the hadronic diffusion coefficient~\cite{Tolos:2013kva}, and the red solid line above $T_c
\approx 160$ MeV our $D_s$
computation in the partonic environment. The lattice
calculations are from Ref.~\cite{Banerjee:2011ra}.} \label{fig:cDs}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{scatter+P.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) The distributions of charm and anticharm quark
scattering by quarks/antiquarks (solid line) and gluons (dashed line)
as a function of the invariant energy $\sqrt{s}$
in 0-10 \% central Au+Au collisions.}
\label{scatterP}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{scatterP} shows the distributions of charm and anticharm quark
scattering with quarks/antiquarks (solid line) and gluons (dashed line)
as a function of the invariant energy $\sqrt{s}$ in 0-10 \% central Au+Au collisions.
The total number of charm and anticharm quark scatterings with light
quarks
and light antiquarks is about 135 and that with gluons is about 83.
We recall that about 19 pairs of charm and anticharm quarks are produced
in this centrality range; each charm or anticharm quark thus experiences
on average 6 elastic scatterings with partons before it is hadronized.
Since the dressed quark/antiquark mass is smaller than the dressed gluon mass,
the peak of the distribution for charm and quark scattering is located at a
lower energy compared to that of charm and gluon scattering.
We additionally note that the number of charm quark scatterings with gluons
is not small compared to that with quarks although the number of gluons is
significantly smaller than that of quarks due to their larger mass.
This is because the cross section for the charm and gluon elastic scattering is about
twice that for charm and light quark elastic scattering.
One characteristic of the partonic scattering of charm quarks is that the
scattering distribution in $\sqrt{s}$ has a long tail up to high
invariant energies beyond that expected in a thermal equilibrium.
This is attributed to the cross section for charm and parton elastic scattering
which does not decrease with increasing $\sqrt{s}$ as shown in Fig.~\ref{SigmacuOffTs}.
Therefore, the partonic scattering is effective for the energy loss of
charm and anticharm quarks at high transverse momentum.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{QGP.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) Transverse momentum spectra of charm and
anticharm quarks at the initial production (dashed red line) and
at hadronization (solid red line) in 0-10 \% central Au+Au
collisions, compared with those of thermal charm quarks with
(dot-dashed blue line) and without (dotted blue line) considering
the transverse flow of the bulk particles at T=158 MeV which is
the critical temperature for the QGP phase transition in PHSD.}
\label{pt-QGP}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{pt-QGP} compares the transverse-momentum spectrum of
charm and anticharm quarks at the initial production with that at
hadronization in the midrapdity interval $(|y|<1)$. We can see that
the scattering with massive partons softens the transverse
momentum spectrum of charm quarks substantially. These spectra are
also compared in Fig.~\ref{pt-QGP} with the thermal spectrum of
charm and anticharm quarks at $T_c$ with the number of charm and
anticharm quarks being the same as in the PHSD. The
dot-dashed blue line in Fig.~\ref{pt-QGP} shows the spectrum when
we take into account the transverse flow velocity $v_T$ of the bulk
particles which is about 0.44 at $T_c$ in 0-10 \% central
collisions in the PHSD simulations:
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{dN}{2\pi p_T dp_T dy}\sim m_T I_0(\alpha) K_1(\beta),
\end{eqnarray}
where $m_T=\sqrt{m_c^2+p_T^2}$, $\alpha=p_T\sinh\rho/T$ and $\beta=m_T \cosh\rho/T$ with $\rho=\tanh^{-1}v_T$, and $K_1$ and $I_0$ are modified Bessel functions~\cite{Heinz:2004qz}.
The dotted blue line shows the
spectrum without including the transverse flow ($v_T=0$). Since the
transverse flow velocity of charm quarks in relativistic heavy-ion
collisions is smaller than that of the bulk particles, even though
they are completely thermalized~\cite{Song:2011kw}, the
transverse-momentum spectrum of thermalized charm quarks is
between the dotted blue and the dot-dashed blue lines. This figure
suggests that charm and anticharm quarks are close to thermal
equilibrium at low transverse momentum ($p_T <$ 2 GeV) after
partonic scattering while they are still off-equilibrium at higher
transverse momenta since the solid red and the dot-dashed blue line
start to deviate substantially for higher $p_T$.
\section{Hadronization of charm quarks}\label{tc}
Since the hot and dense matter created by a relativistic heavy-ion
collision expands with time, the energy density of the matter
decreases and the deconfined degrees-of-freedom hadronize to color
neutral hadronic states. Once the local energy density in PHSD
becomes lower than 0.5 ${\rm GeV/fm^3}$, the partons are
hadronized. First we look for all combinations of a charm quark
and light antiquarks or of an anticharm quark and a light quark and
calculate the probability for each combination to form a $D$ or
$D^*$ (or $D_s, D^*_s$) meson. The probability for a quark
and an anti-quark to form a meson is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
f(\boldsymbol\rho,{\bf k}_\rho)=\frac{8g_M}{6^2}
\exp\left[-\frac{\boldsymbol\rho^2}{\delta^2}-{\bf k}_\rho^2\delta^2\right],
\label{meson}
\end{eqnarray}
where $g_M$ is the degeneracy of the meson $M$, and
\begin{eqnarray}
\boldsymbol\rho=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}({\bf r}_1-{\bf r}_2),\quad{\bf k}_\rho=\sqrt{2}~\frac{m_2{\bf k}_1-m_1{\bf k}_2}{m_1+m_2},
\label{coalescence}
\end{eqnarray}
with $m_i$, ${\bf r}_i$ and ${\bf k}_i$ being the mass, position and momentum of the quark or antiquark $i$, respectively. The width parameter $\delta$ is related to the root-mean-square radius of the meson produced through
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle r^2 \rangle=\frac{3}{2}\frac{m_1^2+m_2^2}{(m_1+m_2)^2}\delta^2
\end{eqnarray}
and thus determined by experiment (if available).
The degeneracy factors, $g_M$, for $D$ and $D^*$ mesons are 1 and 3,
respectively. We also
take into account higher excited states of D mesons from the
Particle Data Group~\cite{Agashe:2014kda}: $D_0^*(2400)^0$,
$D_1(2420)^0$, and $D_2^*(2460)^{0,\pm}$. They dominantly decay into
$D+\pi$ or $D^*+\pi$ and each branching ratio is not known yet.
Therefore, we assume that the higher excited state decays immediately after hadronization into
$D+\pi$ or $D^*+\pi$ with the branching ratio of 1 to 3, keeping its
flavor. We further simplify that higher excited states have the same
mass, 2460 MeV, since $D_2^*(2460)^{0,\pm}$ are most abundantly
produced in the coalescence model due to its large spin, and they
are assumed to have the same radius as $D$ and $D^*$ mesons.
In the actual simulations of the PHSD we perform several tens of
events in parallel to obtain smooth local energy and particle number
densities as a function of time; the charm or anticharm quark in the
hadronization is allowed to take its partner from other events.
Therefore, the coalescence probability given in Eq.~(\ref{meson}) is
divided by the number of parallel events such that the results
become independent on the number of parallel runs.
Collecting all possible combinations of a charm or an anticharm quark
with light quarks or antiquarks and calculating the coalescence
probability for each combination from Eq.~(\ref{meson}), we
obtain the probability for the charm or the anticharm quark to
hadronize by coalescence in the actual space-time volume
$\Delta t \Delta x \Delta y \Delta z$. Whether the
charm or the anticharm quark is actually hadronized by coalescence is decided by
Monte Carlo. Once the charm or the anticharm quark is decided to be
hadronized by coalescence, then we find its partner again by Monte
Carlo on the basis on the probability of each combination in the
selected local ensemble. In case the charm or anticharm quark is
decided not to hadronize by coalescence, it is hadronized by the
fragmentation method as in p+p collisions (see Sec.~\ref{initial}). Since the
hadronization by coalescence is absent in p+p collisions, it can be
interpreted as a nuclear matter effect on the hadronization of charm and anticharm quarks.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{coalescence5.eps}}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{coalescence9.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) The probabilities for charm or anticharm
quarks to hadronize to $D$ or $\bar{D}$ meson through
coalescence as a function of transverse momentum in 0-10,
10-40, 40-80 \% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=$200
GeV for the D meson radius of 0.5 fm (upper) and of 0.9 fm
(lower).} \label{probability}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{probability} shows the probabilities for charm and
anticharm quarks to hadronize to $D$ and $\bar{D}$ mesons
through coalescence as a function of transverse momentum $p_T$ in
0-10, 10-40, 40-80 \% central Au+Au collisions at
$\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=$200 GeV for the D meson radius of 0.5 fm (upper) and
0.9 fm (lower). We can see that
the probability decreases as the transverse momentum of the charm or
anticharm quark increases. The reason is that the charm or anticharm quark
with larger transverse momentum has less chance to find a
neighboring coalescence partner in phase space.
Fig.~\ref{probability} also shows that coalescence probability
depends on centrality and the radius of the $D$ meson. Since there
are more light partons as a coalescence partner for the charm or
anticharm quark in central collisions, the coalescence probability
increases with decreasing centrality. In extremely peripheral
collisions, however, the coalescence probability becomes tiny -- as
in p+p collisions -- and the nuclear modification factor of $D$
mesons naturally approaches to 1. Since the hadronization of charm
quarks through fragmentation is not properly suited at low
transverse momentum, several studies have forced the coalescence
probability to be 1 at
$p_T=$0~\cite{He:2011qa,Gossiaux:2010yx,Cao:2013ita,Oh:2009zj}.
Unless only a single centrality is concerned, it is technically
difficult to do so for all centralities by using the same
coalescence parameters. Moreover, if the coalescence probability is
1 in peripheral collisions, it will induce a large nuclear
modification factor, although small nuclear matter effect is
expected in such collisions. Therefore, we allow the fragmentation
of charm quarks at low transverse momentum as in p+p collisions in
competition with coalescence (for different radii of the
$D$-mesons). In Fig.~\ref{probability} we see that the coalescence
probability is larger for the $D$ meson radius of 0.9 fm than of 0.5
fm. We note that while the smaller radius is more physical for
$D$-mesons, a somewhat larger radius has been used in several
studies~\cite{Cao:2013ita,Oh:2009zj} to get a larger coalescence
probability.
The energy-momentum
difference between the charm or anticharm quark and the fragmented
$D$ or $\bar{D}$ meson in fragmentation and the energy
difference in coalescence are distributed equally to the
surrounding partons (in the same cell) which are not hadronized yet
to conserve the total energy-momentum of the system.
\section{$D$ meson scattering in the hadron gas}\label{HG2}
The $D$ and $D^*$ mesons produced through coalescence or
fragmentation interact with the surrounding hadrons in PHSD. The
presence of several resonances close to threshold energies with
dominant decay modes involving open-charm mesons and light hadrons
suggests that the scattering cross
sections of a $D/D^*$ off a meson or baryon, highly abundant in the
post-hadronization medium, could manifest a non-trivial energy,
isospin and flavor dependence. An example of these states is the
broad scalar resonance $D_0(2400)$, which decays into the
pseudoscalar ground state $D$ by emitting a pion in the $s$-wave
(similarly to the heavy-quark spin partner
$D_1(2420)$, decaying into $D^*\pi$\footnote{According
to quark model predictions, the excitation spectrum of the $D/D^*$
system consists of a triplet and a singlet of positive parity, with
$J^P=0^+,1^+,2^+$ and $1^+$, respectively (corresponding to
$^{2S+1}L_J=^3P_J$ and $^1P_1$). The $1^+$ states mix in such a way
that the meson with the lower mass, $D_1(2420)$, becomes narrow and
decouples from the $D^*\pi$ low-energy dynamics. The higher one,
$D_1(2420)$, on the contrary, is very broad and decays
predominantly in $D^*\pi$. The tensor state, $D_2^*(2460)$, is also
narrow and its influence can be, in principle, disregarded.}).
Moreover, the similarity between the $\Lambda(1405)$ and the
$\Lambda_c(2595)$ has driven the attention to the fact that the
latter could be playing the role of a sub-threshold resonance in the
$DN$ system, connected to the latter by coupled-channel dynamics.
All these features have been addressed within several recent approaches based on hadronic effective models which incorporate chiral symmetry breaking in the light sector. The additional freedom stemming from the coupling to heavy-flavored mesons is constrained by imposing heavy-quark spin symmetry (HQSS) \cite{Abreu:2011ic,Abreu:2012et,Tolos:2013kva,Torres-Rincon:2014ffa,GarciaRecio:2008dp,Romanets:2012hm,Garcia-Recio:2013gaa}. Whereas chiral symmetry fully determines the scattering amplitudes of Goldstone bosons with other hadrons at leading order in a model independent way, by means of HQSS the dynamics of the pseudoscalar and the vector mesons containing heavy quarks can be connected, since all kinds of spin interactions are suppressed in the limit of infinite quark masses.
Following \cite{Abreu:2011ic} (and references therein), the Lagrangian density describing the interaction between the spin-zero and spin-one $D$ mesons with the light pseudoscalar (Goldstone) bosons from the octet ($\pi$, $K$, $\bar K$, $\eta$) reads $\cal L = \cal L_{\rm LO} + \cal L_{\rm NLO}$, where the subscripts LO and NLO refer to the leading and next-to-leading orders in the chiral perturbative expansion, whereas one keeps at leading order in the heavy-quark expansion. The LO Lagrangian reads
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L}_{LO} & = & \langle \nabla^\mu D \nabla_\mu D^\dag \rangle - m_D^2 \langle DD^{\dag} \rangle
- \langle \nabla^\mu D^{*\nu} \nabla_\mu D^{*\dag}_{\nu} \rangle \nonumber \\
&+& m_D^2 \langle D^{*\mu} D_\mu^{* \dag} \rangle
+ ig \langle D^{* \mu} u_\mu D^\dag - D u^\mu D_\mu^{*\dag} \rangle \nonumber \\
&+& \frac{g}{2m_D} \langle D^*_\mu u_\alpha \nabla_\beta D_\nu^{*\dag} -
\nabla_\beta D^*_\mu u_\alpha D_\nu^{*\dag}\rangle \epsilon^{\mu \nu \alpha\beta}\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $D=(D^0,D^+,D_s^+)$ and $D_{\mu}^*=(D^{*0},D^{*+},D_s^{*+})_{\mu}$ are the SU(3) antitriplets of spin-zero and spin-one $D$ mesons, respectively, with mass $m_D$ in the chiral limit, and the brackets denote the trace in flavor space.
Two interaction terms are present in the LO Lagrangian, containing the coupling of the $D$ and $D^*$ meson fields to the light-meson axial vector current, $u_\mu = i \left( u^\dag \partial_\mu u - u \partial_\mu u^\dag \right)$, which describe, for instance, the decay of the $D^*$ meson into a $D\pi$ pair. We note that the two terms are in principle independent but HQSS demands that both are related by a unique coupling constant $g$.
The covariant derivative contains the coupling to the light-meson vector current and reads $\nabla_\mu = \partial_\mu - \frac{1}{2} \left( u^\dag \partial_\mu u + u \partial_\mu u^\dag \right)$, where the Goldstone bosons are introduced within the non-linear realization of chiral symmetry in exponential parameterization, $U=u^2=\exp \left(\frac{\sqrt{2} i\Phi}{f} \right)$, with
\begin{equation}
\Phi= \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \pi^0 + \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}} \eta & \pi^+ & K^+ \\
\pi^- & - \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \pi^0 + \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}} \eta & K^0 \\
K^- & {\bar K}^0 & - \frac{2}{\sqrt{6}} \eta
\end{array}
\right)
\end{equation}
and $f$ the meson decay constant in the chiral limit ($f=93$~MeV).
The NLO Lagrangian, which we omit here for simplicity, introduces twelve low-energy constants (LECs), $h_i$ and $\tilde{h}_i$ $(i=0,\dots,5)$, which have to be fixed by symmetry arguments and known phenomenology. Imposing HQSS at LO reduces the number of free parameters to six, since $h_i=\tilde{h}_i$, whereas by large-$N_c$ considerations it can be argued that only the odd LECs contribute.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{Dpi.eps}
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{DK.eps}}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{DN.eps}
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{DDelta.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) Several examples for the scattering cross sections of $D$ and $D^*$ mesons with light mesons and baryons.}
\label{HG3}
\end{figure*}
The interaction of $D$ mesons with baryons has been recently studied in different approaches which incorporate heavy flavor in the meson baryon interaction, either by implementing $t$-channel vector-meson exchange mechanisms between pseudoscalar mesons and baryons, by extending the J\"ulich meson-exchange model, or relying on the hidden gauge formalism (see \cite{Tolos:2013gta} and references therein). Among these we recourse to the model described in Refs.~\cite{GarciaRecio:2008dp,Romanets:2012hm,Garcia-Recio:2013gaa,Gamermann:2011mq}, which generalizes the Weinberg-Tomozawa form of the meson-baryon interaction, fixed by chiral symmetry at leading order, beyond flavor SU(3) structure. In addition, in this model HQSS is fulfilled exactly whenever charm quarks participate in the interaction.
In all charm sectors, and in particular in $C=1$ ($C=$~charm number), the theory accounts for point-like $s$-wave interactions between charmed mesons and light mesons in the pseudoscalar and vector octets, and the lowest lying baryons from the $J^P=1/2^+$ (nucleon) octet and the $3/2^+$ (Delta) decuplet. It reduces to the WT interaction prescribed by chiral symmetry as long as the pseudoscalar mesons (Goldstone bosons) are involved. The latter is accomplished by enhancing the standard SU(3) flavor symmetry to a SU(6) spin-flavor symmetry [SU(8) when charm is also considered], which has allowed to identify unambiguously many baryonic states as dynamically generated resonances of the meson-baryon interaction in the light sector \cite{GarciaRecio:2008dp,Romanets:2012hm,Garcia-Recio:2013gaa,Gamermann:2011mq}.
HQSS imposes that arbitrary rotations of the heavy-quark spin should leave dynamics unchanged, which prevents charm flavor to be exchanged between the interacting meson-baryon pair, naturally leading to the
suppression of charm-exchange processes\footnote{This feature arises in other models based on meson exchange mechanisms due to the heavy mass of the charmed field and the large heavy-meson decay constants; note, however, that HQSS is not exactly fulfilled in most of these models \cite{Garcia-Recio:2013gaa}.}.
The tree-level amplitudes of the theory are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
V_{ij}^{IJSC}(\sqrt{s}) &=& D_{ij}^{IJSC} \, \frac{2\sqrt{s}-M_i-M_j}{4 f_i f_j} \nonumber \\
&& \times \sqrt{\frac{E_i+M_i}{2 M_i}} \sqrt{\frac{E_j+M_j}{2 M_j}} \ ,
\label{eq:V-spin-flavor}
\end{eqnarray}
where $M_i$ and $E_i$ denote the mass and CM energy of the baryon in channel $i$, respectively, $f_i$ stands for the corresponding meson decay constant, and $D^{IJSC}$ is a matrix of coefficients in the coupled-channel space for given isospin, spin, strangeness and charm numbers. Breaking of the SU(8) symmetry is taken into account by using physical hadron masses and meson decay constants in Eq.~(\ref{eq:V-spin-flavor}).
The model is not complete in the analytic sense since no $t$- or $u$- channel mechanisms are explored; it is, however, a minimal extension of the SU(3) WT interaction with no additional free parameters which simultaneously implements the relevant symmetries of QCD in the light- and heavy-quark sectors.
The tree-level scattering amplitudes obtained from the previous approaches to the scattering of $D/D^*$ mesons with light mesons and baryons are unitarized along the right-hand cut by solving the set of coupled-channel (on-shell) Bethe-Salpeter equations, $T=T+VGT$. Here $T$~($V$) stands for the unitarized~(tree-level) amplitude with matrix element $T$($V$)$^{IJSC}_{ij}$, where $i(j)$ labels the incident~(outgoing) heavy-light meson or heavy-meson baryon state. $G$ represents the two-particle propagator or loop function, which is regularized by subtractions or in dimensional regularization.
The few parameters unconstrained in the heavy-light meson Lagrangian are fixed by the mass difference between the $D$ and $D_s$ mesons, and by the position and width of the $D_0^*(2400)$ resonance, which is dynamically generated by the unitarized interaction in the $I=1/2$ $D\pi$ channel. We recall that the model for the meson-baryon interaction is parameter free, modulo regularization.
The sub-threshold $\Lambda_c(2595)$ resonance is dynamically generated by the model, with a strong coupling to the $DN$ and $D^*N$ channels in $I=0$ and a finite width from the $\Sigma_c\pi$ channel, which is open for decay. Several additional states in the $C=1$ and $S=0$ sector are generated by the interaction, some of which have been identified with experimental observations whereas others are genuine predictions that could be detected in the forthcoming CBM and PANDA experiments at GSI/FAIR \cite{Romanets:2012hm}.
A selection of the $D$ and $D^*$ cross sections off light mesons, nucleons and $\Delta$ baryons is shown in Fig.~\ref{HG3} for several physical (charge) states. The cross sections exhibit a remarkable isospin dependence, as expected, leading to rather different shapes (energy dependence). For example, the $D_0^*(2400)$ resonance is clearly visible in the $D^0\pi^+$ elastic reaction, which has a predominant $I=1/2$ component. Conversely, the $D^0\pi^-$ elastic reaction is pure $I=3/2$ and the cross section is not resonant in this case, whereas other processes exhibit deviations from the resonance profile due to the interference between the $I=1/2,3/2$ amplitudes. We note the dip caused by the opening of the $D\eta$ channel, which mixes with $D\pi$ only at NLO in the chiral Lagrangian.
The $D\bar K$ cross sections present a characteristic monotonic fall due to the presence of the narrow $D_s^*(2317)$, which lies right below threshold energy (compare, e.g, with the cross section of the pure isovector $D^0 K^-$, which is essentially flat). The isoscalar part of the $DK$ amplitude contributes with a broad resonant state around $2700$~MeV. Significantly, the vector partner $D_{s1}^*(2700)$ has been observed with a decay width of about $120$~MeV. Similar cross sections are obtained for the $D^*$ interaction as the underlying dynamics is identical at LO in the heavy-quark expansion, and the only differences are introduced by the slightly higher mass of the $D^*$ (thus thresholds and resonances appear shifted by this amount).
In addition to the subthreshold $\Lambda_c$ and $\Sigma_c$ states generated from the $D$ and $D^*$ interactions with baryons, the $D^{(*)}N$ and $D^{(*)}\Delta$ cross sections are populated by several resonances at higher energies, with a remarkable isospin and coupled-channel dependence. In both cases the reactions with a strong isovector component seem to dominate over other processes. We also account explicitly for the cross sections of reactions with antinucleons, not shown in Fig.~\ref{HG3}, which are obtained from the $\bar D N$ scattering amplitudes by charge conjugation.
Finally, the cross sections for the scattering of $D$ and $D^*$ with the vector mesons from the octet (e.g. $D\rho$), out of the scope of the present model, have been set to an estimated value of $10$~mb and independent of the collision energy.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{scatter+H.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) The distributions of $D$ and $D^*$ meson scattering
with pions and nucleons as a function of the invariant scattering energy $\sqrt{s}$
in 0-10 \% Au+Au central collisions. See the legend for the individual channels.}
\label{scatterH}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{scatterH} shows the distribution of $D$ and $D^*$
meson scatterings with pions and nucleons as a function of the invariant
scattering energy $\sqrt{s}$ in 0-10 \% Au+Au central collisions. The total number of
$D$ and $D^*$ meson scatterings with pions is about 49 and that with
nucleons or antinucleons is $\sim$ 6. The numbers of $D$ and $D^*$ meson
scatterings with all mesons and all baryons are, respectively, $\sim$ 56
and $\sim$ 10. Considering that the number of $D$ and $D^*$ mesons in
0-10 \% central collisions is about 30, excluding $D_s$, $D_s^*$,
$\Lambda_c$, and $\bar{\Lambda}_c$, each $D$ or $D^*$ meson
experiences on average two scatterings with a hadron until it
freezes out. Compared to Fig.~\ref{scatterP}, the number of
scatterings decreases rapidly with increasing scattering energy.
This is attributed to the decrease of hadronic cross sections beyond the resonance region, as shown in Fig.~\ref{HG3}.
Accordingly, hadronic interactions become
ineffective for the energy loss of
$D$ and $D^*$ mesons at high transverse momentum.
\section{results}\label{results}
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{parton-scatt5.eps}}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{parton-scatt9.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) The $\rm R_{AA}$ of $D^0$ mesons without
hadronic scattering in 0-10 \% central Au+Au collisions at
$\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=$200 GeV for a radius of the $D$ meson of 0.5 fm (upper) and
of 0.9 fm (lower), which are compared with
the experimental data from the STAR
Collaboration~\cite{Adamczyk:2014uip}. The cross sections for
charm-parton scattering are multiplied by factors of 0, 0.5, 1, and
2 for the dotted, dashed, solid, and dot-dashed lines,
respectively.} \label{partons}
\end{figure}
The nuclear modification of $D$ mesons is expressed in term of the ratio $\rm R_{AA}$ which is defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
{\rm R_{AA}}(p_T)\equiv\frac{dN_D^{\rm Au+Au}/dp_T}{N_{\rm binary}^{\rm Au+Au}\times dN_D^{\rm p+p}/dp_T},
\label{raa}
\end{eqnarray}
where $N_D^{\rm Au+Au}$ and $N_D^{\rm Au+Au}$ are, respectively, the number of
$D$ mesons produced in Au+Au collisions and that in p+p collisions, and
$N_{\rm binary}^{\rm Au+Au}$ is the number of binary nucleon-nucleon
collisions in Au+Au collision for the centrality class considered. If
the matter produced in relativistic heavy-ion collisions does not
modify the $D$ meson production and propagation, the numerator of
Eq.~(\ref{raa}) should be equal to the denominator. Therefore, an $\rm
R_{AA}$ smaller or larger than one implies that the nuclear matter
suppresses or enhances $D$ mesons, respectively.
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{Raa5.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) The $\rm R_{AA}$ of $D^0$ mesons in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm
NN}}=$200 GeV including partonic and hadronic scatterings for the $D$ meson radius of 0.5 fm (dashed lines), of 0.9 fm (solid lines), and without coalescence, i.e. fragmentation only (dotted lines), which are compared with the experimental data from the STAR
Collaboration~\cite{Adamczyk:2014uip}.}
\label{coalescence1}
\end{figure}
In order to see the effect of partonic scattering, all hadronic
scatterings of $D$ mesons are switched off in Fig.~\ref{partons}.
The dotted, dashed, solid, and dot-dashed lines in the figure show
the $\rm R_{AA}$ of $D^0$ mesons in 0-10 \% central Au+Au collisions
with the cross sections for the partonic scattering of charm being
artificially multiplied by factors of 0, 0.5, 1, and 2, respectively.
We stress that these multiplication factors are introduced in order to explore the impact of the
partonic interaction strength on the shape of $R_{AA}(p_T)$. Note, however, that the default cross
section (multiplication factor 1) is determined consistently on the basis of the DQPM couplings and propagators and thus has no free parameters. The fact that the $R_{AA}(p_T)$ is best described by the consistent cross sections (blue solid lines) points towards an experimental support of our approach.
The black dotted line, where both partonic and hadronic scatterings are
absent, shows that $\rm R_{AA}$ approches 1 at high $p_T$ as it
ought to be. However, the coalescence of charm quarks creates a peak
in $\rm R_{AA}$ around $p_T=$ 2.5 GeV/c. This peak does not show up in
the PHSD calculations when discarding the dissolution of strings to
partons. In this case the $\rm R_{AA}$ is unity. The peak emerges because the charm hadron gains
transverse momentum in the coalescence which is absent in p+p
collisions. The red dashed, blue solid, and green dot-dashed lines
show that with increasing cross section for charm and parton
scattering the charm quark looses more energy at high $p_T$. It is
also seen that the energy loss of a charm or anticharm quark at high
$p_T$ can be dominantly attributed to the interaction with partons in
the QGP. On the other hand, the $\rm R_{AA}$ at low $p_T$ increases
with increasing scattering cross section. The reason is that a
larger scattering cross section produces charm quarks closer to
their thermal equilibrium distribution as shown in
Fig.~\ref{pt-QGP}, which is enhanced at low $p_T$ relative to the
initial $p_T$ distribution.
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{RaaH.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) The $\rm R_{AA}$ of
$D^0$ mesons including partonic scattering with (dashed and solid lines) and without hadronic scattering (dotted and dot-dashed lines)
in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=$200 GeV for a $D$ meson
radius of 0.5 fm and of 0.9 fm. The experimental data are from the
STAR Collaboration~\cite{Adamczyk:2014uip,Tlusty:2012ix} .}
\label{hadrons}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=9.5 cm]{v2H.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) The elliptic flow $v_2$ of $D^0$ mesons including partonic scattering with
(dashed and solid lines) and without
hadronic scattering (dotted and
dot-dashed lines) in Au+Au collisions at
$\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=$200 GeV for a $D$ meson radius of 0.5
fm and of 0.9 fm. The experimental data are from the STAR
Collaboration~\cite{Adamczyk:2014uip,Tlusty:2012ix}.}
\label{hadrons2}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{coalescence1} we show the effect of the coalescence
probability on the $\rm R_{AA}$ of $D^0$ mesons. The dashed and solid
lines are, respectively, the $\rm R_{AA}$ for a $D$ meson radius of 0.5 fm and
of 0.9 fm as shown in Fig.~\ref{probability}. For the
dotted lines, all charm and anticharm
quarks are hadronized by fragmentation. It is seen that
for the $D$ meson radius
of 0.9 fm more charm quarks are hadronized through coalescence
and as a result the peak of $\rm R_{AA}$ is
shifted to higher $p_T$. On the contrary, when all charm quarks are
hadronized through fragmentation, the peak is shifted to lower
$p_T$.
Finally, Fig.~\ref{hadrons} shows the $\rm R_{AA}$ and Fig.~\ref{hadrons2} the elliptic flow $v_2$ of
$D^0$ mesons with and without hadronic scattering. We can see that the
hadronic scattering plays an important role both in $\rm R_{AA}$ and
the elliptc flow $v_2$. It shifts the peak of $\rm R_{AA}$ to higher
transverse momentum especially in central collisions and enhances the
elliptic flow of final $D$ mesons.
\section{summary}\label{summary}
We have studied charm production in relativistic heavy-ion
collisions by using the Parton-Hadron-String Dynamics (PHSD) approach
\cite{PHSDrhic} where the initial charm quark pairs are produced in binary
nucleon-nucleon collisions from the PYTHIA event generator \cite{Sjostrand:2006za} taking into
account the smearing of the collision energy due to the Fermi motion of
nucleons in the initial nuclei. The produced charm and anticharm
quarks interact with the dressed quarks and gluons in the QGP which are
described by the Dynamical Quasi-Particle Model \cite{Cassing:2008nn} in PHSD. The interactions of
the charm quarks with the QGP partons have been evaluated with the DQPM
propagators and couplings consistently~\cite{Berrehrah:2013mua}.
Furthermore, when extracting the spatial diffusion coefficient $D_s$ from our
cross sections (Fig. \ref{fig:cDs}) as a function of the temperature we observe
a minimum of $D_s$ close to $T_c$ which is in line with lattice data above $T_c$
and hadronic many-body calculations below $T_c$.
We recall that the PHSD differs from conventional Boltzmann
approaches incorporating on-shell scattering with pQCD cross
sections in a couple of essential aspects:\\ i) it incorporates
dynamical quasi-particles due to the finite width of the spectral
functions; \\ ii) it involves scalar mean-fields for the light
partons that substantially drive the collective flow in the partonic
phase and includes $c$-quark scattering with the QGP partons that transfers
collective flow also to the charm quarks;\\ iii) it is based on a
realistic equation of state from lattice QCD and thus describes the
speed of sound $c_s(T)$ reliably (without incorporating a first
order phase transition);\\ iv) the hadronization of 'bulk' partons
is described by the fusion of off-shell partons to off-shell
hadronic states (resonances or strings) and does not violate the
second law of thermodynamics; \\ v) all conservation laws
(energy-momentum, flavor currents etc.) are fulfilled in the
hadronization (contrary to some coalescence models);\\ vi) the
effective partonic cross sections no longer are given by pQCD and
are evaluated within the DQPM in a consistent fashion and probed by
transport coefficients (correlators) in thermodynamic equilibrium
(shear- and bulk viscosity, electric conductivity, magnetic
susceptibility, spatial charm diffusion coefficient etc.
\cite{Hamza14,Vitaly2,Ca13}).
We have found that the
interaction with the dynamical partons of the QGP softens the $p_T$ spectrum of charm and
anticharm quarks but does not lead to a full thermalization for transverse
momenta $p_T >$ 2 GeV/c. The charm
and anticharm quarks, furthermore, are hadronized to $D$ mesons either through the
coalescence with a light quark or antiquark or through the
fragmentation by emitting soft 'perturbative' gluons.
Since the hadronization through
coalescence is absent in p+p collisions, it can be interpreted as a
nuclear matter effect on the $D$ meson production in relativistic
heavy-ion collisions. In the coalescence mechanism the charm or
anticharm quark gains momentum by fusing with a light quark or
antiquark while it looses momentum in the fragmentation process (as in
p+p reactions). This partly contributes to the large $\rm R_{AA}$ of
$D$ mesons between 1 and 2 GeV/c of transverse momentum. Finally, the
formed $D$ mesons interact with hadrons by using the cross sections
calculated in an effective lagrangian approach with heavy quark
spin-symmetry \cite{Tolos:2013kva}, which is state-of-the art. We have found that the
contribution from hadronic scattering both to the $\rm R_{AA}$ and to
the elliptic flow of $D$ mesons is appreciable, especially in central
collisions, and produces additional elliptic flow $v_2$.
Since the PHSD results reproduce the experimental data from the STAR
Collaboration without radiative energy loss in the $p_T$ range
considered, we conclude that collisional energy loss is dominant at
least up to $p_T=$ 6 GeV/c in relativistic heavy-ion collisions. In our
approach this is essentially due to the infrared enhanced coupling $\alpha_s(T)$ in
the DQPM leading to large scattering cross sections of charm quarks
with partons at temperatures close to $T_c$ and to rather massive gluons
in the partonic bulk matter. It will be of future
interest to perform a similar study at LHC energies for Pb+Pb reactions
since here a significantly larger $p_T$ range can be addressed and the
effect of gluon bremsstrahlung might become important again~\cite{Younus:2013rja}. Furthermore,
angular correlations between pairs of $D~{\bar D}$ mesons are expected to provide
further valuable information.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors acknowledge inspiring discussions with J. Aichelin, P. B.
Gossiaux, C. M. Ko, O. Linnyk, R. Marty, V. Ozvenchuk, and R.
Vogt. This work was supported by DFG under contract BR 4000/3-1, and
by the LOEWE center "HIC for FAIR". JMTR is supported by the Program
TOGETHER from Region Pays de la Loire and the European I3-Hadron
Physics program. LT acknowledges support from the Ramon y Cajal
Research Programme and contracts FPA2010-16963 and FPA2013-43425-P
from Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovaci\'on, as well as from
FP7-PEOPLE-2011-CIG under Contract No. PCIG09-GA-2011-291679. The
computational resources have been provided by the LOEWE-CSC.
|
\section{Introduction/overview}
Tower of Hanoi is a classical puzzle, a one-player game \cite{DH09, DH}. Here we let two players, \one\ (first player) and \two\ (second player), alternate turns and play a game on three or more pegs with various numbers of disks. We will begin by analyzing games under the following \emph{impartial} rules \cite{ANW, BCG04, Con}.
Let $n\ge 1$ and $l\ge 3$ be positive integers. Two players alternate in transferring precisely one out of $n$ disks (of different sizes) on $l$ pegs. The starting position is as usual for the Tower of Hanoi; \emph{the Tower} (i.e., all the disks) are placed on the starting peg in decreasing size, and at each stage of the game, a larger disk cannot be placed on top of a smaller. The current player cannot move the disk that the previous player just moved. The game ends when the tower has been transferred to some predetermined final peg. It is not allowed to transfer the tower to a non-final peg. We detail five ending conditions in Section~\ref{S2}.
Let us exemplify our game with a position on seven disks and three pegs, and where the disk at the dashed peg has just been moved by the previous player and hence cannot be moved by the current player; below it we find its two legal options.
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.3]
\draw (0,0) -- (25,0);
\draw (4.5,0) -- (4.5,4);
\draw[dashed] (12.5,0) -- (12.5,4);
\draw (20.5,0) -- (20.5,4);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0) rectangle (8,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1.5,0.5) rectangle (7.5,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (2,1) rectangle (7,1.5);
\draw[fill=grayred] (10.5,0) rectangle (14.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (19,0) rectangle (22,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (19.5,0.5) rectangle (21.5,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (20,1) rectangle (21,1.5);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
Move options:
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.3]
\draw (0,0) -- (25,0);
\draw (4.5,0) -- (4.5,4);
\draw[dashed] (12.5,0) -- (12.5,4);
\draw (20.5,0) -- (20.5,4);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0) rectangle (8,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1.5,0.5) rectangle (7.5,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (2,1) rectangle (7,1.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (10.5,0) rectangle (14.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=grayred] (12,.5) rectangle (13,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (19,0) rectangle (22,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (19.5,0.5) rectangle (21.5,1);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.3]
\draw (0,0) -- (25,0);
\draw[dashed] (4.5,0) -- (4.5,4);
\draw (12.5,0) -- (12.5,4);
\draw (20.5,0) -- (20.5,4);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0) rectangle (8,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1.5,0.5) rectangle (7.5,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (2,1) rectangle (7,1.5);
\draw[fill=grayred] (4,1.5) rectangle (5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (10.5,0) rectangle (14.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (19,0) rectangle (22,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (19.5,0.5) rectangle (21.5,1);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
In a two-player game, a given winning condition usually provides the incitement to play. We can adapt the winning condition from the one-player game: the player who plays the last disk (on top o the rest of the tower) wins. And indeed, this corresponds to a classical convention for two-player games, that a player who cannot move loses; this is called \emph{normal play}. If no player can force a win in this setting, then the game is declared drawn\footnote{Or for that matter, a game is declared drawn, in general, if both players chose non-victorious paths independent of optimality, but such plays will not be considered here, and is usually not considered in mathematical texts about combinatorial games. In a disjunctive sum of games, however, a `non-optimal' path in a distinct component could lead to a victory in the full game.}.
One of our first observations, in Section~\ref{S2}, is that in spite of the loopy nature of our game(s), if we play on just three pegs, \one\ will win the normal play (given perfect play). \two's moves will be forced throughout the game and the proof is an adaptation of the well known one-player result. In fact, \one's moves also have a restriction; she will always have to move the smallest disk. But, as we will see, it will not limit her capacities in the slightest. In that section, we also note that the game is drawn on four or more pegs.
As a side note, a complete theory of the disjunctive sum of loopy impartial games (on finite numbers of positions) has recently been developed \cite{FrYe, Sm}. In a disjunctive sum of Tower of Hanoi games, \one\ would not be able to control all moves, because the move sequence is not necessarily alternating in each game component. Therefore, in spite of the simple solutions of these normal play games, the disjunctive sum of games should offer new insights. We also note that it is non-trivial to count the minimal number of moves between two arbitrary Tower of Hanoi positions on three pegs \cite{Hi}, so we guess that a computation of generalized Sprague-Grundy values of the game will be difficult. In this paper, however, we build on another recent development of the original Tower of Hanoi.
In \cite{ 3, 1, 2}, some variations of Tower of Hanoi with some weighted cost are studied: In \cite{3, 1}, the authors consider the recurrence relations generalized from the one by the Frame-Stewart algorithm for the $k$-peg Tower of Hanoi problem, by giving arbitrary positive integers as coefficients of the recurrences and obtained the exact formula for them. In \cite{2}, the authors consider another generalization for the three-peg Tower of Hanoi problem, where each undirected edge between pegs has a positive weight and the problem is to transfer all the disks from one peg to another with the minimum sum of weights, instead of the minimum number of moves, and obtain an optimal algorithm for that problem.
A two-player interpretation of the weighted setting becomes the following \emph{scoring game}, where the gain for a move from Peg~$i$ to Peg~$j$ (or reverse), equals a given real weight $w_{ij}=w_{ji}$. Play the above impartial game, but the player who obtains the largest score when the game ends wins; if the game terminates and none of the players can claim a victory then the game is a tie. We also adapt the convention of drawn games from normal play, so a game is declared a draw if no player can force a win, by terminating the game\footnote{But, for future reference, we note that there is also another choice for loopy scoring games, if one of the players repeatedly moves to more negative scores than the other player, then, even though the game might not terminate, one could define it as a loss for the `more negative' player.}. Disjunctive sum theory for scoring games has been studied e.g. \cite{Et1, LNS, Mil, Ste}, and partial theories have been developed in different settings, but none yet for loopy scoring games. We will only consider the solution of a single game in this paper. Our main result is that \one\ wins nearly all scoring two-player Tower of Hanoi games on three pegs. The reason is partly the same as for the normal play setting, but in this setting the optimal move sequence varies depending on the given weights, and the proof is non-trivial. The only case when \one\ cannot force a win is when all weights are equal and non-positive; otherwise she can attain an arbitrary high score by adhering to certain intermediate repetitive patterns. Questions of termination are often very hard (e.g. Turing machines), but in our three-peg setting it will be easy to distinguish drawn from winning. The first player, namely \one , controls all the moves under optimal play; if she cannot win, it will be easy to play drawn (see also Section~\ref{S4}). The question of minimizing the number of moves in the two-player setting is studied in Section~\ref{S6}.
\section{Ending conditions for the two-player Tower of Hanoi}\label{S2}
Consider the following variations of the two-player Tower of Hanoi; a winning condition is invoked when the tower has been transferred to
\begin{enumerate}[(EC1)]
\item\label{EC1}
a given peg, distinct from the starting peg;
\item\label{EC5}
the starting peg, but the largest disk has to be moved at least once;
\item\label{EC6}
the starting peg, but the smallest disk has to be moved at least once;
\item\label{EC3}
any peg, but the largest disk has to be moved at least once; and
\item\label{EC4}
any peg, but the smallest disk has to be moved at least once.
\end{enumerate}
By convention, it is not meaningful to pile up all disks on a final peg. We disallow such moves in the two-player setting. Therefore (EC2) and (EC3) are not applicable when $n=1$. This rule is a natural extension of the one-player setting.\footnote{Note that if we would have allowed the tower to be transferred to a non-final peg, then the game would terminate on that peg because the current player cannot move the disk that the previous player just moved, which is a contradiction in terms; so some special rule would have been required for that situation. We argue that our choice is a natural way forward, but perhaps there are other interesting ways as well.} In Figure~\ref{F1} to Figure~\ref{F4}, we illustrate the idea of going from the one-player setting to the two-player setting using the standard graph representation. Each edge will now be directed, and the direction depends on the previous move. We did not indicate the directed edges in Figure~\ref{F3}, because it depends on the initial choice, once the first move is made the minimal path is given. In Figure~\ref{F5} we sketch how the Tower of Hanoi game converges to the Sierpinski gasket.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\caption{A graph representation of one-player TH for $n=1$.}\label{F1}
\vspace{2mm}
\begin{tikzpicture}[xscale=0.4,yscale=0.48]
\draw (0,0) -- (7,10);
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (7,10) -- (14,0);
\begin{scope}[xshift=-4cm,yshift=-0cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0) rectangle (2,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=5.4cm,yshift=10.5cm, scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3.5, 0) rectangle (4.5, 0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=14.5cm,yshift=0cm, scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (6, 0) rectangle (7, 0.5);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\caption{ A graph representation of two-player TH for $n=1$, (EC1).}\label{F2}
\vspace{2 mm}
\begin{tikzpicture}[xscale=0.4,yscale=0.48]
\draw [red, thick, dotted] (0,0) -- (7,10);
\draw [darkgreen, thick, ->] (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw [red, thick, dotted] (7,10) -- (14,0);
\begin{scope}[xshift=-4cm,yshift=-0cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0) rectangle (2,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=5.4cm,yshift=10.5cm, scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3.5, 0) rectangle (4.5, 0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=14.5cm,yshift=0cm, scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (6, 0) rectangle (7, 0.5);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\caption{A graph representation of one-player TH for $n=2$.}\label{F3}
\vspace{2mm}
\begin{tikzpicture}[xscale=0.4,yscale=0.47]
\draw (0,0) -- (7,10);
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (7,10) -- (14,0);
\draw (4.6, 6.6) -- (9.4, 6.6);
\draw (4.6, 0) -- (2.3, 3.3);
\draw (9.4, 0) -- (11.7, 3.3);
\begin{scope}[xshift=-1.7cm,yshift=3.3cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (2.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (6,0) rectangle (7,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift= 0.6cm,yshift=6.6cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3,0) rectangle (5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (6,0) rectangle (7,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=12.6cm,yshift=3.3cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0) rectangle (2,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (5.5,0) rectangle (7.5,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=10.2cm,yshift=6.6cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3,0) rectangle (5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0) rectangle (2,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=-4cm,yshift=-0cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (2.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0.5) rectangle (2,1);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=3cm,yshift=-1.5cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (2.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3.5,0) rectangle (4.5,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=7.8cm,yshift=-1.5cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3.5,0) rectangle (4.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (5.5,0) rectangle (7.5,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=5.4cm,yshift=10.5cm, scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3.5,0.5) rectangle (4.5,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3,0) rectangle (5,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=14.5cm,yshift=0cm, scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (5.5,0) rectangle (7.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (6,0.5) rectangle (7,1);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\caption{A graph of two-player TH for $n=2$, (EC2); see also first row in Table~\ref{table:1}.}\label{F4}
\vspace{2mm}
\begin{tikzpicture}[xscale=0.4,yscale=0.47]
\draw [red, thick, dotted] (0,0) -- (7,10);
\draw [red, thick, dotted] (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw [red, thick, dotted] (7,10) -- (14,0);
\draw [darkgreen, thick] (0,0) -- (4.6, 6.6);
\draw [darkgreen, thick] (0,0) -- (9.4, 0);
\draw [darkgreen, thick] (11.7, 3.3) -- (9.4, 6.6);
\draw [darkgreen, thick] (4.6, 6.6) -- (9.4, 6.6);
\draw [red, thick, dotted] (4.6, 0) -- (2.3, 3.3);
\draw [darkgreen, thick] (9.4, 0) -- (11.7, 3.3);
\begin{scope}[xshift=-1.7cm,yshift=3.3cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (2.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (6,0) rectangle (7,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift= 0.6cm,yshift=6.6cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3,0) rectangle (5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (6,0) rectangle (7,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=12.6cm,yshift=3.3cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0) rectangle (2,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (5.5,0) rectangle (7.5,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=10.2cm,yshift=6.6cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3,0) rectangle (5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0) rectangle (2,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=-4cm,yshift=-0cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (2.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0.5) rectangle (2,1);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=3cm,yshift=-1.5cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (2.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3.5,0) rectangle (4.5,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=7.8cm,yshift=-1.5cm,scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3.5,0) rectangle (4.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (5.5,0) rectangle (7.5,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=5.4cm,yshift=10.5cm, scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3.5,0.5) rectangle (4.5,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3,0) rectangle (5,0.5);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=14.5cm,yshift=0cm, scale=0.4]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (5.5,0) rectangle (7.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (6,0.5) rectangle (7,1);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\caption{The case $n=3$. The largest disk is moved along the middle edge as in the case for $n=2$, but as $n$ grows, the middle edge will take on a smaller and smaller proportion of the side of the triangle. Hence the graph representation of Tower of Hanoi will converge to the Sierpinski gasket, the minimal normal-play (EC1) path being along the base of the triangle.}\label{F5}
\vspace{2mm}
\begin{tikzpicture}[xscale=0.43,yscale=0.5]
\draw (0,0) -- (7,10);
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (7,10) -- (14,0);
\begin{scope}[xshift=0cm,yshift=0cm, scale=0.43]
\draw (0,0) -- (7,10);
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (7,10) -- (14,0);
\draw (4.6, 6.6) -- (9.4, 6.6);
\draw (4.6, 0) -- (2.3, 3.3);
\draw (9.4, 0) -- (11.7, 3.3);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=3.99cm,yshift=5.72cm, scale=0.43]
\draw (0,0) -- (7,10);
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (7,10) -- (14,0);
\draw (4.6, 6.6) -- (9.4, 6.6);
\draw (4.6, 0) -- (2.3, 3.3);
\draw (9.4, 0) -- (11.7, 3.3);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=7.99cm,yshift=0cm, scale=0.43]
\draw (0,0) -- (7,10);
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (7,10) -- (14,0);
\draw (4.6, 6.6) -- (9.4, 6.6);
\draw (4.6, 0) -- (2.3, 3.3);
\draw (9.4, 0) -- (11.7, 3.3);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{General play}\label{S3}
In this section we regard `an odd or even number of moves' in the one-player game in the same sense as for the two-player games; no disk will be moved twice unless some other disk has been moved between. Each odd numbered move thus moves the smallest disk, and in fact we could equivalently have chosen to let \one\ lead the game. The initial position throughout the paper is all disks on Peg~1.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:1}
For three pegs, $n\ge 2$ disks can be transferred from an initial position to any position using an odd number of moves. That is, in the two-player version, the first player can force play to any position in an odd number of moves.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We use induction on $n$ and the fact that the smallest disk is always moved on the odd numbered moves. For $n=2$, Table~\ref{table:1} gives examples of sequences for transferring the two disks from Peg~1 to each of the nine possible positions, using in each case an odd number of moves. Suppose now that the result is true for $n\ge 2$ disks. We want to transfer $n+1$ disks from an initial position, say from Peg~1, to a position $P$. We distinguish different cases depending on the position of the largest disk LD in $P$. If LD is on Peg~1 in $P$, we have just to transfer the $n$ other disks from Peg~1 to the position $P$ and we do it by using an odd number of moves by induction hypothesis. Otherwise, if LD is on, say Peg~2 in $P$, we transfer the $n$ smallest disks from Peg~1 to Peg~3 using $n_1$ moves, the LD from Peg~1 to Peg~2, and finally the $n$ smallest disks from Peg~3 to the position $P$ using $n_2$ moves. Thus, we have transferred the $n+1$ disks from Peg~1 to the position $P$ using $n_1+n_2+1$ moves and, since $n_1$ and $n_2$ are odd by induction hypothesis, this number of moves is odd. If LD is on peg 3, the argument is the same. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Any Tower of Hanoi position on two disks and three pegs can be reached in an odd number of moves.}\label{table:1}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
Position & Sequence of moves & Number of moves \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.2]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (2.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0.5) rectangle (2,1);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $13 - 12 - 13 - 23 - 12 - 13 - 12$ & $7$ \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.2]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (2.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3.5,0) rectangle (4.5,0.5);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $12$ & $1$ \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.2]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (2.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (6,0) rectangle (7,0.5);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $13$ & $1$ \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.2]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0) rectangle (2,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3,0) rectangle (5,0.5);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $13 - 12 - 13$ & $3$ \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.2]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3.5,0.5) rectangle (4.5,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3,0) rectangle (5,0.5);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $13 - 12 - 23$ & $3$ \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.2]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3,0) rectangle (5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (6,0) rectangle (7,0.5);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $12 - 13 - 12 - 23 - 13$ & $5$ \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.2]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0) rectangle (2,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (5.5,0) rectangle (7.5,0.5);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $12 - 13 - 12$ & $3$ \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.2]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (3.5,0) rectangle (4.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (5.5,0) rectangle (7.5,0.5);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $13 - 12 - 13 - 23 - 12$ & $5$ \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.2]
\draw (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw (1.5,0) -- (1.5,2);
\draw (4,0) -- (4,2);
\draw (6.5,0) -- (6.5,2);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (5.5,0) rectangle (7.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (6,0.5) rectangle (7,1);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $12 - 13 - 23$ & $3$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:1}
For three pegs, $n\ge 2$ disks can be transferred from an initial position to any intermediate position using an even number of moves.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $P$ be an intermediate position and suppose that the smallest disk is on Peg~p. Since $P$ is an intermediate position, we know that one of the two other pegs, Peg~q or Peg~r, contains at least one disk. Let QD be the smallest disk of the disks on Peg~q and Peg~r and suppose WLOG that QD is on Peg~q. Let $P'$ be the position where all the disks are positioned like in $P$, except QD which is on Peg~r, instead of Peg~q in $P$. Since all the disks can be transferred from Peg~1 to the position $P'$ using an odd number moves by Theorem~\ref{thm:1}, we reach the position $P$ by only adding one move of transferring QD from Peg~r to Peg~q. Indeed, the smallest disk was moved in the previous move to achieve the position $P'$. Thus, we have transferred all the disks from Peg~p to the position $P$ using an even number of moves.
\end{proof}
\section{Normal play two-player games}
In the normal play variation of the two-player Tower of Hanoi, \one\ can avoid drawn simply by adhering to the well known \emph{minimal algorithm} for the one-player Tower of Hanoi (\two's moves will be forced all through the game), using precisely $2^n-1$ moves. However, she can also choose freely among all odd-length move paths.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:2}
For three pegs and $n\ge 1$ disks, the two-player Tower of Hanoi game terminates and the first player wins. This is true for any ending condition and also from any non-final position, provided that the previous player did not move the smallest disk.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
From Theorem~\ref{thm:1}, the number of moves for the one-player Tower of Hanoi can be odd. We use any such sequence in the two-player game. In the one-player game, every odd move transfers the smallest of the $n$ disks, which here means that, in each move, \one\ will move the smallest of the $n$ disks on top of an empty peg or a larger disk. This forces \two\ to move a larger disk at each stage of the game. Precisely one such move is possible since \one's move of the smallest disk occupies one out of precisely three pegs. Since the number of moves used here is odd, \one\ wins.
\end{proof}
Games on four pegs are mostly loopy.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:2}
The two-player Tower of Hanoi on four or more pegs is a draw game if the number of disks is three or more, given any ending condition.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that there are three or more disks. Then \two's moves are never forced; he never has to place the second smallest disk on top of the third smallest (analogously for \one).
\end{proof}
For completeness, let us also give the rest of the four-peg observations. For (EC1-3), if there are two disks, \two\ never has to move the largest disk to a final peg and hence the game is drawn. For (EC1), if there is only one disk, then \one\ wins in the first move. For (EC2,3), if there is only one disk, the special rule is invoked and \two\ wins in his first move. For (EC4,5), if there are two disks, \two\ has to move the largest disk to a final peg and hence loses. If there is only one disk, then \one\ wins in the first move.
\section{Scoring play: two-player games with weights}\label{S3}
As stated in the introduction, for the scoring variation of the normal play setting, we provide real weights to the \emph{move edges}, in the three-peg case, $w_{12}, w_{13}$ and $w_{23}$ respectively. As usual, the two players alternate in moving, and a player gets $w_{ij}=w_{ji}$ points for a move along edge $\{i,j\}$. The player who has most points when the game ends wins. We begin by giving the solution of the game with less than three disks.
We will use $A_{ij}(n)$ and $B_{ij}(n)$, for the total points for \one\ and \two\ respectively, of the two-player Tower of Hanoi game, for transferring $n$ disks from Peg~$i$ to Peg~$j$ by a given algorithm, for example the minimal algorithm, and we let the \emph{total score} be $\Delta_{ij}(n) = A_{ij}(n)-B_{ij}(n)$, or just $\Delta(n)$. Hence, if $\Delta(n)>0$ then \one\ wins, if $\Delta(n)=0$, then the game is tie, and otherwise \two\ wins.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:3}
Consider the two-player Tower of Hanoi game on two disks, three pegs and three weights of real numbers $w_{12}$, $w_{13}$, and $w_{23}$. In case of (EC4) or (EC5), the first player wins if either of the following inequalities holds:
\begin{align}
w_{12}+w_{23}-w_{13} > 0\label{tag1}\\
3w_{13} - w_{12} - w_{23} > 0\label{tag2}\\
w_{13}+w_{23}-w_{12} > 0\label{tag3}\\
3w_{12} - w_{13} - w_{23} > 0\label{tag4}\\
w_{12}+w_{13}-w_{23} > 0\label{tag5}
\end{align}
In case of (EC2) or (EC3), she wins if (\ref{tag5}) holds. In case of (EC1), she wins if (\ref{tag1}) or (\ref{tag2}) holds. Otherwise the game is a draw.
If the game is played on only one disk, then (EC2,3) are not applicable. For (EC1) the first player wins if $w_{13}>0$; loses if $w_{13}<0$; and the game is a tie otherwise. The second player wins (EC4,5) if $w_{12}<0$ and $w_{13}<0$. The game is a tie if at least one of these weights is 0 and the others are non-positive. Otherwise the first player wins.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Notice that in this game, \one\ will only move the small disk and \two\ will only move the large one. There are only six possibilities. If \one\ is not able to force a win, then she will resort to drawn, using either of the two possibilities:
$$
12-(13-12-23)^{\infty}
$$
or
$$
13-(12-13-23)^{\infty},
$$
where $ij$ denotes the current player's move between Peg~$i$ to Peg~$j$, and where $(\cdot )^\infty$ denotes an infinite repetition of a given move sequence. But, in case it is to her advantage, she can interrupt either of these two sequences of moves, and use either of the following six sequences:
$$12-(13-12-23)^{2k}-13-23$$
$$13-(12-13-23)^{2k+1}-13$$
$$12-(13-12-23)^{2k+1}-12$$
$$13-(12-13-23)^{2k}-12-23$$
$$12-(13-12-23)^{2k+1}-13-12-13$$
$$13-(12-13-23)^{2k+1}-12-13-12$$
for $k$ a non-negative integer. In the first two cases she will end the game on Peg~3 for (EC1,4,5), corresponding to the cases (\ref{tag1}) and (\ref{tag2}) respectively. For the two middle move sequences, she will end on Peg~2 for (EC4,5), corresponding to the cases (\ref{tag3}) and (\ref{tag4}) respectively. To terminate the game on Peg~1, only valid for (EC2-5), she uses one of the two last move sequences. They are symmetric and both result in the inequality (\ref{tag5}). In either case, the largest disk has been moved.
In each of the above cases we evaluate the value of $A(2)-B(2)$ and then the triangular inequalities appear, and it is clear that the difference of total points is independent of the choice of $k$ in each case.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\caption{Consider (EC1) for $n=2$. Here $w_{23} = -3$ and the other weights represent the $x$- and $y$-axes. The game is drawn in the white area. Compare this picture with the result for $n\geqslant 3$ in Theorem~\ref{thm:4}, where the class of drawn games would have been represented by a single white dot at $(-3,-3)$.}\label{fig:4}
\vspace{2mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{drawn_dot_sand3-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
It turns out that the case $n\ge 3$ has fewer drawn games, allowing a simpler description; it relies on the general ideas in Section~\ref{S2}. By relabeling the pegs, it suffices to analyze the case of transferring the disks from Peg~1 to Peg~3 and the case from Peg~1 to Peg~1 .
\begin{thm}\label{thm:4}
Given $n\ge 3$ disks, three pegs and three weights of real numbers $w_{13}$, $w_{12}$, and $w_{23}$. Then, for the two-player Tower of Hanoi game, the first player wins any game, except in the case $w_{12}=w_{13}=w_{23}\leq 0$ for which the game is a draw.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
If $w_{12}=w_{13}=w_{23}=\alpha$, it is easy to see that, with any strategy, if the game is not drawn (because of infinite play), then the total score is $\Delta(n)=\alpha$ for any $n\geq 1$ because the total number of moves is always odd if the game finish. The result follows in this case.
Let $\{i,j,k\}=\{1,2,3\}$ and suppose that $w_{ij}$ is the smallest integer among $w_{ij}$, $w_{ik}$ and $w_{jk}$. Then, we have $w_{ik}+w_{jk}>2w_{ij}$. Let $P$ be an intermediate position where the two smallest disks are on Peg~$k$ and let the smallest disk among the disks on Peg~$i$ and Peg~$j$ be on Peg~$i$. We know, from Corollary~\ref{cor:1}, that the $n\ge3$ disks can be transferred from the initial position on Peg~1 to the intermediate position $P$ using an even sequence of moves $s_1$ and, from Theorem~\ref{thm:1}, that all the disks can be transferred from the final position on Peg~f to the intermediate position $P$ using an odd sequence of moves $s_2$. Then, it is clear that the reverse sequence of $s_2$ is an odd sequence ${s_2}^{-1}$ of moves transferring all the disks from the intermediate position $P$ to the final position. Thus, the sequence of moves $s_1{s_2}^{-1}$ is a finite strategy for transferring $n\ge3$ disks from Peg~1 to Peg~f. Let $p$ be the total score $\Delta(n)$ associated with this strategy. If $p>0$, \one\ wins following this strategy and the result is then proved. Suppose now that $p\le0$. We consider a new strategy where \one\ forces \two\ to play as follows:
\begin{enumerate}[1)]
\item
\one\ starts the game and forces \two\ to play the even number of moves of $s_1$, where the $n$ disks are transferred from the initial position on Peg~1 to the intermediate position $P$. After that, since $s_1$ is even, it is \one's turn.
\item
\one\ continues by forcing \two\ to play an even number of moves, whose sequence is denoted as $s_3$ and for which the total score $\Delta(n)$ is incremented by a positive value and where the $n$ disks are always at the position $P$ after $s_3$. Note that after this, it is always \one's turn since $s_3$ is even. This step is repeated until the total score $\Delta(n)$ is sufficiently large.
\item
\one\ finishes the game by forcing \two\ to play the odd number of moves of ${s_2}^{-1}$, where the $n$ disks are transferred from the intermediate position $P$ to the final position on Peg~f.
\end{enumerate}
It remains to detail the sequence $s_3$ and to verify that it effectively increments the total score $\Delta(n)$ by a positive value. In fact, the sequence $s_3$ consists of the 7 moves that transfer the two smallest disks from Peg~$k$ to Peg~$k$, as already seen in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:1}, and the move of the smallest disk of Peg~$i$ and Peg~$j$ from Peg~$i$ to Peg~$j$, and we repeat these $8$ moves twice so that we return to the intermediate position $P$. There are two possible sequences for $s_3$, that are
$$
\left(ik - jk - ik - ij - jk - ik - jk - ij\right)^2\ \text{or}\ \left( jk - ik - jk - ij - ik - jk - ik - ij \right)^2.
$$
In both cases, the total score $\Delta(n)$ is incremented by $2\left(w_{ik}+w_{jk}-2w_{ij}\right)$, which is strictly positive by hypothesis. So we have proved that \one\ wins the game by using the following strategy $s_1{s_3}^\lambda{s_2}^{-1}$, where
$$
\lambda = \left\lfloor\frac{-p}{2\left(w_{ik}+w_{jk}-2w_{ij}\right)}\right\rfloor+1.
$$
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
We can adapt this proof to scoring play from an arbitrary position of disks for the three-peg case. But we have to remember that in the two-player setting a position carries also a memory of the last move.
\begin{cor}
Consider an arbitrary Tower of Hanoi position on $n\geq 3$ disks, three pegs and three weights of real numbers $w_{13}$, $w_{12}$, and $w_{23}$. Then the first player wins, unless $w_{12}=w_{13}=w_{23}\leq 0$, and provided the previous player did not move the smallest disk.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Apply Theorem~\ref{thm:1} and the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:4} (omitting $s_1$).
\end{proof}
\section{The minimal number of moves for winning}\label{S6}
\subsection{The minimal number of moves for winning normal play}
Traditionally, in the one-player setting, the interest has often been focused on the minimal number of moves for transferring the tower. In this section we analyze our variations of the two-player game in this sense. It is not a big surprise that the minimal number of moves required for \one\ to win normal play is the same as the number of moves in the one-player minimal algorithm, but let us sum up the state of the art before we move on to the more challenging analysis of minimum number of moves for winning scoring play.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:5}
The minimum number of moves for transferring $n\ge1$ disks from one peg to another peg is $2^{n}-1$. The minimum number of moves for transferring $n\ge2$ disks from one peg to the same peg is $2^{n+1}-1$, if the largest disk has to be moved; and it is seven if only the smallest disk has to be moved.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
If we want to transfer $n\ge 1$ disks from Peg~1 to Peg~3, it is well known that the minimum number of moves needed is exactly $2^{n}-1$. Recall here in few words how to obtain this result. We prove it by induction on $n$. For $n=1$, the result is clear. Now, suppose that the result is true for transferring $n-1$ disks from one peg to another peg. If we want to transfer the $n$th disk from Peg~1 to Peg~3, the $n-1$ smallest disks must be on Peg~2. So, we transfer the $n-1$ smallest disks from Peg~1 to Peg~2 using $2^{n-1}-1$ moves by induction hypothesis, the largest disk from Peg~1 to Peg~3 and finally the $n-1$ smallest disks from Peg~2 to Peg~3 using also $2^{n-1}-1$ moves by induction hypothesis. This is the reason why the minimal number of moves needed for transferring $n$ disks from Peg~1 to Peg~3 is $2^{n}-1$.
Now, we want to transfer $n\ge 2$ disks from Peg~1 to Peg~1 with the condition that all disks have been moved at least twice (the largest disk has to be moved). We proceed by induction on $n\ge 2$. For $n=2$, it is easy to check that the two minimal sequences of moves are of length $7$, that are
$$
12 - 13 - 12 - 23 - 13 - 12 - 13 \quad\text{and}\quad 13 -12 - 13 - 23 - 12 - 13 - 12.
$$
Suppose that the result is true for transferring $n-1$ disks from one peg to the same peg. First, if we want to transfer the $n$th disk from Peg~1 to another peg, Peg~$i$ with $\{i,j\}=\{2,3\}$, the $(n-1)$th smallest disks have to be transferred from Peg~1 to Peg~$j$ using at least $2^{n-1}-1$ moves. Then, we distinguish two cases.
\begin{case}
If we want to transfer the largest disk from Peg~$i$ to Peg~1, the $n-1$ smallest disks have to be transferred from Peg~$j$ to Peg~$j$ using at least $2^n-1$ moves by induction hypothesis. Finally, we transfer the $n-1$ smallest disks from Peg~j to Peg~1 with at least $2^{n-1}-1$ moves. So, the number of moves is at least $2^{n+1}-1$ if we follow this strategy.
\end{case}
\begin{case}
If we want to transfer the largest disk from Peg~$i$ to Peg~$j$, the $n-1$ smallest disks have to be transferred from Peg~$j$ to Peg~1 using at least $2^{n-1}-1$ moves. After that, for transferring the largest disk from Peg~$j$ to Peg~1, the $n-1$ smallest disks have to be transferred from Peg~1 to Peg~$i$ using at least $2^{n-1}-1$ moves. Finally, we transfer the $n-1$ smallest disks from Peg~$i$ to Peg~1 using at least $2^{n-1}-1$ moves. Thus, the number of moves is at least $2^{n+1}-1$ if we follow this strategy.
\end{case}
In all cases, we have proved that the minimal number of moves for transferring $n$ disks from Peg~1 to Peg~1 is exactly $2^{n+1}-1$, following the two possible strategies that have been represented in Figure~\ref{fig:1}.
If we only require that the smallest disk, instead of the largest disk, has to be moved, the minimal number of moves for transferring $n\ge 2$ disks from one peg to the same peg is seven. The result is obtained when we only move the two smallest disks and let the $n-2$ largest disks unmoved on the starting peg.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\caption{Two possible strategies for transferring $n$ disks from one peg to the same peg.}\label{fig:1}
\vspace{1 mm}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
\hline
Position & Number \\ & of Moves \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.3]
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (2.5,0) -- (2.5,3);
\draw (7,0) -- (7,3);
\draw (11.5,0) -- (11.5,3);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (4.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0.5) rectangle (4,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1.5,1) rectangle (3.5,1.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (2,1.5) rectangle (3,2);
\end{tikzpicture}
& 0 \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.3]
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (2.5,0) -- (2.5,3);
\draw (7,0) -- (7,3);
\draw (11.5,0) -- (11.5,3);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (5,0) rectangle (9,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (10,0) rectangle (13,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (10.5,0.5) rectangle (12.5,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (11,1) rectangle (12,1.5);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $2^{n-1}$ \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.3]
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (2.5,0) -- (2.5,3);
\draw (7,0) -- (7,3);
\draw (11.5,0) -- (11.5,3);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (4.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (10,0) rectangle (13,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (10.5,0.5) rectangle (12.5,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (11,1) rectangle (12,1.5);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $2^{n}$ \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.3]
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (2.5,0) -- (2.5,3);
\draw (7,0) -- (7,3);
\draw (11.5,0) -- (11.5,3);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (4.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0.5) rectangle (4,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1.5,1) rectangle (3.5,1.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (2,1.5) rectangle (3,2);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $2^{n-1}-1$ \\
\hline
\hline
Total & $2^{n+1}-1$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}\quad
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
\hline
Position & Number \\ & of Moves \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.3]
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (2.5,0) -- (2.5,3);
\draw (7,0) -- (7,3);
\draw (11.5,0) -- (11.5,3);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (4.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0.5) rectangle (4,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1.5,1) rectangle (3.5,1.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (2,1.5) rectangle (3,2);
\end{tikzpicture}
& 0 \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.3]
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (2.5,0) -- (2.5,3);
\draw (7,0) -- (7,3);
\draw (11.5,0) -- (11.5,3);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (5,0) rectangle (9,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (10,0) rectangle (13,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (10.5,0.5) rectangle (12.5,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (11,1) rectangle (12,1.5);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $2^{n-1}$ \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.3]
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (2.5,0) -- (2.5,3);
\draw (7,0) -- (7,3);
\draw (11.5,0) -- (11.5,3);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (9.5,0) rectangle (13.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0) rectangle (4,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1.5,0.5) rectangle (3.5,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (2,1) rectangle (3,1.5);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $2^{n-1}$ \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.3]
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (2.5,0) -- (2.5,3);
\draw (7,0) -- (7,3);
\draw (11.5,0) -- (11.5,3);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (4.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (5.5,0) rectangle (8.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (6,0.5) rectangle (8,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (6.5,1) rectangle (7.5,1.5);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $2^{n-1}$ \\
\hline
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.3]
\draw (0,0) -- (14,0);
\draw (2.5,0) -- (2.5,3);
\draw (7,0) -- (7,3);
\draw (11.5,0) -- (11.5,3);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (0.5,0) rectangle (4.5,0.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1,0.5) rectangle (4,1);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (1.5,1) rectangle (3.5,1.5);
\draw[fill=graygreen] (2,1.5) rectangle (3,2);
\end{tikzpicture}
& $2^{n-1}-1$ \\
\hline
\hline
Total & $2^{n+1}-1$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Now, we estimate the minimal number of moves for winning the normal play two-player Tower of Hanoi.
\begin{thm}
Let $\mathrm{M}_l(n)$ denote the minimal number of moves needed for winning a normal play game on $l\ge 3$ pegs and $n\ge 1$ disks. Then,
$$
\begin{array}{ccl}
\mathrm{M}_3(n) & = & \left\{\begin{array}{l}
\begin{array}{ll}
2^{n}-1, & \text{ for }n\ge 1,\text{ for (EC1,4)},\\
\end{array}\\
\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
2^{n+1}-1, & \text{for }n\ge 2,\text{ for (EC2)},\\
7, & \text{for }n\ge 2,\text{ for (EC3)},\\
\end{array}\right.\\
\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
2^n-1, & \text{for }n\le 2,\text{ for (EC5)},\\
7, & \text{for }n\ge 3,\text{ for (EC5)}.\\
\end{array}\right.\\
\end{array}\right.\\ \\
\mathrm{M}_l(n) & = & \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
1, & \text{for } n=1, \ l\ge 4 \text{ and for (EC1,4,5)},\\
3, & \text{for } n=2, \ l\ge 4 \text{ and for (EC4,5)},\\
\infty, & \text{otherwise for }l\ge4.\\
\end{array}\right.
\end{array}
$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Apply the results in this section to the two-player setting.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The minimal number of moves for winning scoring play}
When the players move blindly (ignoring winning) and just follows the classical minimal algorithm, we obtain the total scores according to the following two lemmas.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:1}
Given $n \geq 1$ disks, three pegs and three weights of real numbers $w_{12}$, $w_{13}$, and $w_{23}$. Then, for the two-players' weighted Tower of Hanoi game of transferring $n$ disks from Peg $1$ to Peg $3$ by the minimal algorithm, the total score is
\begin{itemize}
\item
$\Delta_{13}(n) = w_{13}$ if $n$ is odd;
\item
$\Delta_{13}(n) = w_{12}+w_{23} - w_{13}$ if $n$ is even.
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The statement is that \one\ gets $w_{13}$ (or $w_{12}+w_{23}-w_{13}$) more points than \two\ when $n$ is odd (or $n$ is even, resp.). We prove it by induction on $n$.
When $n=1$, \one\ gets $\Delta_{13}(n)=w_{13}$ points by moving one disk from Peg~1 to Peg~3. When $n=2$, by using the usual minimal algorithm, the difference of points is $\Delta_{13}(n)=w_{12}+w_{23}-w_{13}$.
Now suppose that the statement is true for $n-1$. \one\ takes the strategy based on the minimal algorithm.
When $n$ is odd, then the movement of the smaller $n-1$ disks from Peg~1 to Peg~2 gives \one\ $\Delta_{12}(n-1) = w_{13}+w_{23}-w_{12}$ more points since $n-1$ is even and by the assumption of induction. Then, \two\ gets $w_{13}$ points by moving the largest disk from Peg~1 to Peg~3. Finally, the movement of the smaller $n-1$ disks from Peg~2 to Peg~3 gives \one\ $\Delta_{23}(n-1) = w_{12}+w_{13}-w_{23}$ more points. So, the difference of the total points is $\Delta_{13}(n)=(w_{13}+w_{23}-w_{12})-w_{13}+(w_{12}+w_{13}-w_{23})=w_{13}$, when $n$ is odd.
When $n$ is even, using the same argument, \one\ gets $w_{12}$ and $w_{23}$ more points in the phases of moving the smaller $n-1$ disks from Peg~1 to Peg~2 and Peg~2 to Peg~3, respectively by the assumption of induction. So, the difference of the total points is $\Delta_{13}(n) = w_{12}+w_{23}-w_{13}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}
Given $n\geq 2$ disks, three pegs and three weights of real numbers $w_{12}$, $w_{13}$, and $w_{23}$. Then, for the two-players' weighted Tower of Hanoi game of transferring $n$ disks from Peg $1$ to Peg $1$ by the minimal algorithm, if we suppose that the largest disk be moved, the total score is
\begin{itemize}
\item
$\Delta_{11}(n) = 3w_{23}-w_{12}-w_{13}$ if $n$ is odd;
\item
$\Delta_{11}(n) = w_{12}+w_{13} - w_{23}$ if $n$ is even.
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
By induction on $n\ge2$. For $n=2$, we have already seen in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:1} that the two minimal sequences of moves for transferring two disks from Peg~1 to Peg~1 are
$$
12 - 13 - 12 - 23 - 13 - 12 - 13 \quad\text{and}\quad 13 -12 - 13 - 23 - 12 - 13 - 12.
$$
In all cases, we obtain that $\Delta_{11}(2)=w_{12}+w_{13} - w_{23}$. Suppose now that the result is true for $n-1\ge2$. There are two minimal algorithms for transferring $n$ disks from Peg~1 to Peg~1. We recall them below. The first minimal algorithm is:
\begin{enumerate}[i)]
\item
the $n-1$ smallest disks are transferred from Peg~1 to Peg~3 using the $2^{n-1}-1$ moves of the minimal algorithm,
\item
the largest disk is transferred from Peg~1 to Peg~2,
\item
the $n-1$ smallest disks are transferred from Peg~3 to Peg~1 using the $2^{n-1}-1$ moves of the minimal algorithm,
\item
the largest disk is transferred from Peg~2 to Peg~3,
\item
the $n-1$ smallest disks are transferred from Peg~1 to Peg~2 using the $2^{n-1}-1$ moves of the minimal algorithm,
\item
the largest disk is transferred from Peg~3 to Peg~1,
\item
the $n-1$ smallest disks are transferred from Peg~2 to Peg~1 using the $2^{n-1}-1$ moves of the minimal algorithm.
\end{enumerate}
Thus, we have
$$
\Delta_{11}(n) \begin{array}[t]{l}
= \Delta_{13}(n-1) -w_{12} + \Delta_{31}(n-1) - w_{23} + \Delta_{12}(n-1) - w_{13} + \Delta_{21}(n-1) \\
= 2\left(\Delta_{13}(n-1) + \Delta_{12}(n-1)\right) - \left(w_{12}+w_{13}+w_{23}\right). \\
\end{array}
$$
Then, from Lemma~\ref{lem:1}, if $n$ is even, we obtain that
$$
\Delta_{11}(n) = 2\left(w_{13} + w_{12}\right) - \left(w_{12}+w_{13}+w_{23}\right) = w_{12} + w_{13} - w_{23}
$$
and, if $n$ is odd, we have
$$
\Delta_{11}(n) = 2\left(\left(w_{12}+w_{23}-w_{13}\right) + \left(w_{13}+w_{23}-w_{12}\right)\right) - \left(w_{12}+w_{13}+w_{23}\right) = 3w_{23}-w_{12}-w_{13}.
$$
Finally, we consider the second minimal algorithm, that is:
\begin{enumerate}[i)]
\item
the $n-1$ smallest disks are transferred from Peg~1 to Peg~3 using the $2^{n-1}-1$ moves of the minimal algorithm,
\item
the largest disk is transferred from Peg~1 to Peg~2,
\item
the $n-1$ smallest disks are transferred from Peg~3 to Peg~3 using the $2^n-1$ moves of the minimal algorithm,
\item
the largest disk is transferred from Peg~2 to Peg~1,
\item
the $n-1$ smallest disks are transferred from Peg~3 to Peg~1 using the $2^{n-1}-1$ moves of the minimal algorithm.
\end{enumerate}
Thus, we have
$$
\Delta_{11}(n) = \Delta_{13}(n-1) - w_{12} + \Delta_{33}(n-1) - w_{12} + \Delta_{31}(n-1) = 2\Delta_{13}(n-1) + \Delta_{33}(n-1) - 2w_{12}.
$$
Then, from Lemma~\ref{lem:1} for $\Delta_{13}(n-1)$ and by induction hypothesis for $\Delta_{33}(n-1)$, if $n$ is even, we have
$$
\Delta_{11}(n) = 2w_{13} + \left(3w_{12}-w_{13}-w_{23}\right) -2w_{12} = w_{12} + w_{13} - w_{23}
$$
and, if $n$ is odd, we have
$$
\Delta_{11}(n) = 2\left(w_{12}+w_{23}-w_{13}\right) + \left(w_{13}+w_{23} - w_{12}\right) - 2w_{12} = 3w_{23}-w_{12}-w_{13}.
$$
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
We estimate the minimal number of moves for winning scoring Tower of Hanoi under the five ending conditions (EC1-5). We recall that the starting peg is Peg~1 and for (EC1) we suppose the tower is transferred to Peg~3.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:7}
Let $\mathrm{M}_{3}(n)$ denote the minimal number of moves needed for a winning game on three pegs and $n\geq1$ disks. Then, for $n\leq2$,
\begin{itemize}
\item
for (EC1):
$$
\mathrm{M}_{3}(1) = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
1 & \text{ if } w_{13}\neq 0,\\
\infty & \text{ otherwise},
\end{array}\right.
$$
$$
3 \leq \mathrm{M}_{3}(2) \leq \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
3 & \text{ if } w_{12}+w_{23}>w_{13}, \\
5 & \text{ if } 3w_{13}>w_{12}+w_{23}, \\
\infty & \text{ otherwise}, \\
\end{array}\right.
$$
\item
for (EC2,3):
$$
\mathrm{M}_{3}(1) = \infty,
$$
$$
7 \leq \mathrm{M}_{3}(2) \leq \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
7 & \text{ if } w_{12}+w_{13}>w_{23}, \\
\infty & \text{ otherwise}, \\
\end{array}\right.
$$
\item
for (EC4,5):
$$
\mathrm{M}_{3}(1) = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
1 & \text{ if } \max\{w_{12},w_{13}\}\neq 0,\\
\infty & \text{ otherwise},
\end{array}\right.
$$
$$
3 \leq \mathrm{M}_{3}(2) \leq \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
3 & \text{ if } w_{12}+w_{23}>w_{13} \text{ or } w_{13}+w_{23}>w_{12}, \\
5 & \text{ if } 3w_{13}>w_{12}+w_{23} \text{ or } 3w_{12}>w_{13}+w_{23}, \\
7 & \text{ if } w_{12}+w_{13}>w_{23}, \\
\infty & \text{ otherwise.} \\
\end{array}\right.
$$
\end{itemize}
For $n\geq3$, if $w_{12}=w_{13}=w_{23}=\alpha$, we have
$$
\mathrm{M}_{3}(n) = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
2^{n}-1 & \text{ if } \alpha>0, \\
\infty & \text{ if } \alpha\leq 0. \\
\end{array}\right.
$$
Otherwise, suppose that
$$
\beta_1 = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
w_{13} & \text{ if } n \text{ odd},\\
w_{12}+w_{23}-w_{13} & \text{ if } n \text{ even}, \\
\end{array}\right.
$$
$$
\beta_2 = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
3w_{23}-w_{12}-w_{13} & \text{ if } n \text{ odd},\\
w_{12}+w_{13}-w_{23} & \text{ if } n \text{ even}, \\
\end{array}\right.
$$
$$
\beta_3 = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\max\{w_{13}, w_{12}\} & \text{ if } n \text{ odd},\\
\max\{w_{12}+w_{23}-w_{13}, w_{13}+w_{23}-w_{12}\} & \text{ if } n \text{ even}, \\
\end{array}\right.
$$
$$
\text{and }\gamma = \max \left\{ w_{ij}+w_{ik}-2w_{jk} \ \middle\vert\ \{i,j,k\}=\{1,2,3\} \right\}.
$$
Then,
\begin{itemize}
\item
for (EC1):
$$
\mathrm{M}_{3}(n) = 2^{n}-1 \text{ if } \beta_1>0,
$$
otherwise,
$$
2^n \leq \mathrm{M}_{3}(n) \leq 2^{n}+15+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_1}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor,
$$
except for $n=3$ with (i) $\gamma = w_{13}+w_{23}-2w_{12}$ and (ii) $\gamma = w_{12}+w_{13}-2w_{23}$, where
$$
8 \leq \mathrm{M}_{3}(n) \leq \min\biggl\{27+16\left\lfloor\frac{2(w_{12}+w_{23})-3w_{13}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor, 29+16\left\lfloor\frac{-w_{13}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor\biggr\},
$$
\item
for (EC2):
$$
\mathrm{M}_{3}(n) = 2^{n+1}-1 \text{ if } \beta_2 > 0,
$$
$$
2^{n+1} \leq \mathrm{M}_{3}(n) \leq 2^{n+1}+15+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_2}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor \text{ otherwise,}
$$
\item
for (EC3):
$$
\mathrm{M}_{3}(n) = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
7 & \text{ if } w_{12}+w_{13}>w_{23},\\
15 & \text{ if } w_{12}+w_{13}\leq w_{23} \text{ and } \beta_2 > 0, \\
\end{array}\right.
$$
$$
16 \leq \mathrm{M}_{3}(n) \leq
31+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_2}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor \text{ otherwise},
$$
\item
for (EC4):
$$
\mathrm{M}_{3}(n) = 2^n-1 \text{ if } \beta_3 > 0,
$$
otherwise,
$$
2^{n} \leq \mathrm{M}_{3}(n) \leq
\min\biggl\{
2^{n}+15+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_3}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor,
2^{n+1}+15+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_2}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor
\biggr\},
$$
except for (i) $n=3$ and $\gamma = w_{13}+w_{23}-2w_{12}$, where
$$
8 \leq \mathrm{M}_{3}(3) \leq
\min\biggl\{
23+16\left\lfloor\frac{-w_{12}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor,
27+16\left\lfloor\frac{2(w_{12}+w_{23})-3w_{13}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor,
29+16\left\lfloor\frac{-w_{13}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor,$$
$$
31+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_2}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor\biggr\},
$$
for (ii) $n=3$ and $\gamma = w_{12}+w_{23}-2w_{13}$, where
$$
8 \leq \mathrm{M}_{3}(3) \leq
\min\biggl\{
23+16\left\lfloor\frac{-w_{13}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor,
27+16\left\lfloor\frac{2(w_{13}+w_{23})-3w_{12}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor,
29+16\left\lfloor\frac{-w_{12}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor,$$
$$
31+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_2}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor\biggr\},
$$
and for (iii) $n=3$ and $\gamma = w_{12}+w_{13}-2w_{23}$, where
$$
8 \leq \mathrm{M}_{3}(3) \leq
\min\biggl\{
27+16\left\lfloor\frac{2(w_{12}+w_{23})-3w_{13}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor,
29+16\left\lfloor\frac{-w_{13}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor,
$$
$$
27+16\left\lfloor\frac{2(w_{13}+w_{23})-3w_{12}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor,
29+16\left\lfloor\frac{-w_{12}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor,
31+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_2}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor\biggr\},
$$
\item
for (EC5):
$$
7 \leq \mathrm{M}_{3}(n) \leq \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
7 & \text{ if } w_{12}+w_{13}>w_{23}
\text{ or } (n=3 \text{ and } \beta_3>0),\\
15 & \text{ if } (w_{12}+w_{13}\leq w_{23} \text{ and } \beta_2>0) \text{ or } (n=4 \text{ and } \beta_3>0), \\
2^n-1 & \text{ if } \beta_3>0,\\
\end{array}\right.
$$
otherwise,
$$
8 \leq \mathrm{M}_{3}(n) \leq
\min\biggl\{
31+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_2}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor,
2^{n}+15+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_3}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor
\biggr\},
$$
except for the cases (i), (ii), and (iii) that are the same with (EC4).
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We first prove the results for $n=1$ and $2$. For (EC1) and $n=1$, the number of moves for a winning game is 1 if $w_{13} \neq 0$ because what Anh can do in the first turn is to only move the disk from Peg~1 to Peg~3 (note that if $w_{13} < 0$, Bao wins). For $n=2$ and if $w_{12}+w_{23}>w_{13}$, the minimal algorithm for transferring the two disks from Peg~1 to Peg~3 is used for Anh to win. For $n=2$ and if $3w_{13}>w_{12}+w_{23}$, the move sequence $13-12-13-23-13$ with $\Delta(2)=3w_{13}-w_{12}-w_{23}$ is used. For (EC2,3), in the case of $n=1$, the game can not be started because the disk is not allowed to be moved from Peg~1. For $n=2$ and if $w_{12}+w_{13}>w_{23}$, one of the sequences with seven moves used in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:5} is adopted, resulting in $\Delta(2)=w_{12}+w_{13}-w_{23}$. For (EC4,5), the result for $n=1$ is obtained by combining the conditions for moving the disk to Peg~2 and to Peg~3. For $n=2$, the result is obtained by considering all the cases of Anh completing the tower on Peg~1, 2, and 3 and by employing the move sequences in (EC1-3).
For $n\geq 3$, if $w_{12}=w_{13}=w_{23}=\alpha\leq 0$, Anh can not get a positive score so she uses the strategy of escaping the game to end and achives a draw. If $\alpha >0$, Anh wins using the minimal algorithm with difference of score $\Delta(n)=\alpha >0$. Otherwise, that is, when $n\geq 3$ and not all $w_{12}$, $w_{13}$, and $w_{23}$ are equal, Anh uses the common strategy for all ending conditions (EC1-5) of using the minimal algorithm for transferring the tower from Peg 1 to a final peg if that algorithm can be regarded as the concatenation of the move sequences $s_1$ and $s_2^{-1}$ used in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:4}. For all (EC1-5) and $n\geq4$, and for most of the cases with $n=3$, this strategy works. Otherwise, that is, in some exceptional cases with $n=3$, we construct new move sequences. We state the detail for each of the ending conditions below.
For (EC1) and $n\geq3$, except for the two cases ($n=3$ and $\gamma = w_{13}+w_{23}-2w_{12}$) and ($n=3$ and $\gamma = w_{12}+w_{13}-2w_{23}$), the minimal algorithm for transferring the tower from Peg~1 to Peg~3 can be used as concatenation of $s_1$ and $s_2^{-1}$ because the minimal algorithm reaches the intermediate position satisfying the condition for $P$ in Theorem~\ref{thm:4} with an even number of moves. Then it is further divided into two subcases depending on whether $\Delta(n)$ is positive. When $\Delta(n) > 0$, the minimal algorithm results in Anh's win with $\mathrm{M}_{3}(n)=2^n-1$. Otherwise, the move sequence $s_3$ in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:4} is additionally used $\lambda$ times in the notation of Theorem~\ref{thm:4} for Anh to win, where by Lemma~\ref{lem:1},
$$
\lambda = \left\lfloor\frac{-\Delta(n)}{2\left(w_{ik}+w_{jk}-2w_{ij} \right)}\right\rfloor+1 =\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_1}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor+1.
$$
Therefore, the minimal number of moves is bounded as
$$
\mathrm{M}_{3}(n)\leq 2^n-1+16\biggl(\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_1}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor+1\biggr) =2^n+15+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_1}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor.
$$
For $n=3$ and $\gamma = w_{13}+w_{23}-2w_{12}$, that is, if $w_{12}$ is the smallest weight, the minimal algorithm can not reach the position satisfying the condition for $P$, having the two smallest disks on Peg~3 and the largest disk on either of the remaining pegs. So the following two move sequences are considered instead as candidates for $s_1s_2^{-1}$. The sequence with a smaller number of moves is then actually used (we write the sequences in the format ($s_1$)-($s_2^{-1}$).
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &(12-13-23-12)-(23-13-12-23-12-13-23) \ \text{ (11 moves)}\\
& &(13-12-13-23-13-12)-(23-13-12-23-12-13-23) \ \text{ (13 moves)}
\end{eqnarray*}
The total scores for these sequences are $\Delta(n)=2(w_{12}+w_{23})-3w_{13}$ and $\Delta(n)=w_{13}$, respectively. Therefore, $\mathrm{M}_{3}(3)$ is bounded as stated. Next, for $n=3$ and $\gamma = w_{12}+w_{13}-2w_{23}$, similarly to the exceptional case just mentioned, the minimal algorithm can not be used as $s_1 s_2^{-1}$. So, the following two sequences are considered as candidates for $s_1$ and $s_2^{-1}$ and the one with a smaller number of moves is actually used.
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &(12-13-23-12-23-13-12-23)-(12-13-23) \ \text{ (11 moves)}\\
& &(12-13-23-12-13-23-13-12-13-23)-(12-13-23) \ \text{ (13 moves)}
\end{eqnarray*}
For the first and the second sequences, the total scores are $\Delta(n)=2(w_{12}+w_{23})-3w_{13}$ and $\Delta(n)=w_{13}$, respectively. Therefore, $\mathrm{M}_{3}(3)$ is bounded as stated.
For (EC2) and $n\geq3$, the minimal algorithm for transferring the Tower from Peg~1 to itself, where the largest disk has to be moved, can be used as concatenation of $s_1$ and $s_2^{-1}$. More precisely, if $\gamma = w_{12}+w_{23}-2w_{13}$, the first minimal algorithm in Lemma~2 in which the role of Peg~2 and Peg~3 is exchanged is used. Then after the procedure ii) of the algorithm with an even number of moves, it reaches the intermediate position $P$, so this algorithm can be $s_1 s_2^{-1}$. Next, if $\gamma = w_{13}+w_{23}-2w_{12}$, the first minimal algorithm in Lemma~2 can be $s_1 s_2^{-1}$. Finally, if $\gamma = w_{12}+w_{13}-2w_{23}$, after the procedure iv) of the minimal algorithm with an even number of moves, it reaches the intermediate position $P$. So the minimal algorithm can be $s_1 s_2^{-1}$. Similarly to (EC1), it is further divided into two subcases depending on whether $\Delta(n)$ is positive. When $\Delta(n) > 0$, Anh wins with the minimal algorithm with $\mathrm{M}_{3}(n)=2^{n+1}-1$. Otherwise, by Lemma~2 the minimal number of moves is bounded as
$$
\mathrm{M}_{3}(n)\leq 2^{n+1}-1+16\biggl(\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_2}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor+1\biggr) = 2^{n+1}+15+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_2}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor.
$$
For (EC3), recall that the Tower is moved to itself, but only the smallest disk has to be moved at least once. First, we examine the case when only the two smallest disks are to be moved during the game. Then Anh can win with the 7 moves in Table~1 if $\Delta(n)=w_{12}+w_{13}-w_{23}>0$. Next, when more than two disks are moved during the game, then Anh uses the minimal algorithm of transferring the smallest three disks from Peg~1 to itself with 15 moves. Then, as shown in (EC2) with $n=3$, if $\beta_2>0$ $M(n)=2^{3+1}-1=15$ for all $n\geq 3$. Otherwise,
$$
\mathrm{M}_{3}(n)\leq 2^{3+1}-1+16\biggl(\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_2}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor+1\biggr) = 31+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_2}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor.
$$
For (EC4), in which one can win by completing the Tower at Peg~1, 2, or 3, the algorithms and results for (EC1) with Peg~2 or Peg~3 as the final peg and (EC2) are employed. First, recall that
$$
\beta_3 = \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\max\{w_{13}, w_{12}\} & \text{ if } n \text{ odd},\\
\max\{w_{12}+w_{23}-w_{13}, w_{13}+w_{23}-w_{12}\} & \text{ if } n \text{ even}. \\
\end{array}\right.
$$
When $\beta_3>0$, Anh can win by using the minimal algorithm to reach either of Peg~2 or Peg~3 with $2^n - 1$ moves. Otherwise, if pairs of $n$ and $\gamma$ are not the exceptional ones in (EC1) and (EC2), the minimal algorithms for reaching Peg~1, 2, or 3 with the repetitive part $s_3^{\lambda}$ is used. Then, the minimal number of moves is bounded as
$$
\mathrm{M}_{3}(n) \leq \min\biggl\{2^{n}+15+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_3}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor, 2^{n+1}+15+16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_2}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor\biggr\}
$$
as stated. The remaining cases are for (EC1) with Peg~2 or Peg~3 as the final peg with $n=3$ and with either of the following: (i) $\gamma = w_{13}+w_{23}-w_{12}$, (ii) $\gamma = w_{12}+w_{23}-w_{13}$, and (iii) $\gamma = w_{12}+w_{13}-w_{23}$. When $\gamma = w_{13}+w_{23}-w_{12}$, we evaluate the numbers of moves for each case of reaching Peg~3, Peg~2, and Peg~1. When Peg~3 is the final peg, this is exactly one of the exceptional cases in (EC1), so the number of moves should be
$$
\min\biggl\{27+16\left\lfloor\frac{2(w_{12}+w_{23})-3w_{13}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor, 29+16\left\lfloor\frac{-w_{13}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor\biggr\}.
$$
When Peg~2 is the final peg, this case of $\gamma = w_{13}+w_{23}-w_{12}$ is not at all exceptional; thus, the minimal algorithm for transferring the three disks from Peg~1 to Peg~2 is used as the sequence $s_1s_2^{-1}$. So, the number of moves is
$$
2^3 - 1 +16\biggl(\left\lfloor\frac{-w_{12}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor + 1\biggr)
= 23 +16\left\lfloor\frac{-w_{12}}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor.
$$
When Peg~1 is the final peg, there is no exception, so the minimal algorithm is used for $s_1s_2^{-1}$ and the number of moves is
$$
2^{3+1} - 1 +16\biggl(\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_2}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor + 1\biggr) = 31 +16\left\lfloor\frac{-\beta_2}{2\gamma}\right\rfloor.
$$
In all, the minimum of these numbers of moves is taken as the upper bound of $M_3(3)$ as stated for (i) of (EC4). For (ii), the argument is exactly the same with (i) by exchanging the role of Peg~2 and Peg~3. For (iii), since $\gamma = w_{12}+w_{13}-w_{23}$ has to be treated as an exceptional case for both Peg~2 and Peg~3 are final pegs, so the bound for $M_3(3)$ is obtained as stated.
Finally for (EC5), the algorithms and results used for (EC1) and (EC3) are employed for obtaining the bounds for $M_3(n)$. Since the argument is almost the same with (EC4), we omit the detail.
\end{proof}
\section{Discussion}
We have chosen a number of ending conditions for two player variations of the classical Tower of Hanoi. There are probably many other ways to proceed. But one of the most intriguing questions is if there is some way to release Bao from his confinement of forced move play, which gives the two player game still the flavor of a one player game. Indeed each move by Bao is automatic without thinking and his input to the game has diminished to a purely mechanical matter. Still Anh's winning move paths in the scoring variation are non-trivial; in particular when it comes to minimizing the number of moves. Theorem~\ref{thm:7} obviously leads to the big open question what the minimal numbers of moves may be in the open cases.
\subsection{When is Bao at advantage?}\label{S4}
The analysis so far has been disadvantageous for \two, apart from very special circumstances where \one\ was forced to revert to infinite play. Let us discuss minor alternations of the game rules, which gives \two\ a greater impact on the game. We settle with the standard impartial setting and leave possible further scoring analysis for a future study.
A standard variation for impartial games is to play mis\`{e}re rather than normal play, that is, the player who terminates the game loses. We need to impose a rule that makes such rules meaningful. A standard technique in combinatorial games is to use `compulsory' moves. Here: a player must put a disk on a one size larger disk if such a move is available. This rule makes mis\`{e}re meaningful, because a final move is forced if the game goes this far. However there is no guarantee that the game will reach the second last position. In fact, since \one\ still controls the game by always moving the smaller disk she will have to avoid that the game continues until the second last position. Now, the question arises whether she can, at least force drawn. Of course now Anh only has a choice every second move, and the analysis is straight forward. But we leave this to the reader, since we are looking for some rules where Bao actually wins.
Another variation which gives \two\ more impact on the game, is to allow more than one move on a given disk in a direct sequence of moves. If the previous player moved disk $d$, then the current player can move it as well, unless the position would become exactly the same as another position in the current `round'. Here `round' stands for a circuit where only the given disk has been moved. Once another disk has been moved the current circuit is broken, and a new `round' starts. For the three peg case, this gives an immediate advantage for \two, but he will only be able to use it to play a draw game in the general case.
It turns out, that combining the two modifications in this section, but playing normal (EC5), \two\ can force a win. Let us explain in the three-peg case and with two disks. \one\ plays the smallest disk to Peg 3, say. \two\ moves it to Peg 2, which is legal in this round (note that he is not forced to put it on top of the larger disk on Peg 1, since this move is not legal). Now, \one\ has to play the larger disk to Peg 3 and hence \two\ wins by putting the smaller disk on top of the larger. Note that the forced moves were not important in the case for two disks. Now, we let them play the three-disk case, still on three pegs. The move sequence will, for example, be $\emph{12}-23-\emph{12}-23-\emph{13}-12-\emph{23}-12$ where \one's moves are all forced (except the first one), and \two\ wins. \two\ cannot immediately adapt this strategy for the cases $n> 3$, because if $n=4$, then \one\ would get a parity advantage. We leave it as an open question to resolve this game in general.
\subsection{How about several players?}
Yet another variation is to play our standard variation with several players. In the case for (EC1), three players, three pegs and two disks, then the first player cannot win under optimal play, but she can decide which one of the other players that will win. If this game is played with three disks, then it is drawn. This can be seen this way. No player will be forced to put the second smallest disk on a final peg and thereby giving the player just after the winning move. This follows because the player who would have moved the supposedly second last move of the smallest disk, can choose to put it on either the second or third smaller disk, either of which prevents a bad forced move of the second smallest disk. Open problems: classify the variations of normal and scoring play where several player Tower of Hanoi terminates.
|
\section{Introduction}
Magnetic vortices are fundamental topological states in restricted geometries such as thin submicron dots or nanopillars.\cite{COWBURN, Pribiag} For a certain range of aspect ratios, the micromagnetic ground state is a vortex structure because the circular configuration of the spins minimizes the stray dipolar fields. Because the norm of the local magnetization vector is conserved in strong ferromagnets due to a large exchange interaction, the magnetization at the core of the vortex tilts out of the film plane.
Vortices can also be nucleated in extended ferromagnetic thin films in the nanocontact (NC) geometry \cite{Pufall:PRB:2007, Mistral:PRL:2008}, in which it has been demonstrated that vortex manipulation over micrometer-scale distances is possible~\cite{ManNat}. Spin torque effects appear when large current densities ($\sim 10^{12}$ A/m$^2$) are applied through the NC, which also results in significant Oersted-Amp\`{e}re fields, e.g., 300 mT for 50 mA in 100 nm diameter NCs. Indeed the perpendicular component of this current flow (relative to the film plane) leads to a circulating Oersted-Amp\`{e}re field akin to that generated by a cylindrical conductor. As such, a vortex state can appear by minimizing the Zeeman energy associated with the Oersted fields, in contrast to the case of confined geometries in which stray fields are minimized. Because the Zeeman interaction is proportional to the current, vortices only appear above a certain threshold or nucleation current ($I_{\text{nucl}}$)~\cite{Mistral:PRL:2008}.
However, processes involving vortex nucleation are subject to conservation laws involving topological charges \cite{Devolder:APL:2009}. The topology involved is described by the Skyrmion number, $q = \eta p/2$, where $\eta$ is the vorticity which describes the curling magnetization of a vortex by $\eta$ = +1 and $\eta$ = -1 for an antivortex. $p$ is the core polarity, which describes the orientation of the magnetization at the vortex core. Since a uniform state has a total Skyrmion number (topological charge) of $q = 0$, the nucleation of a vortex ($q = p/2$) must be accompanied by the nucleation of an antivortex with the same core polarity such that the total $q$ remains zero~\cite{Tretiakov:PRB:2007}.
The stability of a vortex-antivortex (V-AV) pair in thin films strongly depends on the boundary conditions, i.e., on the micromagnetic state at the system edges. It has been shown \cite{Devolder2010} that pair nucleation in the magnetic free layer in zero field is followed by the antivortex being expelled by the Oersted-Amp\`{e}re field, resulting in steady-state oscillations of the vortex around the NC~\cite{Kim:PRB:2010}. The resulting micromagnetic state of the free layer therefore resembles the well-known Landau state. In contrast, the presence of an in-plane magnetic field would favor an uniform magnetic state far from the NC. In this case, the antivortex would be bound to the vortex such that the uniform state is preserved in the bulk of the film. This should equally be true for a ferromagnet exchange-biased by an antiferromagnet, where the internal field acting on the ferromagnet due to the exchange coupling also favors a uniform state.
Previous studies \cite{RotoloTM,Kuepferling} have suggested that the two ferromagnetic layers of a nanocontacted spin-valve structure may contain a vortex state under certain conditions of the applied magnetic field and injected current. To date, a successful model to explain the new observed dynamics has been lacking. In this article, we address this question from experimental and theoretical perspectives. We present experimental evidence of vortex-antivortex pair nucleation in the pinned layer of magnetic nanocontacts. At low bias currents, we observe the usual free-layer vortex oscillations expected of such structures~\cite{RubenPSB}. However, above a certain critical current, we detect the presence of a vortex-antivortex pair in the pinned layer through changes in the power spectra associated with the free-layer vortex oscillations. This critical current is strongly temperature-dependent, which is suggestive of a thermally-activated process. The experimental results are consistent with predictions based on rigid-vortex model.
\section{Experimental Results}
Figure 1 shows the experimental system studied.
\begin{figure
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{Fig1}
\caption{(Color online) Vortex oscillations in the free layer of the magnetic nanocontact device, with uniform magnetization in the pinned CoFe layer. The vortex spirals out until a stationary orbit in a potential provided by the Oersted-Amp\`{e}re field. The vortex orbital motion leads to a time-varying voltage (top inset). Arrows represent the projection of the average free layer magnetization underneath the NC area.}
\label{standardmode}
\end{figure}
It consists of a metallic nanocontact fabricated on top of a spin-valve (SV) stack of width $L=17 \mu$m. The composition of the SV is IrMn(6)/Co$_{90}$Fe$_{10}$(4.5)/Cu(3.5)/Ni$_{80}$Fe$_{20}$(5)/Pt(3), where the number in parentheses denote the layer thickness in nanometers. Details of the fabrication process are given elsewhere~\cite{Manfrini:APL:2009}. For the system studied here, the NC radius r$_{\text{nc}}$ is 75 nm~\cite{RubenPSB}. To determine the free layer magnetization (Ni$_{80}$Fe$_{20}$) and the Gilbert damping, ferromagnetic resonance experiments were performed from which we determined $\mu_{0}$M$_{\text{s}}$=1.1 T and $\alpha$=0.013, respectively. The electrical properties of the device were characterized by performing static magneto-transport measurements, which give a device resistance of 8.7 $\Omega$ and a magnetoresistance of 25 m$\Omega$ at room temperature. The Co$_{90}$Fe$_{10}$ layer acts as pinned layer since it is exchanged bias by an antiferromagnet (IrMn). Differential magnetoresistance curves have been also measured with a lock-in technique with a 10 $\mu$A ac current and zero dc applied current for different applied temperature. This technique allow us to find out how the exchange bias field ($\vec{H}_{\text{bias}}$) varies from 80 K up to 420 K, as it is shown in figure \ref{bias and Icrit}.
Prior to electrical characterization of the nanocontact device, we applied a magnetic field of $\approx$ 115 mT along the easy axis in order to saturate the free layer magnetization and therefore avoid to have any domain wall or vortex structure in the initial state. The device was measured at different temperatures from 6 K to 300 K in a cryostat probe station under zero applied field. To characterize the magnetization dynamics, the corresponding high-frequency fluctuations in the giant magnetoresistance signal were measured with a spectrum analyzer after amplification. The dc current ($I_{\textrm{dc}}$) applied to the nanocontact was ramped from 0 to 40 mA (upward scan) then back to 0 (downward scan), with electrons always flowing from the free to the pinned layer. The upward scans are used to determine the nucleation current $I_{\textrm{nucl}}$ of the free layer vortex, at which the voltage spectra exhibit a series of well-defined peaks representing the vortex gyration around the nanocontact~\cite{Devolder:APL:2009}.
Figure \ref{PSDtemp} shows the voltage power spectral density (PSD) as a function of the applied current, associated with oscillations of the vortex for four different temperatures, 6, 40, 160, and 200 K.
\begin{figure
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{Fig2}
\caption{\label{PSDtemp} Voltage power spectral densities (PSD) as function of current for different temperatures: (a) 6 K, (b) 40 K, (c) 160 K, and (d) 200 K.}
\end{figure}
The spectra are measured from the highest current value ($\approx$ 40 mA) to the annihilation current ($\approx$ 9 mA) of the vortex. Except for currents close to the annihilation of the vortex, where the dynamics is not well understood, a quasi-linear dependence of the oscillating frequency on current is observed. This result is consistent with a confining potential for the vortex dynamics that is determined by the Zeeman energy associated with the Oersted-Amp\`{e}re field, in line with previous observations on other spin-valve compositions~\cite{Devolder:APL:2010,Manfrini:APL:2009}. This "standard" oscillation mode corresponds to a vortex that orbits around the nanocontact in the free layer (Fig. 1).
However, a different dynamical behavior is seen for currents above $I_{\text{dc}}$ $\approx$ 30 mA at different temperatures. At this critical current (I$_{\text{crit}}$), and in the range of a few mA above this value, power spectra of the vortex oscillations exhibit a bimodal character. We interpret this as a signature of thermally-driven hopping between two distinct dynamical modes with different frequencies, which we label hereafter as the upper mode (UM) and lower mode (LM). Above this critical current, the LM frequency branch represents a continuation of the standard mode, while the UM branch occurs at a higher frequency with a different slope compared with the LM mode. While we have not obtained time-resolved measurements that confirm the hopping between the UM and LM, a signature of the hopping is present in the PSD shown in Figs 2(a)-(d). If a vortex is hopping between two oscillation modes, UM and LM, it spends some time $t_{\text{UM}}$ and $t_{\text{LM}}$ in each mode. A clear feature of hopping is a signal that should appear at frequencies related with the inverse time that the vortex spends to go from one mode to the other one. The observed frequency at which this mode appears is $\approx$ 50 MHz. At high current there appears a low frequency shoulder that only survives as long as the UM and LM modes are present. We have gathered in Table I the frequency jumps $f_{\text{UP}}$-$f_{\text{LM}}$ at $I_{\text{crit}}$ and their slopes ($df/dI$) at different experimental temperatures.
\begin{figure
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{Fig3}
\caption{\label{bias and Icrit} Critical current, nucleation current, and exchange bias field as a function of temperature.}
\end{figure}
The dependence of $I_{\text{nucl}}$ and $I_{\text{crit}}$ as function of the temperature is shown in Fig.~\ref{bias and Icrit}. It is worth noticing these two characteristic currents follow the same trend, which suggests they involve similar physical processes. While $I_{\text{nucl}}$ represents the threshold current to nucleate a vortex state in the free layer, the value $I_{\text{crit}}$ represents a threshold current associated with some dynamics in the pinned layer (PL). The observed decrease in power (not shown) when the current is increased is in agreement with this assertion.
The exchange bias field $\vec{H} _{\text{bias}}$ acting on the PL decreases as the temperature is increased. Note that the cryostat temperature in our experiment does not take into account the Joule heating resulting from the current flow through the nanocontact device. Recently, it has been reported how the current density is distributed along the SV stack after passing trough the NC \cite{APL:Sebastien:2012}. This study allowed us to simulate the temperature profile across the SV thickness underneath the NC \cite{SEbTEMP}. For currents of about 50 mA, we found the temperature increase to be between 150 K and 200 K in the vicinity of the NC. For example, at room temperature the $\vec{H}_{\text{bias}}$ is about 30 mT whereas for an injected current of 50 mA it would decreases down to 22 mT. Therefore, one consequence of Joule heating is to reduce the bias field acting on the PL in the nanocontact region. In line with this reasoning, nucleation of some magnetic structure with an out-of-plane magnetization may occur in the PL underneath the NC. This is discussed in more detail in Section IV.
The presence of a V-AV pair in the pinned layer would give rise to an out-of-plane component of magnetization in the nanocontact region. This has two consequences on the vortex dynamics. First, it leads to a coupling between the gyrating vortex in the free layer and the vortex-antivortex pair through the dipolar interaction, which could lead to an additional term in the confining potential for the vortex. Second, and more importantly, the core magnetization of the vortex-antivortex pair leads to a perpendicular-to-plane component for the spin-polarized current flowing between the free and pinned layers, which can generate additional spin torques for the vortex dynamics. The latter may explain the frequency jump at the threshold $I_{\text{crit}}$ along with the different slope $df/dI$ observed for the UM. In this light, the existence of two oscillation modes suggests that the vortex-antivortex pair in the pinned layer has a finite lifetime, where the hopping is due to the repeated nucleation and annihilation of the vortex-antivortex pair due to thermal fluctuations.
\section{Model for Vortex-Antivortex nucleation}
In order to quantify the scenario involving nucleation and annihilation of the vortex-antivortex pair described in the previous section, we have extended the Thiele formalism for describing the nanocontact vortex oscillations by accounting for the presence of the vortex-antivortex pair. We first examine the nucleation problem without and with spin transfer torques, and then provide a description of the vortex dynamics in the presence of the vortex-antivortex pair.
\subsection{Vortex-antivortex nucleation in the pinned layer in the absence of STT}
As shown previously~\cite{Devolder2010}, the onset of vortex oscillations in the free layer takes place after the following sequence: (1) the initial uniformly-magnetized state is distorted by the large Oersted-Amp{\`e}re field; (2) nucleation of a vortex-antivortex pair occurs after this distortion becomes irreversible; (3) expulsion of the antivortex away from the nanocontact region. A similar process is expected for vortex-antivortex pair nucleation in the pinned layer, but the key difference is the presence of the exchange bias field $\vec{H}_{\text{bias}}$ that will limit the separation distance between the vortex and the antivortex. The equilibrium separation will therefore be determined by balancing the competing attractive and repulsive forces.
To describe the relevant energies associated with nucleation, we use the rigid vortex model to describe the vortex-antivortex pair. This formalism allows us to express the relevant energies in terms of the positions of the vortex and antivortex cores by using a suitable \emph{ansatz} for the spin structure at the cores. To simplify the integrals for the energies, we assume that the vortex is centered about the nanocontact, $X_{v}$= $(0,0)$, while the antivortex is situated at $\vec{X}$=$(X,Y)$. The spatial distribution of the core magnetization in polar coordinates ($\Theta$ and $\Phi$) is taken to be,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq1}
\Phi(x,y;X,Y)=\eta \tan^{-1} \left( \frac{y-Y}{x-X}\right)+\frac{\pi}{2},
\end{equation}
where $\eta = \pm 1$ is the vorticity. By using this \emph{ansatz}, the total magnetic energy of the pinned layer,
\begin{equation}
E=E_{exc}+E_{Oe}+E_{eb},
\end{equation}
which represents the exchange interaction, Oersted field Zeeman energy, and the exchange bias interaction, respectively. The expressions for the different energy terms are as follows,
\begin{equation}
E_{exc}= A_{pl} d_{pl} \int{d^{2}r \left(\nabla\Phi\right)^{2} }
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
E_{Oe}=-\mu_{0} H_{I}\cdot M^{pl}_{s}\int{dV \cos \left(\Phi_{Oe}-\Phi_{\bar{v}}\right)}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
E_{eb}=-\mu_{0} H_{bias}\cdot M^{pl}_{s}\cdot d_{pl}\int{d^{2}r \cos \left(\Phi_{\bar{v}}\right)}
\end{equation}
which can be simplified to give %
\begin{equation}
E_{exc}=4\pi A_{pl} d_{pl} \ln\frac{\| X_{\bar{v}}\| }{r_c},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
E_{Oe}=-\mu_{0} M^{pl}_{s} H_{I} \left(\pi d_{pl} r_{nc}X_{\bar{v}}\right)\ln\left[\frac{L}{r_{nc}}\right],
\label{EOe}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
E_{eb}= \mu_0\vec{H}_{bias}M^{pl}_{s}d^{pl}\kappa.
\end{equation}
Here, $A_{\text{pl}} d_{\text{pl}}$ is the exchange stiffness (0.4 eV), $H_{\text{I}} = \left|I \right|/4 \pi r_{\text{nc}}$ represents the Oersted-Amp\`{e}re field, $\Phi_{Oe}$ and $\Phi_{\bar{v}}$ describe the magnetic texture of the Oersted-Amp\`{e}re field and the antivortex respectively, $\mu_{0}M_{\text{s}}^{\text{pl}}$=1.56 T, $d_{\text{pl}}$ represents the thickness of the pinned layer (see Fig. 1), and $\kappa$ represents the effective surface area covered by the vortex-antivortex pair. For a vortex-antivortex separation in the range of 0 to tens of nm, this surface can be approximated by a disk joining the two cores and can be expressed as $\| \vec{X}_{\bar{v}} \|^{2}$.
Figure~\ref{energy}(a) illustrates how the barrier energy related to pair nucleation depends on the V-AV separation when a dc current of 32 mA (I$_{\text{crit}}$) is applied.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\includegraphics[width=17cm]{Fig4}
\caption{\label{energy} (Color online) (a) Topological configuration of the PL for I$_{\text{dc}}=$32 mA. The dashed lines separate the regions without pair, with a pair and with a sole vortex. The ellipses corresponds to the vortex-antivortex separation at equilibrium, with an underestimation factor due to the semi-infinite cylinder approximation and the approximations of the term $\kappa$.Micromagnetic configuration of the PL for I$_{\text{dc}}=$32 mA in the conservative limit for various exchange bias fields (b) 18 mT, (c) 20 mT (d) 22 mT and (e) 24 mT for the exact Oersted field profile. }
\end{figure*}
When the V-AV pair is present, the energy minimum corresponds to a given separation between the cores, which depends on the magnitude of the exchange bias field. Note that the Oersted-Amp\`{e}re field was calculated considering the NC as an semi-infinite cylinder. This is known ~\cite{APL:Sebastien:2012} to slightly overestimate the Oersted-Amp\`{e}re field, hence the corresponding energy term (eq.~\ref{EOe}); with our material parameter, we will see that this can lead to an underestimation of the separation between the cores of the vortex and the antivortex.
The model predicts that different magnetic states of the PL can appear depending on the magnitude of the field $\vec{H}_{\text{bias}}$. For $H_{\text{bias}} > $ 40 mT, the energy as function of the V-AV separation distance would exhibit a minimum in the range of the exchange length, $I_{\text{exc}}\approx$ 6 nm. Because this value is much smaller than the spatial extension of the vortex-antivortex pair, it suggests that most likely ground state in a pinned layer with $H_{\text{bias}} > $ 40 mT would be simply a distortion of its magnetization underneath the NC. In the other limit ("unpinned" layer with $H_{\text{bias}} \simeq 0$ mT), the energy minimum would correspond to a V-AV separation distance that falls out of the range showed in Figure~\ref{energy}(a). The preferred state in this case would thus involve the expulsion of the antivortex outside of the nanocontact region with the vortex remaining centered about the nanocontact. For the intermediate cases, $0 < H_{\text{bias}} < 40$ mT, the exchange bias field leads to an energy minimum at a well-defined separation distance between the vortex-antivortex pair; this distance has a strong dependence on the magnitude of the exchange bias field. We note that under the highest value of the applied current we used in our study (40 mA), the Joule heating leads to a temperature increase of 120 K~\cite{SEbTEMP} above room temperature, which results in a bias field of $H_{\text{bias}}\approx$ 22 mT; $H_{\text{bias}}$ vanishes at about 600 K in our samples. We conjecture that the separation distance of the vortex-antivortex core remains sufficiently small in our experiment such that spin torques, thermal effects, or both combined can lead to thermally-activated pair annihilation. This provides a mechanism for the intermittence of the LM and UM we observe in the power spectra.
To shed further light on this scenario, we performed micromagnetics simulations on the nucleation process in the pinned layer using the \textsc{Mumax} code~\cite{Vansteenkiste20112585}. The simulations were performed at zero temperature without the spin-torque terms due to the currents flowing perpendicular to the film plane. The material parameters used were $M_{\text{s}}$=1.260 kA/m, $A=19$ pJ/m, and $\alpha=0.013$. The simulated region was a rectangular volume with dimensions of 1280 nm $\times$ 1280 nm $\times$ 5 nm that was discretized using 512 $\times$ 512 $\times$ 1 finite-difference cells. The spatial distribution of the Oersted-Amp\`{e}re field was computed with full 3D finite-element simulations (COMSOL)~\cite{APL:Sebastien:2012}, which was then included into the micromagnetics simulations.
Results from the micromagnetics simulations are shown in Fig.~\ref{energy}(b)-(e). Our simulations confirm that a stable separation distance between the vortex-antivortex pair is possible for a given value of the applied current and exchange bias field. We notice that the main difference between the analytical model and the simulations is the fact that the antivortex is found to be stabilized outside the nanocontact area while in the analytical model the antivortex remains inside the nanocontact. While there are quantitative differences in the separation distance, the simulation results supports the physical picture that underlies the analytical description.
\subsection{Vortex-antivortex nucleation in the pinned layer in the presence of STT}
The previous simulations neglected spin transfer torques (STT) in the nucleation process of the V-AV pair in the pinned layer. In the present step, we now take into account the STT arising from the intralayer spin currents with a spin polarization constant $P=0.2$; the other system parameters remain unchanged and are still meant to describe a single isolated pinned layer. Results from these simulations are given in Fig. 5.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\includegraphics[width=17cm]{Fig5}
\caption{\label{STT} (Color online) Micromagnetic simulations showing the time evolution of the vortex-antivortex pair when a constant current $I_\text{dc}$ of 40 mA is applied, for different exchange bias bias field, (a) $\mu_{0}H_{\text{bias}}=$ 40 mT and (b) $\mu_{0} H_{\text{bias}}=$ 18 mT. The intralayer STT is included in this simulation.}
\end{figure*}
As expected, the addition of the STT results in the vortex spiraling out of the edge of the NC. The simulations suggest that the vortex never reaches a stationary orbit because it annihilates with the antivortex first, resulting in a distorted micromagnetic state in the pinned layer. After this annihilation, the process of nucleation can repeat itself. This scenario accounts for the intermittent hopping between the two vortex oscillation modes (see Fig.~\ref{PSDtemp}). The UM is likely to correspond to the existence of the pair while the LM is likely to correspond to a distortion of the pinned layer (without any out-of-plane component of the magnetization). If the current is considerably larger than $I_{\text{crit}}$, e.g., 50 mA, the antivortex is expelled from the pinned layer and the vortex remaining in the pinned layer starts to perform full rotations around the NC along a stationary orbit. At these very large currents, we would thus be in a situation in which the dynamics inside the pinned layer and inside the free layer are qualitatively similar.
\subsection{Influence of a V-AV pair in the PL onto the oscillating vortex of the free layer}
The analytical theory presented here is based on previous studies \cite{Seb:NatPhys,Kim2012217} in which it was shown that the STT torques from the interlayer spin currents alone cannot drive self-sustained oscillations under zero field.
Instead, it was shown that this is the in-plane (i.e. intralayer) current that drives the vortex motion. However this was for a static and perfectly in-plane magnetized pinned layer.
Here the presence of the V-AV pair in the PL induces a slight out-of-plane tilt of the spin polarization of the CPP current. To describe the free layer dynamics, we need to take into account this slight out-of-plane tilt of the spin polarization of the CPP current $\vec{P}_{\bot}=p_{\bot}\int dV \text{sin}^{2}\Theta \nabla\Phi$, where ($\Theta,\Phi$) represent the magnetization orientation in polar coordinates. In our specific case, the prefactor of the integral, $p_{\bot}$ is calculated as the ratio between the vortex core radius and the radius of the NC giving a value for $p_{\bot} \approx$ 0.02. The value of $p_{\bot}$ depends on the material parameters in the sense that the vortex core radius scales with the exchange length ($l_{\text{exc}}$) of the magnetic material. Therefore, the larger the saturation magnetization $M_{\text{s}}$, the lower the value of $l_{\text{exc}}$ will be and therefore $p_{\bot}$ is expected to decrease accordingly. The impact of the perpendicular component of spin transfer torque acting over the vortex in the free layer follows Thiele's approach\cite{Thiele}. It includes non conservative torques and it is possible to describe the vortex motion around the NC. To describe the magnetization orientation we use polar coordinates $\Theta(\vec{r})$ and $\Phi(\vec{r})$. $\vec{\textbf{X}}=(X,Y)$ represents the vortex position in the free layer. The equation of motion can be expressed as follows,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq2}
\vec{\textbf{G}}\times
\left[\frac{d\vec{\textbf{X}}}{dt}-\vec{\textbf{u}}(\vec{\textbf{X}})\right]+\hat{D}\left[\alpha\frac{d\vec{\textbf{X}}}{dt}-\beta\vec{\textbf{u}}(\vec{\textbf{X}})\right]+\sigma
I P_{\bot}+\frac{\partial{U_{z}}}{d\vec{\textbf{X}}} =0.
\end{equation}
where $U_{\text{z}}$ represents the Zeeman energy, $\sigma$ represents the spin-torque efficiency, and $\vec{\textbf{u}}(\vec{r})$ the spin-current drift velocity. $\alpha$ and $\beta$ represent the damping constant and the nonadiabatic constant, respectively. By solving Eq. 6, using $R_{0} \exp(i\phi)= X_{0}+iY_{0}$, we find the following coupled differential equations,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq3}
G \partial_{t}R+\alpha D R\partial_{t}\varphi+Gu=\frac{M_{s}\pi r^{2}_{nc}
d_{fl}}{\gamma R}\sigma I P_{\bot} \sin^{2}\Theta_{0},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq4}
GR \partial_{t}\varphi-\alpha D \partial_{t}R+\beta D u
=\frac{\partial{U_{z}}}{\partial{R}},
\end{equation}
where $d_\text{{fl}}$ and $M_\text{{s}}$, represent the thickness and the saturation magnetization of the free layer, respectively. To determine the radius of the stationary orbit of the vortex we set $\partial_{t}R=0$, which gives
\begin{equation}
\label{eq5}
R_{0}=\frac{\sigma I a^{2}_{nc} G^{2}\left(1+\frac{1}{2}
p_{\bot} n_{core}\right)}{\alpha
D}\left(\frac{\partial{U_{z}}}{\partial{R}}\right)^{-1}.
\end{equation}
This leads us to classify the FL dynamics into two regimes, depending on the absence ($p_{\bot}$=0) or presence ($p_{\bot} \neq 0$) of a V-AV pair in the PL. The effect of the PL vortex is to increase the radius of the orbit of the FL vortex. Micromagnetic modeling, in agreement with Eq. \ref{eq5}, yields $R_{0}$=110 nm when there is no pair in the PL, and $110 +10 n_{\rm core}$ when cores are present in the PL underneath the NC. The corresponding oscillation frequencies of the FL vortex can be estimated if we assume that the Gilbert damping $\alpha$ and nonadiabatic spin torque parameters $\beta$ have similar magnitudes \cite{beta,beta1}. The frequency tunability, defined as the slope of the frequency versus current relation, then depends on the number of cores ($n_{\text{core}}$) underneath the NC,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq6}
\frac{\partial{\omega_{FL}}}{\partial{I}}=\frac{1}{GR_{0}}\left(\frac{\partial{U_{z}}}{\partial{R}}\right)+\frac{n_{\rm core}}{2}\frac{\alpha
D}{G} \sigma p_{\bot}.
\end{equation}
The agreement between Eq.~\ref{eq6} and the experiments is illustrated in Figure~\ref{result} where we show the dependence of the oscillation frequency versus the applied current. Table I summarizes the theoretical and experimental values for the slope ($\partial\omega_{\text{osc}}/\partial I$) and the frequency jump for different temperatures.
\begin{table}
\caption{\label{tab:table4} Frequency jumps and slopes versus current at different temperatures. LM and UM stand for lower and upper modes. n$_{\text{core}}$ represents the number of vortex or antivortex cores in the pinned layer underneath the nanocontact.}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\newcommand{\mc}[2]{\multicolumn{#1}{c}{#2}}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
$T$& $f_{\rm UM} - f_{\rm LM}$ at $I_{\text{crit}} $& $df/dI$ (LM) & $df/dI$ (UM)\\
(K)&(MHz)&(MHz/mA)&(MHz/mA)\\
\hline\\
Theory(0) & $\approx$ 36 & $\approx$ 4&$\approx$ 4+2$n_{\text{core}}$\\
\rowcolor{lightgray}
6 & 40 & 4&8.7\\
\rowcolor{lightgray}
80 & 36& 2.8&9\\
\rowcolor{white}
120& 44 & 3.4&5.8\\
\rowcolor{white}
160 & 40 & 3.6 &5.7 \\
\rowcolor{white}
200 & 28 & 4.3 &6
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
The validity of the model can be checked by comparing the analytical and experimental slopes. By using the experimental values of $\mu_{0}M_{\text{s}}$, $d_{\text{pl}}$, $\alpha$, and $L$, and by assuming a spin polarization of $P=0.5$ and a radius of the vortex core $r_{\text{core}}$=10 nm, we find a theoretical value for $\partial\omega_{\text{osc}}/\partial I$ =4 MHz/mA in the low frequency regime, which matches with the observed slope experimentally of $\approx$ 3.6 MHz/mA from Eq. (10). The jump in frequency can be calculated theoretically and accounts for a jump of 36 MHz similar to the observed one of $\approx$ 37 MHz. The larger slope in the high frequency regime (upper mode) results from the joint contributions of the Zeeman potential and perpendicular spin torque. This gives a larger slope which again fits well with the experimental one (Table I).
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{Fig6}
\caption{\label{result} (Color online) (a) Sketch of the standard vortex mode and its new dynamics when there is a vortex-antivortex pair in the pinned layer. The extended colorbar below the sketch represents the mode at which the vortex is oscillating depending on the applied dc current. Panels (b), (c), (d), (e) show the mode frequency at different temperatures, 80, 120, 160 and 200 K, respectively.}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
In summary, we have shown that the nucleation of a vortex-antivortex pair in the pinned layer of a spin valve nanocontact oscillator can lead to distinct changes to the oscillatory dynamics of the vortex in the free layer. The pair leads to an additional spin torque term related to currents flowing perpendicular to the film plane, which results in a frequency jump along with a different frequency tunability for the free layer vortex gyration. The temperature dependence of this effect is related to variations in the exchange bias field acting on the pinned layer, which determines the equilibrium separation distance of the vortex-antivortex pair. Intermittent modes in the free layer dynamics are attributed to thermally-activated pair nucleation and annihilation in the pinned layer. Analytical modeling and micromagnetics simulations are shown to give good agreement with experiments.
\begin{acknowledgments}
The authors acknowledge fruitful discussions with G. Hrkac. This work was partially supported by the European Commission under Contract No. MRTN-CT-2008-215368-2 (SEMISPINNET) and the Agence Nationale de la Recherche under Contract No. ANR-09-NANO-006 (VOICE).
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
\subsection{Classical setting} Let $\mathbb{D}$ denote the unit disc in $\mathbb{C}$ and $\mathbb{T}$ the unit circle. Let $\mathcal{O}(\mathbb{D})$ denote the set of holomorphic functions on $\mathbb{D}$. For $1\leq p<\infty$, the ordinary Hardy space is defined as
\begin{displaymath}
\mathcal{H}^p(\mathbb{T}) = \left\{ f \in \mathcal{O}(\mathbb{D}) ~\text{and}~ \norm f_{\mathcal{H}^p} < \infty \right\},
\end{displaymath}
where
\begin{displaymath}
\norm f_{\mathcal{H}^p}^{p} = \underset{0 \leq r < 1}{\text{sup}} \int_{0}^{2\pi} \abs{f(re^{i\theta})}^p d\theta.
\end{displaymath}
It is known that (\cite{DurenHp70}) functions in $\mathcal{H}^p(\mathbb{T})$ have boundary limits almost everywhere, i.e., for almost every $\theta \in [0,2\pi]$
\begin{displaymath}
{f}(e^{i\theta}) = \underset{r \rightarrow 1^{-}}{\text{lim~}} f(re^{i\theta})
\end{displaymath}
exists.
Moreover,
\begin{displaymath}
\norm {{f}}_{L^p(\mathbb{T})} = \norm f_{\mathcal{H}^p(\mathbb{T})}
\end{displaymath}
where $L^p(\mathbb{T})$ is defined using the standard Lebesgue measure (denoted by $d\theta$) on the unit circle.
It is also known that $\mathcal{H}^p(\mathbb{T})$ is a closed subspace of $L^p(\mathbb{T})$. In particular, for $p=2$, the orthogonal projection operator, called the Szeg\"o projection operator exists;
\begin{displaymath}
\mathbf{S}: L^2(\mathbb{T}) \longrightarrow \mathcal{H}^2(\mathbb{T}).
\end{displaymath}
The operator $\mathbf{S}$ is an integral operator with the kernel $S(z, w)$ (called the Szeg\"o kernel) and for $f\in L^2(\mathbb{T})$,
$$\mathbf{S}f(z)=\int_{\mathbb{T}}S(z,w)f(w)d\theta.$$
It follows from the general theory of reproducing kernels that for any orthonormal basis $\{e_n(z)\}_{n = 0}^{\infty}$ for $\mathcal{H}^2(\mathbb{T})$, the Szeg\"o kernel is given by
\begin{displaymath}
S(z,w)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}e_n(z)\overline{e_n(w)}.
\end{displaymath}
\subsection{Weighted setting}
Let $g(z)$ be a holomorphic function on $\mathbb{D}$ that is continuous on $\overline{\mathbb{D}}$ and has no zeros inside $\mathbb{D}$. We set $\mu(z)=|g(z)|^2$ and define weighted Hardy spaces and weighted Szeg\"o projections using the function $\mu(z)$ as a weight on $\mathbb{T}$.
For $1 \leq p < \infty$, we define the weighted Lebesgue and Hardy spaces with respect to $\mu$ as;
\begin{displaymath}
L^p(\mathbb{T}, \mu) = \lbrace f \text{ measurable function on $\mathbb{D}$ and } \norm{f}_{p,\mu} < \infty \rbrace
\end{displaymath}
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
\norm{f}_{p, \mu}^p = \int_{\mathbb{T}} \abs{f(w)}^p \mu(w) d\theta
= \int_{\mathbb{T}} \abs{f(w) (g(w))^{2/p}}^p d\theta
\end{eqnarray*}
and
\begin{displaymath}
\mathcal{H}^p(\mathbb{T}, \mu) = \lbrace f \in \mathcal{O}(\mathbb{D}) \text{ such that } \norm{f}_{\mathcal{H}^p, \mu} < \infty\rbrace
\end{displaymath}
where
\begin{displaymath}
\norm{f}_{\mathcal{H}^p, \mu}^p = \underset{0 \leq r < 1}{\text{sup}}~~ \int_0^{2\pi} \abs{f(re^{i\theta}) (g(re^{i\theta}))^{2/p}}^p d\theta.
\end{displaymath}
Note that, $\displaystyle{f \in \mathcal{H}^p(\mathbb{T}, \mu)}$ implies $\displaystyle{f(z) (g(z))^{2/p} \in \mathcal{H}^p(\mathbb{T})}$ and which in turn gives that $\displaystyle{f(z) (g(z))^{2/p}}$ has almost everywhere boundary limits. Hence so does $\displaystyle{f(z)}$. Additionally, $\displaystyle{\norm{f}_{\mathcal{H}^p, \mu} = \norm{f}_{p, \mu}}$. Furthermore, $\displaystyle{L^p(\mathbb{T}, \mu)}$ is a Banach space and $\displaystyle{\mathcal{H}^p(\mathbb{T}, \mu)}$ is a closed subspace of $\displaystyle{L^p(\mathbb{T}, \mu)}$.
In particular, again when $p = 2$, we obtain the weighted Szeg\"o projection
\begin{displaymath}
\mathbf{S_{\mu}}: L^2(\mathbb{T}, \mu) \longrightarrow \mathcal{H}^2(\mathbb{T}, \mu).
\end{displaymath}
Following the similar theory, we note that $\mathbf{S_{\mu}}$ is an integral operator
\begin{displaymath}
\mathbf{S_{\mu}}f(z) = \int_{\mathbb{T}} S_{\mu}(z, w) f(w) \mu(w) d\theta.
\end{displaymath}
If ~~$\{f_n(z)\}_{n = 0}^{\infty}$ is an orthonormal basis for $\mathcal{H}^2(\mathbb{T}, \mu)$ then
\begin{displaymath}
S_{\mu}(z,w)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}f^{}_n(z)\overline{f^{}_n(w)}.
\end{displaymath}
We are interested in the action of $\mathbf{S}_{\mu}$ on $L^p(\mathbb{T},\mu)$. By definition, $\mathbf{S}_{\mu}$ is a bounded operator from $L^2(\mathbb{T},\mu)$ to $L^2(\mathbb{T},\mu)$. The problem we investigate is the boundedness of $\mathbf{S}_{\mu}$ from $L^p(\mathbb{T},\mu)$ to $L^p(\mathbb{T},\mu)$ for other values of $p\in(1,\infty)$. Note that for any given weight $\mu$ as above, we can associate an interval $I_{\mu}\subset(1,\infty)$ such that $\mathbf{S}_{\mu}$ is bounded from $L^p(\mathbb{T},\mu)$ to $L^p(\mathbb{T},\mu)$ if and only if $p\in I_{\mu}$. By definition, $2\in I_{\mu}$ and by duality and interpolation, $I_{\mu}$ is a conjugate symmetric interval around 2. Namely, if some $p_0>2$ is in $I_{\mu}$, so is $q_0$ where $\frac{1}{q_0}+\frac{1}{p_0}=1$.
In the classical setting, i.e., $\mu\equiv 1$, the Szeg\"o projection operator is bounded from $L^p(\mathbb{T})$ to $L^p(\mathbb{T})$ for any $1<p<\infty$, see \cite[page 257]{ZhuBook}.
The purpose of this note is to construct weights $\mu$ on $\mathbb{T}$ for which the corresponding interval $I_{\mu}$ can be any open interval larger than $\{2 \}$ but smaller than $(1, \infty)$.
\begin{theorem}\label{S_0bounded}
For any given $p_0>2$, there exists a weight $\mu$ on $\mathbb{T}$ such that $I_{\mu}=(q_0,p_0)$ where $\frac{1}{q_0}+\frac{1}{p_0}=1$, i.e., the weighted Szeg\"o projection $\mathbf{S}_{\mu}$ is bounded on $L^p(\mathbb{T},\mu)$ if and only if $q_0<p<p_0$.
\end{theorem}
We prove this theorem similar to the proof of the analogous statement for weighted Bergman projections in \cite{Zeytuncu13} with modifications from Bergman kernels to Szeg\"o kernels. The main ingredient is the theory of $A_p$ weights on $\mathbb{T}$.
When the weighted Szeg\"o projection $\mathbf{S}_{\mu}$ is bounded on $\displaystyle{}$ $\displaystyle{L^p(\mathbb{T}, \mu)}$ for some $p$,
one can identify the dual space of the weighted Hardy space $\displaystyle{\mathcal{H}^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \mu \right)}$. However, when $\displaystyle{\mathbf{S}_{\mu}}$ fails to be bounded, a different approach is needed to identify the dual spaces. In the third section, we address this issue and describe the dual spaces of weighted Hardy spaces.
The following notations are used in the rest of the note. We denote by $\displaystyle{f(z) \simeq g(z)}$ when $\displaystyle{c \cdot g(z) \leq f(z) \leq C \cdot g(z)}$ for some positive constants $c$ and $C$ which are independent of $z$. Similarly we denote by $\displaystyle{f(z) \lesssim g(z)}$ when $\displaystyle{f(z) \leq C\cdot g(z)}$ for some positive constant $C$. We use $d\theta$ for the Lebegue measure on the unit circle $\mathbb{T}$. When we integrate functions (that are also defined on the unit disc) on $\mathbb{T}$, instead of writing $e^{i\theta}$, we keep $z$ and $w$ as the variables.
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{S_0bounded}}
\subsection{Relation between weighted kernels} The particular choice of $\mu_{}(z)$ indicates the following relation between the weighted Szeg\"o kernels ${S_{\mu}}(z,w)$ and the ordinary Szeg\"o kernel ${S}(z,w)$.
\begin{proposition}\label{WeightedNonweighted}
For $\mu(z)=|g(z)|^2$ as above, the following relation holds
\begin{equation} \label{3.5}
S\left(z, w \right) = g_{}(z) S_{\mu}\left( z, w \right) \overline{g_{}(w)}.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\displaystyle{\{e_n(z)\}_{n=0}^{\infty}}$ be an orthonormal basis for $\mathcal{H}^2\left( \mathbb{T}\right)$. Since $g_{}(z)$ does not vanish inside $\mathbb{D}$, each $\frac{e_n(z)}{g_{}(z)}$ is a holomorphic function on $\mathbb{D}$ and is in $\mathcal{H}^2(\mathbb{T},\abs{g_{}}^2)$ by construction. Following the orthonormal properties of $\displaystyle{e_n(z)}$'s we have
\begin{displaymath}
\left<\frac{e_n(z)}{g(z)_{}},\frac{e_m(z)}{g(z)_{}}\right>_{\mu}=\left<e_n(z),e_m(z)\right> = \delta_{n,m},
\end{displaymath}
where $\displaystyle{}$ $\displaystyle{\delta_{n, m}}$ is the Kronecker delta.
Also for any $f$ in $\mathcal{H}^2(\mathbb{T},\abs{g_{}}^2)$, $(f\cdot g)_{}$ is in $\mathcal{H}^2(\mathbb{T})$ and hence can be written as a linear combination of the $e_n(z)$'s. Consequently so can $f$ using $\frac{e_n(z)}{g(z)}$'s. Hence,$\displaystyle{\left\{{e_n}(z)/{g(z)_{}}\right\}}_{n=0}^{\infty}$ is an orthonormal basis for $\mathcal{H}^2(\mathbb{T},\abs{g_{}}^2)$.
Therefore, using the basis representation of the Szeg\"o kernels we obtain
\begin{align*}
S(z,w)&=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}e_n(z)\overline{e_n(w)}=g_{}(z)\left(\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{e_n(z)}{g_{}(z)}\overline{\frac{e_n(w)}{g_{}(w)}}\right)\overline{g_{}(w)}\\
&=g_{}(z)S_{\mu}(z,w)\overline{g_{}(w)}.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\subsection{$A_p$ weights on $\mathbb{T}$}
For $p \in (1, \infty)$, a weight $\mu$ on $\mathbb{T}$ is said to be in $A_p(\mathbb{T})$ if
\begin{displaymath}
\underset{I \subset \mathbb{T}}{\underset{I}{\text{sup}}} \left(\frac{1}{\abs{I}}\int_{I} \mu(\theta) d\theta\right) \left( \frac{1}{\abs{I}} \int_{I} \mu(\theta)^{\frac{-1}{p - 1}} d\theta\right)^{p-1} < \infty,
\end{displaymath}
where $I$ denotes intervals in $\mathbb{T}$.
These weights are used to characterize the $L^p$ regularity of the ordinary Szeg\"o projection on weighted spaces. The following result appears in
\cite{Garnett} and is used in \cite[2.3]{LanzaniStein04} in connection with a conformal map based approach to the investigation of the unweighted Szeg\"o projection for a general domain.
\begin{theorem}\label{Ap}
The ordinary Szeg\"o projection $\mathbf{S}$ is bounded from $\displaystyle{L^p(\mathbb{T}, \mu)}$ to $\displaystyle{L^p(\mathbb{T}, \mu)}$ if and only if $\mu \in A_p(\mathbb{T})$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
This result is an immediate consequence of the fact that the Szeg\"o kernel of the unit disc agrees with the Cauchy kernel (see \cite{KerzmanStein}) together with the classical weighted theory for the latter, see also \cite{Garnett}.
\end{proof}
The following theorem follows from Proposition \ref{3.5} and Theorem \ref{Ap}.
\begin{proposition}\label{Main1}
For $1 < p < \infty$ and $\mu(z)=|g(z)|^2$ as above the following are equivalent.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\mathbf{S_{\mu}}$ is bounded from $\displaystyle{L^p(\mathbb{T}, \abs{g_{}}^2)}$ to $\displaystyle{}$ $\displaystyle{L^p(\mathbb{T}, \abs{g_{}}^2)}$.
\item $\mathbf{S}$ is bounded from $\displaystyle{L^p(\mathbb{T}, \abs{g_{}}^{2 - p})}$ to $\displaystyle{}$ $\displaystyle{L^p(\mathbb{T}, \abs{g_{}}^{2 - p})}$.
\item $\abs{g_{}}^{2 - p} \in A_p(\mathbb{T})$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Theorem \ref{Ap} gives the equivalence of (2) and (3). We show the equivalence of (1) and (2). Using the relation between the kernels from the previous proposition, we obtain the following relation between the corresponding operators:
\begin{displaymath}
g_{}(z) \left({\bf{S}}_{\mu} f\right)(z) = \left({\bf S}(f\cdot g_{})\right)(z) \qquad \text{for} ~~ f \in L^2(\mathbb{T}, \abs{g_{}}^2).
\end{displaymath}
Indeed, suppose (2) is true. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\norm{{\bf S}_{\mu} f}_{p, \abs{g_{}}^2}^p &=& \int_{\mathbb{T}} \abs{({\bf S}_{\mu} f)(w)}^p \abs{g_{}(w)}^2d\theta \\
&=& \int_{\mathbb{T}}\abs{({\bf S}(f\cdot g_{}))(w)}^p \abs{g_{}(w)}^{2-p}d\theta = \norm{{\bf S}(f\cdot g_{})}^p_{p, \abs{g_{}}^{2 - p}}\\
&\lesssim& \norm{f\cdot g}^p_{p, \abs{g_{}}^{2 - p}} = \norm{f}^p_{p, \abs{g_{}}^2}
\end{eqnarray*}
which proves (1).
Now when (1) is true,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\norm{{\bf S}_{} f}_{p, \abs{g_{}}^{2 - p}}^p &=& \int_{\mathbb{T}} \abs{({\bf S}_{} f)(w)}^p \abs{g_{}(w)}^{2 - p} d\theta\\
&=& \int_{\mathbb{T}}\abs{({\bf S}_{\mu}(f/g_{}))(w)}^p \abs{g_{}(w)}^2d\theta = \norm{{\bf S}_{\mu}(f/g_{})}^p_{p, \abs{g_{}}^2}\\
&\lesssim& \norm{f/g_{}}^p_{p, \abs{g_{}}^2} = \norm{f}^p_{p, \abs{g_{}}^{2 - p}}
\end{eqnarray*}
and hence (2) is true.
\end{proof}
We can now present a family of weights that behave as claimed in Theorem \ref{S_0bounded}.
\begin{theorem}\label{Main2}
For $\alpha \geq 0 $, let
$g_{\alpha}(z) = (z - 1)^{\alpha}$ and $\mu_{\alpha}(z) =\abs{g_{\alpha}(z)}^2$. Then the weighted Szeg\"o projection operator $\mathbf{S}_{\mu_{\alpha}}$ is bounded on $L^p(\mathbb{T},\mu_{\alpha})$ if and only if $p \in \left( \frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha + 1}, \frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha} \right)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
Theorem \ref{Main2} is a quantitative version of Theorem \ref{S_0bounded} and therefore we obtain a proof of Theorem \ref{S_0bounded} when we prove Theorem \ref{Main2}.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
Note that as $\alpha\to 0^+$ the interval $\left( \frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha + 1}, \frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha} \right)$ approaches to $(1,\infty)$ and as $\alpha\to\infty$ the interval $\left( \frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha + 1}, \frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha} \right)$ approaches to $\{2\}$. Hence, any conjugate symmetric interval around $2$ can be achieved as the boundedness range of a weighted Szeg\"o projection.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
First note that on intervals $I$ with $\theta = 0 \notin I$, the weight $\abs{g_{\alpha}(z)}^{2 - p}= \abs{z - 1}^{\alpha(2 - p)} \simeq C$. Therefore, both integrals in the $A_p(\mathbb{T})$ condition are finite and hence so is the supremum over all such intervals when $p$ is in the given range. On intervals that contain $z = 0$ we have the following.
\subsubsection*{Step 1}
We show that for the weights $\omega(z) = \abs{g_{\alpha}(z)}^{2 - p} = \abs{z - 1}^{\alpha(2 - p)}$, the second integral in the $A_p(\mathbb{T})$ condition diverges for arcs $I = (-\epsilon, \epsilon)$ if and only if $p$ is outside the given region.
For intervals $I = (-\epsilon, \epsilon)$ with small $\epsilon$ and $p \leq \frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha + 1}$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\int_I \omega(z)^{\frac{1}{1 - p}} d\theta &=& \int_{-\epsilon}^{\epsilon} \abs{e^{i\theta} - 1}^{\frac{\alpha (2 - p)}{(1 - p)}} d\theta \\
&=& \int_{-\epsilon}^{\epsilon} \left( \sqrt{2(1 - \cos(\theta))} \right)^{\frac{\alpha (2 - p)}{(1 - p)}} d\theta \\
&\simeq& \int_{-\epsilon}^{\epsilon} \left( \theta \right)^{\frac{\alpha (2 - p)}{(1 - p)}} d\theta ~=~ \infty \\
\end{eqnarray*}
because \qquad $\displaystyle{\frac{\alpha(2 - p)}{(1 - p)} \leq -1}$.
Hence $\omega \not \in A_p(\mathbb{T})$ for such $p$.
Also when $p \geq \frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha}$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\int_I \omega(z) d\theta
&\simeq& \int_{-\epsilon}^{\epsilon} \left( \theta \right)^{\alpha (2 - p)} d\theta ~=~ \infty\\
\end{eqnarray*}
because $\displaystyle{\alpha(2 - p) \leq -1}$.
Hence $\omega \not \in A_p(\mathbb{T})$ for $p \geq \frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha}$ either.
The same calculations show convergence of all integrals for $p$ in the desired range.
\subsubsection*{Step 2}
We show that for $p\in (\frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha + 1},\frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha})$ and any (general) interval $I = (\theta_0 - R, \theta_0 + R)$ with $\theta_0 \neq 0$ the integrals in the $A_p$ condition is finite. We consider two cases.
\subsubsection*{Case 1}
$\displaystyle{I \cap \text{Arc}(0, 2R) = \emptyset}$.
On such intervals $I$,
$\displaystyle{3R < \theta_0}$ ~and so~ $\displaystyle{2\theta_0/3 \leq \theta_0 - R \leq\theta \leq \theta_0 + R \leq 4\theta_0/3}$ ~giving ~ $\theta \simeq \theta_0$. So, $\displaystyle{\omega = \abs{z - 1}^{\alpha(2 - p)} \simeq \theta_{0}^{\alpha(2 - p)}}$
Therefore,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{1}{\abs{I}} \int_I \omega(z) d\theta
&\lesssim& \frac{1}{2R} \int_I \theta_0^{\alpha(2 - p)} ~d\theta ~=~ \theta_0^{\alpha(2 - p)}. \\
\end{eqnarray*}
and
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left( \frac{1}{\abs{I}} \int_I \left( \omega(z) \right)^{\frac{1}{1 - p}} d\theta \right)^{p - 1}
&\lesssim& \left( \frac{1}{2R} \int_I \theta_0^{\frac{\alpha(2 - p)}{1 - p}} ~d\theta \right)^{p - 1}\\
&=& \theta_0^{-\alpha(2 - p)}
\end{eqnarray*}
Hence the supremum over all such intervals is finite
\subsubsection*{Case 2}
$\displaystyle{I \cap \text{Arc}(0, 2R) \neq \emptyset}$.
In this case, since $\displaystyle{I \subset \text{Arc}(0, 4R)}$ and $\displaystyle{\alpha(2 - p) + 1 > 0}$ ~when~ $\displaystyle{\frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha} > p}$ we have,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{1}{\abs{I}} \int_I \omega(z) d\theta
&\simeq& \frac{1}{8R}~ 2 \int_{0}^{4R} \theta^{\alpha(2 - p)} ~d\theta ~=~ \frac{1}{4R}~ \frac{\theta^{\alpha(2 - p) + 1}}{[\alpha(2 - p) + 1]}\Big|_{0}^{4R} = \frac{4R^{\alpha(2 - p)}}{\alpha(2 - p) + 1}.\\
\end{eqnarray*}
Also since $\displaystyle{\frac{\alpha(2 - p)}{1 - p} + 1 > 0}$ ~~ when ~~ $\displaystyle{\frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha + 1} < p}$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left( \frac{1}{\abs{I}} \int_I \omega(z)^{\frac{1}{1 - p}} d\theta \right)^{p - 1}
&\simeq& \left( \frac{1}{8R}~ 2 \int_{0}^{4R} \theta^{\frac{\alpha(2 - p)}{1 - p}} ~d\theta \right)^{p - 1} ~=~ \left( \frac{1}{4R}~ \frac{\theta^{\frac{\alpha(2 - p)}{1 - p} + 1} }{\left[\frac{\alpha(2 - p)}{1 - p} + 1\right]} \right)^{p - 1} \\
&\simeq& \left( \frac{R^{\frac{\alpha(2 - p)}{1 - p} } }{\left[\frac{\alpha(2 - p)}{1 - p} + 1\right]} \right)^{p - 1}
= \frac{2R^{- \alpha(2 - p)}}{\left[\frac{\alpha(2 - p)}{1 - p} + 1\right]^{p - 1}}.\\
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, the supremum over all intervals of the type in case two are also finite and $\omega=|g|^{2 - p}\in A^p(\mathbb{T})$ if and only if $p\in (\frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha + 1},\frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha})$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The analog of Theorem \ref{S_0bounded} for domains in $\mathbb{C}^n$ ($n\geq 2$) is an open problem. See \cite{BekolleSzego} for a partial result. Also see \cite{LanzaniStein13} for the regularity on strongly pseudoconvex domains.
\end{remark}
\section{Duality}
In this section, we investigate the duals of Hardy spaces corresponding to weights from the previous section.
For $\alpha \geq 0$ and $\displaystyle{\mu_{\alpha}(z) = \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha}}$, a consequence of Theorem \ref{Main2} is the following.
\begin{theorem}\label{FixedWeightDualHardy}
Let $\alpha \geq 0$ and $\displaystyle{\mu_{\alpha}(z) = \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha}}$. For any $\displaystyle{p \in \left( \frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha + 1}, \frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha} \right)}$, the dual space of the weighted Hardy space $\displaystyle{}$ $\displaystyle{\mathcal{H}^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right)}$ can be identified by $\displaystyle{\mathcal{H}^q\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right)}$ where $\displaystyle{\frac{1}{p} + \frac{1}{q} = 1}$ and under the pairing
\begin{displaymath}
\left< f, h \right> = \int_{\mathbb{T}} f(z) \overline{h(z)} \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} d\theta.
\end{displaymath}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
This is a standard argument; however, we present a proof here for completeness.
For a given function $\displaystyle{}$ $\displaystyle{h \in \mathcal{H}^q\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right)}$, we define a linear functional on $\displaystyle{\mathcal{H}^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right)}$ by
\begin{displaymath}
{\bf{G}}(f) = \int_{\mathbb{T}} f(z) \overline{h(z)} \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} d\theta.
\end{displaymath}
It is clear that by the H\"older's inequality, ${\bf{G}}$ is a bounded functional with the operator norm less than $\displaystyle{\norm{h}_{\mathcal{H}^q\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right)}}$.
For the opposite direction, let ${\bf{G}}$ be a bounded linear functional on $\displaystyle{\mathcal{H}^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right)}$. By the Hahn-Banach theorem, ${\bf{G}}$ extends to a bounded linear functional on $\displaystyle{L^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right)}$.
Now using the duality of $L^p$ spaces, we find a function $\displaystyle{h \in L^q\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right)}$ such that
\begin{displaymath}
{\bf{G}}(f) = \int_{\mathbb{T}} f(z) \overline{h(z)} \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} dz \qquad \text{for} \qquad f \in L^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right).
\end{displaymath}
When we restrict ${\bf{G}}$ onto $\displaystyle{L^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right) \cap \mathcal{H}^2\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right)}$
and use self-adjointness of $\displaystyle{{\bf{S}}_{\mu_{\alpha}}}$ we get the following.
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\bf{G}}(f) &=& \int_{\mathbb{T}} f(z)~\overline{h(z)} \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} d\theta\\
&=& \int_{\mathbb{T}} ({\bf{S}}_{\mu_{\alpha}}f)(z) ~\overline{h(z)} \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha}d\theta\\
&=& \int_{\mathbb{T}} f(z) ~\overline{({\bf{S}}_{\mu_{\alpha}}h)(z)} \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} d\theta
\end{eqnarray*}
for $\displaystyle{f \in L^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right) \cap \mathcal{H}^2\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right)}$.
Since the intersection of these two spaces is dense in $\displaystyle{}$ $\displaystyle{\mathcal{H}^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right)}$, we note that ${\bf{G}}$ is represented by the function $\displaystyle{({\bf{S}}_{\mu_{\alpha}}h)(z)}$ and $\displaystyle{{\bf{S}}_{\mu_{\alpha}}h \in \mathcal{H}^q\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right) }$ by Theorem \ref{Main2}.
\end{proof}
A natural question arises after this statement. How can we identify the dual space of the weighted Hardy space, $\displaystyle{\mathcal{H}^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} \right)}$, when $\displaystyle{p \notin \left( \frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha + 1} , \frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha} \right)}$?
The answer to this question follows from the following result on the boundedness of the weighted Szeg\"o projection, $\displaystyle{{\bf{S}}_{\mu_{\alpha}}}$.
Similar results for weighted Bergman projections have been presented recently in \cite{ArroussiPau13} and \cite{ConstantinPelaez13}.
\begin{proposition}\label{ChangeScaleAndMeasure}
Let $\displaystyle{}$ $\displaystyle{\alpha \geq 0}$ and $\displaystyle{\mu_{\alpha} = \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha}}$. For any $\displaystyle{1 < p < \infty}$, the weighted Szeg\"o projection $\displaystyle{{\bf{S}}_{\mu_{\alpha}}}$ is bounded on $\displaystyle{L^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{\alpha p} \right)}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark}
Note that as $p$ varies, changes occur not only the integrability scale but also in the measure.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
The proof follows from the relation between the kernels in Proposition \ref{WeightedNonweighted} and the fact that the unweighted Szeg\"o projection $\textbf{S}$ is bounded on $\displaystyle{L^p(\mathbb{T})}$ for $1<p<\infty$.
Let us take $\displaystyle{f(z) \in L^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{\alpha p} \right)}$ and set $$\widetilde{f}(z)=f(z) \frac{\abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha}}{(z-1)^{\alpha}},$$ then we have $\widetilde{f} \in L^p(\mathbb{T})$. Using this notation, we notice
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\bf{S}}_{\mu_{\alpha}}f (z)&=& \int_{\mathbb{T}} S_{\mu_{\alpha}}(z, w) f(w)\abs{w - 1}^{2\alpha}~ d\theta \\
&=& \frac{(z - 1)^{\alpha}}{(z - 1)^{\alpha}} ~\int_{\mathbb{T}} S_{\mu_{\alpha}}(z, w) (w-1)^{\alpha} f(w)\frac{\abs{w - 1}^{2\alpha}}{(w-1)^{\alpha}} ~ d\theta\\
&=& \frac{1}{(z - 1)^{\alpha}} ~\int_{\mathbb{T}} S(z, w) \widetilde{f}(w) ~ d\theta\\
&=& \frac{1}{(z - 1)^{\alpha}} \textbf{S}\left(\widetilde{f}(w) \right)(z),
\end{eqnarray*}
where we invoke Proposition \ref{WeightedNonweighted} when we pass from the second to the third line. Next by using the fact that the unweighted Szeg\"o projection operator $\textbf{S}$ is bounded on $\displaystyle{L^p(\mathbb{T})}$, we obtain the following.
\begin{eqnarray*}
\norm{{\bf{S}}_{\mu_{\alpha}} f}_{L^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{\alpha p} \right)} &=& \int_{\mathbb{T}} \abs{z - 1}^{\alpha p} \frac{1}{\abs{z - 1}^{\alpha p}} ~~ \left\vert
\textbf{S}\left(\widetilde{f}(w) \right)(z)
\right\vert^p d\theta\\
&=& \norm{
\textbf{S}\left(\widetilde{f}(w) \right)
}^p_{L^p(\mathbb{T})}\lesssim\norm{
\widetilde{f}(w)
}^p_{L^p(\mathbb{T})}\\ &=& \norm{ f(w) \frac{\abs{w - 1}^{2\alpha}}{(w-1)^{\alpha}}}^p_{L^p(\mathbb{T})}\\
&=& \norm{f}^p_{L^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{\alpha p} \right)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
This finishes the proof of the proposition.
\end{proof}
Now we can answer the duality question by using Proposition \ref{ChangeScaleAndMeasure}. Following the same argument in the proof of Theorem \ref{FixedWeightDualHardy} we obtain the following statement.
\begin{theorem}\label{Main3}
Let $\displaystyle{}$ $\displaystyle{\alpha \geq 0}$ and $\displaystyle{\mu_{\alpha} = \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha}}$. Then for any $\displaystyle{p \in (1, \infty)}$, the dual space of the weighted Hardy space $\displaystyle{\mathcal{H}^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{\alpha p} \right)}$ can be identified by $\displaystyle{\mathcal{H}^q\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{\alpha q} \right)}$ where $\displaystyle{\frac{1}{p} + \frac{1}{q} = 1}$, under the pairing
\begin{displaymath}
\left< f, h \right> = \int_{\mathbb{T}} f(z) \overline{h(z)} \abs{z - 1}^{2\alpha} ~ d\theta.
\end{displaymath}
\end{theorem}
At first, the two duality results in Theorem \ref{FixedWeightDualHardy} and Theorem \ref{Main3} may seem confusing for
$\displaystyle{p \in \left(\frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha + 1}, \frac{2\alpha + 1}{\alpha} \right)}$. However, the main point is to note the difference in the exponents of the weights and the way the pairing is defined. We illustrate these two results in the following example.
\begin{example}
Let us take $\alpha = 1/2$. Then $\displaystyle{{\bf{S}}_{\abs{z - 1}}}$ is bounded on $\displaystyle{L^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1} \right)}$ for $\displaystyle{p \in (4/3, 4)}$. In particular, for any $\displaystyle{p \in (4/3, 4)}$, the dual space of $\displaystyle{\mathcal{H}^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1} \right)}$ can be identified by $\displaystyle{\mathcal{H}^q\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1} \right)}$ where $\displaystyle{\frac{1}{p} + \frac{1}{q} = 1}$, under the pairing
\begin{displaymath}
\left< f, h \right>_{\abs{z - 1}} = \int_{\mathbb{T}} f(z)~ \overline{h(z)}~ \abs{z - 1} ~ d\theta.
\end{displaymath}
On the other hand, using the second duality result for any $p > 1$, the dual space of $\displaystyle{\mathcal{H}^p\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1} \right)}$ can be identified by $\displaystyle{\mathcal{H}^q\left( \mathbb{T}, \abs{z - 1}^{q/p} \right)}$ when $\displaystyle{\frac{1}{p} + \frac{1}{q} = 1}$, under the pairing
\begin{displaymath}
\left< f, h \right>_{\abs{z - 1}^{2/p}} = \int_{\mathbb{T}} f(z)~ \overline{h(z)}~ \abs{z - 1}^{2/p} ~ d\theta.
\end{displaymath}
\end{example}
\section{Acknowledgment}
We thank the anonymous referee for constructive comments on the proofs of Proposition 3 and Theorem 5 and also for the useful editorial remarks on the exposition of the article. This study started when the first author visited the second author at Texas A\&M University, we thank the Department of Mathematics for the support.
|
\section{Introduction: Statement of the theorem and the steps of the proof}
The aim of this paper is to generalize Theorem 1 of \cite{HilsSkStab} stating that the $C^*$-algebra of any foliation (of non zero dimension !) is stable.
\begin{theorem}\label{casdesgroupoides}
Let $G$ be a Lie groupoid with $\sigma$-compact $G^{(0)}$. Assume that at every $x\in G^{(0)}$ the anchor $\natural_x:\mathfrak{g}_x\to T_x G^{(0)}$ is nonzero.
Then $C^*(G)$ is stable.
\end{theorem}
In other words, $C^*(G)$ is stable whenever $G$ has no orbit of dimension $0$.
The converse is also true if $G$ is $s$-connected. Indeed, if $G$ is $s$-connected and the anchor at $x$ is the zero map, then the orbit of $x$ is reduced to $x$. Therefore $C^*(G)$ has a character: the trivial representation of the group $G_x^x$.
Since the reduced $C^*$-algebra $C^*_r(G)$ of $G$ is a quotient of $C^*(G)$, it follows that it is also stable when $G$ has no orbit of dimension $0$.
Here however, the converse may fail for the reduced $C^*$-algebra: the reduced $C^*$-algebra of the group $PSL_2(\mathbb{R})$ is stable!
Our proof is not very different from the one of \cite{HilsSkStab} and based on Kasparov's stabilisation theorem (\cite{KaspJOT}). Note that, unlike in \cite{HilsSkStab}, we do not assume the space $G^{(0)}$ to be compact - but this is actually a rather minor point.
\medskip
The proof is as follows.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{step1} Let $x\in G^{(0)}$. There is a section $Y$ of the algebroid $\mathfrak{A}(G)$ whose image under the anchor is a vector field $X$ satisfying $X(x)\ne 0$. Taking a local exponentiation of $X$ we obtain a relatively compact open neighborhood $W$ diffeomorphic to $U\times \mathbb{R}$ where $X$ is proportional to the vector field along the $\mathbb{R}$ lines $\{u\}\times \mathbb{R}$.
This step will be clarified in section \ref{Annexe}
\medskip
We thus choose a locally finite cover $(W_n)$ by relatively compact open subsets and diffeomorphisms $f_n:U_n\times \mathbb{R}\to W_n$ such that $W'_n=f_n(U'_n\times \mathbb{R})$ cover $G^{(0)}$ with $U'_n$ relatively compact in $U_n$. Let $p_n:W_n\to U_n$ be the composition of $f_n^{-1}$ with the projection $U_n\times \mathbb{R}\to U_n$.
\item \label{step2}One may then construct a locally finite family of open subsets $V_j$ of $G^{(0)}$ such that: \begin{itemize}
\item Every $V_j$ sits in a $W_{n(j)}$ and its intersection with each line $f_{n(j)}(u\times \mathbb{R})$ is an (open) interval. More precisely, ${f_{n(j)}(V_j})$ is of the form $\{(x,t)\in U_{n(j)}\times \mathbb{R};\ \varphi_j^-(x)<t<\varphi_j^+(x)\}$ where $\varphi_j^-,\varphi_j^+:U_{n(j)}\to \mathbb{R}$ are smooth and $\varphi_j^+-\varphi_j^-$ is nonnegative with compact support.
\item The $\overline{V_j}$ are pairwise disjoint and locally finite: every compact subset of $M$ meets only finitely many $\overline {V_j}$'s.
\item For every $n$, the $p_n(V_j\cap W_n)$ cover $U'_n$: we have $U'_n\subset \bigcup_{j;\ n(j)=n}p_n(V_j\cap W_n) $.
\end{itemize}
The details of the constructions of the $V_j$'s are given in section \ref{lesVj}.
\item \label{step3} Let then $q_j$ be the characteristic function of $V_j$. We prove that $q_j$ is a multiplier of $C^*(G)$. By local finiteness, the characteristic function $q=\sum q_j$ of $V=\bigcup V_j$ is also a multiplier of $C^*(G)$.
See section section \ref{VjMult}.
\item \label{step4} We show that $qC^*(G)$ is a full Hilbert submodule of $C^*(G)$ (see corollary \ref{fullsub} - section \ref{section3.2}).
\item \label{step5} Considering a natural diffeomorphism $V_j\simeq p_n(V_j)\times {]}0,1{[}$, it follows that the Hilbert $C^*(G)$-modules $q_jC^*(G)$ and $qC^*(G)$ are stable.
\item \label{step6}Using Kasparov's stabilisation Theorem (\cite{KaspJOT}), it follows that $C^*(G)$ is stable.
This follows from corollary \ref{corfinal} - see section \ref{stability}.
\end{enumerate}
In section \ref{foliation}, we prove an analogous theorem for singular foliations in the sense of \cite{AndrSk1}. We prove:
\begin{theorem}\label{casdesfeuilletages}
The $C^*$-algebra of a singular foliation (as defined in \cite{AndrSk1}) which has no leaves reduced to a single point is stable.
\end{theorem}
The main steps of the proof are the same as for theorem \ref{casdesgroupoides}. Using vector fields along the foliation, we construct the same small open subsets $V_j$. Note that, in proving that the characteristic functions of these $V_j$ are multipliers of $C^*(M,\mathcal{F})$, we chose to take a somewhat different path in order to shed a new light to it. This led us to construct groupoid homomorphisms between singular foliation groupoids (section \ref{lexion}). Of course, we could have used the same kind of proof as for the Lie groupoid case.
\section{Geometric constructions}
\subsection{Nonzero vector fields in the algebroid}\label{Annexe}
Let $M$ be a smooth (open) manifold, $x$ a point of $M$, and let $X\in \mathcal{X}(M)$ be a smooth vector field with compact support on $M$ such that $X(x)\ne 0$. Denote by $\Psi_X=(\Psi_X^t)_{t\in \mathbb{R}}$ the flow of $X$.
One can find a codimension one submanifold $U$ of $M$ and a neighborhood $I$ of $0$ in $\mathbb{R}$ such that the restriction of $\Psi_X$ to $U\times I$ is a diffeomorphism onto an open (tubular) neighborhood $W$ of $U$ in $M$. In other words, $U$ is a codimension one submanifold of $M$ which contains $x$ and which is transverse to the integral curves of $X$.
\smallskip If $G$ is a Lie groupoid and $Y$ a section with compact support of its Lie algebroid such that the vector field $X:=\natural(Y)$ doesn't vanish on a point $x\in G^{(0)}$, let $Z_Y$ be the associated right invariant vector field on $G$ and $\Psi_{Z_Y}$ its flow. We have $r\circ \Psi_{Z_Y}^t=\Psi^t\circ r$.
Applying the construction above, one finds a codimension one submanifold $U$ of $G^{(0)}$ and a neighborhood $I$ of $0$ in $\mathbb{R}$ such that the composition map $$U\times I \overset{\Psi_{Z_Y}}{\longrightarrow} G \overset{r}{\longrightarrow} G^{(0)}$$ is precisely the restriction of the flow $\Psi_X$ of $X$ to $U\times I$ and thus a diffeomorphism onto an open neighborhood $W$ of $x$ in $G^{(0)}$. Note that $s\circ \Psi_{Z_Y}$ is the projection $U\times I \rightarrow U$.
Now the following maps are diffeomorphisms :
$$\begin{array}{ccc} G^U\times I & \rightarrow & G^W \\ (\gamma,t) & \mapsto & \Psi_{Z_Y}(r(\gamma),t)\gamma \end{array} \ \mbox{ and } \ \begin{array}{ccc} G^U_U\times I \times I & \rightarrow & G^W_W \\ (\gamma,t,\lambda) & \mapsto & \Psi_{Z_Y}(r(\gamma),t)\gamma \Psi_{Z_Y}(s(\gamma),\lambda)^{-1}\end{array} \ .$$
\subsection{Construction of the family \boldmath{$V_j$}}\label{lesVj}
In this section, we explain the construction of the $V_j$'s.
The construction above yields a locally finite cover $(W_n)$ by relatively compact open subsets and diffeomorphisms $f_n:U_n\times \mathbb{R}\to W_n$ such that $W'_n=f_n(U'_n\times \mathbb{R})$ cover $G^{(0)}$ with $U'_n$ relatively compact in $U_n$. We will often identify $W_n$ and $U_n\times \mathbb{R}$ under $f_n$.
Let $p_n:W_n\to U_n$ be the composition of $f_n^{-1}$ with the projection $U_n\times \mathbb{R}\to U_n$. As $(W_n)$ is locally finite and $G^{(0)}$ is $\sigma$-compact, the set of indices is countable; we identify it with $\mathbb{N}$.
\begin{itemize}
\item First, choose a (Riemannian) metric $d$ on $G^{(0)}$.
\item For every $n\in \mathbb{N}$, let $\varepsilon_n>0$ be small enough so that, for every $m\in \mathbb{N}$ such that $W_n\cap W_m\ne \emptyset$, and every $x\in U'_m$, $d(f_m(x,-1),f_m(x,1))>\varepsilon_n$.
Thus if $W_n\cap W_m\ne \emptyset$, for every $x\in U'_m$ : ${{\mathrm{diam}}}(f_m(\{x\}\times \mathbb{R})) > \varepsilon_n$.
\item Let $n\in \mathbb{N}$. Assume that we have already constructed a finite set $J_n$ with a map, $j\mapsto n(j)$ from $J_n$ to $\mathbb{N}$ with $n(j)<n$ and a family of open sets $(V_j)_{j\in J_n}$ with pairwise disjoint closures satisfying,
$$\forall \ell<n ,\ \ U'_\ell\subset \bigcup_{j;\ n(j)=\ell}p_\ell(V_j), \ \ {{\mathrm{diam}}}(V_j)\le \varepsilon _{n(j)}.$$
By the diameter assumption, for every $x\in U'_n$, the set $f_n(\{x\}\times \mathbb{R})$ is not contained in a $\overline{V_j}$ with $j\in J_n$; therefore $f_n(\{x\}\times \mathbb{R})$ is not contained in $\bigcup_{j\in J_n}\overline{V_j}$ (by connectedness of $\mathbb{R}$).
By compactness, we may then construct a finite cover $(A_\ell)_{\ell\in J'_n}$ of $\overline{U'_n}$ by open subsets of $U_n$ and open intervals $I_\ell$ in $\mathbb{R}$ such that $\overline{f_n({A_\ell}\times {I_\ell})}\cap \bigcup_{j\in J_n}\overline{V_j}=\emptyset$ and ${{\mathrm{diam}}}(f_n({A_\ell}\times I_\ell))\le\varepsilon _n$.
Replacing the $I_\ell$'s by smaller intervals, we now further assume that the $\overline{I_\ell}$ with $\ell\in J'_n$ are pairwise disjoint. One then constructs for each $\ell\in J'_n$ two smooth functions $\varphi_\ell^{\pm}:U_n\to I_\ell$ such that $\varphi_\ell^{+}\ge \varphi_\ell^{-}$ and such that $A_\ell=\{x\in U_n; \ \varphi_\ell^{-}(x)< \varphi_\ell^{+}(x)\}$.
Let then $J_{n+1}$ be the disjoint union of $J_n$ end $J'_n$. For $\ell\in J'_n$, put $V_\ell=f_n(\{(x,t)\in U_n\times \mathbb{R};\ \ \varphi_\ell^{-}(x)< t<\varphi_\ell^{+}(x)\})$ and define $n(\ell)=n$.
\item We will also use the diffeomorphism $h_j:A_j\times {]}0,1{[}\to V_j$ given by \label{carreau}
\begin{equation}\tag{\ding{71}}
h_j(x,t)=f_{n(j)}\Big(x,(1-t)\varphi_j^{-}(x)+ t\varphi_\ell^{+}(x)\Big).
\end{equation}
\item We thus construct the family $(V_j)$ inductively. Every compact set meets only finitely many $W_n$'s and therefore finitely many $\overline{V_j}$'s since $\overline{V_j}\subset W_{n(j)}$ and $\{j;\ n(j)=n\}$ is finite.
\end{itemize}
\section{Hilbert modules}
\subsection{Stable Hilbert modules; full Hilbert modules}
We start by briefly recalling some now classical general facts on Hilbert modules. The basic reference for them is \cite{KaspJOT}. See also e.g. \cite{WE, Lance}.
Let $A$ be a separable $C^*$-algebra.
\begin{definition}
A separable Hilbert $A$-module $E$ is said to be\begin{description}
\item[Stable] if it is isomorphic to $\ell^2(\mathbb{N})\otimes E$.
\item[Full] if the vector span of the set of products $\langle x|y \rangle$ with $x,y\in E$ is dense in $A$.
\end{description}
\end{definition}
We have:
\begin{proposition}\label{utation}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Let $J$ be a countable set and $(E_j)_{j\in J}$ a family of (separable) stable Hilbert $A$ modules, then $\bigoplus_{j\in J} E_j$ is stable.
\item A separable Hilbert $A$-module $E$ is stable if and only if the $C^*$-algebra $\mathcal{K}(E)$ is stable (see {\it e.g.}\/ \cite[Facts 4.7]{DS1}). \hfill$\square$
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
Let us also recall Kasparov's stabilization Theorem. Put $\mathcal{H}_A=\ell^2(\mathbb{N})\otimes A$.
\begin{theorem}[Kasparov's stabilization Theorem]
For every separable Hilbert $A$-module $E$, the Hilbert $A$-modules $\mathcal{H}_A$ and $E\oplus \mathcal{H}_A$ are isomorphic.
\hfill$\square$
\end{theorem}
The following statement is an immediate consequence of Kasparov's stabilization theorem. We outline a proof for completeness.
\begin{corollary}\label{corfinal}
\begin{enumerate}
\item A separable full and stable Hilbert $A$-module is isomorphic to $\mathcal{H}_A$ ({\it cf.}\/ \cite[Prop. 7.4, p. 73]{Lance}).
\item If $E$ is a separable Hilbert $A$-module and $p\in \mathcal{L}(E)$ is a projection such that $pE$ is full and stable, then $E$ is isomorphic to $\mathcal{H}_A$.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Put $B=\mathcal{K}(E)$ and $E^*=\mathcal{K}(E,A)$ considered as a Hilbert $B$ module. Since $E$ is full, we find $\mathcal{K}(E^*)=E^*\otimes _BE=A$. Since $E$ is stable, the Hilbert $B$-module $B$ is isomorphic to $\mathcal{H}_B$, therefore, using Kasparov's stabilization theorem, we find an isomorphism $u:B\to B\oplus (\ell^2(\mathbb{N})\otimes E^*)$. We thus obtain an isomorphism of Hilbert $A$-modules $u\otimes_B1_{E}$ between $E=B\otimes_BE$ and $E\oplus (\ell^2(\mathbb{N})\otimes E^*\otimes_B E)\simeq \mathcal{H}_A$.
\item Write $E=pE\oplus (1-p)E\simeq \mathcal{H}_A\oplus (1-p)E\simeq \mathcal{H}_A$.
\qedhere
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\end{corollary}
\subsection{Hilbert module associated with a transverse map}\label{section3.2}
We now recall the rather well known construction of generalized smooth transverse maps $M\to G$ from a manifold $M$ to a smooth groupoid $G$. This construction is useful in steps \ref{step4} and \ref{step5} of the proof of our theorem as explained in section 1. Note that we actually only use it for a (locally closed) submanifold $M\subset G^{(0)}$ transverse to $G$.
\begin{definition}
Let $M$ be a smooth manifold and $G$ a smooth groupoid with algebroid $\mathfrak{A}$ and anchor $\natural$. A smooth map $f:M\to G^{(0)}$ is said to be \emph{transverse} to $G$ if for every $x\in M$, $df_x(T_xM)+\natural _{f(x)}\mathfrak{A}_{f(x)}=T_{f(x)}G^{(0)}$.
\end{definition}
The \emph{graph} of a smooth map $f:M\to G^{(0)}$ is the set $\Gamma^f=M\times _{G^{(0)}}G=\{(x,\gamma)\in M\times G;\ f(x)=r(\gamma)\}$.
Equivalently, $f$ is transverse if and only if the \emph{source map} $s_f$ is a submersion, where $s_f:\Gamma^f \to G^{(0)}$ is the map $(x,\gamma) \mapsto s(\gamma)$.
We will in fact only use the case where $f:M\to G^{(0)}$ is the inclusion of a (locally closed) submanifold $M$ of $G^{(0)}$. Then, $\Gamma^f=G^M=\{\gamma\in G;\ r(\gamma)\in M\}$.
\medskip For the sake of completeness, we recall also the notion of a \emph{generalized transverse map.}
Let $G$ be a smooth groupoid, $M$ a smooth manifold. A generalized morphism $f:M\to G$ is given either by:
\begin{description}
\item[A cocycle]: An open cover $(U_i)_{i\in I}$ of $M$, smooth maps $f_i:U_i\to G^{(0)}$ and smooth maps $f_{ij}:U_i\cap U_j\to G$ satisfying $r\circ f_{ij}=f_i$, $s\circ f_{ij}=f_j$ and, for all $x\in U_i\cap U_j\cap U_k$, $f_{ik}(x)=f_{ij}(x)f_{jk}(x)$.
\item[The graph of $f$]: A set $\Gamma^f$ which is a $G$-principal bundle over $M$. We therefore are given maps $r_f:\Gamma^f\to M$ which is a smooth surjective submersion and $s_f:\Gamma^f\to G^{(0)}$ with a right action of $G$ which is a smooth map $(x,\gamma)\mapsto x\gamma$ from $\Gamma^f\times _{G^{(0)}}G=\{(x,\gamma)\in \Gamma^f\times G;\ s_f(x)=r(\gamma)\}$ to $\Gamma^f$. This action is assumed to be proper and free with quotient $M$:
\begin{description}
\item[Proper] means that the map $(x,\gamma)\mapsto (x,x\gamma)$ is proper from $\Gamma^f\times _{G^{(0)}}G$ to $ \Gamma^f\times \Gamma^f$.
\item [Free] means that the map $(x,\gamma)\mapsto (x,x\gamma)$ is injective.
\item[The quotient is $M$] means that for a pair $(x,y)\in \Gamma^f\times \Gamma^f$ there exists $\gamma\in G$ with $x\gamma =y$ if and only $r_f(x)=r_f(y)$. Note that by freeness, this $\gamma$ is unique. We will denote it by $x^{-1}y$.
\end{description}
These three conditions altogether mean that the map $(x,\gamma)\mapsto (x,x\gamma)$ is a diffeomorphism from $\Gamma^f\times _{G^{(0)}}G$ onto $\Gamma^f\times _M\Gamma^f=\{(x,y)\in \Gamma^f\times \Gamma^f;\ r_f(x)=r_f(y)\}$ - whose inverse is $(x,y)\mapsto (x,x^{-1}y)$.
\end{description}
Given a cocycle $(f_i)$, $(f_{i,j})$, we obtain the graph $\Gamma^f$ by gluing the graphs $\Gamma^{f_i}$ thanks to the $f_{i,j}$'s. Conversely, we obtain a cocycle out of $\Gamma^f$ by means of local sections of the submersion $r_f:\Gamma^f\to M$.
The generalized morphism $f$ is \emph{transverse} to $G$ (or a submersion from $M$ to the `bad manifold' $G^{(0)}/G$) if $s_f:\Gamma^f\to G^{(0)}$ is a submersion. This is equivalent to saying in the cocycle vision that the maps $f_{i}$ are transverse to $G$.
If $f$ is transverse to $G$, the map $(x,\gamma)\mapsto \gamma$ is a submersion from $\Gamma^f\times _{G^{(0)}}G$ into $G$, whence the map $(x,y)\mapsto x^{-1}y$ is a submersion from $\Gamma^f\times _M\Gamma^f$ to $G$
It then defines a Hilbert-$C^*(G)$-module $C^*(\Gamma^f)$: this is the completion of $C_c(\Gamma^f)$ with respect to the $C^*(G)$-valued inner product given (using $1/2$-densities) by $$\langle g|h\rangle(\gamma)=\int_{x\in \Gamma^f;\ s_f(x)=r(\gamma)} \overline g(x)h(x\gamma).$$
Let us state the following easy fact which is important for our constructions:
\begin{proposition}
Let $f:M\to G$ be a generalized \emph{transverse} morphism with graph $\Gamma^f$. The module $C^*(\Gamma^f)$ is full if and only if $s_f:\Gamma^f\to G^{(0)}$ is onto.
\begin{proof}
The image of the submersion $s_f:\Gamma^f\to G^{(0)}$ is an open subset $U$ of $G^{(0)}$. Using the action of $G$ on $\Gamma^f$, we deduce that $U$ is saturated in $G^{(0)}$ - i.e. if $r(\gamma)\in U$, there exists $x\in \Gamma^f$ with $r(\gamma)=s_f(x)$; then $s(\gamma)=s_f(x\gamma)\in U$.
The image of the map $(x,y)\mapsto x^{-1}y$ from (defined on $\Gamma^f\times _M\Gamma^f$) is $G_U^U$.
It follows that the inner products $\langle g|h\rangle$ with $g,h\in C_c^\infty(\Gamma^f)$, span a dense subset of $C_c^\infty(G_U^U)$.
If $U=G^{(0)}$, these scalar products span a dense subspace in $C^*(G)$; if $U\ne G^{(0)}$, they all sit in the kernel of a regular representation associated to any point $x\not\in U$.
\end{proof}
\end{proposition}
Note that if $M$ is a submanifold of $G^{(0)}$, this condition means that $M$ meets all the $G$ orbits.
Let us state this proposition in the precise way we will need to use it:
\begin{corollary}\label{fullsub}
Let $G$ be smooth and $V$ an open subset of $G^{(0)}$. Consider $C_0(V)$ as sitting in $C_0(G^{(0)})$ and therefore in the multiplier algebra of $C^*(G)$. Assume that every orbit of $G$ has a nonempty intersection with $V$. Then $C_0(V)C^*(G)$ is a full submodule of $C^*(G)$.\hfill$\square$
\end{corollary}
\subsection{The characteristic function of \boldmath{$V_j$} is a projection}\label{VjMult}
We prove here that the characteristic function $q_j$ of $V_j$ is a multiplier of $C^*(G)$, {\it i.e.}\/ that $C_0(V_j)C^*(G)$ is \emph{orthocomplemented} in $C^*(G)$.
Indeed, put $n=n(j)$. We may write $q_j=\vartheta_j q_j\vartheta_j$ where $\vartheta_j$ is a smooth real valued function on $G^{(0)}$ with support in $W_n$ which is equal to $1$ on $\overline V_j$. It is then enough to prove that $q_j\in \mathcal{L}(C^*(G^{W_{n}}))$ viewing $\vartheta_j$ as an element $T_{\vartheta_j}\in \mathcal{L}(C^*(G);C^*(G^{W_{n}}))$ and write $q_j=T_{\vartheta_j}^*q_jT_{\vartheta_j}$.
Using the identification between $W_n$ and $U_n\times \mathbb{R}$ coming from the diffeomorphism $f_n$, we may write $C^*(G^{W_{n}}) =(C_0(U_n)\otimes L^2(\mathbb{R}))\otimes_{C_0(U_n)}C^*(G^{U_{n}})$.
The characteristic function of $V_j$ is given by a ($*$-)strongly continuous map from $U_{n}$ to $\mathcal{L}(L^2(\mathbb{R}))$, and therefore is an element $Q_j \in \mathcal{L}(C_0(U_n)\otimes L^2(\mathbb{R}))$. Therefore $q_j=Q_j\otimes_{C_0(U_n)}1$ is in $\mathcal{L}(C^*(G^{W_{n}}))$.
Note also that $Q_j$ is the $*$-strong limit of a sequence $(\theta_k)$ of smooth functions on $U_n\times \mathbb{R}$: put $\theta_k(x,t)=\phi(k(t-\varphi^- (x)))\phi(k(\varphi^+ (x)-t))$ where $\phi:\mathbb{R}\to [0,1]$ is a continuous function vanishing for $t\le 0$ and equal to $1$ for $t\ge 1$. It follows that the range of $q_j$ is (the closure of) $C_0(V_j)C^*(G)$. It is the Hilbert $C^*(G)$-module $C^*(G^{V_j})$ corresponding to the inclusion $V_j\to G^{(0)}$.
Now the projections $q_j$ are pairwise orthogonal and, by local finiteness, the sum $\sum q_j$ is strictly convergent. Indeed, the sum $\sum q_j\xi$ has only finitely many nonzero terms for $\xi\in C_c(G)$.
\subsection{Stability} \label{stability}
\begin{description}
\item[Stability of \boldmath{$q_jC^*(G)$}.] Using the diffeomorphism $h_j:A_j\times {]}0,1{[}\to V_j$ (see section \ref{carreau}, formula (\ding{71})), we deduce a diffeomorphism $G^{V_j}\simeq G^{A_j}\times {]}0,1{[}$, whence an isomorphism of Hilbert $C^*(G)$-modules $C^*(G^{V_j})\simeq C^*(G^{A_j})\otimes L^2({]}0,1{[})$. Therefore, the Hilbert $C^*$-module $q_jC^*(G)$ is stable.
\item[Stability of \boldmath{$qC^*(G)$}.] Since $q=\sum q_j$ ($*$-strong convergence), it follows that $qC^*(G)=\bigoplus_j q_jC^*(G)$. Therefore $qC^*(G)$ is stable too.
\item[Conclusion.] It then follows from corollary \ref{corfinal} that the Hilbert $C^*(G)$-module $C^*(G)$ is isomorphic to $\mathcal{H}_{C^*(G)}$. The $C^*$-algebra $C^*(G)=\mathcal{K}(C^*(G))=\mathcal{K}(\mathcal{H}_{C^*(G)})$ is stable.
\end{description}
This ends the proof of theorem \ref{casdesgroupoides}.
\section{Stability of the C*-algebra of a singular foliation}\label{foliation}
\subsection{The holonomy groupoid of a singular foliation}
The C*-algebra of a singular foliation was defined in \cite{AndrSk1}. Let us briefly recall a few facts and constructions from \cite{AndrSk1}.
Recall that a foliation on a manifold $M$ is defined in \cite{AndrSk1} to be a (locally) finitely generated submodule $\mathcal{F}$, stable by Lie brackets, of the $C^\infty(M)$-module $\mathcal{X}_c(M)$ of smooth vector fields on $M$ with compact support.
A \emph{bi-submersion} of $\mathcal{F}$ is the data of $(N,r_N,s_N)$ where $N$ is a smooth manifold, $r_N,s_N : N\rightarrow M$ are smooth submersions such that :
$$r_N^{-1}(\mathcal{F})=s_N^{-1}(\mathcal{F}) \mbox{ and } s_N^{-1}(\mathcal{F})=C_c^{\infty}(N;\mbox{ker } ds_N) + C_c^{\infty}(N;\mbox{ker } dr_N) \ \footnote{If $h:N \rightarrow M$ is a smooth submersion $h^{-1}(\mathcal{F})$ is the vector space generated by tangent vector fields $fZ$ where $f\in C_c^{\infty}(N)$ and $Z$ is a smooth tangent vector field on $N$ which is projectable by $dh$ and such that $dh(Z)$ belongs to $\mathcal{F}$.}\!^) .$$
The \emph{inverse} of $(N,r_N,s_N)$ is $(N,s_N,r_N)$ and if $(T,r_T,s_T)$ is another bi-submersion for $\mathcal{F}$ the \emph{composition}
is given by $(N,r_N,s_N)\circ (T,r_T,s_T):=(N \times_{s_N,r_T} T,r_N\circ p_N, s_T\circ p_T) \ ,$
where $p_N$ and $p_T$ are the natural projections respectively of $N \times_{s_N,r_T} T$ on $N$ and on $T$. \\
A \emph{morphism} from $(N,r_N,s_N)$ to $(T,r_T,s_T)$ is a smooth map $h:N\rightarrow T$ such that $s_T\circ h=s_N$ and $r_T\circ h=r_N$ and it is \emph{local} when it is defined only on an open subset of $N$. \\
Finally a bi-submersion can be \emph{restricted} : if $U$ is an open subset of $N$, $(U,r_U,s_U)$ is again a bi-submersion, where $r_U$ and $s_U$ are the restriction of $r_N$ and $s_N$ to $U$.
\smallskip \noindent For $x$ in $M$, we define the \emph{fiber} of $\mathcal{F}$ at $x$ to be the quotient $\mathcal{F}_x=\mathcal{F}/ I_x\mathcal{F}$.
Let $\mathcal{X}=(X_i)_{i\in \llbracket 1,n\rrbracket} \in \mathcal{F}^n$ be such that $\mathcal{X}_x=([X_i]_x)_{i\in \llbracket 1,n\rrbracket}$ is a basis of $\mathcal{F}_x$. For any $\xi=(\xi_i)_{i\in \llbracket 1,n\rrbracket} \in \mathbb{R}^n$, we consider the vector field $X_{\xi}:= \sum_{i=1}^n \xi_i X_i$ and we denote by $\Psi_{\xi}^s$ its flow at time $s$. We consider the two smooth submersions from $M \times \mathbb{R}^n$ to $M$ :
$$(s_{\mathcal{X}},r_{\mathcal{X}}) : M\times \mathbb{R}^n \longrightarrow M\times M \ ; \ (x,\xi) \mapsto (x,\Psi_{\xi}^1(x)) \ .$$
According to Proposition 2.10 and 3.11 of \cite{AndrSk1}, one can find an open neighborhood $W$ of $(x,0)$ in $M\times \mathbb{R}^n$ such that $(W,r_W,s_W)$ is a bi-submersion, where the map $r_W$ and $s_W$ are the restriction to $W$ of the maps $r_{\mathcal{X}}$ and $s_{\mathcal{X}}$ defined above. Such a bi-submersion is called a \emph{path holonomy bi-submersion minimal at} $x$.
\smallskip \noindent Notice, that any restriction around $(x,0)$ of a path holonomy bi-submersion minimal at $x$, is again a path holonomy bi-submersion minimal at $x$.
\smallskip \noindent Let $\mathcal{U}=(U_i,r_i,s_i)_{i\in I}$ be a family of bi-submersions of $\mathcal{F}$. A bi-submersion $(U,r_U,s_U)$ is \emph{adapted} to $\mathcal{U}$ if for any $u\in U$ there is a local morphism around $u$ from $U$ to a $U_i$ for some $i$.
\smallskip \noindent A family $\mathcal{U}=(U_i,r_i,s_i)_{i\in I}$ of bi-submersions of $\mathcal{F}$ which satisfies $M=\underset{i\in I}{\bigcup} s_i(U_i)$ and the inverse of any element in $\mathcal{U}$ is adapted to $\mathcal{U}$ together with the composition of any two elements of $\mathcal{U}$ is an \emph{atlas}.
The \emph{path holonomy atlas} is the family of bi-submersions of $\mathcal{F}$ generated by the path holonomy bi-submersions.
\smallskip \noindent The \emph{groupoid of the atlas} $\mathcal{U}$ is the quotient $G(\mathcal{U})=\sqcup_{i\in I} U_i/\sim$ where $U_i\ni u \sim v\in U_j$ if and only if there is a local morphism from $U_i$ to $U_j$ sending $u$ on $v$. When $(U,r_U,s_U)$ belongs to $\mathcal{U}$ and $u\in U$, let us denote by $[U,r_U,s_U]_u$ its image in $G(\mathcal{U})$. The structural morphisms of $G(\mathcal{U})$ are given by :
\begin{description}
\item[source and range :] ${\bf s}([U,r_U,s_U]_u)=s_U(u), {\bf r}([U,r_U,s_U]_u)=r_U(u)$,
\item[inverse :] $[U,r_U,s_U]_u^{-1}=[U,s_U,r_U]_u$,
\item[product :]$[U,r_U,s_U]_u \cdot [V,r_V,s_V]_v=[U\times_{s_U,r_V}V,r_U\circ p_U, s_V\circ p_V]_{(u,v)} \mbox{ when } s_U(u)=r_V(v)$.
\end{description}
\noindent The groupoid of an atlas is endowed with the quotient topology which is quite bad, in particular the dimension of the fibers may change.
The \emph{holonomy groupoid} of $\mathcal{F}$ is the groupoid of the path holonomy atlas.
\subsection{Subfoliations}\label{lexion}
A \emph{subfoliation} $\mathcal{F}_1$ of a foliation $\mathcal{F}_2$ is a submodule of $\mathcal{F}_2$ which is a foliation {\it i.e.}\/ it is locally finitely generated and stable by Lie brackets.
In this section, we fix a foliation $\mathcal{F}_2$ and a subfoliation $\mathcal{F}_1$ of $\mathcal{F}_2$.
\subsubsection{The atlas of compatible bi-submersions}
\begin{definition}
A bi-submersion $(U,r,s)$ of $\mathcal{F}_1$ is said to be \emph{compatible} with $\mathcal{F}_2$ if $r^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2)=s^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2)$.
\end{definition}
\begin{proposition}\label{ge}
\begin{enumerate}
\item For every $x_0\in M$, there is a bi-submersion $(\mathcal{W},r,s)$ of $\mathcal{F}_1$ compatible with $\mathcal{F}_2$ such that $x_0\in s(\mathcal{W})$.
\item If $f:(U,r_U,s_U)\to (V,r_V,s_V)$ is a morphism of bi-submersions for $\mathcal{F}_1$ and $(V,r_V,s_V)$ is compatible with $\mathcal{F}_2$, then $(U,r_V,s_V)$ is compatible with $\mathcal{F}_1$.
\item The bi-submersions of $\mathcal{F}_1$ compatible with $\mathcal{F}_2$ form an atlas.\footnote{To make it a set, take only bi-submersions defined on open subsets of $\mathbb{R}^N$ for all $N$. Note that a bi-submersion $(U,r,s)$ of $\mathcal{F}_1$ is then adapted to this atlas if and only if $r^{-1}\mathcal{F}_2=s^{-1}\mathcal{F}_2$.}
\end{enumerate}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Fix vector fields $X_1,\ldots ,X_n$ which generate $\mathcal{F}_1$ in a neighborhood of $x_0$. For $y=(y_1,\ldots,y_n)\in \mathbb{R}^n$, put $\varphi_y=\exp (\sum y_iX_i)\in \exp \mathcal{F}$. On $\mathbb{R}^n\times M$, put $s_0(y,x)=x$ and $t_0(y,x)=\varphi_y(x)$. It is proved in \cite[section 2.3]{AndrSk1} that there is a neighborhood $\mathcal{W} $ of $(0,x_0)$ in $\mathbb{R}^n\times M$ such that $(\mathcal{W} ,t,s)$ is a bi-submersion for $\mathcal{F}_1$ where $s$ and $t$ are the restrictions of $s_0$ and $t_0$.
Let $Y$ be the vector field on $\mathbb{R}^n\times M$ given by $Y(y,x)=(0,\sum y_iX_i)\in \mathbb{R}^n\times T_xM=T_{(y,x)}(\mathbb{R}^n\times M)$. Since $Y\in s^{-1}\mathcal{F}_1\subset s^{-1}\mathcal{F}_2$, it follows that $s^{-1}\mathcal{F}_2$ is invariant under $\exp Y$. We find that $s^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2)=(s\circ \exp Y)^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2)$ as desired.
\item As $r_U=r_V\circ f$ and $s_U=s_V\circ f$, we find $r_U^{-1}(\mathcal{F})=f^{-1}(r_V^{-1}(\mathcal{F}))=f^{-1}(s_V^{-1}(\mathcal{F}))=s_U^{-1}(\mathcal{F})$.
\item Let $(U,r_U,s_U)$ and $(V,r_V,s_V)$ be bi-submersions (for $\mathcal{F}_1$) compatible with $\mathcal{F}_2$.\begin{enumerate}
\item Obviously, the inverse $(U,s_U,r_U)$ of $(U,r_U,s_U)$ is compatible with $\mathcal{F}_2$.
\item Recall that the composition $(W,r_W,s_W)$ of $(U,r_U,s_U)$ and $(V,r_V,s_V)$ is constructed as follows: define $W=\{(u,v)\in U\times V;\ s_U(u)=r_V(v)\}$ and for $(u,v)\in W$, set $s_W(u,v)=s_V(v)$ and $r_W(u,v)=r_U(u)$. As $p_U:(u,v)\mapsto u$ and $p_V(u,v)\mapsto v$ are submersions on $W$, and $s_U\circ p_U=r_V\circ p_V$, we find
\begin{eqnarray*}
r_W^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2)&=&p_U^{-1}(r_U^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2))=p_U^{-1}(s_U^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2))\\
&=&p_V^{-1}(r_V^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2))=p_V^{-1}(s_V^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2))\\
&=&s_W^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2).
\end{eqnarray*}\qedhere
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}\label{us}
The composition of a bi-submersion of $\mathcal{F}_1$ compatible with $\mathcal{F}_2$ with a bi-submersion of $\mathcal{F}_2$ is a bi-submersion of $\mathcal{F}_2$.
\begin{proof}
Let $(U,r_U,s_U)$ be a bi-submersion of $\mathcal{F}_1$ compatible with $\mathcal{F}_2$ and $(V,r_V,s_V)$ be a bi-submersion for $\mathcal{F}_2$. As previously let $W=\{(u,v)\in U\times V;\ s_U(u)=r_V(v)\}$ and denote by $p_U$ and $p_V$ the projections on $U$ and $V$. We set $s_W=s_V\circ p_V$, $r_W=r_U\circ p_U$ and $\alpha=s_U\circ p_U=r_V\circ p_V$.
Since $(U,r_U,s_U)$ is compatible with $\mathcal{F}_2$ we have : $$r_W^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2)=\alpha^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2)=s_W^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2) $$
In particular $C_c^{\infty}(W;\ker dr_W)+C_c^{\infty}(W;\ker ds_W)\subset s_W^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2)$.
On the other hand $$\begin{array}{ccl}
C_c^{\infty}(W;\ker d\alpha) & = & C_c^{\infty}(W;\ker dp_U) \oplus C_c^{\infty}(W;\ker dp_V) \\ & \\ s_W^{-1}(\mathcal{F}_2) &= & p_V^{-1}(C_c^{\infty}(V;\ker ds_V) + C_c^{\infty}(V;\ker dr_V) )\\ & = & C_c^{\infty}(W;\ker ds_W) +C_c^{\infty}(W;\ker d\alpha) \\ & = & C_c^{\infty}(W;\ker dp_U) + C_c^{\infty}(W;\ker dp_V) + C_c^{\infty}(W;\ker ds_W) \\ & \subset & C_c^{\infty}(W;\ker dr_W)+C_c^{\infty}(W;\ker ds_W)+C_c^{\infty}(W;\ker ds_W)
\end{array}$$
\end{proof}
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark}\label{rigerer}
Given bi-submersions $(U,r_U,s_U)$ and $(U',r_U',s_U')$ of $\mathcal{F}_1$ and $(V,r_V,s_V)$ and $(V',r_V',s_V')$ of $\mathcal{F}_2$ and morphisms $f:U\to U'$ and $g:V\to V'$, we obtain a morphism $(u,v)\mapsto (f(u),g(v))$ of bi-submersions $U\circ V\to U'\circ V'$.
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{Morphism on holonomy groupoids}
Let $G_i$ be the (path) holonomy groupoids of $\mathcal{F}_i$ (\cite[Example 3.4.3 and Def. 3.5]{AndrSk1}). Let $\check G_1$ be the groupoid associated with the atlas of bi-submersions of $\mathcal{F}_1$ compatible with $\mathcal{F}_2$. Let $\widehat G_2$ be the maximal holonomy groupoid of $\mathcal{F}_2$ associated to the ``maximal atlas'' of all possible bi-submersions (\cite[Ex. 3.4.1]{AndrSk1}).
Let $(U,r_U,s_U)$ in $\mathcal{U}(\mathcal{F}_1)$, $u\in U$ and $x=s_U(u)$. Choose a bi-submersion $(V,r_V,s_V)$ and $v\in V$ representing the unit $x\in G_2^{(0)}$ that is :
\begin{itemize}
\item $v\in V$ satisfies $s_V(v)=r_V(v)=x$ and
\item There is an identity bisection through $v$. This means that there is an open subset $W\subset M$ and a smooth map $j:W\to V$ which is a section for both $s$ and $r$.
\end{itemize}
According to proposition \ref{us}, the composition of $(U,r_U,s_U)$ and $(V,r_V,s_V)$ is a bi-submersion for $\mathcal{F}_2$. Let then $U'$ be the open subset $s_U^{-1}(W)$ of $U$ and define $\psi :U'\to U\circ V$ by $\psi (u)=(u,j\circ s(u))$.
According to remark \ref{rigerer}, the class of $\psi(u)$ in $\widehat G_2$ only depends on the class of $u$ in $\check G_1$. Note also, that taking a bi-submersion $(V'',r''_V,s''_V)$ and $v''\in V''$ representing the unit $r_U(u)\in G_2^{(0)}$, we find a bi-submersion $V''\circ U$ for $G_2$. As the class of $v$ ({\it resp.}\/ $v''$) is the identity at $x$ ({\it resp.}\/ $r_U(u)$), the classes of $(v'',u)\in V''\circ U$ ({\it resp.}\/ $(u,v)\in U\circ V$) and $(v'',u,v)\in V''\circ U\circ V$ coincide.
Finally, for any bi-submersion $V_1$ for $\mathcal{F}_1$, bi-submersion $V_2$ for $\mathcal{F}_2$ the class $[(v_1,v_2)]$ of $(v_1,v_2)\in V_1\circ V_2$ is $\varphi([v_1])[v_2]$.
We thus constructed a ``smooth'' morphism of groupoids $\varphi:\check G_1\to \widehat G_2$. Smoothness means that for every $\gamma_1\in G_1$ there is a bi-submersion $U$ associated with $\check G_1$ such that $\gamma_1$ is the class of some element in $U$ and a smooth map $\psi$ from $U$ is a bi-submersion $V$ for $\mathcal{F}_2$ such that the diagram
$$\xymatrix{U\ar[r]^{\psi}\ar[d]&V\ar[d]\\ \check G_1\ar[r]^\varphi& \widehat G_2}$$
commutes, where the vertical maps associate to elements of the bi-submersions their class in the corresponding groupoids.
According to \cite{DebCRAS} and remark 3.13 of \cite{AndrSk1}, the $s$-fibers $\check G_{1,x}$ and $\widehat G_{2,x}$ are smooth manifolds. The restriction of $\varphi$ defines in particular a smooth map $\check G_{1,x}\to \widehat G_{2,x}$.
By definition of the path holonomy atlas, the corresponding groupoid $G_1$ is $s$-connected, since it is generated by any small neighborhood of the identity. More precisely, and thanks to \cite{DebCRAS}, the $s$-fibers $G_{1,x}$ are connected manifolds. It follows that $\varphi (G_1)\subset G_2$.
It follows that if $(U,r_U,s_U)$ is a bi-submersion for $\mathcal{F}_1$ adapted to the path holonomy atlas of $\mathcal{F}_1$ and $(V,r_V,s_V)$ is a bi-submersion for $\mathcal{F}_2$ adapted to the path holonomy atlas of $\mathcal{F}_2$, then $U\circ V$ is a adapted to the path holonomy atlas of $\mathcal{F}_2$.
\subsubsection{The morphism of foliation C*-algebras}
For every bi-submersion $(U,r,s)$ of $\mathcal{F}_i$ ($i=1,2$), we denote by $\Omega^{1/2}U$ the bundle over $U$ of half densities on the bundle $\ker dr \oplus \ker ds$.
Let $(U_1,r_1,s_1)$ be a bi-submersion for $\mathcal{F}_1$ and $(U_2,r_2,s_2)$ a bi-submersion for $\mathcal{F}_2$. Put $(W,r_W,s_W)=(U_1,r_1,s_1)\circ (U_2,r_2,s_2)$. Denote by $p_i:W\to U_i$ the projections. For $w=(u_1,u_2)\in W$, since $r_W=r_1\circ p_1$, and $\ker (dp_1)_w=\ker (dr_2)_{u_2})$, we find exact sequences $$0\to \ker (dr_2)_{u_2}\to \ker (dr_W)_{w}\to \ker (dr_1)_{u_1}\to 0$$ and in the same way, $$0\to \ker (ds_1)_{u_1}\to \ker (ds_W)_{w}\to \ker (ds_2)_{u_2}\to 0.$$ It follows that $\Omega^{1/2}W$ identifies with $\Omega^{1/2}U_1\otimes \Omega^{1/2}U_2$.
The algebra $C^*(M,\mathcal{F}_i)$ is constructed in \cite[section 4.4]{AndrSk1}. Recall that for every bi-submersion $U$ in the path holonomy atlas of $\mathcal{F}_i$ we have a linear map $\Theta^U_i:C_c^\infty (U;\Omega^{1/2})\to C^*(M,\mathcal{F}_i)$, and that given an atlas $(U_j)_{j\in J}$ of bi-submersions adapted to the path holonomy atlas, the vector span of $\Theta^{U_j}_i:C_c^\infty (U_j;\Omega^{1/2}),\ j\in J$ is dense in $C^*(M,\mathcal{F}_i)$.
\begin{proposition}\label{amidmopassant}
\begin{enumerate}
\item There is a morphism $\Phi:C^*(M,\mathcal{F}_1)\to \mathcal{M}(C^*(M,\mathcal{F}_2))$ characterized by the equality $\Phi(\Theta^{U_1}_1(f_1))\Theta^{U_2}_2(f_2)=\Theta^{U_1\circ U_2}_2(f_1\bullet f_2)$ for every bi-submersion $U_1$ for $\mathcal{F}_1$, every bi-submersion $U_2$ for $\mathcal{F}_2$, every $f_1\in C_c^\infty(U_1;\Omega^{1/2}U_1)$, $f_2\in C_c^\infty(U_2;\Omega^{1/2}U_2)$ where $f_1\bullet f_2\in C_c^{\infty}(U_1\circ U_2;\Omega^{1/2}(U_1\circ U_2))$ is the restriction to $U_1\circ U_2\subset U_1\times U_2$ of $f_1\otimes f_2\in C_c^{\infty}(U_1\times U_2;\Omega^{1/2}U_1\otimes \Omega^{1/2}U_2)$.
\item The morphism $\Phi$ is non degenerate.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}
\item We prove that, given a (faithful) representation $\varpi_2$ of $C^*(M,\mathcal{F}_2)$, there is a representation $\varpi_1$ of $C^*(M,\mathcal{F}_1)$ such that $\varpi_1(\Theta^{U_1}_1(f_1))\varpi_2(\Theta^{U_2}_1(f_2))=\varpi_2(\Theta^{U_1\circ U_2}_2(f_1\bullet f_2))$.
Recall from \cite[section 5]{AndrSk1} that the representation $\varpi_2$ corresponds to a triple $(\mu,H,\pi_2)$ where $\mu$ is a measure on $M$ which is quasi invariant by $G_2$, $H=(H_x)_{x\in M}$ is a $\mu$ measurable field of Hilbert spaces and $\pi_2$ is a representation of $G_2$ on the field $(\mu,H)$.
Fix a a bi-submersion $(U_1,r_1,s_1)$ for $\mathcal{F}_1$. Let $(U_2,r_2,s_2)$ be a bi-submersion for $\mathcal{F}_2$, denote by $(W,r_W,s_W)$ the composition $U_1\circ U_2$ and let $p_i:W\to U_i$ be the projections. Put also $q=s_1\circ p_1=r_2\circ p_2$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{We show that $\mu $ is quasi-invariant by the groupoid $G_1$.} Choose positive smooth sections of the bundles of $1$-densities of the bundles $\ker ds_1,\ \ker ds_2,\ \ker dr_1,\ \ker dr_2$. Thanks to these choices we construct measures $\mu\circ \lambda^{r_1}$ and $\mu\circ \lambda^{s_1}$ on $U_1$, measures $\mu\circ \lambda^{r_2}$ and $\mu\circ \lambda^{s_2}$ on $U_2$ and measures $\mu\circ \lambda^{r_W}$ and $\mu\circ \lambda^{s_W}$ on $W$. Consider also the measure $\mu \circ \lambda^q$. As $(W,r_W,s_W)$ is a bi-submersion for $\mathcal{F}_2$ as well as $(W,q,s_W)$, it follows that the measures $\mu\circ \lambda^{r_W}$ and $\mu\circ \lambda^{q}$ are equivalent. Using a cover of $s_1(U_1)$ by open sets of the form $r(U_2)$, we deduce that $\mu\circ \lambda^{r_1}$ and $\mu\circ \lambda^{s_1}$ are equivalent. This being true for every bi-submersion $U_1$, it follows that the measure $\mu$ is quasi-invariant by the groupoid $G_1$.
\item \emph{We construct a representation $\pi_1$ of the groupoid $G_1$.} Associated with the bi-submersions $(U_2,r_2,s_2)$ and $(W,r_W,s_W)$ for $\mathcal{F}_2$, we have measurable families of isomorphisms $\pi_{U_2}(u_2):H_{s_2(u_2)}\to H_{r_2(u_2)}$ and $\pi_{W}(u_1,u_2):H_{s_2(u_2)}\to H_{r_1(u_1)}$. We wish to define $\pi_{U_1}(u_1):H_{s_1(u_1)}\to H_{r_1(u_1)}$ by putting ({almost everywhere}) $\pi_{U_1}(u_1)=\pi_{W}(u_1,u_2)\circ \pi_{U_2}(u_2)^{-1}$. To do so, we define the measurable section $\tilde\pi_{U_1}$ over $W$ by setting $\tilde\pi_{U_1}(u_1,u_2)=\pi_{W}(u_1,u_2)\circ \pi_{U_2}(u_2)^{-1}$ and show it is constant ({almost everywhere}) along the fibers of $p_1:W\to U_1$. Let $(U'_2,r'_2,s'_2)$ be another bi-submersion for $\mathcal{F}_2$. Since the identity of $U'_2\circ U_1\circ U_2$ is an isomorphism of bi-submersions between the composions $U'_2\circ (U_1\circ U_2)$ and $(U'_2\circ U_1)\circ U_2$, it follows that, ({almost everywhere} in $U'_2\circ U_1\circ U_2$) we have $$\pi_{U'_2}(u'_2)\pi_{U_1\circ U_2}(u_1,u_2)=\pi_{U'_2\circ U_1}(u'_2,u_1)\pi_{U_2}(u_2)$$ {whence}$$\pi_{U_1\circ U_2}(u_1,u_2)\circ \pi_{U_2}(u_2)^{-1}=\pi_{U'_2}(u'_2)^{-1}\circ \pi_{U'_2\circ U_1}(u'_2,u_1).$$
This shows that $\tilde\pi_{U_1}(u_1,u_2)$ is independent on $u_2$, {\it i.e.}\/ is constant along the fibers of $p_1$.
\end{enumerate}
The triple $(\mu,H,\pi_1)$ yields now a representation $\varpi_1$ of $C^*(M,\mathcal{F}_1)$ on the Hilbert space $L^2(M,\mu ,H)$ of $L^2$ sections of the bundle $H$.
Recall that the representations $\varpi_1$ and $\varpi_2$ are defined on any bi-submersion $(V,r_V,s_V)$ of $\mathcal{F}_i$ by setting $\varpi_i\circ \Theta_i^V=\hat \pi_i^V$ where, for $f\in C_c^\infty(V;\Omega^{1/2}V)$ and $\xi\in L^2(M,\mu ,H)$, we have a formula:
$$\hat\pi_i^V(f)(\xi)(x) = \int_{V^{x}}(1\otimes\rho^{V}(v)) (f(v))\pi_i^V(v)(\xi(s_{V}(v))) D^V(v)^{1/2}.$$
Recall that: \begin{itemize}
\item $V^x=r_V^{-1}(x)$;
\item $\rho^V$ is an isomorphism between $\Omega^{1/2}\ker ds_V$ and $\Omega^{1/2}\ker dr_V$ corresponding to the choice of a Riemannian metric on $M$, thus $(1\otimes\rho^{V}(v)) (f(v))$ is a $1$-density on $V^{x}$ and thus can be integrated;
\item the isomorphism $\rho^V$ is used to compare Lebesgue measures on the fibers of $s_V$ and of $r^V$; using it we obtain the Radon Nikodym derivative $D^V$ between the measures $\mu\circ \lambda^{s_V}$ and $\mu\circ \lambda^{r_V}$ which is used in this formula.
\end{itemize}
It is an easy check that, under the identification $\Omega^{1/2}(U_1\circ U_2)$ with $\Omega^{1/2}(U_1)\otimes \Omega^{1/2}(U_2)$, we have $\rho^{U_1\circ U_2}(u_1,u_2)=\rho^{U_1}(u_1)\otimes \rho^{U_2}(u_2)$ and also $D^{U_1\circ U_2}(u_1,u_2)=D^{U_1}(u_1)D^{U_2}(u_2)$.
One then checks immediately the equality $\hat \pi_1^{U_1}(f_1)\hat\pi_2^{U_2}(f_2)=\hat\pi^{U_1\circ U_2}_2(f_1\bullet f_2)$.
\item Take a bi-submersion $U_1$ for $\mathcal{F}_1$, a bi-submersion $U_2$ for $\mathcal{F}_2$. Let $(u_1,u_2)\in U_1\circ U_2$. If the class of $u_1$ is a unit of $G_1$ - {\it i.e.}\/ if $U_1$ carries an identity bissection through $u_1$, then the classes of $(u_1,u_2) $ and $u_2$ coincide. It follows that the bi-submersions of the form $U_1\circ U_2$ form an atlas of bi-submersions equivalent to the path holonomy atlas of $\mathcal{F}_2$ and therefore the span of $\Theta^{U_1\circ U_2}_2(f_1\bullet f_2)$ is dense in $C^*(M,\mathcal{F}_2)$. The result follows. \qedhere
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\end{proposition}
\subsection{Stability}
Since for every $x\in M$ there is $X\in \mathcal{F}$ such that $X_x\ne 0$, we can find, using the construction of section \ref{Annexe}, \begin{itemize}
\item a locally finite open cover $(W_n)_{n\in \mathbb{N}}$;
\item for every $n\in \mathbb{N}$ a submanifold $U_n\subset W_n$ (closed in $W_n$) and a compact subset $U'_n\subset U_n$;
\item a vector field $X_n\in \mathcal{F}$,
\end{itemize}
such that \begin{itemize}
\item $(t,u)\mapsto \exp_{tX_n}(u)$ is a diffeomorphism $f_n:{]}{-}1,1{[}\times U_n\to W_n$;
\item $\bigcup _{n\in \mathbb{N}}f_n({]}{-}1,1{[}\times U'_n)=M$.
\end{itemize}
It then follows from section \ref{lesVj}, that we can construct a family of open sets $V_j$ satisfying the properties explained in step \ref{step2}.
The vector field $X_n$ defines a subfoliation $\mathcal{F}_n=\{fX_n;\ f\in C_c^\infty(M)\}$ of $\mathcal{F}$. Of course $X_n$ defines also an action $\beta_n$ of $\mathbb{R}$ on $M$ and $C^*(M;\mathcal{F}_n)$ is a quotient of $C(M)\rtimes _{\beta_n}\mathbb{R}$ (the holonomy groupoid of $(M,\mathcal{F}_n)$ is a quotient of $M\times _{\beta_n}\mathbb{R}$ since $M\times _{\beta_n}\mathbb{R}$ is an $s$-connected Lie groupoid with associated foliation $\mathcal{F}_n$). Now it follows from the construction above that, if $n=n(j)$, the characteristic function $q_j$ of $V_j$ is a multiplier of $C(M)\rtimes _{\beta_n}\mathbb{R}$ and thus of $C^*(M;\mathcal{F}_n)$ and finally, thanks to proposition \ref{amidmopassant}, of $C^*(M,\mathcal{F})$. The image of $q_j$ as a left multiplier of $C(M)\rtimes _{\beta_n}\mathbb{R}$ is $C_0(V_j)\Big(C(M)\rtimes _{\beta_n}\mathbb{R}\Big)$, therefore $q_jC^*(M,\mathcal{F})=C_0(V_j)C^*(M,\mathcal{F})$.
As $C^*(V_j,\mathcal{F}_n)$ is stable and acts in a non degenerate way on $q_jC^*(M,\mathcal{F})$, it follows that the Hilbert-$C^*(M,\mathcal{F})$ module $q_jC^*(M,\mathcal{F})$ is stable. Finally, putting $q=\sum q_j$, we find that $qC^*(M,\mathcal{F})$ is stable.
To conclude, we prove that the Hilbert-$C^*(M,\mathcal{F})$ module $qC^*(M,\mathcal{F})$ is full. It follows from corollary \ref{corfinal} that the Hilbert-$C^*(M,\mathcal{F})$ module $C^*(M,\mathcal{F})$ is stable, {\it i.e.}\/ that the $C^*$-algebra $C^*(M,\mathcal{F})$ is stable.
\begin{proposition}
Let $W\subset M$ be open. Assume that $W$ meets all the leaves of $\mathcal{F}$. Then $C_0(W)C^*(M,\mathcal{F})$ is a full Hilbert submodule of $C^*(M,\mathcal{F})$.
\begin{proof}
Note that if $x,y\in M$ are in the same leaf, there is a bi-submersion $(U,r,s)$ in the path holonomy atlas and $u\in U$ such that $r(u)=x$ and $s(u)=y$. It follows that for every $x\in M$, there is a bi-submersion $(U,r,s)$ in the path holonomy atlas such that $x\in s(U)$ and $r(U)\subset W$.
Let $\mathcal{U}=(U_i,r_i,s_i)_{i\in I}$ be a family of bi-submersions defining the path holonomy atlas of $\mathcal{F}$. For $i\in I$, put $U'_i=\{u\in U;\ r_i(u)\in W\}$. Define then $\widetilde \mathcal{U}=(\tilde U_{i,j},\tilde r_{i,j},\tilde s_{i,j})_{(i,j)\in I^2}$ where $\tilde U_{i,j}=(U'_i)^{-1}\circ U'_j=\{(u,v)\in U_i\times U_j;\ r_i(u)=r_j(u)\in W\}$, and where we put $\tilde r_{i,j}(u,v)=s_i(u)$, and $\tilde s_{i,j}(u,v)=s_j(v)$.
Note that since $U'_j\circ \tilde U_{k,\ell}$ is adapted to $\mathcal{U}$, it follows that $\tilde U_{i,j}\circ \tilde U_{k,\ell}$ is adapted to $\widetilde \mathcal{U}$. We deduce that $\widetilde \mathcal{U}$ is an atlas. It is obviously adapted to $\mathcal{U}$; on the other hand, since $\mathcal{U}$ is minimal, it is adapted to $\widetilde \mathcal{U}$.
It follows that the subspaces $C_c^\infty (\tilde U_{i,j})$ span a dense subalgebra of $C^*(M,\mathcal{F})$ and therefore $\{f^*g;\ f\in C^\infty_c(U'_i),\ g\in C^\infty_c(U'_j)\}$ span a dense subalgebra of $C^*(M,\mathcal{F})$. As the image of $C^\infty_c(U'_k)$ is in $C_0(W)C^*(M,F)$, the result follows.
\end{proof}
\end{proposition}
This ends the proof of theorem \ref{casdesfeuilletages}.
\begin{remarks}\begin{enumerate}
\item Note also that since the reduced $C^*$-algebra of the foliation is a quotient of the full one, it is also stable if $\mathcal{F}$ vanishes nowhere.
\item As $C^*(M,\mathcal{F})$ corresponding to the minimal (path holonomy) atlas is a sub-algebra of the $C^*$-algebra of any atlas in a non degenerate way, it follows that, under our assumption that $\mathcal{F}$ vanishes nowhere, all these $C^*$-algebras are stable.
\end{enumerate}
\end{remarks}
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
\label{sec:intro}
Origin of sub-eV scale neutrino masses and large leptonic mixing is one of the biggest unresolved mysteries in particle physics. Due to the absence of right handed neutrinos in the standard model (SM), neutrinos remain massless at renormalizable level. Several beyond standard model (BSM) frameworks have been proposed to explain tiny neutrino masses observed by neutrino oscillation experiments more than a decade ago \cite{Fukuda:2001nk,Ahmad:2002jz,Ahmad:2002ka,Bahcall:2004mz}. More recently, the experiments like T2K \cite{Abe:2011sj}, Double Chooz \cite{Abe:2011fz}, Daya-Bay \cite{An:2012eh} and RENO \cite{Ahn:2012nd} have not only confirmed the earlier measurements but also discovered a small but non-zero reactor mixing angle. Two different sets of latest global fit values for $3\sigma$ range of neutrino oscillation parameters given in \cite{Gonzalez-Garcia:2014bfa} and \cite{Forero:2014bxa} are shown in table \ref{tab:data1} and \ref{tab:data2} respectively.
\begin{center}
\begin{table}[htb]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
Parameters & Normal Hierarchy (NH) & Inverted Hierarchy (IH) \\
\hline
$ \frac{\Delta m_{21}^2}{10^{-5} \text{eV}^2}$ & $7.02-8.09$ & $7.02-8.09 $ \\
$ \frac{|\Delta m_{31}^2|}{10^{-3} \text{eV}^2}$ & $2.317-2.607$ & $2.307-2.590 $ \\
$ \sin^2\theta_{12} $ & $0.270-0.344 $ & $0.270-0.344 $ \\
$ \sin^2\theta_{23} $ & $0.382-0.643$ & $0.389-0.644 $ \\
$\sin^2\theta_{13} $ & $0.0186-0.0250$ & $0.0188-0.0251 $ \\
$ \delta_{CP} $ & $0-2\pi$ & $0-2\pi$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Global fit $3\sigma$ values of neutrino oscillation parameters \cite{Gonzalez-Garcia:2014bfa}}
\label{tab:data1}
\end{table}
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{table}[htb]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
Parameters & Normal Hierarchy (NH) & Inverted Hierarchy (IH) \\
\hline
$ \frac{\Delta m_{21}^2}{10^{-5} \text{eV}^2}$ & $7.11-8.18$ & $7.11-8.18 $ \\
$ \frac{|\Delta m_{31}^2|}{10^{-3} \text{eV}^2}$ & $2.30-2.65$ & $2.20-2.54 $ \\
$ \sin^2\theta_{12} $ & $0.278-0.375 $ & $0.278-0.375 $ \\
$ \sin^2\theta_{23} $ & $0.393-0.643$ & $0.403-0.640 $ \\
$\sin^2\theta_{13} $ & $0.0190-0.0262$ & $0.0193-0.0265 $ \\
$ \delta_{CP} $ & $0-2\pi$ & $0-2\pi$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Global fit $3\sigma$ values of neutrino oscillation parameters \cite{Forero:2014bxa}}
\label{tab:data2}
\end{table}
\end{center}
Although the $3\sigma$ range for the leptonic Dirac CP phase $\delta_{CP}$ is $0-2\pi$, there are two possible best fit values of it found in the literature: $306^o$ (NH), $254^o$ (IH) \cite{Gonzalez-Garcia:2014bfa} and $254^o$ (NH), $266^o$ (IH) \cite{Forero:2014bxa}. If neutrinos are Majorana fermions whose masses are generated by conventional seesaw mechanism \cite{Minkowski:1977sc,GellMann:1980vs,Yanagida:1979as,Mohapatra:1979ia,Schechter:1980gr}, then two Majorana phases also appear in the mixing matrix which do not affect neutrino oscillations and hence can not be measured by oscillation experiments. The Majorana phases can however, have interesting implications in lepton number violating process like neutrinoless double beta decay, origin of matter-antimatter asymmetry of the Universe etc. Apart from the mass squared differences and mixing angles, the sum of the absolute neutrino masses are also tightly constrained from cosmology $\sum_i \lvert m_i \rvert < 0.23$ eV \cite{Ade:2013zuv}.
One of the most popular BSM framework to understand the origin of tiny neutrino mass and large leptonic mixing is to identify the possible underlying symmetries. Symmetries can either relate two or more free parameters of the model or make them vanish, making the model more predictive. The widely studied $\mu-\tau$ symmetric neutrino mass matrix giving $\theta_{13}=0$ is one such scenario where discrete flavor symmetries can relate two or more terms in the neutrino mass matrix. Non-zero $\theta_{13}$, as required by latest oscillation data, can be generated by incorporating different possible corrections to leading order $\mu-\tau$ symmetric neutrino mass matrix, as discussed recently in many works including \cite{Borah:2013jia,Borah:2013lva,Borah:2014fga,Borah:2014bda,Kalita:2014mga}. The other possible role symmetries can play is to impose texture zeros in the mass matrices. The symmetry realization of such texture zeros can be found in several earlier as well as recent works
\cite{Berger:2000zj,Low:2004wx,Low:2005yc,Grimus:2004hf,Dighe:2009xj,Dev:2011jc,Felipe:2014vka}. Recently, a systematic study of texture zeros in lepton mass matrices were done in \cite{Ludl:2014axa}. In the simplest case, one can assume the charged lepton mass matrix to be diagonal and then consider the possible texture zeros in the symmetric Majorana neutrino mass matrix. It turns out that in this simplest case, only certain types of one-zero texture and two-zero textures in the Majorana neutrino mass matrix are consistent with neutrino data.
In this work, we consider all types of texture zeros allowed in the Majorana neutrino mass matrix (in the diagonal charged lepton basis) from neutrino oscillation data and constrain them further from the requirement of producing successful baryon asymmetry through the mechanism of leptogenesis. Some earlier works related to the calculation of lepton asymmetry with texture zero Majorana neutrino mass matrix can be found in \cite{Kaneko:2002yp,Kaneko:2003cy,Dev:2010vy,Bando:2004hi}. Leptogenesis is one of the most widely studied formalism which provides a dynamical origin of the observed baryon asymmetry in the Universe. The asymmetry is created in the leptonic sector first which later gets converted into baryon asymmetry through $B+L$ violating electroweak sphaleron transitions \cite{Kuzmin:1985mm}. As pointed out first by Fukugita and Yanagida \cite{Fukugita:1986hr}, the required lepton asymmetry can be generated by the out of equilibrium CP violating decay of heavy Majorana neutrinos which are present in several BSM frameworks which attempt to explain tiny SM neutrino masses. We consider the framework of type I seesaw mechanism \cite{Minkowski:1977sc,GellMann:1980vs,Yanagida:1979as,Mohapatra:1979ia,Schechter:1980gr} generating tiny SM neutrino masses where right handed neutrinos are present and discriminate between different texture zeros in the neutrino mass matrix from the requirement of producing the correct baryon asymmetry seen by Planck experiment \cite{Ade:2013zuv}
\begin{equation}
Y_B = (8.58 \pm 0.22) \times 10^{-11}
\label{barasym}
\end{equation}
Usually, the Majorana neutrino mass matrix can be constrained from the neutrino oscillation data on two mass squared differences and three mixing angles. But the most general neutrino mass matrix can still contain those neutrino parameters which are not yet determined experimentally: the lightest neutrino mass, leptonic Dirac CP phase and two Majorana CP phases. All these four free parameters can in general, affect the resulting lepton asymmetry calculated from the lightest right handed neutrino decay. Although it is difficult to make predictions with four free parameters, in case of texture zero Majorana mass matrix, it is possible to reduce the number of free parameters. As we show in details in this work, two of these free neutrino parameters can be determined in terms of the other two in one-zero texture case whereas all four free parameters can be numerically determined in case of two-zero texture mass matrices. To simplify the calculation, we assume equality of Majorana phases in one-zero texture case and write down all the free parameters in the neutrino mass matrix in terms of Dirac CP phase. We then compute the baryon asymmetry as a function of Dirac CP phase. We not only constrain the Dirac CP phase from the requirement of producing the observed baryon asymmetry but also show that some of the texture zeros (allowed from neutrino oscillation data) are disfavored if leptogenesis through the lightest right handed neutrino decay is the only source of baryon asymmetry. Since all the neutrino parameters are fixed in two-zero texture mass matrices, we compute baryon asymmetry for different choices of Dirac neutrino mass matrices. Thus we not only discriminate between different two-zero texture mass matrices, but also constrain the Dirac neutrino mass matrices from the requirement of producing the observed baryon asymmetry.
This paper is organized as follows. In section \ref{sec:texture}, we discuss all the possible texture zeros in the Majorana neutrino mass matrix with diagonal charged lepton basis. In section \ref{sec:lepto}, we briefly outline the mechanism of leptogenesis through right handed neutrino decay. In section \ref{sec:numeric}, we discuss the numerical analysis of all the texture zero models and finally conclude in section \ref{sec:conclude}.
\section{Majorana Texture Zeros}
\label{sec:texture}
A symmetric $3\times 3$ Majorana neutrino mass matrix $M_{\nu}$ can have six independent parameters. If $k$ of them are vanishing then the total number of structurally different Majorana mass matrices with texture zeros is
\begin{equation}
\label{prmtn}
^6C_k=\frac{6!}{k!(6-k)!}
\end{equation}
A symmetric mass matrix with more than 3 texture zeros $k\geq 4$ can not be compatible with lepton masses and mixing. Similarly in the diagonal charged lepton basis, a symmetric Majorana neutrino mass matrix with 3 texture zeros is not compatible with neutrino oscillation data \cite{Xing:2004ik}. Therefore, we are left with either one-zero texture which can be of six different types and two-zero texture which can be of fifteen different types. Different possible Majorana neutrino mass matrices with one-zero texture and one vanishing eigenvalue was studied by the authors of \cite{Xing:2003ic} whereas one-zero texture in the light of recent neutrino oscillation data with non-zero $\theta_{13}$ was discussed in the work \cite{Lashin:2011dn,Deepthi:2011sk}. Implications of one-zero texture for neutrinoless double beta decay can be found in \cite{Merle:2006du}. Two-zero textures in the Majorana neutrino mass matrix have received lots of attention in several works in the last few years, some of which can be found in \cite{Frampton:2002yf,Xing:2002ta,Xing:2002ap,Kageyama:2002zw,Grimus:2004az,Dev:2006qe,Ludl:2011vv,Kumar:2011vf,Fritzsch:2011qv,Meloni:2012sx,Meloni:2014yea,Dev:2014dla}. We briefly discuss these texture zero Majorana neutrino mass matrices in the following subsections \ref{one} and \ref{two} respectively.
\subsection{One-zero texture}
\label{one}
In case of one-zero texture, the Majorana neutrino mass matrix $M_{\nu}$ contains only one independent zero. There are six possible patterns of such one-zero texture which, following the notations of \cite{Deepthi:2011sk} can be written as
\begin{center}
$ G_1 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
0& \times&\times\\
\times& \times&\times \\
\times& \times&\times
\end{array}\right) , G_2 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& 0&\times\\
0& \times&\times \\
\times& \times&\times
\end{array}\right) , G_3 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& \times&0\\
\times& \times&\times \\
0 & \times&\times
\end{array}\right) , G_4 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& \times&\times\\
\times & 0 &\times \\
\times& \times&\times
\end{array}\right) ,$
\end{center}
\begin{equation}
G_5 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& \times&\times\\
\times& \times & 0 \\
\times& 0 &\times
\end{array}\right) ,
G_6 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& \times&\times\\
\times& \times& \times \\
\times& \times & 0
\end{array}\right)
\end{equation}
Where the crosses ``$\times$'' denote non-zero arbitrary elements of $M_{\nu}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{37a_IH_G3_Majvsdel}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{38a_IH_G4_Majvsdel}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{39a_IH_G5_Majvsdel}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{40a_IH_G6_Majvsdel}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of $\cos \alpha$ with $\delta$ for one-zero texture with inverted hierarchy.}
\label{fig001}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{37_IH_G3_m3vsdel}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{37b_IH_G3_1flvr}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{41_IH_G3_2flvr}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{45_IH_G3_3flvr}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of lightest neutrino mass $m_3$ and baryon asymmetry with Dirac CP phase $\delta$ for one-zero texture $G_3$ with inverted hierarchy.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{38_IH_G4_m3vsdel}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{38b_IH_G4_1flvr}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{42_IH_G4_2flvr}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{46_IH_G4_3flvr}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of lightest neutrino mass $m_3$ and baryon asymmetry with Dirac CP phase $\delta$ for one-zero texture $G_4$ with inverted hierarchy.}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{39_IH_G5_m3vsdel}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{39b_IH_G5_1flvr}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{43_IH_G5_2flvr}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{47_IH_G5_3flvr}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of lightest neutrino mass $m_3$ and baryon asymmetry with Dirac CP phase $\delta$ for one-zero texture $G_5$ with inverted hierarchy.}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{40_IH_G6_m3vsdel}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{40b_IH_G6_1flvr}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{44_IH_G6_2flvr}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{48_IH_G6_3flvr}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of lightest neutrino mass $m_3$ and baryon asymmetry with Dirac CP phase $\delta$ for one-zero texture $G_6$ with inverted hierarchy.}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{50a_NH_G2_Majvsdel}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{51a_NH_G3_Majvsdel}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of $\cos \alpha$ with $\delta$ for one-zero texture with normal hierarchy.}
\label{fig01}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{49_NH_G1_1flvr}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{52_NH_G1_2flvr}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{55_NH_G1_3flvr}
\end{minipage}%
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry with Dirac CP phase $\delta$ for one-zero texture $G_1$ with normal hierarchy.}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{50_NH_G2_m1vsdel}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{50b_NH_G2_1flvr}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{53_NH_G2_2flvr}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{56_NH_G2_3flvr}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of lightest neutrino mass $m_1$ and baryon asymmetry with Dirac CP phase $\delta$ for one-zero texture $G_2$ with normal hierarchy.}
\label{fig6}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{51_NH_G3_m1vsdel}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{51b_NH_G3_1flvr}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{54_NH_G3_2flvr}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{57_NH_G3_3flvr}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of lightest neutrino mass $m_1$ and baryon asymmetry with Dirac CP phase $\delta$ for one-zero texture $G_3$ with normal hierarchy.}
\label{fig7}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline
Patterns & $m_3$ & $\delta$&$\alpha$ &$\beta$\\
\hline \hline
\mbox{$A1$} & 0.00019 & 0.0059 & 2.99 & 0.99\\
\mbox{$A2$} & 0.00038 & 0.34 & 2.99 &0.87\\
\mbox{$B1$} & 0.049 & 1.57 & 3.10 &3.11\\
\mbox{$B2$} & 0.0048 & 1.62 & 0.93 &3.88\\
\mbox{$B3$} & 0.00055 & 0.055 & 4.99 &6.098\\
\mbox{$B4$} & 0.0052 & 0.37 & 2.00 &0.73\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Values of $m_3$, $\delta$, $\alpha$ and $\beta$ for two-zero texture with inverted hierarchy.}
\label{table-2zero1}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline
Patterns & $m_1$ & $\delta$&$\alpha$ &$\beta$\\
\hline \hline
\mbox{$A1$} & 0.005 & 4.36 & 1.73 &4.21\\
\mbox{$A2$} & 0.0069 & 0.039 &1.57 & 1.55\\
\mbox{$B1$} & 0.068 &1.59 &0.041 &3.14\\
\mbox{$B2$} & 0.022 & 0.84 &2.72 & 3.31\\
\mbox{$B3$} &0.07 & 1.55 & 3.11 &0.0017\\
\mbox{$B4$} & 0.07 & 4.79 &3.15 &6.19\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Values of $m_1$, $\delta$, $\alpha$ and $\beta$ for two-zero texture with normal hierarchy.}
\label{table-2zero2}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{1_IH_1flav_2zeroA1}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{1a_IH_1flav_2zeroA1}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{19_NH_1flav_2zeroA1}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{19a_NH_1flav_2zeroA1}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in one flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $A_1$.}
\label{fig8}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{2_IH_1flav_2zeroA2}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{2a_IH_1flav_2zeroA2}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{20_NH_1flav_2zeroA2}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{20a_NH_1flav_2zeroA2}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in one flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $A_2$.}
\label{fig9}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{3_IH_1flav_2zeroB1}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{3a_IH_1flav_2zeroB1}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{21_NH_1flav_2zeroB1}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{21a_NH_1flav_2zeroB1}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in one flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $B_1$.}
\label{fig10}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{4_IH_1flav_2zeroB2}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{4a_IH_1flav_2zeroB2}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{22_NH_1flav_2zeroB2}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{22a_NH_1flav_2zeroB2}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in one flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $B_2$.}
\label{fig11}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{5_IH_1flav_2zeroB3}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{5a_IH_1flav_2zeroB3}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{23_NH_1flav_2zeroB3}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{23a_NH_1flav_2zeroB3}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in one flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $B_3$.}
\label{fig12}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{6_IH_1flav_2zeroB4}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{6a_IH_1flav_2zeroB4}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{24_NH_1flav_2zeroB4}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{24a_NH_1flav_2zeroB4}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in one flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $B_4$.}
\label{fig13}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Two-zero texture}
\label{two}
There are fifteen possible two-zero textures of the Majorana neutrino mass matrix $M_{\nu}$ . Using the notations of \cite{Fritzsch:2011qv}, these fifteen two-zero textures of $M_{\nu}$ can be classified into six categories given below:
\begin{equation}
A_1 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
0& 0&\times\\
0& \times&\times \\
\times& \times&\times
\end{array}\right) ,
A_2 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
0& \times&0\\
\times& \times&\times \\
0& \times&\times
\end{array}\right);
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
B_1 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& \times&0\\
\times& 0&\times \\
0& \times&\times
\end{array}\right) ,
B_2 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& 0 &\times\\
0& \times&\times \\
\times& \times&0
\end{array}\right),
B_3 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& 0&\times\\
0& 0&\times \\
\times& \times&\times
\end{array}\right),
B_4 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& \times&0\\
\times& \times&\times \\
0& \times&0
\end{array}\right);
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
C :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& \times&\times\\
\times& 0&\times \\
\times& \times&0
\end{array}\right);
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
D_1 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& \times&\times\\
\times& 0&0 \\
\times& 0&\times
\end{array}\right) ,
D_2 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& \times&\times\\
\times& \times&0 \\
\times& 0&0
\end{array}\right);
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
E_1 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
0& \times&\times\\
\times& 0&\times \\
\times& \times&\times
\end{array}\right) ,
E_2 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
0& \times &\times\\
\times& \times&\times \\
\times& \times&0
\end{array}\right),
E_3 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
0& \times&\times\\
\times& \times&0 \\
\times& 0&\times
\end{array}\right);
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
F_1 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& 0&0\\
0& \times&\times \\
0& \times&\times
\end{array}\right) ,
F_2 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& 0 &\times\\
0& \times&0 \\
\times& 0&\times
\end{array}\right),
F_3 :\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\times& \times&0\\
\times& \times&0 \\
0& 0&\times
\end{array}\right),
\end{equation}
Where the crosses ``$\times$'' imply non-zero arbitrary elements of $M_{\nu}$. In the light of recent oscillation as well as cosmology data, only six different two-zero textures namely, $A_{1,2}$ and $B_{1,2,3,4}$ are favorable as discussed by the authors of \cite{Fritzsch:2011qv,Meloni:2014yea}. We therefore, consider only these six possible two-zero textures for our analysis.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{7_IH_2flav_2zeroA1}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{7a_IH_2flav_2zeroA1}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{25_NH_2flav_2zeroA1}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{25a_NH_2flav_2zeroA1}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in two flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $A_1$.}
\label{fig14}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{8_IH_2flav_2zeroA2}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{8a_IH_2flav_2zeroA2}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{26_NH_2flav_2zeroA2}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{26a_NH_2flav_2zeroA2}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in two flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $A_2$.}
\label{fig15}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{9_IH_2flav_2zeroB1}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{9a_IH_2flav_2zeroB1}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{27_NH_2flav_2zeroB1}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{27a_NH_2flav_2zeroB1}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in two flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $B_1$.}
\label{fig16}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{10_IH_2flav_2zeroB2}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{10a_IH_2flav_2zeroB2}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{28_NH_2flav_2zeroB2}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{28a_NH_2flav_2zeroB2}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in two flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $B_2$.}
\label{fig17}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{11_IH_2flav_2zeroB3}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{11a_IH_2flav_2zeroB3}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{29_NH_2flav_2zeroB3}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{29a_NH_2flav_2zeroB3}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in two flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $B_3$.}
\label{fig18}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{12_IH_2flav_2zeroB4}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{12a_IH_2flav_2zeroB4}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{30_NH_2flav_2zeroB4}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{30a_NH_2flav_2zeroB4}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in two flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $B_4$.}
\label{fig19}
\end{figure}
\section{Leptogenesis}
\label{sec:lepto}
Leptogenesis is one of the most well motivated framework of producing baryon asymmetry of the Universe which creates an asymmetry in the leptonic sector first and then converts it into baryon asymmetry through $B+L$ violating electroweak sphaleron transitions. For a review of leptogenesis, please refer to \cite{Davidson:2008bu}. Although the origin of leptonic mixing and baryon asymmetry could be entirely different, leptogenesis provides a minimal setup to understand the dynamical origin of both these problems in particle physics which remain unsolved till now. There are three basic requirements to produce baryon asymmetry in our Universe which most likely, was in a baryon symmetric state initially. As pointed out first by Sakharov \cite{Sakharov:1967dj}, these three requirements are (i) Baryon number violation, (ii) C and CP violation and (iii) Departure from equilibrium. Although the standard model satisfies the first two requirements and out of equilibrium conditions in principle, can be achieved in an expanding Universe like ours, it turns out that the amount of CP violation measured in the SM quark sector is too small to account for the entire baryon asymmetry of the Universe. Since there can be more sources of CP violating phases in the leptonic sector which are not yet from experimentally determined, leptogenesis provides an indirect way of constraining these unknown phases from the requirement of producing the observed baryon asymmetry.
In a model with type I seesaw mechanism at work, the CP violating out of equilibrium decay of the lightest right handed neutrino can give rise to the required lepton asymmetry. The neutrino mass matrix in type I seesaw mechanism can be written as
\begin{equation}
M_{\nu}=-m_{LR}M_{RR}^{-1}m_{LR}^{T}.
\label{eq:type1}
\end{equation}
where $m_{LR}$ is the Dirac neutrino mass matrix and $M_{RR}$ is the right handed singlet neutrino mass matrix. We note that the Pontecorvo-Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata (PMNS) leptonic mixing matrix is related to the diagonalizing
matrices of neutrino and charged lepton mass matrices $U_{\nu}, U_l$ respectively, as
\begin{equation}
U_{\text{PMNS}} = U^{\dagger}_l U_{\nu}
\label{pmns0}
\end{equation}
In the diagonal charged lepton basis, $U_{\text{PMNS}}$ is same as the diagonalizing matrix $U_{\nu}$ of the neutrino mass matrix given by \eqref{eq:type1}. The PMNS mixing matrix can be parametrized as
\begin{equation}
U_{\text{PMNS}}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
c_{12}c_{13}& s_{12}c_{13}& s_{13}e^{-i\delta}\\
-s_{12}c_{23}-c_{12}s_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta}& c_{12}c_{23}-s_{12}s_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta} & s_{23}c_{13} \\
s_{12}s_{23}-c_{12}c_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta} & -c_{12}s_{23}-s_{12}c_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta}& c_{23}c_{13}
\end{array}\right) \text{diag}(1, e^{i\alpha}, e^{i(\beta+\delta )})
\label{matrixPMNS}
\end{equation}
where $c_{ij} = \cos{\theta_{ij}}, \; s_{ij} = \sin{\theta_{ij}}$. $\delta$ is the Dirac CP phase and $\alpha, \beta$ are the Majorana phases.
In our work we are considering CP-violating out of equilibrium decay of heavy right handed neutrinos into Higgs and lepton
within the framework type I seesaw mechanism. The lepton asymmetry from the decay of right handed neutrino into leptons
and Higgs scalar is given by
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_{N_k} = \sum_i \frac{\Gamma(N_k \rightarrow L_i +H^*)-\Gamma (N_k \rightarrow \bar{L_i}+H)}{\Gamma(N_k \rightarrow L_i +H^*)
+\Gamma (N_k \rightarrow \bar{L_i}+H)}
\end{equation}
In a hierarchical pattern of three right handed neutrinos $M_{2,3} \gg M_1$, it is sufficient to consider the lepton asymmetry produced by
the decay of the lightest right handed neutrino $N_1$. Following the notations of \cite{Joshipura:2001ya}, the lepton asymmetry arising from the decay of $N_1$ in the
presence of type I seesaw only can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon^{\alpha}_1 &=& \frac{1}{8\pi v^2}\frac{1}{(m^{\dagger}_{LR}m_{LR})_{11}} \sum_{j=2,3} \text{Im}[(m^*_{LR})_{\alpha 1}
(m^{\dagger}_{LR}m_{LR})_{1j}(m_{LR})_{\alpha j}]g(x_j) \nonumber \\&& + \frac{1}{8\pi v^2}\frac{1}{(m^{\dagger}_{LR}m_{LR})_{11}}
\sum_{j=2,3} \text{Im}[(m^*_{LR})_{\alpha 1}(m^{\dagger}_{LR}m_{LR})_{j1}(m_{LR})_{\alpha j}]\frac{1}{1-x_j}
\label{eps1}
\end{eqnarray}
where $v = 174 \; \text{GeV}$ is the vev of the Higgs bidoublets responsible for breaking the electroweak symmetry, $$ g(x) = \sqrt{x}
\left ( 1+\frac{1}{1-x}-(1+x)\text{ln}\frac{1+x}{x} \right) $$and $x_j = M^2_j/M^2_1$. The second term in the expression for $\epsilon^{\alpha}_1$
above vanishes when summed over all the flavors $\alpha = e, \mu, \tau$. The sum over flavors is given by
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_1 = \frac{1}{8\pi v^2}\frac{1}{(m^{\dagger}_{LR}m_{LR})_{11}}\sum_{j=2,3} \text{Im}[(m^{\dagger}_{LR}m_{LR})^2_{1j}]g(x_j)
\label{noflavor}
\end{equation}
The corresponding baryon asymmetry is related to the lepton asymmetry as
\begin{equation}
Y_B = c \kappa \frac{\epsilon_1}{g_*}
\end{equation}
through electroweak sphaleron processes \cite{Kuzmin:1985mm}. Here, $c$ is a measure of the fraction of lepton asymmetry being
converted into baryon asymmetry and is approximately equal to $-0.55$. $\kappa$ is the dilution factor due to wash-out processes which
erase the produced asymmetry and can be parametrized as \cite{Kolb:1990vq,Flanz:1998kr,Pilaftsis:1998pd}
\begin{eqnarray}
-\kappa &\simeq & \sqrt{0.1K} \text{exp}[-4/(3(0.1K)^{0.25})], \;\; \text{for} \; K \ge 10^6 \nonumber \\
&\simeq & \frac{0.3}{K (\ln K)^{0.6}}, \;\; \text{for} \; 10 \le K \le 10^6 \nonumber \\
&\simeq & \frac{1}{2\sqrt{K^2+9}}, \;\; \text{for} \; 0 \le K \le 10.
\end{eqnarray}
where K is given as
$$ K = \frac{\Gamma_1}{H(T=M_1)} = \frac{(m^{\dagger}_{LR}m_{LR})_{11}M_1}{8\pi v^2} \frac{M_{Pl}}{1.66 \sqrt{g_*}M^2_1} $$
Here $\Gamma_1$ is the decay width of $N_1$ and $H(T=M_1)$ is the Hubble constant at temperature $T = M_1$. The factor $g_*$ is the
effective number of relativistic degrees of freedom at $T=M_1$ and is approximately $110$.
It should be noted that the lepton asymmetry given by equation \eqref{noflavor} has been obtained by summing over all the lepton flavors $\alpha = e, \mu, \tau$.
A non-zero lepton asymmetry can however, be obtained only when the right handed neutrino decay is out of equilibrium. Otherwise both the forward
and the backward processes will happen at the same rate resulting in a vanishing asymmetry. Departure from equilibrium can be estimated by
comparing the interaction rate with the expansion rate of the Universe, parametrized by the Hubble parameter. At very high temperatures $(T \geq 10^{12} \text{GeV})$ all charged
lepton flavors are out of equilibrium and hence all of them behave similarly resulting in the one flavor regime mentioned above. However at temperatures
$ T < 10^{12}$ GeV $(T < 10^9 \text{GeV})$, interactions involving tau (muon) Yukawa couplings enter equilibrium and flavor effects become
important in the calculation of lepton asymmetry \cite{Barbieri:1999ma,Abada:2006fw,Abada:2006ea,Nardi:2006fx,Dev:2014laa}. The temperature regimes $10^9 < T/\text{GeV} < 10^{12}$ and $T/\text{GeV} < 10^9$ correspond to two and three flavor regimes of leptogenesis respectively. The final baryon asymmetry in the two and three flavor regimes can be written as
\begin{equation}
Y^{2 flavor}_B = \frac{-12}{37g^*}[\epsilon_2 \eta\left (\frac{417}{589}\tilde{m_2} \right)+\epsilon^{\tau}_1\eta\left (\frac{390}{589}
\tilde{m_{\tau}}\right )] \nonumber
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
Y^{3 flavor}_B = \frac{-12}{37g^*}[\epsilon^e_1 \eta\left (\frac{151}{179}\tilde{m_e}\right)+ \epsilon^{\mu}_1 \eta\left (\frac{344}{537}
\tilde{m_{\mu}}\right)+\epsilon^{\tau}_1\eta\left (\frac{344}{537}\tilde{m_{\tau}} \right )] \nonumber
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon_2 = \epsilon^e_1 + \epsilon^{\mu}_1, \tilde{m_2} = \tilde{m_e}+\tilde{m_{\mu}}, \tilde{m_{\alpha}} = \frac{(m^*_{LR})_{\alpha 1}
(m_{LR})_{\alpha 1}}{M_1}$. The function $\eta$ is given by
$$ \eta (\tilde{m_{\alpha}}) = \left [\left ( \frac{\tilde{m_{\alpha}}}{8.25 \times 10^{-3} \text{eV}} \right )^{-1}+ \left ( \frac{0.2\times
10^{-3} \text{eV}}{\tilde{m_{\alpha}}} \right )^{-1.16} \right ]^{-1} $$
For the calculation of baryon asymmetry, we choose the basis where right handed singlet neutrino mass matrix $M_{RR}$ takes the diagonal form
\begin{equation}
U^*_R M_{RR} U^{\dagger}_R = \text{diag}(M_1, M_2, M_3)
\label{mrrdiag}
\end{equation}
In this diagonal $M_{RR}$ basis, the Dirac neutrino mass matrix also changes to
\begin{equation}
m_{LR} = m^0_{LR} U_R
\label{mlrdiag}
\end{equation}
where $m^0_{LR}$ is the Dirac neutrino mass matrix given. If the Dirac neutrino mass matrix is assumed to be diagonal, it can be parametrized by
\begin{equation}
m^d_{LR}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\lambda^m & 0 & 0\\
0 & \lambda^n & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{array}\right)m_f
\label{mLR1}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda = 0.22$ is the standard Wolfenstein parameter and $(m,n)$ are positive integers. We choose the integers $(m,n)$ in such a way which keeps the lightest right handed neutrino mass in the appropriate flavor regime.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{13_IH_3flav_2zeroA1}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{13a_IH_3flav_2zeroA1}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{31_NH_3flav_2zeroA1}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{31a_NH_3flav_2zeroA1}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in three flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $A_1$.}
\label{fig20}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{14_IH_3flav_2zeroA2}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{14a_IH_3flav_2zeroA2}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{32_NH_3flav_2zeroA2}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{32a_NH_3flav_2zeroA2}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in three flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $A_2$.}
\label{fig21}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{15_IH_3flav_2zeroB1}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{15a_IH_3flav_2zeroB1}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{33_NH_3flav_2zeroB1}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{33a_NH_3flav_2zeroB1}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in three flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $B_1$.}
\label{fig22}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{16_IH_3flav_2zeroB2}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{16a_IH_3flav_2zeroB2}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{34_NH_3flav_2zeroB2}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{34a_NH_3flav_2zeroB2}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in three flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $B_2$.}
\label{fig23}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{17_IH_3flav_2zeroB3}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{17a_IH_3flav_2zeroB3}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{35_NH_3flav_2zeroB3}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{35a_NH_3flav_2zeroB3}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in three flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $B_3$.}
\label{fig24}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{18_IH_3flav_2zeroB4}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{18a_IH_3flav_2zeroB4}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{36_NH_3flav_2zeroB4}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{36a_NH_3flav_2zeroB4}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Variation of baryon asymmetry in three flavor regime with Dirac neutrino masses for two-zero texture $B_4$.}
\label{fig25}
\end{figure}
\section{Numerical Analysis}
\label{sec:numeric}
Using the parametric form of PMNS matrix shown in \eqref{matrixPMNS}, the Majorana neutrino mass matrix $M_{\nu}$ can be found as
\begin{equation}
M_{\nu}=U_{\text{PMNS}} M^{\text{diag}}_{\nu}U^T_{\text{PMNS}}
\label{numatrix}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
M^{\text{diag}}_{\nu}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
m_1& 0&0\\
0& m_2& 0 \\
0& 0 &m_3
\end{array}\right),
\end{equation}
where $m_1, m_2$ and $m_3$ are the three neutrino mass eigenvalues. As mentioned earlier, here we assume that the diagonalizing matrix of the neutrino mass matrix $M_{\nu}$ is same as the PMNS mixing matrix due to the chosen charged lepton mass matrix in the diagonal form.
For the case of normal hierarchy (NH), the three neutrino mass eigenvalues can be written as $m_{\text{diag}}
= \text{diag}(m_1, \sqrt{m^2_1+\Delta m_{21}^2}, \sqrt{m_1^2+\Delta m_{31}^2})$, while for the case of inverted hierarchy (IH), it can be written as
$m_{\text{diag}} = \text{diag}(\sqrt{m_3^2+\Delta m_{23}^2-\Delta m_{21}^2}, \sqrt{m_3^2+\Delta m_{23}^2}, m_3)$.
For illustrative purposes, we consider two different order of magnitude values for the lightest neutrino mass $m_1$ for NH and $m_3$ for IH.
In the first case, we assume $m_{\text{lightest}}$ as large as possible so that the sum of the absolute neutrino masses lie just below the
cosmological upper bound and it turns out to be $0.07$ eV and $0.065$ eV for NH and IH respectively. This gives rise to a quasi-degenerate type of neutrino mass spectrum. Secondly.
we choose the lightest mass eigenvalue to be $10^{-6}$ eV for both NH and IH cases so that
we have a hierarchical pattern of neutrino masses. The PMNS mixing matrix is evaluated by taking the best fit values of the neutrino mixing angles given in
Table \ref{tab:data1}. After using the best fit values of two mass squared differences and three mixing angles, the most general neutrino mass matrix given by \eqref{numatrix} contain four parameters: the lightest neutrino mass, Dirac CP phase and two Majorana phases. Comparing the most general neutrino mass matrix to the texture zero mass matrices, we can either relate two or more terms in the mass matrix or equate them to zero. Depending upon the number of constraints for a specific texture zero mass matrix, we can either write down some free parameters in the most general neutrino mass matrix in terms of the others or we can find the exact numerical values of the free parameters. We briefly discuss the procedure we adopt for numerical analysis involving different types of Majorana texture zero mass matrices in the following subsections \ref{ponezero} and \ref{ptwo}.
\subsection{Parametrization of One-zero Texture}
\label{ponezero}
In the case of one-zero texture mass matrices discussed in subsection \ref{one}, there is only one independent zero and hence we have only one complex equation as constraint resulting in two real equations relating $m_1 (m_3), \delta, \alpha, \beta$. To simplify the analysis, we assume equality of two Majorana phases $\alpha = \beta$. Using the constraints, we write down the Majorana phases $\alpha = \beta$ as well as lightest neutrino mass in terms of Dirac CP phase $\delta$. However, for a specific type of one-zero texture mass matrix denoted by $G_1$, the zero appears in the $(1,1)$ term and in the most general neutrino mass matrix \eqref{numatrix}, the $(1,1)$ term does not depend upon the Dirac CP phase. Therefore, in this case the Majorana phase is independent of the Dirac phase, but depends upon the value of lightest neutrino mass. The lightest neutrino mass for normal hierarchy is found to be $0.0062$ eV, whereas for inverted hierarchy, we do not get any real solution for lightest neutrino mass, satisfying the constraint. For one-zero texture $G_2$ also, we do not get any real solution for lightest neutrino mass in the case of inverted hierarchy. For $G_{3,4,5,6}$ with inverted hierarchy, the variation of Majorana CP phase with Dirac CP phase is shown in figure \ref{fig001}. Similarly, the dependence of lightest neutrino mass on Dirac CP phase is shown in the first panel of figures \ref{fig1}, \ref{fig2}, \ref{fig3} and \ref{fig4} respectively. For normal hierarchy, we do not get any real solution for lightest neutrino mass for the one-zero textures $G_{4,5,6}$. For $G_{2,3}$, the dependence of Majorana CP phase with Dirac CP phase is shown in figure \ref{fig01}. For $G_1$, the lightest neutrino mass is exactly determined whereas for $G_{2,3}$ its dependence on $\delta$ can be seen in the first panel of figure \ref{fig6} and \ref{fig7}.
\subsection{Parametrization of Two-zero Texture}
\label{ptwo}
In two-zero texture mass matrices discussed in subsection \ref{two}, the Majorana neutrino mass matrix contains two independent zeros. Therefore, we have two complex and hence four real constraint equations to relate the four independent parameters. We numerically solve these four equations to find lightest neutrino mass, Dirac CP phase $\delta$ and Majorana CP phases $\alpha, \beta$. A set of such solutions are shown in table \ref{table-2zero1} and \ref{table-2zero2}.
\subsection{Calculation of Baryon Asymmetry}
To calculate the baryon asymmetry in the appropriate flavor regime, we choose the diagonal Dirac neutrino mass matrix in such a way that the lightest right handed singlet neutrino mass lies in the same flavor regime. Similar to the discussion in earlier works \cite{Borah:2014fga,Borah:2014bda,Kalita:2014mga}, we choose $m_f=82.43$ GeV in the Dirac neutrino mass matrix given by \eqref{mLR1}. We also choose $(m,n) = (1,1), (3,1)$ and $(5,3)$ to keep the lightest right handed neutrino mass in one, two and three flavor regimes respectively. The resulting baryon asymmetry as a function of Dirac CP phase for different patterns of one-zero texture in the Majorana neutrino mass matrix are shown in figures \ref{fig1}, \ref{fig2}, \ref{fig3}, \ref{fig4}, \ref{fig5}, \ref{fig6} and \ref{fig7}.
In case of two-zero texture mass matrices, since all the neutrino parameters are fixed, we compute the baryon asymmetry by varying the Dirac neutrino mass matrix. We choose the Dirac neutrino mass matrix to be of the form
\begin{equation}
m^d_{LR}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
m_{11} & 0 & 0\\
0 & m_{22} & 0 \\
0 & 0 & m_{33}
\end{array}\right)
\label{mLR1}
\end{equation}
We fix $m_{11}$ such that the lightest right handed neutrino mass falls in the appropriate flavor regime, and vary $m_{22}=x, m_{22}=y \geq x$ and calculate the amount of baryon asymmetry. The resulting baryon asymmetry as a function of $m_{22}=x, m_{22}=y \geq x$ are shown in figures from \ref{fig8} to figure \ref{fig25}.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\hline
\hline
Patterns & One flavor & Two flavor & Three flavor\\
\hline
\mbox{$G_1$} & $\times$ & $\times$ & $\times$\\
\mbox{$G_2$} & $\times$ & $\times$ & $\times$\\
\mbox{$G_3$} & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\times$\\
\mbox{$G_4$} & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ \\
\mbox{$G_5$} & $\checkmark$ & $\times$ & $\checkmark$ \\
\mbox{$G_6$} & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Summary of results for one-zero texture with inverted hierarchy.
The symbol $\checkmark$ ($\times$) is used when the baryon asymmetry $Y_B$ is in (not in) range.}
\label{table3}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\hline
\hline
Patterns & One flavor & Two flavor & Three flavor \\
\hline
\mbox{$G_1$} & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$\\
\mbox{$G_2$} & $\checkmark$ & $\times$ & $\times$ \\
\mbox{$G_3$} & $\checkmark$ & $\times$ & $\times$ \\
\mbox{$G_4$} & $\times$ & $\times$ & $\times$\\
\mbox{$G_5$} & $\times$ & $\times$ & $\times$\\
\mbox{$G_6$} & $\times$ & $\times$ & $\times$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Summary of results for one-zero texture with normal hierarchy.
The symbol $\checkmark$ ($\times$) is used when the baryon asymmetry $Y_B$ is in (not in) range.}
\label{table4}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\hline
Patterns &One flavor IH (NH) & Two flavor IH (NH)& Three flavor IH (NH)\\
\hline \hline
\mbox{$A_1$} & $\checkmark$($\checkmark$) & $\times$($\times$) &$\times$($\times$) \\
\mbox{$A_2$} & $\checkmark$($\checkmark$) & $\times$($\times$) & $\times$($\times$)\\
\mbox{$B_1$} & $\checkmark$($\times$) & $\times$($\times$) &$\times$($\times$)\\
\mbox{$B_2$} & $\checkmark$($\checkmark$) & $\checkmark$($\times$) &$\checkmark$($\checkmark$)\\
\mbox{$B_3$} & $\times$($\times$) & $\checkmark$($\times$) &$\checkmark$($\times$)\\
\mbox{$B_4$} & $\checkmark$($\times$) & $\checkmark$($\times$) &$\checkmark$($\times$)\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Summary of results for two-zero texture with inverted and normal hierarchy.
The symbol $\checkmark$ ($\times$) is used when the baryon asymmetry $Y_B$ is in (not in) range.}
\label{table5}
\end{table}
\section{Results and Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclude}
Assuming the charged lepton mass matrix to be diagonal, we have studied all possible texture zeros in the Majorana neutrino mass matrix that are allowed by latest neutrino oscillation data as well as the Planck bound on the sum of absolute neutrino masses and constrain them further from the requirement of producing correct baryon asymmetry of the Universe through the mechanism of leptogenesis. The allowed Majorana texture zeros broadly fall into two categories: one-zero texture and two-zero texture. There are six different one-zero textures all of which are allowed by latest oscillation and cosmology data and hence we consider all of them in our analysis. Out of fifteen possible two-zero textures, only six are compatible with oscillation data and the Planck bound, as pointed out by \cite{Fritzsch:2011qv,Meloni:2014yea}.
We have first derived the most general Majorana neutrino mass matrix in terms of the neutrino best fit values as well as the free parameters: lightest neutrino mass, Dirac CP phase and two Majorana phases. Comparing this mass matrix to a specific type of texture zero mass matrix we arrive at one or two complex constraints relating some or all of the free parameters. Since in case of one-zero texture we have only one complex and hence two real constraints but four free parameters, we assume the equality between two Majorana phases so that we can write them as a function of Dirac CP phase. In case of two-zero textures, we have two complex and hence four real constraints that allow us to find all the four free parameters numerically. We get several solutions for $(m_{\text{lightest}}, \delta, \alpha, \beta)$ all of which give $m_{\text{lightest}}$ of the same order of magnitude but different possible values of phases. We list one such set of solutions for each two-zero texture in table \ref{table-2zero1} and \ref{table-2zero2}. Since all the free neutrino parameters are numerically determined in this case, any future measurement of Dirac CP phase in neutrino experiments will verify or falsify some of these sets of solutions.
The summary of our baryon asymmetry results in one-zero texture models is given in table \ref{table3} and \ref{table4}. It can be seen from these tables that in the one-flavor regime, all one-zero textures can give rise to correct baryon asymmetry depending upon the hierarchy of light neutrino masses. However, in two flavor regime, only $G_1$ with NH and $G_{3,4,6}$ with IH can give rise to correct baryon asymmetry. In the three flavor regime, $G_1$ with NH and $G_{4,5,6}$ with IH can give rise to correct baryon asymmetry.
The summary of results in two-zero texture models are shown in table \ref{table5}. In one flavor regime, all the two-zero texture mass matrices except $B_3$ can give rise to correct $Y_B$, depending on the neutrino mass hierarchy. For two flavor regime, only $B_{2,3,4}$ with IH can give rise to the observed baryon asymmetry. Similarly, in three flavor regime $B_2$ with both IH, NH and $B_{3,4}$ with only IH can produce correct $Y_B$. Thus if $M_1 < 10^{12}$ GeV, then all the allowed two-zero textures except $B_{3,4,5}$ are disfavored in the light of baryon asymmetry. For the two-zero texture mass matrices that give correct baryon asymmetry, we also constrain the entries in the diagonal Dirac neutrino mass matrices as can be seen from figures \ref{fig8} to \ref{fig25}.
In all the tables mentioned above, the symbol $\checkmark$ ($\times$) is used when the baryon asymmetry $Y_B$ for a particular case in (not in) the range given by the Planck experiment. As we mention above, here we have tried to discriminate between all possible Majorana neutrino textures by demanding the observed baryon asymmetry to arise from leptogenesis through the CP violating decay of the lightest right handed neutrino. We have not only constrained the number of texture zero mass matrices, but also constrained the parameters of the neutrino mass matrix which are yet undetermined in experiments. We should however, note that although a certain number of texture zero mass matrices with a particular light neutrino mass hierarchy do not give rise to correct baryon asymmetry, this does not rule out that particular texture as there could be some other source of baryon asymmetry in the Universe. Our analysis in this work only provide a guideline for future works related to model building in neutrino physics attempting to understand the dynamical origin of neutrino mass and mixing.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The work of M K Das is partially supported by the grant no. 42-790/2013(SR) from University Grants Commission, Government of India.
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
\label{introduction}
Broad absorption lines (BALs) in quasar spectra have observed velocity widths greater than 2000 \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi \ and are thought to be produced by high-velocity outflowing winds launched near the quasar's supermassive black hole (SMBH; e.g., \citealt{Weymann91}). Many theoretical investigations into these winds have supported a model in which the outflows are driven by radiation pressure on lines (e.g., \citealt{Murray95}; \citealt{Proga00}), although magnetohydrodynamical forces may contribute (e.g., \citealt{Konigl94}). These winds are potentially a means by which gas is evacuated from the host galaxy and thus have the potential to affect the growth of both the galaxy and its SMBH (e.g., \citealt{Dimatteo05}; \citealt{Moll07}; \citealt{Springel05b}; \citealt{King10}). BALs are observed in 10--15\% of optically selected quasars (e.g., \citealt{Gibson09b}; \citealt{Allen11}); as such, BALs play an important part in our understanding of both quasars and galaxy/quasar evolution. The detailed structures and locations of these outflows are not well determined, and we must understand their environments to determine if BALs are viable agents of feedback in their host galaxies.
Variability of BAL troughs provides a powerful tool with which to constrain the properties of these outflows. BALs are observed to be variable in time, both in strength (frequently characterized by equivalent width) and in shape. There are many possible causes of the variability, including movement of the absorbing gas (``cloud crossing") or changes in the ionizing radiation received by the gas. Several studies show support for the variability arising due to bulk movement of the outflowing gas (e.g., \citealt{Lundgren07}; \citealt{Gibson08}; \citealt{Hall11}; \citealt{Vivek12}; \citealt{Capellupo13}), while others present evidence consistent with ionization changes or changes in ``shielding gas" as the cause (e.g., the coordinated variability seen in multiple troughs of the same transition by \citealt{Filizak12}, 2013). It is possible that the mechanisms causing variability differ from object to object, yet each mechanism allows one to constrain different properties of the outflow environment. For example, if the variability arises from cloud crossing, one can estimate the radius of the absorbing gas from the ionizing continuum source. If the variability is due to ionization response, one can estimate the density of the outflow. Either of these parameters can help determine whether or not BALs are viable sources of large-scale feedback to their host galaxies.
The variability timescales probed by previous BAL studies vary widely --- studies have reported BAL-trough variability on timescales of years (e.g., \citealt{Filizak13}) all the way down to timescales of 8--10 days (\citealt{Capellupo13}), with many studies examining timescales in between (e.g., \citealt{Barlow93}; \citealt{Lundgren07}). BAL variability has been seen on all of the timescales probed; however, to date, no studies have reported variability on rest-frame timescales shorter than 8--10 days. In addition, BALs are generally observed to be less variable on shorter timescales (e.g., \citealt{Gibson10}; \citealt{Filizak13}). Detection of variability on short timescales would yield novel constraints on variability mechanisms and outflow environments.
Recent spectroscopy from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey Reverberation Mapping Project (SDSS-RM; \citealt{Shen15}), whose primary goal is reverberation mapping of the broad emission line regions of quasars, also includes observations of a number of quasars hosting BALs. The cadence of these observations allows investigation of BAL variability in a number of targets down to short rest-frame timescales. In particular, preliminary measurements for one target indicated C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL variability on short ($\sim$1 day) rest-frame timescales. This target, the quasar SDSS\,J141007.74+541203.3 (also known as SBS 1408+544A; \citealt{Chavushyan95}), was observed spectroscopically in 1991 by \cite{Stepanian98}, who noted strong absorption in the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission-line region. There was also one previous spectrum taken as a part of the SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (BOSS; \citealt{Eisenstein11}; \citealt{Dawson13}) from 2013 May that was released in the SDSS Data Release 12 (DR12; \citealt{Alam15}). Based on the Mg\,{\sc ii} \ and \ifmmode {\rm C}\,{\sc iii}] \else C\,{\sc iii}]\fi \ emission lines from the DR12 spectrum, the redshift of this quasar is $z = \ $2.337 $\pm$ 0.003. It has an apparent $i$-band magnitude $m_{i} = 18.1$ (\citealt{Alam15}) and absolute magnitude $M_i$ = \absmag \ (\citealt{Paris15}).
We here report on the detailed investigation of this target and the implications of these measurements for the environment producing the BAL trough. In Section~\ref{sec:data}, we present the data used in our investigation and its preparation for analysis. We discuss our measurements of the BAL parameters and the search for variability in Section~\ref{sec:measurements} and follow with a review of possible causes of variability and the physical constraints we can derive from our data in Section~\ref{sec:discussion}. We conclude in Section~\ref{sec:conclusions} by summarizing our results and their implications. Throughout this work, we assume a cosmology with $H_{0}~=~70$~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_{\rm M}~=~0.3$, and $\Omega_{\Lambda}~=~0.7.$
\section{DATA AND DATA PREPARATION}
\label{sec:data}
\subsection{BOSS Spectra}
The spectra utilized in our study were acquired as a part of the SDSS-RM project, which is a dedicated multi-object reverberation mapping campaign performed as a part of SDSS-III BOSS. For a technical overview of the SDSS-RM project, see \cite{Shen15}. In brief, 849 quasars were spectroscopically monitored with the BOSS spectrograph on the SDSS 2.5-meter telescope (\citealt{Smee13}; \citealt{Gunn06}) from 2014~January~1 through 2014~July~3, resulting in 32 epochs of spectroscopic observations over this period. The median spacing between observations is about 4 days --- see Table~2 of \cite{Shen15} for a complete log of these observations.
The FOV of the BOSS spectrograph is 2.5 degrees in diameter, and its wavelength coverage is 3650--10,400~\AA \ with a spectral resolution of $R \sim 2000$. Because of the need for high-precision relative spectrophotometric calibrations for the SDSS-RM project, the data were processed using an improved flux-calibration method that uses extra simultaneous standard star observations (see \S 3.3 and 3.4 of \citealt{Shen15}). The first SDSS-RM BOSS spectrum was obtained on MJD\,56660.209 --- we define this as the ``beginning" of our campaign, and all light curves presented as a part of our analysis (unless explicitly stated otherwise) show the rest-frame time between each epoch and MJD\,56660.209 (2~January~2014).
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.325, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 35 10, clip]{f1a.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.325, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 35 10, clip]{f1b.pdf}
\caption{Left panel: The mean spectrum (black solid line) from all 31 epochs used in this analysis with its continuum fit (blue dashed line). The line-free regions chosen to include in the continuum fit are shaded in gray and also highlighted in red. The approximate wavelength coverage of the SDSS $g$- and $i$-band photometric filters are shown as solid blue horizontal lines. Right panel: The SDSS-RM spectrum (black) from MJD 56683 and its accompanying PCA fit (blue) from \cite{Paris15}. We use the PCA fit to remove the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission-line signatures, and investigate the lower-velocity C\,{\sc iv} \ absorption features.}
\label{fig:confit}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
The processed BOSS spectra from this campaign were first corrected for Galactic extinction using a $R_{\rm V}$ = 3.1 Milky Way extinction model (\citealt{Cardelli89}) and $A_{\rm V}$ values from \cite{Schlegel98}. Before beginning analysis, we converted the observed wavelengths of the spectra to the rest frame. All 32 epochs of data were visually inspected for quality; the median signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) of the spectra was $\sim$30 per pixel, with most spectra falling between 20--40. We excluded one spectrum from our analysis due to low S/N ($<$ 10), leaving 31 SDSS-RM spectral epochs for our analysis and the earlier observation from the DR12 data release. Figure~\ref{fig:confit} shows the mean spectrum of our quasar during the SDSS-RM campaign (RMID 613 in Table 1 of \citealt{Shen15}).
Visual inspection of the spectrum reveals a BAL quasar with low reddening and a prominent C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL trough that is at sufficiently high velocity to be detached from the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission line. There are no BAL features in lower-ionization transitions like Mg\,{\sc ii} \ or Al\,{\sc iii}, making this target a high-ionization BAL quasar. There are also two narrower C\,{\sc iv} \ absorption features at lower outflow velocities superimposed on the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission line, as well as N\,{\sc v} \ absorption redward of the Lyman-$\alpha$ emission line, but this region is heavily contaminated by intervening Lyman-$\alpha$ absorption and thus its analysis is outside the scope of this work. There is a hint of broad Si\,{\sc iv} \ absorption at a similar velocity as the C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL, but it is heavily contaminated by C\,{\sc ii} and O\,{\sc i}/Si\,{\sc ii} features and does not ever reach a depth below 90\% of the continuum level.
We also inspected the spectrum taken on 1991 October 4 by \cite{Chavushyan95} for comparison (Figure~\ref{fig:oldspec}). The C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL trough does not appear to be present in the 1991 spectrum, though the S/N is too low to determine definitively whether or not the BAL trough is present; however, the depth measured within the trough region in the 1991 spectrum is consistent with there being no trough flux below 90\% of the continuum level to $\sim$3$\sigma$ significance. The lowest-velocity, narrower C\,{\sc iv} \ absorption feature close to the C\,{\sc iv} \ line center is clearly present in the 1991 spectrum, though we cannot tell if the nearby higher-velocity narrow absorption feature superimposed on the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission line is present due to low S/N.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.4, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 195 260, clip]{f2.pdf}
\caption{The 1991 spectrum from \cite{Chavushyan95}, smoothed by 5 pixels and normalized by the mean flux density (black solid line) and our mean continuum-normalized spectrum from the SDSS-RM campaign (red solid line). The blue dashed lines show the rest-frame wavelengths of N\,{\sc v}, Si\,{\sc iv}, and C\,{\sc iv} \ for reference. The red dotted lines show the wavelength region spanned by the C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL trough during the SDSS-RM campaign. }
\label{fig:oldspec}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Continuum Fits and Normalization}
\label{sec:confits}
To disentangle the BAL variability from the overall quasar variability, we fit a continuum to each individual spectrum. Following \S 3.1 of \cite{Filizak12}, we first attempted to fit a reddened power law model to the continuum emission using the SMC-like reddening model from \cite{Pei92} --- however, the results were consistent with no extinction, so a simple, non-reddened power law yielded suitable fits for this particular target. We used a nonlinear least-squares algorithm and fit to four regions within the spectra that were relatively free of emission and absorption features. We chose these relatively line-free regions, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:confit}, by visually inspecting the mean spectrum and comparing it with the SDSS composite spectrum of \cite{Vandenberk01}. We used the same line-free regions for each epoch. Because some of the line-free regions contained more pixels than others, we weighted each pixel such that each individual region contributed equally in the continuum fit. This ensures that none of the line-free regions holds more weight in the fit just because it spans a larger wavelength range (and thus contains more pixels).
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.25, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 100 0, clip]{f3a.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.25, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 90 0, clip]{f3b.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.25, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 100 0, clip]{f3c.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.25, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 90 0, clip]{f3d.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.25, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 60 0, clip]{f3e.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.25, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 70 0, clip]{f3f.pdf}
\caption{Mean and RMS residual spectra for the continuum-normalized (left panels) and of the PCA-normalized (right panels) cases. The PCA fit generally results in similar mean and residual spectra compared to our continuum fit, but also allows one to isolate and characterize the low-velocity C\,{\sc iv} \ absorption near the broad emission. Each panel shows a different wavelength region along the spectrum. The top subpanel for each region displays the mean continuum-normalized spectrum over the 31 epochs, and the bottom panel shows the RMS residual spectrum. Dotted horizontal lines across the mean spectrum show a normalized flux density of 1.0 and 0.9 to help the eye in identifying absorption features. Vertical dashed lines indicate the wavelength regions spanned by the C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL (middle panels) and also in which absorption associated with the C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL would be expected to appear for N\,{\sc v} \ and Si\,{\sc iv} \ (top panels) and Mg\,{\sc ii} \ (bottom panels). }
\label{fig:confit_mean_rms}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
To characterize the uncertainties in the continuum fits, we account for two different sources of error. The first component accounts for the uncertainty caused by noise in the spectra. To evaluate these uncertainties, we used ``flux randomization'' Monte Carlo iterations as described by \cite{Peterson98b}, where the flux in each pixel of the spectrum is altered by a random Gaussian deviate based on the uncertainty assigned to that particular pixel. The continuum is then fit to the new spectrum, and the process is repeated 100 times. We adopt the standard deviation of these 100 iterations as the first component of the uncertainties in the continuum fit.
The second component to the continuum uncertainties considers the small changes in the fit resulting from the decisions we made when fitting the continuum. For example, we choose which particular line-free regions of the spectrum are used in the fit, and whether or not each pixel is given equal weight. To evaluate the uncertainties introduced by these decisions, we created two more continuum fits for each spectrum. First, we fit the continuum in each epoch using two additional line-free regions, but still using the same weighting scheme as described above, where each line-free region is given equal weight. Second, we fit a continuum using our original line-free regions while weighting each pixel equally. We then adopted the average deviation of these two continuum fits from the original continuum fit as the second component to the continuum uncertainty.
The two uncertainty components are added in quadrature and adopted as our formal uncertainties in each continuum fit. Although a continuum was fit to each epoch individually, Figure~\ref{fig:confit} shows the fit to the mean spectrum as an example of how well the fits performed. Each individual epoch was divided by its continuum fit to obtain a normalized spectrum, and both the spectral and continuum fit uncertainties were propagated to determine the final uncertainty on the normalized spectrum. Hereafter, we will refer to these normalized spectra as the ``continuum-normalized" spectra. In all cases, the uncertainties in the continuum-normalized spectra are dominated by the spectral uncertainties rather than the formal uncertainties in the continuum model.
We created a mean and root mean square (RMS) residual spectrum from the continuum-normalized spectra; the RMS residual spectrum is obtained by taking the standard deviation about the mean spectrum, the result of which shows the variable components (Figure~\ref{fig:confit_mean_rms}). The base level of the RMS flux (on the order of $\sim0.2$) in all panels is above zero due to noise in the spectra, which adds a constant to the entire RMS spectrum. The RMS spectrum contained a few sharp features arising from poor/inconsistent sky subtraction; these small segments of the spectra were masked to avoid confusion, as they did not lie near any of the emission or absorption features of interest in this study (all fell between 1600--1900~\AA \ in the rest frame). The region of the spectrum redward of $\sim$2200~\AA \ suffered from telluric contamination; these features were too widespread to mask, so they are shown in full in Figure~\ref{fig:confit_mean_rms}.
\subsection{Principal Component Analysis Fits}
As a part of the SDSS DR12 quasar catalog production (\citealt{Paris15}), a principal component analysis (PCA) was done on each epoch of BOSS spectroscopy. This procedure was also used for the DR9 and DR10 quasar catalogs \citep{Paris12, Paris14}; see these works for a description of this technique. PCA fits both the emission-line and continuum features in each spectrum using a reference sample of quasars for which the relevant features are observed. An example of a PCA fit to one of our spectra is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:confit}. In this target, two lower-velocity and narrower C\,{\sc iv} \ absorption features are seen superimposed on the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission line, and the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission-line flux in this low-velocity region is well-fit by the PCA approach. Thus, we consider the PCA fits in our analysis to help eliminate contributions from the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission line, particularly relevant for measurements of the lower-velocity absorption features. As with our continuum fits, we divide the original spectra by their PCA fits to obtain the ``PCA-normalized" spectra at each epoch for use when investigating the lower-velocity C\,{\sc iv} \ absorption features. Figure~\ref{fig:confit_mean_rms} shows the mean and RMS residual spectrum of the PCA-normalized spectra. All of the emission features are well-removed from the mean and RMS residual spectra by the normalization except for the Lyman-$\alpha$ region, which is blended with N\,{\sc v} \ and has significant Lyman-$\alpha$ absorption on top of the emission line. The poor fit is due to the sample size used in the PCA in this region --- below rest-frame 1280 \AA , the sample used to perform PCA is small and makes use of hand-fitted continua, so we are able to reproduce
fewer features in this region (e.g., \citealt{Paris12}). As with the continuum-normalized spectra, we mask a few regions with significant sky features in the RMS residual spectrum to avoid confusion.
\subsection{Photometric Observations}
\label{sec:photobs}
As a part of the SDSS-RM program, photometric observations of our target were also obtained with the 2.3m Steward Observatory Bok telescope and the 3.6m Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT). The observations are described in \S 3.5 of \cite{Shen15}. The Bok/90Prime instrument has a 1 deg$^{2}$ field of view and a plate scale of $0\farcs45$ pixel$^{-1}$. About 60 nights were allocated to the SDSS-RM program from January-July 2014, yielding 31 epochs in the $g$ band and 27 in the $i$ band by the end of the program. The CFHT observations were taken with MegaCam, which also has a 1 deg$^{2}$ field of view, with a pixel size of $0\farcs187$. Over the course of the campaign, 26 epochs were observed in the $g$ band and 20 observed in the $i$ band with the CFHT (see \citealt{Fukugita96} for a description of the $ugriz$ filters).
In this target, the $g$ filter covers both Lyman-$\alpha$/N\,{\sc v} \ and C\,{\sc iv} \ (see Figure~\ref{fig:confit}), both of which are observed to vary during the campaign, particularly the \mbox{Lyman-$\alpha$/N\,{\sc v}} \ region (Figure~\ref{fig:confit_mean_rms}). Thus, we do not consider the $g$-band photometric light curve to be a good proxy for the continuum variability. However, the $i$-band photometric light curve covers a relatively line-free region of the spectrum for this object (Figure~\ref{fig:confit}) so we include this light curve in our investigations (Figure~\ref{fig:phot_lcs}). Aperture photometry was performed on all images using SExtractor (\citealt{Bertin96}) and a preliminary flux calibration was performed. A zero-point shift was applied to place the Bok photometry onto the CFHT magnitude scale, which in turn is tied to the photometry of SDSS objects in our field as a step in the MegaPipe reduction pipeline (\citealt{Gwyn08}). Several epochs were identified as outliers for all targets observed and thus categorized as bad data and removed from the light curves; we had good measurements for 43 total epochs. The quasar did not exhibit very much photometric variability during the campaign; the flux changed by a factor of only about 10--15\% during this period. Measurements of the flux densities within the line-free regions of the spectra similarly yield light curves consistent with little variability.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.35, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 310 130, clip]{f4.pdf}
\caption{Photometric $i$-band continuum light curves from the CHFT (black filled circles) and Bok (red squares) telescopes. The BAL quasar varies by only $\sim$10\% over this time period.}
\label{fig:phot_lcs}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{VARIABILITY MEASUREMENTS}
\label{sec:measurements}
\subsection{Searching for Variability}
Inspection of the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission-line region in the mean and RMS residual of both the continuum-normalized and PCA-normalized spectra (Figures \ref{fig:confit_mean_rms} and \ref{fig:mean_zoom}) reveals significant variability in the high-velocity C\,{\sc iv} \ absorption trough centered near $-16700 \ $km s$^{-1}$ (hereafter referred to as Trough A; see Figure~\ref{fig:mean_zoom}). Figures \ref{fig:confit_mean_rms} and \ref{fig:mean_zoom} also show some variability in the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission line, which makes it more difficult to determine whether there is any variability in the lower-velocity C\,{\sc iv} \ absorption troughs using the continuum-normalized spectra. However, the RMS spectrum of the PCA-normalized spectra largely removes the variability signatures from the emission-line features (Figure~\ref{fig:confit_mean_rms}), allowing us to investigate variability in the lower-velocity absorption features. There is detectable low-amplitude variability in the associated medium-velocity C\,{\sc iv} \ trough (hereafter Trough B; centered near $-4800$ km s$^{-1}$), but none is detected in the lowest-velocity associated narrow C\,{\sc iv} \ absorption trough (hereafter Trough C; centered near $-1000$ km s$^{-1}$) superimposed on the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission line. The RMS residual signal in the Trough A region is nearly identical to that in the continuum-normalized RMS spectrum, which is expected given that this trough is detached from the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission line and thus we expect little contamination from the emission-line variability.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.3, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 80 20, clip]{f5.pdf}
\caption{Mean and RMS residual spectra for the continuum-normalized case, expanded to emphasize the C\,{\sc iv} \ region of the spectrum. Dotted horizontal lines across the mean spectrum show a normalized flux density of 1.0 and 0.9 to help the eye in identifying absorption features.}
\label{fig:mean_zoom}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Examining the RMS residual spectra derived from both the continuum-normalized spectra and the PCA-normalized spectra at various other wavelength regimes allows a search for associated (or non-associated) absorption and emission-line variability across the spectrum. There are signs of variable absorption in the N\,{\sc v}, Al\,{\sc iii}, and Si\,{\sc iv} \ regions (as evidenced by a slight increases in the RMS residual flux in these regions), but these signatures are not significant enough to disentangle them properly from the noise, and as discussed in Section \ref{sec:confits}, none hosts a BAL trough of $>$10\% fractional depth. We hereafter focus our attention on the C\,{\sc iv} \ region of the spectrum shown in Figure~\ref{fig:mean_zoom}.
\subsection{Measurements}
\label{sec:balmeasurements}
\subsubsection{BAL-Trough Properties}
\label{sec:baltroughproperties}
To determine the minimum and maximum velocities of Trough A, we smoothed the mean continuum-normalized spectrum using a boxcar smoothing algorithm over five pixels. As is standard in BAL studies, we then determined the velocities between which the flux in Trough A remained below 90\% of the continuum level (i.e., where the normalized flux density is $<$ 0.9) and obtained \mbox{$v_{\rm min}$~=~$-14470$ \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi} and \mbox{$v_{\rm max}$~=~$-18810$ km s$^{-1}$,} which yields a trough velocity width of 4340 \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi. The minimum and maximum velocities of the trough in each epoch were measured separately, and were consistent with those measured for the mean spectrum to within the uncertainties (the range of measured values was within $\sim$200 km s$^{-1}$ of the mean values). We applied the velocity limits found in the mean spectrum to measure the rest-frame equivalent width (EW), mean fractional depth, and absorbed-flux-weighted centroid velocity ($v_{\rm cent}$) of Trough A at each epoch using the non-smoothed continuum-normalized spectra (Table~\ref{tbl:bal_params}). Uncertainties in each parameter were calculated using flux-randomization Monte Carlo iterations as described in Section \ref{sec:confits}. We adopt the standard deviation of these iterations as our measurement uncertainties and tabulate them in Table \ref{tbl:bal_params}.
\begin{deluxetable}{lcccc}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablecaption{BAL Trough Parameters\tablenotemark{a}}
\tablehead{
\colhead{MJD} &
\colhead{$\Delta t_{\rm rest}$\tablenotemark{b} } &
\colhead{EW } &
\colhead{Mean} &
\colhead{$v_{\rm cent}$} \\
\colhead{} &
\colhead{(days)} &
\colhead{(\AA) } &
\colhead{Depth} &
\colhead{(km s$^{-1}$)}
}
\startdata
56426.00 & 0.00 & 4.37 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.203$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16799 \pm$ 25 \\
56660.21 & 70.19 & 5.07 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.235$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16768 \pm$ 20 \\
56664.51 & 1.29 & 4.80 $\pm$ 0.11 & $0.223$ $\pm$ 0.005 & $-16768 \pm$ 30 \\
56669.50 & 1.49 & 4.77 $\pm$ 0.16 & $0.221$ $\pm$ 0.007 & $-16698 \pm$ 41 \\
56683.48 & 4.19 & 5.06 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.234$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16695 \pm$ 17 \\
56686.47 & 0.90 & 5.37 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.249$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16707 \pm$ 20 \\
56696.78 & 3.09 & 5.78 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.268$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16707 \pm$ 17 \\
56715.39 & 5.58 & 6.24 $\pm$ 0.07 & $0.289$ $\pm$ 0.003 & $-16706 \pm$ 17 \\
56717.33 & 0.58 & 5.81 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.269$ $\pm$ 0.003 & $-16711 \pm$ 15 \\
56720.45 & 0.93 & 6.02 $\pm$ 0.09 & $0.279$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16724 \pm$ 17 \\
56722.39 & 0.58 & 5.95 $\pm$ 0.06 & $0.276$ $\pm$ 0.003 & $-16737 \pm$ 11 \\
56726.46 & 1.22 & 5.81 $\pm$ 0.09 & $0.269$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16727 \pm$ 16 \\
56739.41 & 3.88 & 5.64 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.261$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16688 \pm$ 19 \\
56745.28 & 1.76 & 5.28 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.245$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16687 \pm$ 19 \\
56747.42 & 0.64 & 5.09 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.236$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16743 \pm$ 25 \\
56749.37 & 0.59 & 5.40 $\pm$ 0.09 & $0.250$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16721 \pm$ 19 \\
56751.34 & 0.59 & 5.49 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.254$ $\pm$ 0.003 & $-16735 \pm$ 18 \\
56755.34 & 1.20 & 4.95 $\pm$ 0.09 & $0.229$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16741 \pm$ 21 \\
56768.23 & 3.86 & 5.22 $\pm$ 0.07 & $0.242$ $\pm$ 0.003 & $-16756 \pm$ 17 \\
56772.23 & 1.20 & 4.79 $\pm$ 0.07 & $0.222$ $\pm$ 0.003 & $-16729 \pm$ 19 \\
56780.23 & 2.40 & 4.41 $\pm$ 0.09 & $0.205$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16746 \pm$ 22 \\
56782.25 & 0.60 & 4.32 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.200$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16768 \pm$ 22 \\
56783.25 & 0.30 & 4.51 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.209$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16755 \pm$ 21 \\
56795.18 & 3.57 & 4.01 $\pm$ 0.09 & $0.186$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16776 \pm$ 25 \\
56799.21 & 1.21 & 4.07 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.188$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16783 \pm$ 22 \\
56804.19 & 1.49 & 3.90 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.181$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16774 \pm$ 25 \\
56808.26 & 1.22 & 4.08 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.189$ $\pm$ 0.003 & $-16739 \pm$ 25 \\
56813.23 & 1.49 & 3.77 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.175$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16750 \pm$ 27 \\
56825.19 & 3.58 & 3.68 $\pm$ 0.07 & $0.171$ $\pm$ 0.003 & $-16790 \pm$ 29 \\
56829.21 & 1.21 & 3.34 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.155$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16866 \pm$ 33 \\
56833.21 & 1.20 & 3.41 $\pm$ 0.08 & $0.158$ $\pm$ 0.004 & $-16782 \pm$ 32 \\
56837.19 & 1.19 & 3.65 $\pm$ 0.07 & $0.169$ $\pm$ 0.003 & $-16796 \pm$ 24 \\
mean\tablenotemark{c} & \nodata & 4.83 $\pm$ 0.01 & $0.224$ $\pm$ 0.001 & $-16739 \pm$ 4
\enddata
\tablenotetext{a}{All measurements are made with the continuum-normalized spectra.}
\tablenotetext{b}{All $\Delta t$ measurements are made with respect to the previous epoch in the rest-frame.}
\tablenotetext{c}{Measurements made from the mean spectrum created from the 31 SDSS-RM spectra --- excluding the early spectrum from DR12.}
\label{tbl:bal_params}
\end{deluxetable}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.42, angle = 0, trim = 0 0 0 250, clip]{f6.pdf}
\caption{Equivalent width (top panel), mean fractional depth (middle panel) and centroid velocity (bottom panel) of the high-velocity C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL trough (Trough A; centered near $-$16700 \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi) as a function of days since the RM campaign began, in the rest frame. The point at far left is the additional observation of our target taken by SDSS, about 70 rest-frame days before the SDSS-RM project began. The apparent decline in velocity centroid, on the order of $\sim$100 \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi, is of much smaller amplitude than the changes seen in the EW and depth, and corresponds to less than two pixels in the spectral direction.}
\label{fig:lightcurves}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:lightcurves} shows the EW, mean fractional depth, and $v_{\rm cent}$ measurements of Trough A as a function of rest-frame time from the beginning of the RM campaign. Both the trough EW and depth increase from $\Delta t$ = 0 to $\sim$15 days by about 23\%, followed by a steady decline over the rest of the campaign by a factor of $\sim$2. The similarity of the EW and mean fractional depth light curves indicates that the trough profile does not change significantly over the period of the campaign; we investigate this further below. The centroid velocity decreases slightly over the campaign, but with a small amplitude of $\sim$ 100 \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi \ that corresponds to less than two pixels in the spectral direction.
We also measure the EW in all three C\,{\sc iv} \ absorption troughs (A, B, and C) using the PCA-normalized spectra, as the latter two cannot be examined with the continuum-normalized spectra due to their positions on top of the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission line. We examine the resulting light curves (Figure~\ref{fig:pca_ewlightcurves}): The widths of Trough B and Trough C are $\sim$1311 \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi \ and $\sim$1380 \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi, respectively, classifying them as mini-BALs. For our purposes, we do not need to consider each component of the C\,{\sc iv} \ doublet separately in these troughs. Nonetheless, we note that Trough B appears to be a line-locked system of two C\,{\sc iv} \ absorbers, with the weaker one closer to the systemic redshift. The light curve for Trough A created from the PCA-normalized spectra is very similar to that obtained using the continuum-normalized spectra; there is again a clear increase, followed by a long-term decrease in EW. However, the PCA fits produce more scatter in the EW light curve of Trough A than the continuum fits, likely due to uncertainty in determining the boundaries of the BAL trough for exclusion during the PCA fitting. Thus, we rely on our continuum-normalized spectra for our quantitative assessment of Trough A. Our conclusions below about the BAL variability still hold when considering the PCA-normalized spectra --- however, we opt for the conservative route of using the continuum-normalized spectra for our quantitative analysis. However, when comparing the behavior of Trough A with Troughs B and C, we use the PCA fits for all three troughs to avoid introducing possible systematic uncertainties between the continuum-normalized and PCA-normalized spectra.
As expected based on the RMS of the PCA-normalized spectra, there is no significant variability of Trough C, but the EW light curve for Trough B shows a similar behavior to that of the light curve of Trough A (though with smaller fractional variability). The EW light curves for Trough A and B from the PCA-normalized spectra have a Spearman rank correlation coefficient of 0.525 with a $p$-value of 0.002, indicating that the two are correlated. The cross-correlation function for the two light curves (Figure~\ref{fig:ccf}), showing the Pearson coefficient as a function of time delay between the two light curves, similarly reveals that they are well-correlated, with a peak $r$ $\sim$ 0.7. We are unable to measure any time delay between the two troughs with sufficient precision to be useful; we measure a time delay of 17~$\pm$~19 days, which is consistent with zero.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.46, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 85 250, clip]{f7.pdf}
\caption{Equivalent widths of Trough A (centered at $\sim-$16700 \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi), Trough B (centered at $\sim-4800$ \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi), and Trough C (centered at $\sim-1025$ \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi) absorption components as a function of rest-frame days since the RM campaign began. These measurements were made using the PCA-normalized spectra rather than the continuum-normalized spectra, as Troughs B and C lie on top of the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission line.}
\label{fig:pca_ewlightcurves}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.43, angle = -90, trim =0 0 200 200, clip]{f8.pdf}
\caption{The cross correlation function (CCF; black solid line) between the EW light curve of Trough A and the EW light curve of Trough B, showing the Pearson's correlation coefficient as a function of time delay. The auto-correlation function (ACF), which shows the high-velocity trough EW light curve correlated with itself, is show for Trough A (red dashed line) and Trough B (blue dotted line). To eliminate contributions from the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission line, these calculations were done using light curves made from the PCA-normalized spectra. }
\label{fig:ccf}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Short-Term EW Variability}
\label{sec:shorttermvariability}
To search for short-timescale variability between epochs in Trough A, we calculated the change in EW ($\Delta$EW) between each pair of sequential observations using the continuum-normalized spectra. Uncertainties in $\Delta$EW ($\sigma_{\Delta {\rm EW}}$) were calculated by summing the uncertainties of the two contributing EW measurements in quadrature. Following \cite{Capellupo13}, in order to be considered ``real" variability, we require a significance of 4$\sigma$ (that $\Delta$EW is at least four times as large as $\sigma_{\Delta {\rm EW}}$).
We identified four instances of secure variability between sequential epochs during the SDSS-RM campaign, with variability on timescales down to 1.20 days ($\sim$ 29 hours) in the quasar rest frame. Figure~\ref{fig:real_variability} displays the four variable pairs of spectra.
To assess if this short-term variability in the trough is consistent with coordinated variations across the entire trough, we took the ratio between each pair of spectra and determined whether the flux ratio in the Trough A region is consistent with a constant to within the measurement uncertainties. The flux ratios are shown in Figure \ref{fig:fluxratios} along with a constant fit to the region across the trough. In all cases, a constant model fits the flux ratio in the trough region quite well. However, to be sure that the two sub-troughs within Trough A are not varying differently, we measured individual EW light curves for the blue half and red half of Trough A (which can be decomposed into two BALs of widths at least $\sim2470$ \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi \ and $\sim$1870 \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi, respectively, when ignoring the overlapping wings). We find that the two sub-troughs show the same behavior; i.e., when the blue half is increasing in EW, so is the red half, and by similar fractional changes in EW. Thus, the trough is varying in a very similar, or coordinated, fashion across all velocities.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.5, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 0 0, clip]{f9.pdf}
\caption{Four different pairs of continuum-normalized spectra between which the EW of Trough A varies at greater than 4$\sigma$ significance ($\Delta$ EW $\geq 4 \times \sigma_{\Delta {\rm EW}}$). The continuum-normalized spectra are indicated in red and blue, and the horizontal dashed lines are at a normalized flux density of 1.0 and 0.9 to help guide the eye. The spectra have been smoothed for display purposes (only in this figure) using a boxcar window over 3 pixels to reduce noise. The vertical bars show the 1$\sigma$ uncertainties associated with each point in the smoothed, normalized spectra.}
\label{fig:real_variability}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.3, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 0 0, clip]{f10.pdf}
\caption{Flux ratios between the four different pairs of continuum-normalized spectra shown in Figure \ref{fig:real_variability}. The spectra have been binned by 3 pixels to reduce noise. Red vertical bars show the 1$\sigma$ uncertainty in the flux ratio in each binned pixel, and the horizontal bars show the size of the bins. Blue horizontal lines show the weighted mean of the flux ratio across the Trough~A region. The $\chi^2$ of the fit and the number of degrees of freedom (DOF) are shown in each panel. In all cases, a fit to this constant model is statistically acceptable.}
\label{fig:fluxratios}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
As discussed in Section \ref{sec:baltroughproperties}, examination of the EW light curve of Trough A (Figure~\ref{fig:lightcurves}) shows a steady increase in EW from rest-frame days 0--15, followed by a steady decreasing trend for the remainder of the campaign. This behavior raises the concern that our observed short-term variability could be merely caused by statistical noise about this long-term trend, which would affect the interpretation of the variability. Three of the four pairs of variable epochs are found in the decreasing half of the light curve, so to determine whether or not these features are likely to be statistical noise, we fit a linear trend to the light curve between days 15--55. A simple linear fit did not perform particularly well (the fit has a reduced $\chi^{2}$ of 5.02), so we instead fit the linear trend allowing for an intrinsic scatter component. We use the Bayesian linear-regression model of \cite{Kelly07b} to fit the line, and find an intrinsic scatter of 0.18 \AA, which is twice the typical measured uncertainty in EW. Explaining this scatter without intrinsic variability would require that our EW uncertainties are underestimated by at least a factor of two: an error this size is unlikely because we account for both pixel uncertainties and noise introduced by the continuum-fitting procedure (see Section \ref{sec:confits}). We present the linear fit, intrinsic scatter, and uncertainties in the fit in Figure~\ref{fig:lineartrend}.
To explore further the likelihood that our observed short-term variability is due to genuine variability, we created a simulated EW light curve for Trough A, placing each epoch directly on the fitted linear trend and assigning uncertainties equal to our measured uncertainties at each epoch. We then allowed the EW in each epoch to deviate by a random Gaussian deviate reflecting these uncertainties, and counted the number of epoch pairs that deviated from each other by greater than 4$\sigma$ solely due to statistical fluctuations. This simulation was designed to mimic our actual search for pairs of epochs that varied in our data. We repeated this test $10^6$ times to determine the probability that the observed variations are due simply to statistical fluctuations about the long-term decreasing trend. The simulations indicate a probability of only 0.025\% for statistical noise to produce three pairs of sequential EWs that differ by at least 4$\sigma$. When we restrict the simulation to count only those pairs with $\Delta~t<$~2 days in the rest-frame (of which we found two pairs in our light curve), the probability drops to 0.0076\%. Thus, it is highly unlikely that the detected variations are due to statistical fluctuations about the long-term trend, and we conclude that they represent real short-term intrinsic variability in this system.
\subsubsection{Trough-Profile Variability}
\label{sec:profilevariability}
Though the variations in trough-profile shape are minimal on the shortest timescales, we also search for indications of variability in trough-profile shape associated with the underlying longer-term trends seen in EW in Trough A. To do this, we divided spectra into groups containing spectra that were close together in time and had similar EW measurements. We averaged the continuum-normalized spectra in each group to improve the S/N, allowing us to compare the average trough profiles at different times throughout the campaign. Grouping the spectra resulted in six groups, each containing 3--5 sequential spectra with similar EW values. Group 1 contains the spectra taken from MJD 56660--56669, Group 2 between MJD 56717--56722, Group 3 between MJD 56745--56752, Group 4 between MJD 56780--56783, Group 5 between MJD 56795--56808, and Group 6 between MJD 56813--56837. We averaged all of the normalized spectra in each group and plot each mean spectrum in Figure~\ref{fig:avg_by_ew}. The average trough profiles of each group appear similar throughout the campaign; it is only the strength of the trough that appears to change. To test this conclusion, we measured the flux ratios between each pair of group-averaged spectra at each pixel of the trough. We find that in all cases, a constant model fit to the flux ratio between the different group-averaged spectra is again a statistically acceptable fit, indicating that the absorption trough is changing in a coordinated manner across its entire velocity span on longer timescales as well.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.47, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 250 300, clip]{f11.pdf}
\caption{The decreasing part of the EW light curve for Trough A (black filled circles) with a linear fit using the \cite{Kelly07b} method that includes intrinsic scatter. The three pairs of epochs between which we see significant variability are shown as colored squares (red, cyan, and yellow). The black solid line shows the linear fit, blue dotted lines show the measured intrinsic scatter, and red dashed lines show the expected scatter about the linear fit assuming no intrinsic scatter; i.e., if the expected scatter was only due to the uncertainties in EW. The expected scatter due to uncertainties in EW is smaller than that observed.}
\label{fig:lineartrend}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Emission-Line Variability}
\label{sec:emissionlinevar}
The SDSS-RM campaign also offers the opportunity to search for links between emission-line and BAL-trough variability and thus possible connections between the high-ionization broad-line region and BAL outflows; such connections have been suggested by many authors (e.g., \citealt{Chiang96}; \citealt{Richards11}; \citealt{Higginbottom13}). As such, we also measured the integrated flux within the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission line during the SDSS-RM campaign, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:civ_emission}, to look for possible coordinated variability. We calculated the flux in only the red half of the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission line ($\lambda_{\rm rest}~>~1548$~\AA), as the blue half is affected by the mini-BAL troughs B and C. The C\,{\sc iv} \ emission-line light curve shows some low-level variations throughout the SDSS-RM campaign, changing by about a factor of $\sim$10\% during this time period, but no large-scale changes similar to those shown by the BAL trough. However, the uncertainties are non-negligible due to the uncertainty of the spectrophotometric flux calibrations (\citealt{Shen15}).
Based off of its luminosity at rest-frame 1350 \AA \ (as measured from the mean spectrum) and the C\,{\sc iv} \ $R-L$ relation of \cite{Kaspi07}, the expected mean timescale for C\,{\sc iv} \ to respond to ionizing-flux changes is on the order of 130 rest-frame days, though gas nearer to the line of sight will respond more quickly. Because of the uncertainties in integrated emission-line fluxes and because the baseline of the current data from the SDSS-RM campaign is less than $\sim$130 days, we are not able to explore fully the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission-line variability --- it might simply not have responded to the observed ionizing continuum yet. Additional observations of this target, with the extended time baseline covered by the ongoing monitoring periods in 2015 and 2016, could be used to explore this further.
We also consider the He\,{\sc ii} \,$\lambda$1640 ($n=3-2$) emission line as a potential probe of the ionizing continuum above 54~eV.
The He\,{\sc ii} \ emission line is present but weak in our spectra; we measured the He\,{\sc ii} \ EW using the method of \cite{Baskin13}
for ease of comparison with their dataset. Our quasar's average He\,{\sc ii} \ EW of $3.5\pm 0.4$ \AA\ is consistent with their BAL quasar average of 3.9\,\AA, but lower than their non-BAL quasar average of 5.1\,\AA\ (their Table 2). From the pre-campaign BOSS spectrum to the last SDSS-RM spectrum, He\,{\sc ii} \ shows a marginal weakening in its rest-frame EW of approximately $20\pm 10$\%. The weakness of the He\,{\sc ii} \ emission line and the resulting large uncertainties in measuring its EW make it impossible for us to measure short-term variability, and thus the He\,{\sc ii} \ emission in this target is not instructive as a probe of the short-term variability of the ionizing continuum.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.3, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 0 10, clip]{f12.pdf}
\caption{Mean continuum-normalized spectra in each group as defined in Section \ref{sec:profilevariability} of the text. Each color shows the mean of each group of spectra throughout the campaign. Horizontal dotted lines are normalized flux densities of 1.0 and 0.9 to guide the eye. The profile of Trough A remains the same throughout the campaign; only the strength/depth of the trough varies. }
\label{fig:avg_by_ew}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.43, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 200 200, clip]{f13.pdf}
\caption{The rest-frame EW of the C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL (Trough A; top panel) and the integrated flux of the C\,{\sc iv} \ emisson line (lower panel) as a function of rest-frame days since the beginning of the SDSS-RM campaign. The emission-line flux was calculated using only the red half of the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission line, which is free of absorption features.}
\label{fig:civ_emission}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{DISCUSSION}
\label{sec:discussion}
\subsection{Observed Variability in Context}
\label{sec: obsvar}
Our observations of C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL variability in this quasar are the fastest reported detections of significant BAL variability to date. Previously, \cite{Capellupo13} reported variability on timescales down to 8--10 days in two quasars; our shortest observed timescale is shorter by more than a factor of five.
The targets observed by \cite{Capellupo13} showed variability in only small portions of their respective troughs; we here see coordinated variations across the entire velocity range of the trough, with no discernible BAL-profile changes throughout the campaign. We see very little significant variability in the rest-frame UV continuum as measured by the $i$-band photometric light curve and within the line-free regions of the spectra.
To determine whether this particular quasar and the C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL are atypical when compared to the general BAL population, we compare their various properties with those of the BAL quasar sample of \cite{Gibson09b}. Our target has an absolute magnitude and redshift that are fairly typical of the BAL population; however, the quasar itself is less reddened than typical BAL quasars. The BAL trough itself is somewhat weak, with a smaller EW than many C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL troughs, and the higher-velocity portion of the trough is deeper than the low-velocity portion --- this shape is more common in weaker BALs. The velocity width of the trough, at $4340$~ \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi, is not unusual, but is somewhat larger than the majority of C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL troughs. The maximum velocity of the trough falls within the normal range of the broader BAL population, but the minimum velocity of the trough falls towards the high end of the distribution (the trough is well-separated from the C\,{\sc iv} \ emission-line). In summary, neither the quasar nor its BAL are strong outliers in any of the properties examined, though in some cases they do fall in less common regions of the distribution among BAL quasars.
We also investigate whether the amplitude and timescale of variability seen during the SDSS-RM campaign is normal for a BAL quasar by comparing our observed variability with that of the large sample of \cite{Filizak13}. Figure~\ref{fig:filizak} shows the change and fractional change in EW as a function of $\Delta~t$, reproduced from \cite{Filizak13} with our data overplotted in red. Our points lie within the envelope defined in that work, suggesting that the variability properties seen in our target may be common in quasars; our target is not an apparent outlier in its variability characteristics. The variability amplitudes on short timescales during our campaign are also consistent with those observed on short timescales in a few targets by \cite{Capellupo13}.
There are a number of potential causes of BAL variability previously discussed in the literature, and the physical constraints we can place on the nature of the outflow are dependent on the mechanism driving the variability. Below we briefly consider a few possible causes of the observed BAL variability and use our measurements to determine the relevant physical parameters of the outflow.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.32, angle = -90, trim = 0 0 85 0, clip]{f14.pdf}
\caption{Change in EW ($\Delta$EW; top panel) and fractional change in EW ($\Delta$EW/$<$EW$>$; lower panel) as a function of time between epochs ($\Delta t$), reproduced from \cite{Filizak13}. Gray points show data from \cite{Filizak13}, \cite{Barlow93}, \cite{Lundgren07}, and \cite{Gibson08}. Red squares show data for each SDSS-RM epoch paired with every other epoch during the campaign. Values and uncertainties for the SDSS-RM data were calculated following the prescriptions defined in Section 3.3 of \cite{Filizak13}. }
\label{fig:filizak}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Possible Causes of Variability}
\label{sec:causes}
\subsubsection{Ionization State Variability}
\label{sec:ionization_variability}
Recent studies by Filiz Ak et al. (2012, 2013) have demonstrated that, in general, distinct C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL troughs in the same object separated by as much as 10,000--20,000 \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi \ tend to strengthen or weaken together. Such correlated changes over large velocity ranges suggest that much BAL variability arises from changes in the ionizing flux reaching the absorber rather than from transverse gas motions. There are several aspects of our observations that suggest variations in the ionization state of the gas are responsible for the observed variability. First, global changes occur across the entire trough rather than in small segments --- this can be understood if the ionization state of the gas changes but is difficult to explain in other scenarios (see below). Secondly, we see coordinated variability between the high-velocity C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL Trough A and the mini-BAL Trough B (Figures~\ref{fig:pca_ewlightcurves} and \ref{fig:ccf}), which are separated by $\sim$12,000 \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi.
A notable aspect of our observations is the lack of significant variability in the rest-frame UV continuum flux, as measured in the photometric light curves (Figure~\ref{fig:phot_lcs}); at most, the photometric flux in our observations varies by only 10\%. However, the flux in the $i$ band is not necessarily a reliable tracer of the ionizing continuum --- C\,{\sc iv} \ is ionized by radiation in the extreme ultraviolet (EUV) part of the spectrum, which is likely more variable than the observed emission. For example, \cite{Marshall97} monitored the Seyfert 1 galaxy NGC\,5548 using the {\it Extreme Ultraviolet Explorer}, finding that the EUV continuum at 0.15--0.2 keV was significantly more variable than that of the continuum at 1350 \AA; at times the EUV was observed to vary by factors of $\sim$2 while the lower-energy UV as observed with the {\it Hubble Space Telescope} varied by only $\sim$10\% during the same period. The EUV was found to vary in phase with the UV/optical continuum to within the time sensitivity limit imposed by the cadence of the observations.
While there are few other examples of AGN variability monitoring in the EUV (e.g., \citealt{Marshall96}), the same trend has been seen in X-rays; simultaneous observations in the X-ray and optical have shown that the short-term variations in X-ray flux are often not detected in the optical, though correlations are seen on longer timescales (e.g., \citealt{Peterson00b}). These studies were done with local Seyfert galaxies rather than distant quasars; however, the X-ray variability properties are broadly similar among the two populations --- both quasars and nearby Seyferts show strong, rapid X-ray variability (e.g., \citealt{Gibson12}; \citealt{Shemmer14}). Such strong variations of the ionizing continuum could be sufficient to drive the observed rapid ionization response of the BAL trough. Furthermore, if the ionization conditions of the absorber are such that the C\,{\sc iv} \ abundance has a steep dependence on the ionization parameter (e.g., see Figure 1 of \citealt{Kallman82}), even more modest changes in the ionizing continuum can drive strong changes in the C\,{\sc iv} \ column density along the line of sight.
Clumpiness of the X-ray ``shielding gas" (from the model of \citealt{Murray95}) is another possible explanation for the observed lack of photometric variability. In this model, the shielding gas is located between the continuum source and the outflow, and prohibits high-energy radiation (soft X-rays and potentially some of the ionizing continuum) from reaching the outflow, but does not necessarily affect the lower-energy observed UV continuum. If the shielding gas is corotating with the disk, clumpiness or movement of the shielding gas could cause the amount of ionizing flux reaching the outflow to vary on shorter timescales than the ionizing continuum changes themselves. Models do predict variability on short timescales related to the shielding gas (e.g., \citealt{Proga00}; \citealt{Sim10}) and a few studies report possible detections of this as well (e.g., \citealt{Gallagher04}; \citealt{Saez12}). If our BAL variability is driven predominantly by changes in the shielding gas, then the rapidity of the trough variability constrains models of the size and kinematics of the shielding gas rather than the outflow gas.
\subsubsection{Cloud Crossing}
\label{sec:cloudcrossing}
Another potential source of variability is the transverse movement of the outflow material across our line of sight to the quasar source (``cloud crossing"). Several previous studies of BAL variability are consistent with this scenario, as variability is often observed in only narrow portions of the BAL troughs (e.g., \citealt{Hall11}; \citealt{Vivek12}; \citealt{Capellupo13}). However, for the C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL trough in our target, which is $\sim$4300~km\,s$^{-1}$ wide, to undergo coherent strengthening or weakening across its entire velocity span as observed would require the absorbing gas at all velocities to be physically connected. This explanation is implausible, as the trough width is too large to be sustained as a turbulent velocity dispersion without dispersing the absorbing structure
(e.g., see \S 5.2 of \citealt{Rogerson11})
or heating it to a temperature at which no C\,{\sc iv} \ would be seen (the thermal velocity in photoionized gas exhibiting C\,{\sc iv} \ absorption will be $\leq 10$~km\,s$^{-1}$). An absorbing structure with a gradient in line-of-sight velocity across the continuum source can explain the trough width, but not the coherent variability as a function of velocity, because gas at different velocities will cover different regions of the continuum source and will not be moving into or out of the same line of sight at the same time, as required to explain our observations. We can think of no plausible absorbing structure whose bulk motion, either into or out of our line of sight to the entire continuum emission region (or to hot spots within that region), can reproduce our observations. Furthermore, this scenario does not explain the coordinated variability seen between Trough A and Trough B.
\subsubsection{Inhomogeneous Emission}
\label{sec:inhomogeneous}
Partial coverage of a variable inhomogeneous accretion disk (e.g., \citealt{Dexter11}) by an absorber can cause EW variability in the resulting trough. If the part of the disk not covered by an absorber brightens, both the observed continuum and the residual flux in the trough will increase, and the normalized trough will appear to weaken; conversely, if that part of the disk fades, the EW of the trough will increase due to the fading continuum. If the part of the disk covered by an absorber brightens, the observed continuum flux will increase more than the residual flux in the trough will, and the normalized trough will appear to strengthen; conversely, if that part of the disk fades, the normalized trough will appear to weaken.
However, in any of the above cases, for the mean fractional depth of the trough to decrease smoothly by 12\% of the continuum level from rest-frame day 18 to 53, as observed, would require the observed continuum flux to change smoothly by a similar percentage in that time frame. The photometric light curves suggest no such trend. Therefore, we do not consider an inhomogeneous emitter a viable explanation for the observed variability.
\subsection{Physical Constraints from the Lack of Trough-Profile Variability}
\label{sec:noprofilevar}
We found in Section \ref{sec:profilevariability} that Trough A is consistent with having an unchanged line profile throughout the campaign; only its strength varies. The normalized flux density at velocity $v$ in a trough can be characterized as $F_v~=~(1-C_v)~+~C_ve^{-\tau_v}$, where $C_v$ is the fraction of the emission source covered by the absorber and $\tau_v$ is the optical depth in the absorbing ion, both along our line of sight.
In cloud crossing variability, changes in $C_v$ predominate; in ionization variability, changes in $\tau_v$ predominate.
The S/N of our spectra are not high enough to distinguish statistically between changing $C_v$ while keeping $\tau_v$ fixed at all $v$ and changing $\tau_v$ while keeping $C_v$ fixed at all $v$; both models are acceptable fits to our data.
However, the former scenario requires coordinated changes in $C_v$ across the entire width of the profile, for which we found no plausible mechanism in Section \ref{sec:cloudcrossing}.
On the other hand, the latter scenario is naturally explained by ionization variability.
Adopting that scenario, we can constrain the gas to be at most marginally optically thick, with $\tau_{\rm max}=0.55$ (for constant $C_v=1$) to $\tau_{\rm max}=1.5$ (for constant $C_v=0.47$), and with gas at most velocities and in most epochs having $\tau_v$ well below $\tau_{\rm max}$.
\subsection{Physical Constraints from Ionization State Variability}
\label{sec:ionization_constraints}
Following the discussion in Section \ref{sec:causes}, we conclude that a change in ionization state of the absorbing gas is the most likely cause of the observed BAL variability in our target. Regardless of whether the change in ionizing flux reaching the absorber is caused by fluctuations in the high-energy ionizing continuum itself, or due to changes in shielding gas, we can use our observations to place constraints on the outflow properties.
For gas which is initially in photoionization equilibrium,
the characteristic timescale for changes in the density $n_i$ of ionization stage $i$ of some element in response to an ionizing flux change can be written as
\begin{equation}
t_i^* = \left[ -f_i \left(I_i-n_e\alpha_{i-1}\right) \right]^{-1}
\end{equation}
(equivalent to Eq.\ 10 of \citealt{Arav12}),
where $-1<f_i<+\infty$ is the fractional change in
$I_i$, the ionization rate per ion of stage $i$ ($I_i(t>0) = (1+f_i)I_i(t=0)$), $\alpha_{i-1}$ is the recombination coefficient to ionization stage $i-1$ of the ion,
and a negative timescale represents a decrease in $n_i$ with time.
This equation only considers photoionization and recombination; other processes are neglected.
Assuming an absorber of constant thickness, observed changes in ionic column density
(i.e., $\tau$) correspond to ionic density changes. Gas showing such variations is not in a steady state by definition, but such gas can still be in equilibrium with a varying ionizing flux if its $t_i^*$ is considerably shorter than the flux variability timescale (e.g., \S 6 of \citealt{Krolik95}).
For optically thin gas at distance $r$ from a quasar with luminosity $L_\nu$ at frequency $\nu$, the ionization rate per ion of stage $i$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq2}
I_i=\int_{\nu_i}^{\infty}\frac{(L_\nu/h\nu)\sigma_\nu}{4\pi r^2} d\nu
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_\nu$ is the ionization cross-section for photons of energy $h\nu$.
If the absorbing gas is sufficiently far from the quasar that
$I_i\ll n_e\alpha_{i-1}$, then Equation 1 reduces to $t_{\rm rec}~=~1/f_in_e\alpha_{i-1}$ (which is just the recombination time of the ion in the $f_i=-1$ case where the ionizing flux drops to zero; e.g., \citealt{Capellupo13}),
and the observed absorption variability timescale constrains the density of the absorber.
However, if the absorbing gas is close enough to the quasar that
$I_i\gg n_e\alpha_{i-1}$, then the relevant timescale is $t_i=-1/f_iI_i$
and the absorption variations of the ion reflect the ionizing flux variations of the quasar, with no density constraint derivable just from absorption variations.
An observed timescale for variations in optically thin absorption therefore constrains the absorbing gas to either have a density $n_e>n_{\rm min}$ and $r>r_{\rm equal}$, where $r_{\rm equal}$ is the distance at which $I_i=n_{\rm min}\alpha_{i-1}$, or to be located at $r<r_{\rm equal}$ with no constraint on the density.
To determine the constraints in our target, we assume a temperature of $\log {T} = 4.3$, the temperature of the broad line region gas in the C\,{\sc iv} \ region (e.g., \citealt{Krolik99}).
The recombination coefficient corresponding to this temperature is
$\alpha_{\rm C III}~=~2.45~\times~10^{-11}$~cm$^3$~s$^{-1}$ (from the CHIANTI online database; \citealt{Dere97}; \citealt{Landi13}).
For the simple case of the ionizing flux dropping to zero, $f_i = -1$ and the timescale $t_i^*$ above can be approximated as the recombination time $t_{\rm rec}$ $\sim$ 1/$n_{e}\alpha_{C{\sc III}}$. Using our observed timescale of 1.20 days as an upper limit to $t_{\rm rec}$ for Trough A, we calculate a lower limit on the density of the gas to be $n_e$~\gtsim~3.9~$\times~10^5$~cm$^{-3}$.
We cannot search Trough B for short-term variations as we can in Trough A, because Trough B sits on top of a slowly varying, imperfectly modeled emission line. However, we can set a lower limit on $n_e$ for Trough B using the observed EW decrease of about 20\% in 20 days. This indicates a characteristic timescale of $\sim$100 days and a minimum $n_e$ about 100 times lower than that in the Trough A absorber.
Our calculation for Trough A at log~$T$~=~4.3 yields similar densities to those found by \cite{Capellupo13} for their targets, which showed variability on timescales down to 8--10 days, though they used a different recombination coefficient (presumably calculated for a different temperature). Using the same recombination coefficient they used with our observed timescale would yield $n_e$ for our target higher than their measurement by more than a factor of six ($n_e$~\raisebox{-.5ex}{$\;\stackrel{>}{\sim}\;$}~2.7~$\times~10^6$~cm$^{-3}$).
Using our lower limit density of $n_e$~\gtsim~3.9~$\times~10^5$~cm$^{-3}$, we calculate the minimum distance from the quasar at which that lower limit is valid.
From its observed flux density at rest-frame 3000\,\AA, our quasar has a bolometric luminosity $L_{\rm Bol}~=~1.7\times~10^{47}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ using a bolometric correction factor of 5 (\citealt{Richards06}). We adopt the UV-soft spectral energy distribution of \cite{Dunn10} to calculate $L_\nu$ and integrate Equation \ref{eq2}, setting $I_i$ = $n_e$$\alpha_{\rm C III}$ to solve for the radius $r_{\rm equal}$ at which the ionization rate is equal to the recombination rate. We find $r_{\rm equal}=3.8\times 10^{20}$ cm (120 pc).
Thus, the absorber in this quasar either has $n_e$~\gtsim~3.9~$\times~10^5$~cm$^{-3}$ \ and $r>~120$~pc, or it has $r~<~120$~pc, in which case the recombination timescale cannot be used to constrain the density. This radius is much larger than the launching radius proposed by theoretical studies, which is on the order of 10$^{-3}$ pc (e.g., \citealt{Murray95}; \citealt{Proga00}; \citealt{Higginbottom13}) --- some also theorize that BALs are launched at distances comparable to the radius of the broad line-emitting region (e.g., \citealt{Baskin14}). A physical mechanism for launching such high-velocity outflows at distances of parsecs or kiloparsecs that is consistent with observations is difficult to produce. However, $r ~>$~120~pc falls within the wide spread of outflow radii reported in the literature --- many studies report outflow radii on the order of parsecs or kiloparsecs (see, e.g., Table 10 of \citealt{Dunn10} and references therein), though some studies do report significantly smaller radii (e.g., \citealt{Leighly09}; \citealt{Capellupo13}). Our measured lower limit on $n_e$ is higher than those typically found for the outflows at kpc-scale distances, which are on the order of $10^3-10^4$~cm$^{-3}$ (e.g., \citealt{Dunn10}; \citealt{Hall11}; \citealt{Borguet13}), though we make this comparison with caution due to the differences in analysis methods and possible biases within the samples of outflows. Our density lower limit is closer to other measurements of outflows that are found at distances on the order of $r_{\rm equal}$ ($\sim$100 pc), which have $n_e$ $\sim10^4-10^5$~cm$^{-3}$ (e.g., \citealt{Arav13}; \citealt{Borguet13}).
The discrepancy between observations and model predictions can likely be reconciled through selection effects that lead to at least some BAL outflows (particularly those with distance measurements to date) being observed at radii much larger than the launching radii (e.g., \citealt{Lucy14}). The radius at which BAL outflows are observed is not necessarily the radius from which they are launched; some studies suggest that outflows can maintain high velocities at large distances allowing us to observe them much farther out than the launching location (e.g., \citealt{Faucher12}).
In fact, we can use our observations to estimate the upper limit for the launching radius $r_{\rm launch}$ of the outflow; however, to do so requires the adoption of an outflow model. For example, within the context of the radiation pressure confinement (RPC) model of \cite{Baskin14}, the terminal velocity of an outflow is $v_{\rm term} \sim v_{\rm Kep} \sqrt{\Gamma L/L_{\rm Edd}}$, where $\Gamma$ is the force multiplier and $v_{\rm Kep}$ is the circular velocity of gas at the launch radius (e.g., \citealt{Laor02}). Adopting $\Gamma \sim$ 10 from \cite{Baskin14} and assuming that our BAL is observed at terminal velocity, we find $r_{\rm launch} < 0.3$ pc $\sim$ 400 light-days. The mean radius of the C\,{\sc iv}-emitting broad line region in this quasar is estimated to be $R_{\rm BLR}$ $\sim$ 130 light-days (see Section \ref{sec:emissionlinevar}), and with $M_{\rm BH} = 1.1 \times 10^{9}$~\ifmmode {\rm M}_{\odot} \else $M_{\odot}$\fi , this target has a Schwarzchild radius $R_{\rm Sch} \sim$ 0.125 light-days. Thus for this quasar, assuming the RPC model of \cite{Baskin14} yields $r_{\rm launch} <$ 3$R_{\rm BLR}$ $\sim$ 3200$R_{\rm Sch}$. Note that $r_{\rm launch}$ is model dependent and thus different values will be obtained depending upon the model.
We can also place constraints on $n_e$ using the presence of other absorption features, or the lack thereof. For example: With a density of $n_e$~\gtsim~3.9~$\times~10^5$~cm$^{-3}$ \ at $r~=~r_{\rm equal}$, the gas would have an ionization parameter of $U_H~=~0.07$ for our assumed SED ($U_H~=~Q_H/4\pi r^2 n_Hc$, with $Q_H~=~1.2\times~10^{57}$ hydrogen-ionizing photons s$^{-1}$ and $n_H~=~0.82n_e$). That value of $U_H$ is consistent with the presence of absorption from C\,{\sc iv} \ but not C\,{\sc ii}\,$\lambda$1335 in this object. A factor of $\sim$50 lower $U_H$ would yield C\,{\sc ii}\,$\lambda$1335 absorption about half as deep as that of C\,{\sc iv} \ (Fig.\ 3 of \citealt{Hamann95}),
which is not observed in this source. Given that $U_H$ can be lower by at most a factor of 50, if the gas is located at $r>r_{\rm equal}$, it is thus also constrained to have $r_{\rm equal} \leq r \lesssim \sqrt{50}r_{\rm equal}$ and also must have density $3.9\times 10^5 \leq n_e \leq 10^7(r_{\rm equal}/r)^2$ cm$^{-3}$.
We next measure the kinetic luminosity of the outflow relative to its Eddington luminosity to evaluate the potential of the outflow to provide substantial feedback to the quasar host galaxy. To estimate the Eddington luminosity ($L_{\rm Edd}$) of this quasar, we first require an estimate of $M_{\rm BH}$. We use Equation 9 from \cite{Rafiee11}, which incorporates the dispersion $\sigma$ (in \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi) of the Mg\,{\sc ii} line:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:mbh}
M_{\rm BH}/M_\odot = 30.5 [\lambda L_{3000}/10^{44}] ^{0.5} \sigma^2
\end{equation}
We assume $\sigma~=~$FWHM/2.35, with FWHM~=~3274~\ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi \ (\citealt{Paris15}).
The observed flux density at rest-frame wavelength 3000\,\AA \ is $f_{3000}$~=~8$\times$10$^{-17}$~\ifmmode {\rm erg~s}^{-1} \else erg~s$^{-1}$~cm$^{-2}$\fi ~\AA$^{-1}$, which corresponds to
$\lambda L_{3000}$ = $3.38\times 10^{46}$ erg s$^{-1}$.
Using the above equation yields $M_{\rm BH} = 1.1 \times 10^{9}$~\ifmmode {\rm M}_{\odot} \else $M_{\odot}$\fi \
with an intrinsic scatter of $0.4\times 10^{9}$ (\citealt{Rafiee11}).
With our calculation of $M_{\rm BH}$\ above, we measure $L_{\rm Edd}~=~1.7\times 10^{47}$ \ifmmode {\rm erg~s}^{-1} \else erg~s$^{-1}$\fi,
and thus in this case the Eddington ratio, $f_{\rm Edd} = L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd}$, is about 1. We note that $M_{\rm BH}$\ measurements made from single spectra such as this are subject to a number of uncertainties; we consider our measured $L_{\rm Edd}$ to be an approximation.
The kinetic luminosity of a BAL outflow consisting of a thin shell at distance $r$ from the quasar is
\begin{equation}
L_k=2\pi\mu m_p\Omega r N_H v^3
\end{equation}
(e.g., Eq. 1 of \citealt{Arav13}) where $\Omega$ is the global BAL covering fraction (unity for a spherical outflow), $\mu m_p=1.4m_p$ is the mean mass per proton in the absorber, and $N_H$ is the absorber's hydrogen column. We assume $C_v=1$ (see Section \ref{sec:noprofilevar}) and $\Omega=0.2$ (derived from the overall fraction of quasars hosting C\,{\sc iv} \ BALs; e.g., \citealt{Gibson09b} or \citealt{Dunn10}), and the average C\,{\sc iv} \ $\tau_v$ of Trough A is 0.26. The column density per \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi \ for an unsaturated and resolved doublet absorption feature is $N_v~=~(3.7679~\times~10^{14}$~cm$^{-2})\tau_v/\lambda f_{ij}$ (\citealt{Arav99}; \citealt{Hall03}); we assume an unresolved, optically thin trough and use an average $\lambda=1549.055$~\AA\ and a summed oscillator strength $f_{ij}=0.286$. For Trough A, with a total width of 4340 \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi, we have a total $N_{\rm CIV}~=~9.6 \times~10^{14}$~cm$^{-2}$. Conservatively assuming that all carbon is in the form of C\,{\sc iv}, then for solar abundance (\citealt{Asplund09}), we have $N_H=3.7\times 10^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$ in the Trough A outflow. With a mean absorbed-flux-weighted centroid velocity of $v=1.675\times 10^9$ cm s$^{-1}$ over the campaign (see Section \ref{sec:baltroughproperties}) and assuming a distance of 120 pc, the Trough A outflow has $L_k/L_{\rm Edd}~=~1.1\times~10^{-4}$, or 0.01\%.
AGN/host-galaxy feedback models require $L_{k}/L_{\rm Edd}$ \raisebox{-.5ex}{$\;\stackrel{>}{\sim}\;$} 0.5\% to 5\% in order for the outflowing material to provide substantial feedback to the host galaxy (e.g., \citealt{Dimatteo05}; \citealt{Hopkins05a}; \citealt{Hopkins10}), which is about an order of magnitude larger than our measurement. Thus, we find no evidence that the outflow will contribute significant feedback to the host galaxy. However, it could do so if it is accompanied by a sufficient column density of very high ionization gas, to which we are not sensitive.
\section{SUMMARY AND FUTURE WORK}
\label{sec:conclusions}
We have discovered and studied a rapidly variable C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL trough in a quasar observed as a part of the SDSS-RM campaign using 31 epochs of BOSS spectroscopic observations and accompanying optical photometric light curves obtained over six months in 2014. Our main findings are the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item We measure significant variability of the EW of the high-velocity C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL trough (Trough A) on timescales as short as 1.20 days in the quasar rest frame, the shortest timescale yet reported. The EW varied on the order of $\sim$10\% on the smallest timescales, while over the entire campaign, the EW varied by more than factor of two. See Section \ref{sec:balmeasurements}.
\item The rest-frame UV photometric flux of the quasar shows little variability ($\sim$10\%) during the length of the campaign. See Section \ref{sec:photobs}.
\item The trough itself shows coordinated variability across its entire velocity range throughout the campaign, with no significant change in shape across its 4340 \ifmmode {\rm km~s}^{-1} \else km~s$^{-1}$\fi \ span, suggesting that the variability is not due to bulk motion of the gas. See Sections \ref{sec:profilevariability} and \ref{sec:cloudcrossing}.
\item We measure coordinated variability between a lower-velocity C\,{\sc iv} \ mini-BAL (Trough B) and the highest-velocity C\,{\sc iv} \ BAL (Trough A); this behavior, combined with the coordinated variability across the entire Trough A structure, suggests that the variability is driven by a change in ionization state of the gas. See Sections~\ref{sec:baltroughproperties} and \ref{sec:ionization_variability}.
\item For a change in ionization state, a variability timescale of 1.20 days suggests a lower limit to the density of the gas of $n_e$~\gtsim~3.9~$\times~10^5$~cm$^{-3}$ \ so long as the gas is at a radius of greater than $\sim$ 120 pc. We also measure the kinetic luminosity $L_k~=~2.2~\times~10 ^{-4}~L_{\rm Edd}$, which suggests that the outflow itself is not a major contributor to host galaxy feedback; however, since this is an approximation only, we do not rule out the possibility. See Section \ref{sec:ionization_constraints}.
\end{enumerate}
The key to this successful investigation of such short-timescale variability was the high cadence of the SDSS-RM spectroscopic data; this allowed a robust exploration of changes on shorter timescales than have previously been investigated. There are several other BAL quasars that were observed as a part of this program that have not yet been thoroughly investigated; a search for similar short-term BAL variability in these targets will be instructive and will help determine the frequency of this behavior. Additional monitoring of these BAL quasars will be obtained in the following years as a part of the ongoing SDSS-RM program. While the upcoming observations will not provide spectra at the same high cadence that was obtained in 2014, the additional data will allow a search for continued BAL variability in these targets and extend the baseline for the longer-term trends observed (for example, the troughs in this object are present at approximately the same strength in the first few spectra of 2015). In addition, the extended baseline of these observations will allow us to explore the relationship between BAL trough and emission-line variability (see Section~\ref{sec:emissionlinevar}), which has not previously been investigated due to the lack of suitable data for such a study.
Figure~\ref{fig:filizak} shows that the variability properties of this target are consistent with those found in other quasars, indicating that short-term variability such as we see may be common. High-cadence, high-S/N spectroscopic observing programs geared toward investigating variability in additional BAL quasars would expand the sample, allow us to constrain further the dominant driving mechanisms of BAL variability in quasars, and refine models describing the environment and physics regulating BALs as well as their possible contributions to feedback to their host galaxies.
\acknowledgments
We thank A. Baskin for valuable discussions with regards to this work and also our anonymous referee for their helpful suggestions. We also thank Vahram Chavushyan for providing us with the original spectrum of this target taken in 1991. CJG and WNB acknowledge support from NSF grant AST-1108604 and the V.M. Willaman Endowment. PBH is supported by NSERC. JRT and YS acknowledge support from NASA through Hubble Fellowship grants \#51330 \#51314, respectively, 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. KDD is supported by an NSF AAPF fellowship awarded under NSF grant AST-1302093. CSK acknowledges the support of NSF grant AST-1009756. BMP acknowledges support from NSF Grant AST-1008882 to The Ohio State University. 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.
This work has made use of the CHIANTI Atomic Database for Spectroscopic Diagnostics of Astrophysical Plasmas. CHIANTI is a collaborative project involving George Mason University, the University of Michigan (USA), and the University of Cambridge (UK).
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:Introduction}
The family problem, repeating fifteen chiral fields three times in the standard model (SM), has been known for almost four decades without an accepted theory so far. One family consists of fifteen chiral fields. In the Georgi-Glashow(GG) grand unification(GUT) model, the fifteen chiral fields in the first family are grouped into ${\ten}\,(u^c,u,d,e^+)$ and $\fiveb\,(d^c,\nu_e,e)$ of \GG\,\cite{GG74}. The family problem posited in GUTs is how $\ten+\fiveb$ repeats exactly three times in an extended GUT. The gauge coupling unification \cite{GQW74} is the underlying principle for a GUT. A gauge model based on a simple group is a GUT. A gauge model based on a semi-simple group rendering one coupling constant (by some discrete symmetry) is a GUT also \cite{PS73}.
A chiral model with fifteen fields in a GUT is achieved by assigning fifteen in some complex representation of a GUT gauge group. Toward a solution of the family problem, Georgi formulated a principle on the unification of GUT-families with gauge groups containing SU(5) as a subgroup \cite{Georgi79}. Absence of gauge anomaly is required. Then, any gauge group except SU($N$) can be used for a GUT if they allow complex representations. In this try of anomaly-free groups, SO($2N$) with $N=2n+1$ allows complex representaions which are spinors of SO($2N$). The simplest case is SO(10) where the fifteen chiral fields plus a singlet neutrino are assigned in the spinor {\bf 16} \cite{SO10}. It is one family model. One may try SO(12) which however is not considered to be complex because the spinor {\bf 32} branches to ${\bf 16}$ and $\overline{\bf 16}$ of SO(10). So, the next step is a two family model where the spinor {\bf 64} of SO(14) is used \cite{Kim80,Kim81} where however non-standard charges must appear.\footnote{There can exist a missing partner mechanism in this model, however, with certain assumptions. This was emphasized in \cite{Dimopoulos81}. Later, it was worked out in SO(10) \cite{Missing}, which is basically \anti=\flip.} If we exclude the possibility beyond the SM charges, {\bf 64} of SO(14) is vectorlike and no chiral family is obtained. A scheme toward unification of GUT-families (UGUTF) came to a dead end within SO($2N$) groups.
To open a gate from the dead end alley toward the meadow, Georgi proposed UGUTFs in SU($N$) groups \cite{Georgi79}, where the condition on the anomaly-freedom plays a central role. There have been some attempts along this line \cite{Frampton79,FramptonPRL79}.
After the string revolution with heterotic strings \cite{Gross85}, the low energy gauge groups and spectra are computed through the compactification process \cite{Candelas85,Dixon85,Ibanez87}, and UGUTFs did not attain much interest because three SM families could have been obtained through the compactification process \cite{IKNQ87}. In this string scenario, the compactification schemes (such as orbifolds) basically choose what is the number of families. The drawback is that there are too many parameters to predict the fermion mass spectra.
In this paper, we attempt to realize Georgi's UGUTFs in string compactification. If possible, we will try to introduce some structure among three families so that the difference of the third family from the the first two is understood.
Among heterotic strings, usually the $\EE8$ hetrotic string has been used because it contains spinors in the adjoint representation {\bf 248} of E$_8$. Then, the $\EE8$ heterotic string has been favored subconciously because of the embedding chain of the SO(10) spinor {\bf 16} in SO(10)$\to$E$_6 \to$E$_7\to$E$_8$. But, the SO(32) hetrotic string is also useful for phenomenology as we will briefly argue in this paper. The most severe obstacle in obtaining a realistic SU(5) GUT from heterotic string has been the difficulty, at the level 1 construction, of obtaining the adjoint representation {\bf 24} of SU(5) which is needed to break SU(5) down to the SM gauge group.
The first example without an adjoint representation for the Brout-Englert-Higgs(BEH) boson can be traced back to anti-SU(7) where antisymmetric tensor fields for BEH bosons, denoted as two and three index anti-symmetric tensor fields, $\Phi^{[\alpha\beta]},\,\Phi_{[\alpha\beta]},\,\Phi^{[\alpha\beta\gamma]}$, and $\Phi_{[\alpha\beta\gamma]}$, are used to reduce the rank of the SU(7)$\times$U(1) GUT gauge group and separate the color and the weak parts \cite{Kim80,Kim81}.\footnote{The acronym anti- was used in Ref. \cite{DKN84} as anti-SU(5).}
The sixteen chiral fields of the first family are grouped into ${\ten}_1\,(d^c,u,d,N_{1}^0)$ and $\fiveb_{-3}\,(d^c,\nu_e,e)$ and $e^+_5$ in \flip. The structure is included in \antiSD.
If it is applied to SO($2N$) gauge groups, we can call it anti-SU($N$) where anti means that separation of color SU(3)$_c$ from weak SU(2)$_W$ is by the anti-symmetric tensor fields instead of the adjoint representation. For $N=5$, it is now known as the flipped SU(5) \cite{Barr82}. It is obvious that the essential feature is included in the {\it word} `anti-SU($N$)'. Anti-SU(5) GUTs were obtained in string compactification \cite{Ellis89,KimKyae07}. But, SU(5) GUTs are not UGUTFs.
In addition to the restriction on the number of families for $n_f=3$, the R-parity is used for proton longevity and weakly interacting massive particle possibility for cold dark matter candidate. The R-parity can be a discrete subgroup of a U(1) gauge group which has been discussed in Ref. \cite{KimPRL13,KimPLB13}. Another issue in supersymmetric GUTs is the problem of doublet-triplet splitting in the BEH multiplets containing $H_u$ and $H_d$. We will realize the doublet-triplet splitting mechanism in \antiSD~anticipated in Ref. \cite{Dimopoulos81}.
In Sec. \ref{sec:UGUTF}, we recapitulate the old UGUTF scenario, and continue in Sec. \ref{section:Orb} to present a rationale that anti-SU($N$)s are theories for UGUTFs.
In Sec. \ref{sec:SU7Model}, we summarize an SU(7) realization of UGUTF in the $\Z_{12-I}$ orbifold compactification. Here, we present some details on how the massless spectra are obtained in $\Z_{12-I}$ so that line by line can be followed up in other orbifold constructions. We also point out how the missing-partner mechanism is realized in \antiSD.
Sec. \ref{sec:Conclusion} is a conclusion. In Appendix, we present the spectra not included in Sec. \ref{sec:SU7Model}.
\section{Families unified in grand unification}\label{sec:UGUTF}
Let the fundamental representations (or anti-symmetric representations) of SU($N$) are bounded by square brackets. Representations [1] and [2] have the following matrix forms,
\dis{
[1]\equiv \Phi^{[A]}=\begin{pmatrix}
\alpha_1\\[0.2em] \alpha_2\\[0.2em] \alpha_3\\[0.2em] \alpha_4\\[0.2em] \alpha_5\\[0.2em] f_6\\ \cdot \\[0.2em] \cdot\\[0.2em] \cdot\\[0.3em] f_N\\[0.2em]
\end{pmatrix},\hskip 0.5cm
[2]\equiv \Phi^{[AB]}=\begin{pmatrix}
0, &\alpha_{12}, &\cdots,&\alpha_{15} & {\Big|}&\epsilon_{16},&\cdots,&\epsilon_{1N}\\[0.2em]
-\alpha_{12},& 0,&\cdots,&\alpha_{25}&{\Big|}&\epsilon_{26},&\cdots,&\epsilon_{2N}\\
\cdot& \cdot& \cdot& \cdot&{\Big|}& \cdot& \cdot& \cdot \\
\cdot& \cdot& \cdot& {\color{red}\alpha_{45}}&{\Big|}& \cdot& \cdot& \cdot \\
-\alpha_{15}, &-\alpha_{25},& \cdots,&0&{\Big|}&\epsilon_{56},&\cdots,&\epsilon_{5N}\\[0.2em]
\hline
-\epsilon_{16},& -\epsilon_{26}\,&\cdots,&-\epsilon_{56}&{\Big|}&0,&\cdots,&\beta_{6N}\\
\cdot& \cdot& \cdot& \cdot&{\Big|}& \cdot& \cdot& \cdot \\
-\epsilon_{1N},& -\epsilon_{2N}\,&\cdots,&-\epsilon_{5N} &{\Big|}&-\beta_{6N},&\cdots,&0
\end{pmatrix} \label{eq:FundSUN}
}
where [1] means the dimension {\bf N}, $ [2]$ means the dimension $\left({\bf \frac{N(N-1)}{2!}} \right)$ with two antisymmetric indices, $ [3]$ means the dimension $\left({\bf \frac{N(N-1)(N-2)}{3!}} \right)$ with three antisymmetric indices, etc. We do not consider the symmetric indices such as $\{ 2 \}$ $\left(={\bf \frac{N(N+1)}{2!}} \right)$ because they will contain color sextets.
[1] contains one $\five$, and [2] contains one $\ten$ of SU(5). The number of the SU(5)$_{\rm GG}$ families, \ie that of $\ten$ plus $\fiveb$, is counted by the number of $\ten$ minus the number of $\tenb$.
The anomaly-freedom condition chooses the matching number of $\fiveb$'s. The numbers $n_1$ and $n_2$ for the vectorlike pairs $n_1(\five\oplus\fiveb)+ n_2(\ten\oplus\tenb)$ are not constrained by the anomaly freedom. Thus, we count the number of families just by the net number of two index fermion representations in the SU(5)$_{\rm GG}$ subgroup.
For several SU($N$)'s, we have the following family number $n_f$ by counting the number of $\ten$'s,
\dis{
&{\rm SU(5)}: [2]\to n_f=1\\
&{\rm SU(6)}: [3]\to n_f=0, ~[2]\to n_f=1\\
&{\rm SU(7)}: [3]\to n_f=1, ~[2]\to n_f=1\\
&{\rm SU(8)}: [4]\to n_f=0, ~[3]\to n_f=2, ~[2]\to n_f=1\\
&{\rm SU(9)}: [4]\to n_f=5, ~[3]\to n_f=3, ~[2]\to n_f=1\\
&{\rm SU(11)}: [5]\to n_f=-5, ~ [4]\to n_f=9, ~[3]\to n_f=5, ~[2]\to n_f=1 \label{eq:NumberGGf}
}
from which we define $[\overline{m}]=[N-m]$.
Negative $n_f$ gives the chiral family number $|n_f|$, which is also allowed.
The anomaly units in SU($N$) are
\dis{
&~{\cal A}([m])= \frac{(N-3)!(N-2m)}{(N-m-1)!(m-1)!},\\
&~{\cal A}({[1]})=1,~{\cal A}\left({ [2]} \right)=N-4,~ {\cal A}\left([3] \right) = \frac{(N-3)(N-6)}{2},\,{\rm etc.} \label{eq:anomaly}
}
where $m\ge 1$. For $[\bar{m}]$, we use ${\cal A}([\bar{m}])=- {\cal A}([m])$.
From now on, we frequently use the indices to represent the antisymmetric $[m]$ in terms of $\Psi^{[\alpha_1,\cdots,\alpha_m]}$ where $\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\cdots,$ and $\alpha_m$ are completely antisymmetrized.
Theory of families in GUTs does not allow repetition of the representation and gauge anomalies \cite{Georgi79}. I. I. Rabi's terse question, ``Who ordered that?'' quipped after the 1936 discovery of muon, eloquently states the essence of the family problem. Let the matter representation be
\dis{
{\cal M}=\sum_{i=1}^{[N/2]} c _i [\, i\,]+\sum_{j=1}^{[N/2]} \bar{c} _j [ \,\bar{j}\,]-\bar{c} _{N/2} [ N/2]\delta_{N/2,\rm integer}\,.
}
where the elements of the integer set $\{c_i, \bar{c}_j \}$ do not have a common divisor. For three standard families of Georgi-Glashow GUT \GG, Georgi required that all integers are 1 and found an SU(11) unification of three \GG~ families \cite{Georgi79}, which was the first exampe of UGUTF. Allowing possiblities of $c_i>1$ and $ \bar c_j>1$ but requiring no common divisor for all of them is a non-repetition of a set, which is a reasonable requirement for a solution of the family problem. Then, there are many possibilities \cite{FramptonPLB79}. If one requires renormalizable Yukawa couplings, in addition, with one irreducible type of representation containing the BEH doublet, an SU(9) model seems minimal \cite{FramptonPRL79}. However, at the GUT scale it is possible to have some Planck mass suppressed nonrenormalizable Yukawa couplings. Thus, constraining models by renormalizable couplings is not warranted at this stage. The minimal chiral choice plus vectorlike representations for UGUTF by the rules of (\ref{eq:NumberGGf}) is
\dis{
{\rm SU(8)}\,:~ [3]\oplus[2]\oplus 9\,[\bar{1}] \oplus n_{1}([1]\oplus [\bar{1}] ) \oplus n_{2}([2]\oplus [\bar{2}] )+\cdots.\label{eq:mini8}
}
\dis{
{\rm SU(7)}\,:~ [3]\oplus 2\,[2]\oplus 8\,[\bar{1}] \oplus n_{1}([1]\oplus [\bar{1}] ) \oplus n_{2}([2]\oplus [\bar{2}] )+\cdots.\label{eq:mini7}
}
where $n_i\ne 0$ for $i=1,2$ are needed for the BEH mechanism. For Eq. (\ref{eq:mini8}) the number of non-singlet chiral fields is 156, while for Eq. (\ref{eq:mini7}) the number of non-singlet chiral fields is 133. In this sense, Eq. (\ref{eq:mini7}) is the minimal model.
\subsection{Anti-SU($N$)'s and SO(32) heterotic string}
By the rules of (\ref{eq:NumberGGf}), an SU(7) model with $[\bar3]\oplus [2]\oplus [\bar{1}] $ of Ref. \cite{Kim80} cannot be a theory of UGUTF because family numbers in Eqs. (\ref{eq:NumberGGf}) do not allow funnily charged quarks and leptons. But it contains the key feature we explore in this paper. Spinor representations of SO($4n+2$) can be complex and the next possibility beyond spinor {\bf 16} of SO(10) is spinor {\bf 64} of SO(14) which contains the SU(7) model with $[\bar3]\oplus [2]\oplus [\bar{1}] $. Under the SU(7) antisymmetric-tensor notation, it is $ \Psi_{[\alpha\beta\gamma]}\oplus \Psi^{[\alpha\beta]}\oplus \Psi_{[\alpha]} $ \cite{Kim80}. It was the first example of anti-SU($N$) where antisymmetric tensor BEH bosons, $\Phi^{[\alpha\beta]},\,\Phi_{[\alpha\beta]},\,\Phi^{[\alpha\beta\gamma]}$, and $\Phi_{[\alpha\beta\gamma]}$ are used to reduce the rank of the GUT gauge group. It allows two quark families and three lepton families, but it had a drawback due to the appearance of non-standard quarks and a doubly charged lepton. Note here that the rank $2n+1$ of SO($4n+2$) is reduced down to the rank $2n$ via the vacuum expectation values (VEVs) of $\Phi^{[\alpha\beta]}$ and $\Phi_{[\alpha\beta]}$ representations of the SU($2n+1$)$\times$U(1) subgroup of SO($4n+2$).
Following the philosophy of Ref. \cite{Kim80}, we define SU($N$)$\times$U(1) subgroups of SO($2N$) by \antinD, \antinT, \antinQ, etc., which means that the spontaneous symmetry breaking of SO($2N$) takes the SU($N)\times$U(1)$_{2,3,4}$ subgroup route if $\Phi^{[AB]}$, $\Phi^{[ABC]}$, $\Phi^{[ABCD]}$ are used for the BEH bosons, respectively. The symmetry breaking of Ref. \cite{Kim80} was the intersection of \antiSD~and SU(7)$_{\rm anti3}$. In this language, \flip~ is identical to \antiFD,
since there is no higher order anti-symmetric tensor field beyond $\Phi^{[AB]}$ for $N=5$.\footnote{In Ref. \cite{DKN84}, \flip ~was called anti-SU(5).} In this vain, we can define SU$(N)_{\rm GG}$ as the symmetry breaking route of the BEH field $\Phi^{A}_B$ of SU($N)\times$U(1) subgroup of SO($2N$).
It looks like that the SM families are only possible from the spinor of SO(10), which has been a reason for a GUT extension chain, containing the spinor {\bf 16} of SO(10),
\dis{
{\rm SO(10)}\to {\rm E}_6\to {\rm E}_7\to {\rm E}_8,
}
or
\dis{
{\rm SO(10)}\to {\rm SO(12)}\to {\rm SO(14)}\to {\rm SO(16)}\cdots
}
Of course, SO($2N$) contains spinors, and spinors for $N>5$ can produce {\bf 16}'s of SO(10). In string theory, gauge groups $\EE8$ and SO(32) are allowed only with their adjoint representations. This observation did not favor the SO(32) hetrotic string theory for the realistic purpose of obtaining {\bf 16} of SO(10), because the adjoint representation of SO(32) cannot produce any spinor representation in its subgroups.
Because no non-SM charges have been found up to the TeV scale, the \antiFD~rather than $[\bar3]\oplus [2]\oplus [\bar{1}] $ in SU(7) seems to contain some truth in it. But, for a UGUTF one should consider groups larger than SO(10). Here, we go beyond the \antiFD. Then, we can use anti-SU($N$)'s for a theory of UGUTF.
In particular, GUT symmetry breaking is easier in supersymmetric GUTs if we assign VEVs to $\Phi^{[45]}$ ($=\alpha_{45}$ of Eq. (\ref{eq:FundSUN})) and $\Phi_{[45]}$, \ie in \antinD. In addition, the flipped SU(5) GUTs have been obtained from string compactification \cite{Ellis89, KimKyae07}. These string-derived anti- or flipped- SU(5)'s are assuming the symmetry breaking chain through the SO(10) route assuming the appearance of the spinor {\bf 16}, but the SO(10)-spinor chain is not possible in Eq. (\ref{eq:NumberGGf}). Therefore, for UGUTFs we follow the extension chain
\dis{
{\rm SU(5)} \to {\rm SU(6)} \to {\rm SU(7)} \to {\rm SU(8)} \to {\rm SU(9)}\left\{
\begin{array}{l} \to {\rm E_8}\\[0.3em]
\to \rm SO(18)\to \cdots\to SO(32).
\end{array}
\right.
}
In these chains, we do not follow the groups allowing only spinor representations.
So, anti-SU($N$) by anti-symmetric tensor fields \cite{Kim80} is the key in string compactification. The UGUTF of Eq. (\ref{eq:mini7}) may be obtained in this way.
The SO(32) heterotic string is useful for phenomenology and UGUTF. Symmetry breaking of SO(32) through \antinD~is possible because {\bf 496} of SO(32) contains the following SU(16) representations
\dis{
\Phi^A_B \oplus \Phi^{[AB]} \oplus \Phi_{[AB]}, ~~(A, B=1,2,\cdots,16),
}
whose dimensions are $(N^2-1), \frac{N(N-1)}{2}$, and $\frac{N(N-1)}{2}$, respectively, of its SU(16) subgroup. In the orbifold compactification of SO(32), it will be easy to realize the representation $\Phi^{[AB]}$ and $\Phi_{[AB]}$ even at level 1, and the key UGUTF breaking, \ie the separation of color SU(3)$_c$ and weak SU(2)$_W$, to the SM is possible by $\langle \Phi^{[45]}\rangle$ and $\langle\Phi_{[45]}\rangle$ of Eq. (\ref{eq:FundSUN}). Because we allow only the SM fields, the fundamental representations $\Phi^{[A]}$ and $\Phi_{[A]}$ are also used to reduce the rank further by the VEVs at the locations $f_6,\cdots,f_N$ of Eq. (\ref{eq:FundSUN}).
\section{Toward a theory of family uniflication in orbifold compactification}\label{section:Orb}
As noted in the previous section, a minimal UGUTF needs a GUT allowing SU(7) as a subgroup. Compactification of heterotic string frequently needs an anti-SU($N$) or \antinD. The $\EE8$ heterotic string allows the rank 8 SU(9) which is considered to be a subgroup of E$_8$. We will try to realize Eq. (\ref{eq:mini7}) from the string compactification. In addition, no degeneracy between families is left below the compactification scale. This means that we will introduce all the needed Wilson lines. As we will see, it is more difficult to obtain multi-index tensor fields in the twisted sectors. In particular, the three-index tensor field $\Psi^{[ABC]}$ cannot be obtained in the twisted sectors. So, $\Psi^{ABC]}$, if they appear, is required to come from $U$.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline &&&\\[-1.1em]
Order $N$ & $\phi_s$ & $\phi_s^2$ &No. of fixed points\\[0.2em]
\hline &&&\\[-1.1em]
4 & $\frac14(2~1~1)$ &$\frac{3}{8}$ & 16\\[0.2em] \hline &&&\\[-1.1em]
6-I &$\frac16(2~1~1)$ &$\frac{1}{6}$& 3\\[0.2em] \hline &&&\\[-1.0em]
6-II & $\frac16(3~2~1)$&$\frac{14}{36}$ & 12\\[0.2em] \hline &&&\\[-1.1em]
8-I & $\frac18(3~2~1)$&$\frac{14}{64}$ & 4 \\[0.2em]\hline &&&\\[-1.1em]
8-II & $\frac18(4~3~1)$ &$\frac{26}{64}$& 8\\[0.2em] \hline &&&\\[-1.1em]
12-I & $\frac1{12}(5~4~1)$&$\frac{42}{144}$ & 3\\[0.2em] \hline &&&\\[-1.1em]
12-II & $\frac1{12}(6~5~1)$&$\frac{62}{144}$ & 4 \\[0.2em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Number of fixed points of non-prime orbifolds.}\label{tab:lattices}
\end{center}
\end{table}
In Table \ref{tab:lattices}, we list the number of fixed points for the non-prime orbifolds. For example, the cental number in $\Z_{6-II}$ and $\Z_{12-I}$ are 2 and 4, respectively, which mean that they have $\Z_{6/2}$ and $\Z_{12/4}$ symmetries, \ie both have the $\Z_3$ symmetry in the second torus. They correspond to the gauge group phase in the untwisted sector matter $P\cdot V=\frac{2}{6}$ and $\frac{4}{12}$, respectively, and the untwisted sector multiplicity is 3. This is the easiest way to obtain three families from the $U$ sector, \ie $3\,(\ten\oplus \fiveb)$. In this case, the three families are not distinguished, and there must be an $S_3$ discrete symmetry. It may be broken by Higgsing at a GUT scale. Here, we do not follow this line of argument because there are too many possibilities.
If $\Psi^{[ABC]}$ appears from $U$, its multiplicities can be 1, 2, 3, or 4. Always, $p\cdot V=\frac{1}{N}$ gives the multiplicity 1 except in $\Z_4$. In $\Z_{4}\,({\rm entries\,1})$ and $\Z_{8-I}\,({\rm entry\,2})$, they give $\Z_4$ which leads to multiplicity 2. In $\Z_{6-I}\,({\rm entry\,2}), \Z_{6-II}\,({\rm entry\,2})$ and $\Z_{12-I}\,({\rm entry\,4})$, they give $\Z_3$ which leads to multiplicity 3. In $\Z_{4}\,({\rm entry\,2}), \Z_{6-II}\,({\rm entry\,3}),\Z_{8-II}\,({\rm entry\,4})$ and $\Z_{12-II}\,({\rm entry\,6})$, they give $\Z_2$ which leads to multiplicity 4.
\begin{table} [!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c| c| }
\hline
$U_i$ &\,Number~of\,${\bf 10}\,\rm s$\,&\,Tensor~form\,&\,Chirality\,&\,$[p_{\rm spin}]~(p_{\rm spin}\cdot\phi_s)$\, \\[0.1em] \hline
~$U_1\,(p\cdot V=\frac{5}{12})$~ & 1 &~$\Psi^{[ABC]}$~ &R &$[\oplus;+++]~~\left(\frac{+5}{12} \right)$ \\
$U_2\,(p\cdot V=\frac{4}{12})$ & 3 & ~$\Psi^{[ABC]}$~&L &$[\ominus;++-]~~\left(\frac{+4}{12} \right)$ \\
$U_3\,(p\cdot V=\frac{1}{12})$ & 1 &~$\Psi^{[ABC]}$~ &L &$[\ominus;+-+]~~\left(\frac{+1}{12} \right)$ \\[0.1em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Number of $\ten$'s from \antiSD~in $\Z_{12-I}$, and chirality for $P\cdot V=\phi_s\cdot s$ with $\phi_s=(\frac{5}{12},\frac{4}{12}, \frac{1}{12})$ and even number of minuses from $s=(\ominus~{\rm or}~\oplus;\pm,\pm,\pm)$. For example, $s=(\oplus;+++)$ gives chirality R for $P\cdot V=p_{\rm spin}\cdot\phi_s=\frac{5}{12}$. }
\label{tab:tenfromU}
\end{table}
As an example, we show the $U$ sector multiplicity of $\Psi^{[ABC]}$ in $\Z_{12-I}$ in Table \ref{tab:tenfromU}. If it is the representation of an SU(8) GUT, then there are two $\ten$'s (due to Eq. (\ref{eq:NumberGGf})) from $U$. If it is the representation of an SU(7) GUT, then there is a possibility of one $\ten$ from $U$. Thus, we choose \antiSD. The remaining $\ten$'s of SU(5), \ie {\bf 21}'s of \antiSD, come from the twised sectors. However, it is not so easy to obtain two $\Psi^{[AB]}$'s of \antiSD~from $T$.
Summarizing the method to obtain three $\ten$'s from \antiSD,
\dis{
\begin{array}{l}
\rm {\bf 1}.~ Matter~representation~ \Psi^{[ABC]}\,({A=1,2,\cdots,7})~ must~be ~present~in~ the~untwisted~ sector.\\ [0.2em]
\rm {\bf 2}. ~Matter~\Psi^{[AB]}~ must~not ~appear~in~ the~untwisted~ sector. \\ [0.2em]
\rm {\bf 3}.~ Matter~\Psi^{[AB]}~ must~be ~present~in~ a~ twisted~ sector~with ~the ~chirality~that~ of~ \Psi^{[ABC]}.
\end{array}\label{eq:conditions}
}
Matter in the untwisted sector $U_i$ occurs with $P\cdot V=\frac{N_i}{N}$. For example, $N_i=5,4,1$ for $\Z_{12-I}$ is shown in Table \ref{tab:lattices}. In addition, one matter $\Psi^{[ABC]}$ is allowed only in $U_1$ and $U_3$ in $\Z_{12-I}$. We require that it has the spinor form, by choosing an appropriate $V$,
\dis{
p\cdot V= \frac{1}{12},\,U_3 :&(\underline{----+++};+)(0^8)', \\
p\cdot V =\frac{5}{12},\,U_1 :&(\underline{----+ ++};+)(0^8)',
\label{eq:Umatter}
}
where the underline means permutations. Here, the torus or untwisted sector are called $U_3$ and $U_1$, respectively.
Their CTP conjugates also appear in $U$ as $(\underline{---++ ++};-)(0^8)'$. Representations (\ref{eq:Umatter}) satisfies {\bf Condition 1}. To satisfy {\bf Condition 2}, Wilson lines can be used if needed.
{\bf Condition 3} requires a full construction method. $\Psi^{[AB]}$ located in a twisted sector is the key part in this paper.
In the $\Z_{N}$ orbifold, multiplicities in the $k$-th twisted sector ${\cal P}_k$ need to be calculated, which is given by\footnote{$\tilde\chi(\theta^k,\theta^l)$ are presented in Ref. \cite{LNP696}.}
\dis{
{\cal P}_k =\frac{1}{N}\sum_{l=0}^{[N/2]}
\tilde\chi(\theta^k,\theta^l)e^{i\,2\pi l\Theta_0},\label{eq:Multiplicity}
}
where $\Theta_0$ will be defined later.
The chirality is given by the first entry of $s$, denoted as L- or R- movers, with the even number of total `$-$'s,
\dis{
s=(s_0;\tilde{s})=(\ominus ~{\rm or}~\oplus\,;\pm,\pm,\pm).
}
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c cc|}
\hline
& & & {\rm Mult.} &\\
& i & ${\cal P}_k (0)$ & ${\cal P}_k (\frac{\pi}{3})$& ${\cal P}_k (\frac{2\pi}{3})$ \\[0.2em]
\hline
& 1 &3 &0 &0 \\
$\Z_6{\rm -I}$ & 2 &15 &0 &0 \\
& 4 & 8&0&4 \\
\hline
& 1 &12 &0 &0 \\
$\Z_6{\rm -II}$ & 2 &6 &0 &0 \\
& 4 & 8&0&0 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\hskip 0.3cm
\begin{tabular}{|c|c |ccc|}
\hline
& & &{\rm Mult.} &\\
& i & ${\cal P}_k (0) $& ${\cal P}_k (\frac{\pi}{2})$& ${\cal P}_k (\pi)$ \\[0.2em]
\hline
& 1 &4 &0 &0 \\
$\Z_8{\rm -I}$ & 2 &{\color{red} 10} &0 &0 \\
& 3 &4 &0 &0 \\
& 4 &6 &{ 3} &{ 4} \\
\hline
& 1 & 8 &0 & 0 \\
$\Z_8{\rm -II}$ &2 &{\color{red} 3} & {\color{red} 1} & {\color{red} 1} \\
& 3 & 8 & 0 & 0 \\
& 4 &6&3 &{ 4} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\hskip 0.3cm
\begin{tabular}{|c|c |cccc|}
\hline
& &&{\rm Mult.}&& \\
& i & ${\cal P}_k (0)$ & ${\cal P}_k (\frac{\pi}{3})$& ${\cal P}_k ( \frac{2\pi}{3} )$ & ${\cal P}_k (\pi)$ \\[0.3em]
\hline
& 1 &3 &0&0&0\\
& 2 & 3 &0 &0&0 \\
$\Z_{12}{\rm -I}$ & 3 &{\color{red}2} &0&{\color{red}1} &0\\
& 4 &9 &0&0&6\\
& 5 &3&0&0&0\\
& 6 &{4} &2 &{3} &{2} \\
\hline
& 1 &4 &0 &0 &0 \\
& 2 &1 & 0 &0&0 \\
$\Z_{12}{\rm -II}$ & 3 & {\color{red} 8} & 0&0 &0 \\
& 4 &5 &0&3&0\\
& 5 & 4 & 0& 0& 0\\
& 6 &{4} &{2} &{3} &{2} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Multiplicities in the $\Z_6, Z_8,$ and $\Z_{12}$ twisted sectors.}\label{tab:12Multiplicity}
\end{table}
In Table \ref{tab:12Multiplicity}, multiplicities are presented for $\Z_{6}, \Z_{8}$ and $\Z_{12}$ orbifolds. The multiplicities in $T_{N/4}$ are colored red. Matter $\Psi^{[AB]}$ can appear, if they do, only at $T_{N/4}$. From the red numbers in Table \ref{tab:12Multiplicity}, we note that $\Z_{8-II}$ and $\Z_{12-I}$ are the only allowed possibilities of obtaining multiplicity 2 at $T_{N/4}$, due to the large vacuum energy $2\tilde{c}_{N/4}=\frac{13}{8}$, as presented below in Eqs. (\ref{eq:Twist82}) and (\ref{eq:Twist121}). In other models, it is impossible to house $\Psi^{[AB]}$. Out of $\Z_{8-II}$ and $\Z_{12-I}$, we choose the simpler case $\Z_{12-I}$ because we need to specify only one Wilson line. Note that in $\Z_{8-II}$ one has to specify two Wilson lines to specify the model completely without degeneracy. Then, at $T_{N/4}$, we must obtain two $\Psi^{[AB]}$'s. This condition is very restrictive and may rule out the $\Z_{12-I}$ possibility. Luckily, we find a model, satisfying this condition.
In the twisted sector, the masslessness conditions are satisfied for the phases contributed by the left- and right-movers \cite{KimKyae07},
\dis{
2N_L^j\hat{\phi}_j +(P+kV)\cdot V -\frac{k}{2}V^2 =2\tilde{c}_k, ~{\rm L~movers},\label{eq:oscillatorL}
}
\dis{
2N_R^j\hat{\phi}_j - \tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s +\frac{k}{2}\phi_s^2 =2 {c}_k, ~{\rm R~movers},\label{eq:oscillatorR}
}
where $j$ denotes the coordinate of the 6-dimensional compactified space running over $\{1,\bar{1}\},\{2,\bar{2}\},\{3,\bar{3}\}$, and $\hat{\phi}^j=\phi_{s}^j\cdot {\rm sign}(\tilde\phi^j)$ with ${\rm sign}({\phi}^{\bar j})=-{\rm sign}(\tilde\phi^j) $.
In calculating the multiplicities in Eq, (\ref{eq:Multiplicity}), we use the phase $\Theta_0$ with
$\Delta_k$,
\begin{eqnarray}
&\Theta_0 = \sum_j (N^j_L-N^j_R)\hat{\phi}^j -\frac{k}{2}(V_a^2-\phi_s^2)+(P+kV_a)\cdot V_a-(\tilde s +k\phi_s)\cdot\phi_s +{\rm integer}, \nonumber\\
&=-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s+\Delta_k,\label{eq:Phase}
\end{eqnarray}
\dis{
\Delta_k&= (P+kV_a)\cdot V_a-\frac{k}{2}(V_a^2-\phi_s^2)+\sum_j (N^j_L-N^j_R)\hat{\phi}^j\\
&\equiv\Delta_k^0+\Delta_k^N,\label{eq:Deltak}
}
where $V_a$ is $V$ distinguished by Wilson lines, and
\dis{
&\Delta_k^0 =P\cdot V_a+\frac{k}{2}(-V_a^2+\phi_s^2) , \\
&\Delta_k^N =\sum_j (N^j_L-N^j_R)\hat{\phi}^j.\label{eq:PhaseMore}
}
We choose $0<\hat{\phi}^j\le 1$ mod integer and oscillator contributions due to $(N_L-N_R)$ to the phase can be positive or negative, with $N_{L,R}\ge 0$. But each contribution to the vacuum energy $N_{L,R}^j\hat{\phi}^j$ is nonnegative. One oscillation contributes one number in $\phi_s$. With the oscillator, the vacuum energy is shifted to
\dis{
&(P+kV_a)^2=-2\sum_j N_L^j \hat{\phi}^j +2\tilde{c}_k\\
&(p_{\rm vec}+k\phi_s)^2=-2\sum_j N_R^j \hat{\phi}^j +2 {c}_k .\label{eq:vacuumE}
}
In Eq. (\ref{eq:vacuumE}), instead of $p_{\rm vec}$ a four entry quantity $p_{\rm spin}$ of $\pm \frac12$'s with even number of $-$'s is possible, but we do not find any example with $p_{\rm spin}$.
The vacuum energy contributions in the twisted sectors in $\Z_{6,8,12}$ are given by\footnote{Typos of Appendix D of Ref. \cite{LNP696} are corrected here.}
\dis{
\Z_{6-I}: \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
2\tilde{c}_k: &
~ \frac{3}{2}(k=1),~ \frac{4}{3}(k=2),~ \frac{3}{2}(k=3),\\[0.3em]
2 {c}_k: &
~ \frac{1 }{ 2}(k=1),~ \frac{1}{3 }(k=2),~ \frac{1}{2}(k=3), \end{array}\right.\label{eq:Twist61}
}
\dis{
\Z_{6-II}: \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
2\tilde{c}_k: &
~ \frac{25}{18}(k=1),~ \frac{14}{9}(k=2),~ \frac{3}{2}(k=3),\\[0.3em]
2 {c}_k: &
~ \frac{7}{ 18}(k=1),~ \frac{5}{9}(k=2),~ \frac{1}{2}(k=3), \end{array}\right.\label{eq:Twist62}
}
\dis{
\Z_{8-I}: \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
2\tilde{c}_k: &
~ \frac{47}{32}(k=1),~ \frac{11}{8}(k=2),~ \frac{47}{ 32}(k=3),~ \frac{3}{2}(k=4),\\[0.3em]
2 {c}_k: &
~ \frac{15}{ 32}(k=1),~ \frac{3}{8}(k=2),~ \frac{15}{ 32}(k=1),~ \frac{1}{2}(k=3), \end{array}\right.\label{eq:Twist81}
}
\dis{
\Z_{8-II}: \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
2\tilde{c}_k: &
~ \frac{45}{32}(k=1),~ \frac{13}{8}(k=2),~ \frac{45}{ 32}(k=1),~ \frac{3}{2}(k=4),\\[0.3em]
2 {c}_k: &
~ \frac{13}{32}(k=1),~ \frac{5}{8}(k=2),~ \frac{13}{ 32}(k=1),~ \frac{1}{2}(k=4). \end{array}\right.\label{eq:Twist82}
}
\dis{
\Z_{12-I}: \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
2\tilde{c}_k: &
~ \frac{210}{144}(k=1),~ \frac{216}{144}(k=2),~ \frac{234}{144}(k=3),~ \frac{192}{144}(k=4),~ \frac{210}{144}(k=5),~ \frac{216}{144}(k=6),\\[0.3em]
2 {c}_k: &
~ \frac{11}{24}(k=1),~ \frac{1}{2}(k=2),~ \frac{5}{8}(k=3), ~\frac{1}{3}(k=4),~ \frac{11}{24}(k=5),~ \frac{1}{2}(k=6).
\end{array}\right.\label{eq:Twist121}
}
\dis{
\Z_{12-II}: \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
2\tilde{c}_k: &
~ \frac{103}{72}(k=1),~ \frac{31}{18}(k=2),~ \frac{11}{8}(k=3),~ \frac{14}{9}(k=4),~ \frac{103}{72}(k=5),~ \frac{3}{2}(k=6),\\[0.3em]
2 {c}_k:&
~ \frac{31}{72}(k=1),~ \frac{13}{18}(k=2),~ \frac{3}{8}(k=3), ~\frac{5}{9}(k=4),~ \frac{31}{72}(k=5),~ \frac{1}{2}(k=6).
\end{array}\right.\label{eq:Twist122}
}
Note that $2\tilde{c}_k-2 {c}_k=1$ which is the required condition for ${\cal N}=1$ supersymmetry in the 4 dimensional spectra.
After $\Psi^{[ABC]}$ and $\Psi^{[AB]}$ are obtained, the number of families is fixed. Namely, the number of $\Psi_{[A]}$ of \antiSD~is fixed after fixing $\Psi^{[ABC]}$ and $\Psi^{[AB]}$. For $\Psi^{[ABC]}_R\oplus 2\Psi^{[AB]}_R$, there must be eight $ \Psi_{[A]R}$'s. Locating ${\five}_{\rm BEH}$ and ${\fiveb}_{\rm BEH}$ of \GG~in \antiSD~can be achieved in many ways.
Not to allow any left-over degeneracy, one must assign all possible Wilson lines. For $\Z_3$ and $\Z_4$, one must specify three Wilson lines, $a_1=a_2, a_3=a_4, a_5=a_6$. So, they have the most complicated Wilson line structures. For $\Z_{6-II}, \Z_{8-I}$ and $\Z_{8-II}$, one must specify two Wilson lines. Specifying one Wilson line is enough in $ \Z_{12-I}$, \ie only $a_3=a_4$ in the 2nd torus.
The Wilson loop integral is basically the Bohm-Aharanov effect in the internal space of two-torus,
\dis{
\oint V^i\,dx_i=\frac12\oint \left(\vec{\nabla}\times \vec{V}\right)^{i}_{0,+,-}\epsilon^{ijk} \,dx_{[jk]}.\label{eq:BAflux}
}
If the {\bf B}-field (\ie $\vec{\nabla}\times \vec{V}$) at the orbifold singularity is present, the phase through $\Delta_0$ contributes in the multiplicity. For $\Z_{12-I}$, this is the case in $T_{1,2,4,5}$. The complication arises at the points with $3a_3=0$ mod. integer, \ie at $T_{3,6}$ \cite{KimKyae07},\footnote{$T_9$ contains the CTP conjugate states of $T_3$.}
where the Bohm-Aharanov phase has to be taken into account explicitly. If there is no {\bf B}-field at the orbifold singularity, there is no Bohm-Aharanov phase, but then there for the (internal space) gauge symmetry we must require explicitly
\dis{
(P+kV_0)\cdot a_3=0.\label{eq:WilsonCond}
}
This case applies to $ T_{3}^{0,+,-},T_6$, and of course at $U$ also. We distinguish $T_3$ by $0,+$ and $-$ because the phase $\Delta_k^0$ of Eq. (\ref{eq:PhaseMore}) contains an extra $\frac{k}{2}$ factor. Namely, Eq. (\ref{eq:WilsonCond}) is applied only at $U, T_3$ and $T_6$. We will comment more on this in Subsecs. $T_3$ and $T_6$.
\section{\antiSD~spectra}
\label{sec:SU7Model}
We calculate the SU(7) non-singlet spectra of \antiSD~in the $\Z_{12-I}$ orbifold.
We choose the following model,
\dis{
V^a=\left\{\begin{array}{l} V_0=\left(\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{ 12},\,\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{12} ;\, \frac{+5}{12}\right)
\left(\frac{4}{12},\, \frac{4}{12},\, \frac{4}{12},\,\frac{4}{12},\, 0,\, \frac{4}{12},\, \frac{7}{12},\, \frac{ 3}{12}\right)',~V^2_0=\frac{ 338}{144},\\[0.2em]
a_3=a_4=(\frac{1}{3},\,\frac{1}{3},\,\frac{1}{3},\,\frac{1}{3},\,\frac{1}{3},\,\frac{1}{3},\,\frac{1}{3};\frac{1}{3}) (\frac{-1}{3},\,\frac{-1}{3},\,\frac{-1}{3},\,\frac{-1}{3},\,0,\,0,\, \frac{5}{3},-1)' . \end{array}\right. \label{eq:Model}
}
Here, $a_3\,(=a_4)$ is chosen to allow and/or forbid some spectra,
and is composed of fractional numbers with the integer multiples of $\frac13$ because the second torus has the $\Z_3$ symmetry. Shifted lattices by Wilson lines are given by $V_+$ and $V_-$,
\dis{
\left\{\begin{array}{l}V_+=\left( \frac{-1}{12},\, \frac{-1}{12},\, \frac{-1}{12},\, \frac{-1}{12},\, \frac{-1}{12},\, \frac{-1}{12},\, \frac{-1}{12} ; \,\frac{9}{12}\right)
\left(0,\, 0,\, 0,\, 0,\, 0,\, \frac{ 4}{12},\,\frac{27}{12},\, \frac{-9}{12} \right)',~V_+^2 =\frac{914 }{144},\\ [0.2em]
V_-= \left(\frac{-9}{12},\,\frac{-9}{12},\,\frac{-9}{12},\,\frac{-9}{12},\,\frac{-9}{12},\,\frac{-9}{12},\,\frac{-9}{12} ;\, \frac{+1}{12}\right) \left(
\frac{8}{12},\, \frac{8}{12},\, \frac{8}{12},\, \frac{8}{12},\, 0,\, \frac{4}{12},\,\frac{-13}{12},\, \frac{15}{12}\right)',~V_-^2=\frac{1234}{144}.\\[0.2em]
\end{array}\right.
\label{eq:VPlusAndMinus}
}
We anticipated to achieve the key spectra needed for \antiSD\,
\dis{
\Psi^{[ABC]}_{U_3} + 2\Psi^{[AB]}_{T_3} +(?)\left(\Phi^{[AB]}_{T_3}+
\Phi_{[AB],T_3}\right)+\cdots,\label{eq:TENinSU8}
}
where the sectors they appear are marked as subscripts. At this point, we do not fix how many vectorlike pairs appear in $T_3$. The chiral representations, the candidates of fermion families, are represented by $\Psi$, and vectorlike reresentations, candidates for the BEH bosons, are represented by $\Phi$.
The orbifold conditions, toward a low energy 4 dimensional (4D) effective theory, remove some weights of the original ten dimensional $\EE8$ weights. The remaining ones constitute the gauge multiplets and matter fields in the untwisted sector in the low energy 4D theory. Therefore, the weights in the $U$ sector must satisfy $P^2=2$ as in the original $\EE8$ weights. Orbifold conditions produce singularities. They are typically represented in three two-dimensional tori. A loop of string can be twisted around these singularities and define twisted sectors $T_k\,(k=1,2,\cdots,12)$. Twisting can introduce additional phases. Since $T_{12-k}$ provides the anti-particles of $T_k$, we consider only $T_k$ for $k=1,2,\cdots,6$. $T_6$ contains both particles and anti-particles. $T_6$, not affected by Wilson lines, is like an untwisted sector. It contains the antiparticles also as in $U$.
Since the Wilson lines can affect only in non-contractible loops as the hidden sector Aharanov-Bohm effect, the Wilson lines can affect only around the singularities in the twisted sectors, but have no effects in the untwisted sector.
In this section we consider two twisted sectors, $T_3 $ and $T_6$, explicitly. The other twisted sectors, $T_1, T_2, T_4, $ and $T_5$ will be listed in Appendix.
\subsection{Untwisted sector $U$}
In $U$, we find the following nonvanishing roots of SU(7)$\times$SU(4)$'$
\dis{
{\rm E_8~gauge~ multiplet:}~~& P\cdot V =0{\rm~mod.~ integer}\\
{\rm SU(7)}&:\left\{\begin{array}{l} P=(\underline{+1\, -1\, 0\, 0\, 0\, 0\, 0};0)(0^8)' \end{array}\right.\\[0.3em]
{\rm E_8'~gauge~ multiplet:}~~& P\cdot V =0{\rm~mod.~ integer}\\
{\rm SU(4)'} &: \left\{\begin{array}{l}
P=(0^8)( \underline{1\, -1\,0\,0 }~0~ 0~ 0~ 0 )'.
\end{array} \right.
}
In addition, there exists U(1)$^2\times$U(1)$'^{5}$ symmetry.
The non-singlet SU(7) matter fields are
\dis{
{\rm E_8~matter~ multiplet:}~~& P\cdot V =\frac{5}{12},{\rm~mod.~ integer}\\
{\rm SU(7)}&:\left\{\begin{array}{c}
\left.
\begin{array}{l}
P=(\underline{+++----};+)(0^8)' \end{array} \right\}: ~\Psi^{[ABC]}_R . \\[0.5em]
\end{array}\right.
}
$\Psi^{[ABC]}$ contains one {\bf 10} of \GG~family, which belongs to the first family, and is R-handed as shown in Table \ref{tab:tenfromU}.
It is simple to find the E$_8'$ hidden sector matter in $U$,
\dis{
{\rm E_8'~matter~ multiplet:}~~&\\
{\rm SU(4)'}&:\left\{\begin{array}{l}
P=(0^8)(\underline{+---};+---)',~ P\cdot V =\frac{1}{12} \end{array}\right\} :~ \four'_L ,
}
where $P\cdot a_3=0$ excludes the cases of $P=(0^8)(\underline{+---};+++-)'\,(P\cdot V= 0)$ and $P=(0^8)(\underline{++--};-++-)'\,(P\cdot V= \frac{4}{12})$.
\subsection{Twisted sectors $T$}
In the twisted sectors, we list only SU(7) or SU(4)$'$ non-singlets. Wilson lines distinguish three fixed points in the second torus, and the shift vectors we consider at $T_k$ are split into three cases
\dis{
T_k^{0,+,-}: ~kV_a=\left\{\begin{array}{l}kV\equiv kV_0\\[0.2em]
k(V+a_3)\equiv kV_+\\[0.2em]
k(V-a_3)\equiv kV_-,\end{array}\right.
}
where $V_+$ and $V_-$ are given in Eq. (\ref{eq:VPlusAndMinus}).
Because $3a_3=0$ mod. integer and due to Eq. (\ref{eq:Deltak}), $T_{ 6 }$ sector is not distingushed by the Wilson lines but $T_{3,9}$ are distinguished.
We select only the even lattices shifted from the untwisted lattices. They form even numbers for the sum of entries of each elements of $P$.
To obtain non-trivial number of families, we need two index tensor fields, $\Psi^{[AB]}$ and/or $\Psi_{[AB]}$. This possibility arises only in $T_3$ because at $T_3$ there appear fractional number with integer times $\frac14$. In other twisted sectors, the entries are not multiples of $\frac14$ in which case we cannot fulfil the masslessness condition with $2\tilde{c}_k$ given below.
In the $k$-th twisted sector, the masslessness condition to raise the tachyonic vacuum energy to zero is
\dis{
(P+kV_a)^2=2\tilde{c}_k -(2\sum_j N_L^j \hat{\phi}^j ),\label{eq:MasslessConV}
}
\dis{
({\it p}+k\phi_s)^2=2{c}_k -(2\sum_j N_R^j \hat{\phi}^j ),\label{eq:MasslessConS}
}
where $2\tilde{c}_k$ and $2 {c}_k$ are given in Eq. (\ref{eq:Twist121}), and the brackets must be taken into account when oscillators contribute.
When the conditions (\ref{eq:MasslessConV},\ref{eq:MasslessConS}) are satisfied, we obtain the SUSY spectra for which the chirality and multiplicity are calculated from $\Theta_0$ in the $k$-th twisted sector,
\begin{eqnarray}
&\Theta_0 =-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s+ P\cdot V_a+\Delta_k^0+\Delta_k^N+\left( {\it p}\cdot \phi_{s}+\delta_k^N\right) ,\label{eq:PhaseA}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\dis{
&\Delta_k^0 = \frac{k}{2}(\phi_s^2-V_a^2) , \\
&\Delta_k^N =2\sum_j N^j_L\,\hat{\phi}^j , \\
&\delta_k^N =-2\sum_j N^j_R\,\hat{\phi}^j.\label{eq:DeltaNkA}
}
We choose $0<\hat{\phi}^j\le 1$ mod integer and oscillator contributions due to $(N_L-N_R)$ can be in principle positive or negative. As an example, consider the $T_3$ sector for the $N_R^j$ contribution.
Here, $3\phi_s=(\frac54,\frac44,\frac14)$, needing ${\it p}=(-1,-1,0)$. So, $({\it p}+3\phi_s)^2=\frac18$, needing the $N_R$ contribution $\frac48=2\cdot \frac{3}{12}$ to make up $2c_3=\frac58$ \cite{KimKyae07}. Thus, the R-handed oscillator contribution is $\frac{6}{12}=2\cdot\frac{3}{12}$. Namely, $\delta^3$ is $\frac{+3}{12}$ which is included in the tables.
We will select only the even lattices shifted from the untwisted lattices. They form even numbers if the entries of each elements of $P$ are added. Because we consider $\EE8$, the product of $E_8$ and $E_8'$ parts must be even. They need not be even separately. But, there is a distinction in ${\rm even}\times{\rm even}$ lattice and ${\rm odd}\times{\rm odd}$ lattice. In the former case, E$_8$ and E$_8'$ gauge quatum numbers do not change, but in the latter case we change the signs of the quantum numbers. In the table captions, we take into account this fact.
\subsubsection{Twisted sector $T_3 \,( \delta^3 =\frac{+3}{12})$}
In the multiplicity calculation in $\Theta_0$, there is a factor $\frac12$ between the lattice shifts by Wilson lines. Even though the Wilson lines cannot distinguish the fixed points, we consider $V_+$ and $V_-$ also as if Wilson lines distinguish fixed points.
\begin{itemize}
\item Two index spinor form for $V^3_{0}$:
the spinor form gives $(P+3V_0)^2=\frac{13}{8}$ but $(P+3V_0)\cdot a_3\ne 0$, and there is no allowed states.
\item Two index vector form for $V_0^3 $:
For a vector form of $P$,
\dis{
&3V_0=\left(\frac{-5}{4},\,\frac{-5}{4},\,\frac{-5}{4},\,\frac{-5}{4},\,\frac{-5}{4},\,\frac{-5}{4},\,\frac{-5}{4} ;\, \frac{+5}{4}\right)
\left(\frac{4}{4},\, \frac{4}{4},\, \frac{4}{4},\,\frac{4}{4},\, 0,\, \frac{4}{4},\, \frac{7}{4},\, \frac{ 3}{4}\right)',~V^2_0=\frac{ 338}{144}\\
&P =(\underline{ 2, 2,1,1,1,1,1 };-1)(-1,-1,-1,-1,0,-1,-2,-1)', ~P\cdot V_0= \frac{ -87 }{12}\\
&P+3V_0 =\left(\underline{\frac{ 3}4\, \frac{ 3}4\, \frac{ -1}4\, \frac{-1}4\, \frac{ -1}4\, \frac{ -1}4\, \frac{ -1}4}; \frac{ 1}4 \right)\left(0^6\, \frac{-1}{4}\, \frac{ -1}4 \right)',~ (P+3V_0)\cdot a_3= 0,\\
&3\phi_s=\left(\frac{5}{4},\,\frac{4}{4},\,\frac{1}{4} \right) ,~p_{\rm vec} =(-1,-1,0),~p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s =\frac{-9}{12},~p_{\rm vec} +3\phi_s =\left( \frac{1}{4},0, \frac{1}4 \right).
}
Massless states are shown in Table \ref{tab:T3ZeroVec}.
Since the phase $\frac{21}{48}-\frac{169}{48}$ is an even integer times $\frac{1}{24}$, we choose the vector form $-p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s =-[\frac{5}{12}\times (-1) +\frac{4}{12} \times (-1)+\frac{1}{12}\times (0)]=\frac{18}{12}$, instead of the spinor form $p_{\rm spin}$. So, we used $-p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s =\frac{+9}{12}$ in the table.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|c|c|ccc|c|c|c| }
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
Chirality & $\tilde s$& $-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s$& ${\rm -}p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s ,~P\cdot V_0$& $(3/2)\phi_s^2$,&$ -(3/2) V_0^2 $,& $\Delta_{3}^N[\delta^3 ] $ &$\Theta_0\,( {\cal P}_3^N)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\ominus=L$& $(---)$ & $\frac{+5}{12}$ & $ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48} $ &$\frac{-169}{48}$ & $0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $&
$\frac{+ 1}{12}\,(0),\, \frac{+7}{12}\,(0) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$ &
$\color{red} (-++)$& $0$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$&$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-169}{48}$&
$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $ &$\frac{+8}{12}\,(3),\, \frac{+2}{12}\,(2) $ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (+-+)$ & $\frac{-1}{12}$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-169}{48}$&
$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $ & $\frac{ +7}{12}\,(0),\, \frac{+1}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $ \color{red}(++-)$ &$\frac{-4}{12}$&$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-169}{48}$&$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $ &$\frac{+4}{12}\,(3),\, \frac{-2}{12}\,(2) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $(+++)$& $\frac{-5}{12}$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-169}{48}$& $0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $&$\frac{+3}{12}(0),\, \frac{-3}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&& && \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ \color{red}(+--)$& $0$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-169}{48}$ &
$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $ &$\frac{+8}{12}(3),\, \frac{+2}{12}\,(2) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ (-+-)$& $\frac{+1}{12}$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-169}{48}$ &
$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $&$\frac{+9}{12}\,(0),\, \frac{+3}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$& $ \color{red}(--+)$ & $\frac{+4}{12}$ &$ \color{red}~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-169}{48} $& $0 [\frac{+8}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $& $\frac{+12}{12}\,(4),\, \frac{+6}{12}\,(2) $ \\[0.15em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Two index vector for $V^3_{0}$: Chiralities (in the first column) and multiplicities (in the last column) of $\Phi^{[AB]}$ in the $T_3$ sector of $\Z_{12-I}$ for $N=12$. $\phi_s=(\frac{5}{12},\frac{4}{12},\frac{1}{12}),\,(3/2)\phi_s=(\frac{5}{8},\frac{4}{8},\frac{1}{8})$ and $12(P+3V)\cdot a_3=0$. In the last column, $\delta^k_R=\frac{3}{12}$ is added. Multiplicities of the masslessness states are given by the phase $\Theta_0$. The allowed chiralities are colored red, ${\color{red} \Psi^{[AB]}_R}+10(\Phi^{[AB]}_L+\Phi^{[AB]}_R)$.} \label{tab:T3ZeroVec}
\end{table}
\end{itemize}
\begin{itemize}
\item Two index spinor form for $V_+^3$:
the spinor form gives $(P+3V_0)^2=\frac{13}{8}$ but $(P+3V_0)\cdot a_3\ne 0$, and there is no allowed states.
\item Two index vector form for $V_+^3 $:
For a vector form of $P$,
\dis{
&3V_+=\left( \frac{-1}{4},\, \frac{-1}{4},\, \frac{-1}{4},\, \frac{-1}{4},\, \frac{-1}{4},\, \frac{-1}{4},\, \frac{-1}{4} ; \,\frac{9}{4}\right)
\left(0,\, 0,\, 0,\, 0,\, 0,\, \frac{ 4}{4},\,\frac{27}{4},\, \frac{-9}{4} \right)',~V_+^2 =\frac{914 }{144}\\
&P =(\underline{ 2, 2,1,1,1,1,1 };-1)(-1,-1,-1,-1,0,-1,-7, 2)', ~P\cdot V_+= \frac{ -219 }{12}=\frac{+9}{12}\\
&P+3V_0 =\left(\underline{\frac{ 3}4\, \frac{ 3}4\, \frac{ -1}4\, \frac{-1}4\, \frac{ -1}4\, \frac{ -1}4\, \frac{ -1}4}; \frac{ 1}4 \right)\left(0^6\, \frac{-1}{4}\, \frac{ -1}4 \right)',~ (P+3V_0)\cdot a_3= 0,\\
&3\phi_s=\left(\frac{5}{4},\,\frac{4}{4},\,\frac{1}{4} \right) ,~p_{\rm vec} =(-1,-1,0),~p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s =\frac{-9}{12},~p_{\rm vec} +3\phi_s =\left( \frac{1}{4},0, \frac{1}4 \right).
}
Massless states are shown in Table \ref{tab:T3PlusVec}, which are exactly the same as those of Table \ref{tab:T3ZeroVec}.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|c|c|ccc|c|c| }
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
Chirality & $\tilde s$& $-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s$& ${\rm -}p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s ,~P\cdot V_+$& $(3/2)\phi_s^2$,&$ -(3/2) V_+^2 $,& $\Delta_{3}^N[\delta^3 ] $ &$\Theta_0\,( {\cal P}_3^N)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (---)$ & $\frac{+5}{12}$ & $ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48} $ &$\frac{-169}{48}$ & $0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $&
$\frac{+ 1}{12}\,(0),\, \frac{+7}{12}\,(0) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$ &
$\color{red} (-++)$& $0$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$&$\frac{21}{48}$&$(\frac{-1}{12})\frac{-457}{48}$&
$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $ &$\frac{+8}{12}\,(3),\, \frac{+2}{12}\,(2) $ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (+-+)$ & $\frac{-1}{12}$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-169}{48}$&
$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $ & $\frac{ +7}{12}\,(0),\, \frac{+1}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $\color{red} (++-)$ &$\frac{-4}{12}$&$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-169}{48}$&$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $ &$\frac{+4}{12}\,(3),\, \frac{-2}{12}\,(2) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $(+++)$& $\frac{-5}{12}$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-169}{48}$& $0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $&$\frac{+3}{12}(0),\, \frac{-3}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&& && \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $\color{red} (+--)$& $0$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-169}{48}$ &
$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $ &$\frac{+8}{12}(3),\, \frac{+2}{12}\,(2) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ (-+-)$& $\frac{+1}{12}$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-169}{48}$ &
$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $&$\frac{+9}{12}\,(0),\, \frac{+3}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$& $\color{red} (--+)$ & $\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\color{red} ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-169}{48} $& $0 [\frac{+8}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $& $\frac{+12}{12}\,(4),\, \frac{+6}{12}\,(2) $ \\[0.15em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Two index vector for $V_+^3$: The entries are the same as Table \ref{tab:T3ZeroVec}, and we obtain ${\color{red} \Psi^{[AB]}_R}+10(\Phi^{[AB]}_L+\Phi^{[AB]}_R)$.} \label{tab:T3PlusVec}
\end{table}
\end{itemize}
\begin{itemize}
\item Two index spinor form for $V_-^3$:
the spinor form gives $(P+3V_0)^2=\frac{13}{8}$ but $(P+3V_0)\cdot a_3\ne 0$, and there is no allowed states.
\item Two index vector form for $V_-^3 $:
For a vector form of $P$,
\dis{
&3V_-= \left(\frac{-9}{4},\,\frac{-9}{4},\,\frac{-9}{4},\,\frac{-9}{4},\,\frac{-9}{4},\,\frac{-9}{4},\,\frac{-9}{4} ;\, \frac{+1}{4}\right) \left(
\frac{8}{4},\, \frac{8}{4},\, \frac{8}{4},\, \frac{8}{4},\, 0,\, \frac{4}{4},\,\frac{-13}{4},\, \frac{15}{4}\right)',~V_-^2=\frac{1234}{144}\\
&P =(\underline{ 2, 2,1,1,1,1,1 };-1)(-2,-2,-2,-2,0,-1,3,-4)', ~P\cdot V_-= \frac{ -100 }{12}=\frac{-4}{12},\\
&P+3V_- =\left(\underline{\frac{ 3}4\, \frac{ 3}4\, \frac{ -1}4\, \frac{-1}4\, \frac{ -1}4\, \frac{ -1}4\, \frac{ -1}4}; \frac{ 1}4 \right)\left(0^6\, \frac{-1}{4}\, \frac{ -1}4 \right)',~ (P+3V_0)\cdot a_3= 0,\\
&3\phi_s=\left(\frac{5}{4},\,\frac{4}{4},\,\frac{1}{4} \right) ,~p_{\rm vec} =(-1,-1,0),~p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s =\frac{-9}{12},~p_{\rm vec} +3\phi_s =\left( \frac{1}{4},0, \frac{1}4 \right).
}
Massless states are shown in Table \ref{tab:T3MinusVec}.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|c|c|ccc|c|c| }
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
Chirality & $\tilde s$& $-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s$& ${\rm -}p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s ,~P\cdot V_-$& $(3/2)\phi_s^2$,&$ -(3/2) V_-^2 $,& $\Delta_{3}^N[\delta^3 ] ,\Delta_{3}^N[-\delta^3 ]$ &$\Theta_0\,( {\cal P}_3^N)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\ominus=L$& $(---)$ & $\frac{+5}{12}$ & $ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48} $ &$\frac{-617}{48}$ & $0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $&
$\frac{+8}{12}\,(3),\, \frac{+2}{12}\,(2)$ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$ &
$ (-++)$& $0$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$&$\frac{21}{48}$&$ \frac{-617}{48}$&
$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $ &$\frac{+3}{12}\,(0),\, \frac{-3}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (+-+)$ & $\frac{-1}{12}$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-617}{48}$&
$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $ & $\frac{+2}{12}\,(2),\, \frac{-4}{12}\,(3)$ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (++-)$ &$\frac{-4}{12}$&$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-617}{48}$&$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $ &$\frac{-1}{12}\,(0),\, \frac{-7}{12}\,(0)$ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $(+++)$& $\frac{-5}{12}$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-617}{48}$& $0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $&$\frac{-2}{12}(2),\, \frac{-8}{12}\,(3) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&& && \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ (+--)$& $0$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-617}{48}$ &
$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $ &$\frac{+3}{12}\,(0),\, \frac{-3}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ (-+-)$& $\frac{+1}{12}$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-617}{48}$ &
$0 [\frac{+3}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $&$\frac{+4}{12}\,(3),\, \frac{-2}{12}\,(2)$ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$& $ (--+)$ & $\frac{+4}{12}$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-617}{48} $& $0 [\frac{+8}{12}],0 [\frac{-3}{12}] $& $\frac{+7}{12}\,(0),\, \frac{+1}{12}\,(0)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{ Two index vector for $V_-^3$: Chiralities (in the first column) and multiplicities are $ 10(\Phi^{[AB]}_L+\Phi^{[AB]}_R)$.} \label{tab:T3MinusVec}
\end{table}
\end{itemize}
\noindent The chiral spectrum we obtained for the two index tensors in $T_3$ is
\dis{
T_3\,:~ 2\,\Psi^{[AB]}_{R,T_3^0} .\label{eq:Tenfields}
}
These make up three chiral families together with $\Psi^{[ABC]}_R$ from $U$. The number in (\ref{eq:Tenfields}) is the same as the one if we treat $T_3$ with multiplicity 2. This multiplicity is because $3V$ is a $\Z_4$ twist which has two fixed points in a two-dimensional torus. Since there is no Wilson line, we could have treated only $3V$ with multiplicity 2 of $\Z_4$. The multiplicity 2 is accounted by $T_3^0$ and $T_3^+$. But, $T_3^-$ produce additional vectorlike pairs, which must be fictitious. We may consider the spectra in Table \ref{tab:T3MinusVec} are fictitious. In the remainder of the paper, we will not consider $V_+^3$ and $V_-^3$. We consider only $V_0^3$ and take into account the multiplicity 2 of $T_3$.
Now let us proceed to consider one index tensors in $T_3$. In the final result, we will multiply the overall multiplicity 2 as commented above.
\begin{itemize}
\item One index spinor form for $V^3_{0}$:
\dis{
&3V_0=\left(\frac{-5}{4},\,\frac{-5}{4},\,\frac{-5}{4},\,\frac{-5}{4},\,\frac{-5}{4},\,\frac{-5}{4},\,\frac{-5}{4} ;\, \frac{+5}{4}\right)
\left(\frac{4}{4},\, \frac{4}{4},\, \frac{4}{4},\,\frac{4}{4},\, 0,\, \frac{4}{4},\, \frac{7}{4},\, \frac{ 3}{4}\right)',~V^2_0=\frac{ 338}{144}\\
&P =\left(\underline{\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2}, \frac{3}{2}, \frac{3}{2}, \frac{3}{2}, \frac{3}{2}, \frac{3}{2}}; \frac{-3}{2}\right)(-1,-1,-1,-1,0,-1,-2,-1)',~P\cdot V_0=\frac{-92}{12}\\
&P+3V_0 =\left(\underline{\frac{- 3}4\, \frac{ 1}4\, \frac{ 1}4\, \frac{ 1}4\, \frac{ 1}4\, \frac{ 1}4\, \frac{ 1}4}; \frac{ -1}4 \right)\left(0^6\, \frac{-1}{4}\, \frac{-1}4 \right)',~ (P+3V_0)\cdot a_3= 0,
}
which make up $\frac98$. The oscillator contributions of $2\frac{3}{12}$ are needed to satisfy the masslessness condition. Chiralities and multiplicities are tabulated in Table \ref{tab:T3ZeroOneInSpinor}.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|c|c|ccc|c|c|}
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
Chirality & $\tilde s$& $-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s$& ${\rm -}p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s ,~P\cdot V_0$& $(3/2)\phi_s^2$,&$ -(3/2) V_0^2 $,& $\pm \Delta_{3}^N[\pm \delta^3 ] $ &$\Theta_0\,( {\cal P}_3^N)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\ominus=L$& $\color{red}(---)$ & $\frac{+5}{12}$ & $ \color{red} ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48} $ &$\frac{-169}{48}$ & $\frac{\pm 3}{12}[\frac{\pm 3}{12}] $&
$\frac{+12}{12}(4), \frac{+6}{12}(2), \frac{+6}{12}(2), \frac{0}{12}(4)$ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\ominus=L$ &
$ (-++)$& $0$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+4}{12}$&$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-169}{48}$&
$ \frac{\pm 3}{12}[\frac{\pm 3}{12}] $ &$ \frac{+7}{12}(0), \frac{+1}{12}(0), \frac{+1}{12}(0), \frac{-5}{12}(0) $ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\ominus=L$& $\color{red} (+-+)$ & $\frac{-1}{12}$ &$ \color{red} ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-165}{48}$&
$\frac{\pm 3}{12}[\frac{\pm 3}{12}] $ & $ \frac{+6}{12}(2), \frac{0}{12}(4), \frac{0}{12}(4), \frac{-6}{12}(2) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (++-)$ &$\frac{-4}{12}$&$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-165}{48}$&$\frac{\pm 3}{12}[\frac{\pm 3}{12}] $ &$ \frac{+3}{12}(0), \frac{-3}{12}(0), \frac{-3}{12}(0), \frac{-9}{12}(0) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\oplus=R$ & $\color{red} (+++)$& $\frac{-5}{12}$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-165}{48}$&
$\frac{\pm 3}{12}[\frac{\pm 3}{12}] $&$ \frac{+2}{12}(2), \frac{-4}{12}(3), \frac{-4}{12}(3), \frac{-10}{12}(2)$ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&& && \\[-1.15em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ (+--)$& $0$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-165}{48}$ &
$\frac{\pm 3}{12}[\frac{\pm 3}{12}] $ &$ \frac{+7}{12}(0), \frac{+1}{12}(0), \frac{+1}{12}(0), \frac{-5}{12}(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\oplus=R$ & $\color{red} (-+-)$& $\frac{+1}{12}$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-165}{48}$ &
$\frac{\pm 3}{12}[\frac{\pm 3}{12}] $&$\frac{+8}{12}(3), \frac{+2}{12}(2), \frac{+2}{12}(2), \frac{-4}{12}(3) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$& $(--+)$ & $\frac{+4}{12}$ &$ ~~\frac{+9}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{48}$&$\frac{-165}{48} $& $\frac{\pm 3}{12}[\frac{\pm 3}{12}] $& $ \frac{+11}{12}(0), \frac{+5}{12}(0), \frac{+5}{12}(0), \frac{-1}{12}(0)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{ One index spinor form for $V^3_{0}$: In the multiplicity, the order of $ \frac{\pm 3}{12}[\frac{\pm3}{12}]$ is $\frac{+3}{12}[\frac{+3}{12}], \frac{-3}{12}[\frac{+3}{12}], \frac{+3}{12}[\frac{-3}{12}],$ and $\frac{-3}{12}[\frac{-3}{12}]$. Massless states are $ {\color{red} 4\left(\Psi_{[\alpha']L,1}+\Psi_{[\alpha']L,\bar1} \right)} \oplus 20 \left( \Phi_{[\alpha' ] L, 1}+\Phi_{[\alpha' ] L, \bar1}\right) \oplus 20 \left( \Phi_{[\alpha' ] R, 1}+\Phi_{[\alpha' ] R, \bar1}\right) $, where multiplicity 2 of $T_3$ is taken into account.} \label{tab:T3ZeroOneInSpinor}
\end{table}
\item One index vector form for $V^3 $:
vector forms do not give massless states because $(P+3V_-)\cdot a_3\ne 0$.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Twisted sector $T_6$\,$(\delta ^6=0$)}
\begin{itemize}
\item One index spinor form for $V^6 $: we have \footnote{Its CTP conjugate is provided by
$P = (\underline{7+, 5+, 5+, 5+, 5+, 5+, 5+}; 5-)(-2,-2,-2,-2,0,-2,-4,-2)'$.}
\dis{
&6V_0=\left(\frac{-5}{2},\,\frac{-5}{2},\,\frac{-5}{2},\,\frac{-5}{2},\,\frac{-5}{2},\,\frac{-5}{2},\,\frac{-5}{2} ;\, \frac{+5}{2}\right)
\left(\frac{4}{ 2},\, \frac{4}{ 2},\, \frac{4}{ 2},\,\frac{4}{ 2},\, 0,\, \frac{4}{ 2},\, \frac{7}{ 2},\, \frac{ 3}{ 2}\right)',~V^2_0=\frac{ 338}{144}\\[0.2em]
&P =(\underline{3+, 5+, 5+, 5+, 5+, 5+, 5+};5-)(-2,-2,-2,-2,0,-2,-3,-1)',~ \frac{-159}{12},\\[0.2em]
&P +6V_0=\left(\underline{ -1, 0^6};0\right)\left(0^6,\frac{ 1}{2},\frac{ 1}{2} \right)',~(P+6V_0)\cdot a_3=0,
}
which saturate the needed masslessness condition $\frac32$ of $T_6$, which are tabulated in Table \ref{tab:MultiplicityT6}. Note that to make the phase an integer times $\frac{1}{12}$, we choose $-p_{\rm vev}\cdot\phi_s$ as: Since $-(6/2) (V_0^2-\phi_s^2)$ is even number times $1/24$, we choose a vector $p_{\rm vev}$: $-p_{\rm vev}\cdot\phi_s=-[(-2)\times \frac{5}{12} +(-2)\times \frac{4}{12} +(0)\times \frac{1}{12} ]=\frac{18}{12}$. So, we used $\frac{18}{12}$ in the table.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|c|c|ccc|c|c| }
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
Chirality & $\tilde s$& $-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s$& ${\rm -}p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s ,~P\cdot V_0$& $(6/2)\phi_s^2$,&$ -(6/2) V_0^2 $,& $\Delta_{6}^N[\delta^6] $ &$\Theta_0\,( {\cal P}_6^N)$ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\ominus=L$& $ \color{red} (---)$ & $\frac{+5}{12}$ & $\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24} $ &$\frac{-169}{24}$ & $0[0] $& $\frac{+6}{12}\,(2) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$ & $ (-++)$& $0$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$ \frac{-169}{24}$ &
$0[0] $ &$\frac{+1}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $ \color{red}(+-+)$ & $\frac{-1}{12}$ &$ \color{red}\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$&
$0 [0] $ &$\frac{0}{12}\,(4) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (++-)$ &$\frac{-4}{12}$&$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$&
$0[0] $ &$\frac{-3}{12}\,(0) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ \color{red} (+++)$& $\frac{-5}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$ & $0 [0] $&$\frac{-4}{12}\,(3) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&& && \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ (+--)$& $0$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~ \frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$ &$0[0] $ & $ \frac{+1}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $\color{red}(-+-)$& $\frac{+1}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$ &$0[0] $&$ \frac{+2}{12}\,(2)$ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&& & \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$& $ (--+)$ & $\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$& $0[0] $&$\frac{+5}{12}\,(0)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{One index spinor from $V_0^6$: Chiralities and multiplicities, ${\color{red} \Psi_{[A]L}} \oplus 5\left(\Phi_{[A]L} +\Phi_{[A]R} \right)$. } \label{tab:MultiplicityT6}
\end{table}
\item One index vector form for $V^6_{0}$:
vector type forms cannot satisfy the masslessness condition.
\end{itemize}
The remaining SU(7) non-singlet massless particles together with SU(4)$'$ nonsinglets are presented in Appendix. The SU(7) and SU(4)$'$ indices are represented by $A$ and $\alpha'$, respectively. Therefore, twisted sectors $T_3,T_6,$ and $T_9$ may be guessed that they are not affected by Wilson lines. However, $T_3$ and $T_9$ are affected by Wilson lines because in the calculation of the phase $\Delta_k^0$ there is an additional factor $\frac{k}{2}$ (viz. Eq. (\ref{eq:PhaseMore})). Indeed, the inclusion of this factor $\frac{k}{2}$ correctly produces a combination of an anomaly free set.
Let us comment on the multiplicities in $T_3$ and $T_6$. In $T_3$, the multiplicity is 2 as mentioned in subsubsection $T_3$. In $T_6$, we note that it is a $\Z_2$ shift which is in fact an untwisted sector. The multiplicity of $\Z_2$ untwisted sector is 2, but it must include antiparticles also. Thus, the multiplicity of $\Z_2$ untwisted sector is 1 \cite{ChoiKS03}. It is taken into account in the twisted sector $\Z_6$.
\begin{table}[!t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|cc|c|c|ccccccc| }
\hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
&~${\cal P}\times$(rep.) & Sector& ~Weight~ & $V_a^k$ &$Q_1$& $Q_2$&$Q_3$&$Q_4$
&$Q_5$&$Q_6$& $Q_7$ \\[0.15em]
\hline
&&&&& &&&&&& \\[ -1.05em]
$(a)$ & $\Psi^{[ABC]}_R$& $U_1 $ & $\left(\underline{----+++};+\right)(0^8)'$ & $0 $ & $\frac{-6}{12}$& $\frac{6}{12}$& 0&0&0&0&0 \\ [0.3em] \hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\ [-1.05em]
$(b)$ & $2\,\Psi^{[AB]}_R$ & $T_3 $ & $\left(\underline{\frac{ 3}4\, \frac{ 3}4\, \frac{ -1}4\, \frac{-1}4\, \frac{ -1}4\, \frac{ -1}4\, \frac{ -1}4}; \frac{ 1}4 \right)\left(0^6\, \frac{-1}{4}\, \frac{-1}4 \right)'$ &$V_0^3$ & $\frac{3}{12}$& $\frac{ 3}{12}$& 0&0 & 0& $\frac{-3 }{12}$& $\frac{ -3}{12}$ \\[0.3em] \hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$(c)$ &$~8\,\Psi_{[A] R } $ & $T_3$& $\left(\underline{\frac{ -3}4\, \frac{1}4\, \frac{ 1}4\, \frac{1}4\, \frac{ 1}4\, \frac{ 1}4\, \frac{ 1}4}; \frac{- 1}4 \right)\left(0^6\, \frac{-1}{4}\, \frac{-1}4 \right)'$ &$V_0^3$ & $\frac{9}{12} $ &$\frac{-3}{12} $ & 0& 0& 0&$\frac{-3}{12} $ & $\frac{-3}{12} $ \\[0.3em] \hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$(d)$ &$\Psi_{[A]R }$ & $T_5^+$& $\left(\frac{11}{12} \frac{-1}{12} \frac{-1}{ 12} \frac{ -1}{12} \frac{ -1}{12} \frac{-1}{12} \frac{-1}{12}; \frac{-3}{12}\right)
\left( 0 \,0 \, 0 \, 0\, 0 \frac{4}{12} \frac{-3}{12} \frac{-3}{12}\right)'$ &$V_+^5$ &$ \frac{5}{12}$ & $\frac{-3}{12}$&0&0&$\frac{4}{12}$&$\frac{-3}{12}$ & $\frac{-3}{12}$ \\[0.3em] \hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$(e)$ &$\Psi^{[A]}_R$ & $T_6 $& $\left(\underline{ -1, 0^6};0\right)\left(0^6,\frac{ 1}{2},\frac{ 1}{2} \right)'$ &$V_0^6$ & $ \frac{-12}{12}$&0& 0&0 & 0&$\frac{6}{12} $& $\frac{6}{12} $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$(f)$ &$40 \left(\Phi_{[A]R }+\Phi^{[A]} _{R } \right) $& $T_3$ &$\left(\underline{\frac{- 3}4\, \frac{ 1}4\, \frac{ 1}4\, \frac{ 1}4\, \frac{ 1}4\, \frac{ 1}4\, \frac{ 1}4}; \frac{ -1}4 \right)\left(0^6\, \frac{-1}{4}\, \frac{-1}4 \right)' \oplus$~H.c. &$V_0^3$ & 0 & $0$&0&0 &$0$&$0$&0 \\[0.3em]
\hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$(g)$ &$5\left(\Phi_{[A]R}+\Phi^{[A]}_R\right)$& $T_6$ & $\left(\underline{ -1\, 0^6}\,0\right)\left(0^6\,\frac{ 1}{2}\, \frac{1}{2} \right)'\oplus$~H.c. &$V_0^6$ & 0&0 &0&0&0 &0& 0 \\[0.3em]
\hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$(h)$ &$ 10\left( \Phi_{[A]R }+\Phi^{[A]}_{R }\right) $& $T_5^+$ & $\left(\frac{11}{12} \frac{-1}{12} \frac{-1}{ 12} \frac{ -1}{12} \frac{ -1}{12} \frac{-1}{12} \frac{-1}{12}; \frac{-3}{12}\right)
\left( 0 \,0 \, 0 \, 0\, 0 \frac{4}{12} \frac{-3}{12} \frac{-3}{12}\right)'\oplus$~H.c. &$V_+^5$ & 0& 0&0&0 &0&0& 0 \\[0.25em]
\hline
&&&& & &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
& & && $\sum_i$ & $\frac{35}{12}$ &$\frac{63}{12}$&0&0 &$\frac{4}{12}$&$\frac{-51}{12}$&$\frac{-51}{12}$ \\[0.3em]
\hline\hline &&&& & &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$(a')$ & $\Psi_{[\alpha']R} $& $U_3$ & $(0^8)\left(\underline{-+++};-+++\right)'$ & $0 $ &$0$ & $0$&$\frac{ 1}{12}$&$\frac{ -1/2}{12}$&$\frac{1/2}{12}$&$\frac{1/2}{12}$&$\frac{ 1/2}{12}$ \\ [0.3em]
\hline &&&&& &&&&& \\ [-1.05em]
$(b')$ & $ \Psi^{[\alpha']}_R $& $T_1^0$ & $\left( (\frac{1}{12})^7\, ;\frac{-1}{12} \right)\left(\underline{ \frac{10}{12}\, \frac{-2}{12}\,\frac{-2}{12}\,\frac{-2}{12}};\frac{-6}{12}\,\frac{-2}{12}\,\frac{1}{12};\frac{-3}{12} \right)' $ &$V_0^1 $ & $\frac{7}{12}$&$\frac{-1}{12}$ & $\frac{4}{12}$&$\frac{-6}{12}$&$\frac{-2}{12}$ &$\frac{1}{12}$&$\frac{-3}{12}$ \\[0.3em]
\hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$(c')$ & $ \Psi_{[\alpha'] R }$& $T_4^0$ & $\left( (\frac{-1}{6})^7\, ;\frac{1}{6} \right)\left(\underline{ \frac{-1}{3}\, \frac{1}{3}\,\frac{1}{3}\,\frac{1}{3}};0\,\frac{ 1}{3}\,\frac{ 1}{3}\,0 \right)' $ &$V_0 ^4$ & $\frac{-14}{12}$&$\frac{2}{12}$& $\frac{8}{12}$& 0&$\frac{4}{12}$ &$\frac{4}{12}$& 0 \\[0.3em]
\hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$(d')$ & $ \Psi^{[\alpha']}_R $& $T_5^0$ & $\left( (\frac{1}{12})^7\,;\frac{-1}{12} \right)\left(\underline{ \frac{10}{12}\, \frac{-2}{12}\,\frac{-2}{12}\,\frac{-2}{12}};\frac{-6}{12}\,\frac{-2}{12}\,\frac{-5}{12}\,\frac{ 3}{12} \right)' $ &$V_0^5 $ & $\frac{7}{12}$&$\frac{-1}{12}$ &$\frac{4}{12}$&$\frac{-6}{12}$&$\frac{-2}{12}$ &$\frac{-5}{12}$&$\frac{ 3}{12}$ \\[0.3em]
\hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$(e')$ &$ 10\left(\Phi_{[\alpha']R}+\Phi^{[\alpha']}_R\right)$& $T_1^0$ & H.c.$\oplus\left( (\frac{1}{12})^7\,;\frac{-1}{12} \right)\left(\underline{ \frac{10}{12}\, \frac{-2}{12}\,\frac{-2}{12}\,\frac{-2}{12}};\frac{-6}{12}\,\frac{-2}{12}\,\frac{1}{12};\frac{-3}{12} \right)' $ &$V_0^1 $ & 0& 0&0&0 &0&0& 0 \\[0.3em]
\hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$(f')$ &$ 5\left(\Phi_{[\alpha']R}+\Phi^{[\alpha']}_R\right)$& $T_4^0$ & $\left(( \frac{-1}{6})^7\, ;\frac{1}{6} \right)\left(\underline{ \frac{-1}{3}\, \frac{1}{3}\,\frac{1}{3}\,\frac{1}{3}};0\,\frac{ 1}{3}\,\frac{ 1}{3}\,0 \right)'\oplus $~H.c. &$V_0 ^4$ & 0&0&0 &0&0& 0 &0 \\[0.3em]
\hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$(g')$ &$10\left(\Phi_{[\alpha']R}+\Phi^{[\alpha']}_R\right) $& $T_5^0$ & H.c.$\oplus\left( (\frac{1}{12})^7\, ;\frac{-1}{12} \right)\left(\underline{ \frac{10}{12}\, \frac{-2}{12}\,\frac{-2}{12}\,\frac{-2}{12}};\frac{-6}{12}\,\frac{-2}{12}\,\frac{-5}{12}\,\frac{ 3}{12} \right)' $ &$V_0^5 $ & 0& 0&0&0 &0&0& 0 \\[0.3em]
\hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$(h')$ &$ 7\left(\Phi_{[\alpha']R}+\Phi^{[\alpha']}_R\right)$& $T_6 $ & $\left( 0^8\right)\left(\underline{ 1\, 0\,0\,0};0\,0\,\frac{ -1}{2}\,\frac{ -1}{2} \right)'\oplus $~H.c. &$V_0 ^4$ & 0& 0&0&0 &0&0& 0 \\[0.3em]
\hline &&&&& &&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
& & && $\sum_i$ & $0$ &$0$&$\frac{17}{12}$&$\frac{-25/2}{12}$ &$\frac{1/2}{12}$&$\frac{1/2}{12}$&$\frac{1/2}{12}$ \\[0.25em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Non-singlet \antiSD~spectra represented as R-handed chiral fields. H.c. means the opposite numbers of those in the same site. } \label{tab:SU7Spectra}
\end{table}
The SU(7) and SU(4)$'$ non-singlet massless states are summarized as R-handed fields in Table \ref{tab:SU7Spectra}. The matter fields are denoted as $\Psi$ and vectorlike representations are represented by $\Phi$. Some of $\Phi$ fields develop VEVs. The $\Phi$ fields can be removed at the GUT scale if correct combinations of sectors and oscillators are satisfied. The chiral fields of Table \ref{tab:SU7Spectra} are
\dis{
\Psi^{[ABC]}_R\oplus 2\,\Psi^{[AB]}_R\oplus 8\,\Psi_{[A]R}
}
which do not have the SU(7) nonabelian anomaly. In the untwisted sector, there is no $[\,\bar1\,]$. Thus, the family $\Psi^{[ABC]}$ from $U$ has more suppressed $Q_{\rm em}=\frac23$ quark Yukawa coupling and $\Psi^{[ABC]}$ is interpreted to include the 1st family members. All $\Psi_{[A]R}$'s appear in twisted sectors. Two chiral fields, $(e)$ and one combination from $(c)$, form a vectorlike pair and removed at a high energy scale. The field in $(d)$ and the remaining 7 fields from $(c)$ are the needed 8 fields for $\Psi_{[A]R}$. $\Psi_{[A]R}$ from $(e)$, \ie from $T_5^+$, is interpreted as $u^c$ because it can lead to the smallest Yukawa coupling among $Q_{\rm em}=\frac23$ quarks. The other 7 fields $\Psi_{[A]R}$ from $T_3$ have the same fate. Then, note that $t^c$ and $c^c$ are located in $T_3$.
Since both $\Psi^{[AB]}$ and $t^c$ (from $\Psi_{[A]}$) arise at $T_3$, the cubic Yukawa coupling is possible from the BEH boson from $T_6$. There are many possibilities for assigning $H_u$ and $H_d$ of the MSSM in $T_3$ and $T_6$. We will choose a specific one in Subsec. \ref{subsec:Yukawa}.
\subsection{U(1) charges and anomalous U(1)}\label{subsec:Uones}
We use the normalization that the index $\ell$ for fundamental representation {\bf N} of SU($N$) is 1. Then, the indices of some representations are \cite{RamondGroup},
\dis{
{\rm SU}(N): &~\ell({\bf N})=1,~\ell\left({ [2]} \right)=N-2,~ \ell\left([3] \right) = \frac{(N-2)(N-3)}{2},\\
&~ \ell({\rm Adj.})=2N,~\ell\left( \{ 2\} \right) =N+2, \\
&~ \ell\left( \{ 3\} \right) = \frac{(N+2)(N+3)}{2},\\[0.4em]
{\rm U(1)_{em}}: &~\ell(Q_{\rm em})=2Q_{\rm em}^2 . \label{eq:indices}
}
where $ [2]$ means the dimension $\left({\bf \frac{N(N-1)}{2!}} \right)$ with two antisymmetric indices, $\{ 2 \}$ means the dimension $\left({\bf \frac{N(N+1)}{2!}} \right)$ with two symmetric indices, $ [3]$ means the dimension $\left({\bf \frac{N(N-1)(N-2)}{3!}} \right)$ with three antisymmetric indices, etc. For SU(7), the index of $\Psi^{[ABC]}$ is 10 and the index of $\Psi^{[AB]}$ is 5. We need these numbers for the contribution of $\Psi^{[ABC]}$ and $\Psi^{[AB]}$ to the U(1)-SU(7)$^2$ anomalies.
We choose the following seven U(1) directions, in terms of $Q_i$ \cite{LNP696},
\dis{
Q_1=\left( 1\,1\,1\,1\,1\,1\,1\,0\right)\left(0^8 \right)' & \\[0.2em]
Q_2=\left(0\,0\,0\,0\,0\,0\,0\,1 \right)\left(0^8 \right)' &;~~ Q_2'= \frac{103}{35}Q_1+Q_6+Q_7,\\[0.2em]
Q_3= \left( 0^8\right)\left(1\,1\,1\,1\,0\,0\,0\,0 \right)'&;~~ Q_3'= \frac{103}{63}Q_2+Q_6+Q_7,\\[0.2em]
Q_4= \left( 0^8\right)\left(0\,0\,0\,0\,1\,0\,0\,0 \right)'&;~~ Q_4'=\frac{7}{34}Q_3+Q_5, \\[0.2em]
Q_5=\left( 0^8\right)\left(0\,0\,0\,0\,0\,1\,0\,0 \right)' &;~~ Q_5'=-\frac{7}{25}Q_4+Q_5 , \\[0.2em]
Q_6=\left( 0^8\right)\left(0\,0\,0\,0\,0\,0\,1\,0 \right)' &;~~ Q_6'= \frac{11}{255} Q_4+Q_5 +\frac{2}{51}(Q_6+Q_7),\\[0.2em]
Q_7=\left(0^8 \right)\left(0\,0\,0\,0\,0\,0\,0\,1 \right)' &, \label{eq:Qorig}
}
where the redefined primed U(1) combinations give the identical sum for the SU(7) and SU(4)$'$ anomalies. Note that $Q_6'$ itself is anomaly free. In terms of $Q_2', \cdots, Q_5'$, we can redefine anomaly free combinations. Six nonabelian-anomaly-free U(1) combinations are denoted with tilde,
\dis{
&\tilde{Q}_1=Q_2'- Q_3' ,\\
&\tilde{Q}_2=2(Q_2' + Q_3')-Q_4' ,\\
&\tilde{Q}_3= Q_4'-Q_5' ,\\
&\tilde{Q}_4= 2Q_2'+\frac12 Q_4' -Q_5' , \\
&\tilde{Q}_5=Q_6'= \frac{11}{255} Q_4+Q_5 +\frac{2}{51}(Q_6+Q_7), \\[0.2em]
&\tilde{Q}_6= Q_6-Q_7.
}
The remaining U(1) must carry anomaly, which can be represented as
\dis{
Q_a &= Q_2'+aQ_3'+bQ_4'+cQ_5' .\label{eq:Qanomal}
}
Parameters $a,b$ and $c$ are determined by how one breaks the \antiSD, which defines the electroweak hypercharges or the electromagnetic charges of the SM particles. Note that \GG\,subgroup of SO(10) use the U(1) direction, or equivalently the $B-L$ direction $(1\,1\,1\,0\,0\,0\,0;0)(0^8)'$. The \flip\,subgroup of SO(10) use instead the U(1) direction $(1\,1\,1\,1\,1\, 0\,0;0)(0^8)'$. \antiSD\,uses $(1\,1\,1\,1\,1\, 0\,0;0)(0^8)'$ and in addition $(1\,1\,1\,0\,0\,1\,1;0)(0^8)'$. These two directions of \antiSD~can be fixed only after \antiSD\,is broken down to the SM gauge group. The U(1)$_X$ of \antiSD~is given by
\dis{
Q_X=Q_1+Q_2-\frac13(Q_3+Q_4) +Q_5+Q_6+Q_7,
}
which is anomaly-free. The orthogonalities of $Q_a$ with $Q_X$ and the above two \antiSD\,directions determine three parameters of (\ref{eq:Qanomal}).
\subsection{Yukawa couplings}\label{subsec:Yukawa}
For Yukawa couplings, we must satisfy all the symmetries of low energy effective fields
and the selection rules in the orbifold compactification. For the fields from twisted sectors, the Yukawa coupling structure is simpler than those involving the untwisted sector fields. Consider for example a vectorlike set from $T_6$ in Table \ref{tab:MultiplicityT6}. For the coupling,
$\Phi^{[A]}_R\cdot\Phi_{[A]R} $, we must satisfy the selection rules for the right-mover and for the left-mover conditions. For the right-mover condition, 36 times $p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s$ is 0 mod. integer. It is satisfied for the coupling $\Phi^{[A]}_R\cdot\Phi_{[A]R} $. For the left-mover condition, 36 times $P\cdot V$ is 0 mod. integer. It is also satisfied for the coupling $\Phi^{[A]}_R\cdot\Phi_{[A]R} $.
As commented above, $t,c,t^c$ and $c^c$ quarks are located $T_3$. On the other hand, $u$ is located in $U$ and $u^c$ is located in $T_5^+$. Order 1 Yukawa coupling of the form ${\bf 21}(T_3)\times \overline{\bf 7}(T_3)\times\overline{\bf 7}(T_6)$ is possible if $H_u$ in $T_6$ is not removed at the GUT scale. This requires a hierarchy of scales,
\dis{
M_s\ll M_3
}
where $M_3$ is a vacuum expectation value of a singlet {\bf 1} in $T_3$,
\dis{
\langle{\one} (T_3)\rangle=M_3.\label{eq:hierarchyM}
}
Eight $\Psi_{[A]}$'s and five $(\Phi^{[A]}+\Phi_{[A]})$'s have the following Yukawa couplings
\dis{
{\one} (T_3)\Psi_{[A]}^i \Phi^{[A]}_\mu,~M_s\Phi_{[A]}^i\Phi^{[A]}_\mu;~i=1,\cdots,8,~\mu=1,\cdots,5.
}
Due to the hierarchy (\ref{eq:hierarchyM}), five $\Phi^{[A]}$'s of $T_6$ are paired with five $\Psi_{[A]}$'s from $T_3$. Three $\Psi_{[A]}$'s of $T_3$ and five $\Phi_{[A]}$'s of $T_6$ remain light at this stage. Introducing an angle $\tan\theta=\frac{M_s}{M_3}$, five
BEH fields
\dis{
\cos\theta\Phi_{[A]}^\mu-c_{\mu i}\,\sin\theta \Psi_{[A]}^i.\label{eq:mixedBEH}
}
obtain mass of order $M_3\sin\theta$. Because of the democracy of couplings, four out of five
$\Phi_{[A]}$'s of $T_6$ remain light. Collecting light $\overline{\bf 7}$'s up to this stage, we have
\dis{
{\rm Three~}\Psi_{[A]}(T_3),~ \Psi_{[A]}(T_5^+),~{\rm Four~}\Phi_{[A]}(T_6).
}
At the \antiSD~level, still we have eight light $\overline{\bf 7}$'s. Thus, the BEH fields are located at $T_6$. Depending on $\theta$, the BEH fields contain small components from $T_3$, viz. Eq. (\ref{eq:mixedBEH}). We interpret this angle as the ratio $m_c/m_t=\tan\theta$.
The $t$-quark Yukawa coupling in \antiFD\,is
\dis{
T^{\bf 21}_{3}T^{\overline{\bf 7}}_{3}T^{\overline{\bf 7}}_{6,\rm BEH}~( t{ \rm~mass}).\label{eq:BEH3rdt}
}
The BEH fields giving mass to the $b$-quark are located in $T_3$. There are 40 $\Phi^{[A]}$ fields in $(f)$ of Table \ref{tab:SU7Spectra}. Because of the mass democracy, there can remain some light fields. Most of them will be removed when \antiSD~is broken, but we need one $\Phi^{[A]}$ for the $Q_{\rm em}=-\frac13$ quark masses.
For the $b$-quark mass, we need the coupling
\dis{
\sim\frac{1}{M_s}\,T^{\bf 21}_{3}T^{\bf 21}_{3}T^{\bf 21}_{3,\rm BEH}T^{\bf 7}_{3,\rm BEH} .\label{eq:BEH3rdb}
}
Thus, the $b$-quark mass is expected to be much smaller than the $t$-quark mass, $ O( \langle T^{ \bf 21 }_{3,\rm BEH}\rangle \langle T^{ \bf 7 }_{3,\rm BEH} \rangle/ M_s \langle T^{ \bf 7 }_{6,\rm BEH}\rangle )$, where $ \langle T^{ \bf 21 }_{3,\rm BEH}\rangle$ is the SU(5) splitting VEV $\langle\Phi^{[67]}\rangle$. Thus, we expect $m_b/m_t\sim\frac{\langle\Phi^{[67]}\rangle}{M_s\tan\beta}$. Even if $\tan\beta=O(1)$, we can fit $m_b/m_t$ to the observed value by appropriately tuning $\langle\Phi^{[67]}\rangle$. A similar suppression occurs for the second family members.
For the 1st family members, the story is different. This is because $d^c$ appears in {\bf 35} of \antiSD, appearing in $U$. The $d$-quark mass may arise from
\dis{
\sim\frac{1}{M_s^2} {\bf 35}_{U_1} {\bf 35}_{U_1}{\bf 7}_{T_{3}, \rm BEH} \langle {\one}_{T_5,\rm BEH}\rangle \langle {\one}_{T_6,\rm BEH}\rangle.\label{eq:dmass}
}
Let us check whether this coupling is present. $p_{\rm spin}\cdot\phi_s=\frac{10}{12}$ for ${\bf 35}_{U_1} {\bf 35}_{U_1}$. From Table \ref{tab:T3ZeroOneInSpinor}, we note $p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s=\frac{-9}{12}$ for ${\bf 7}_{T_,BEH} $. We need the remaining singlet combinations to provide $\frac{-1}{12}$. Since we do not list singlets here, it cannot be shown at this stage, but there are numerous singlets and we assume that it is possible. For the left-movewr conditions which are the gauge invariance conditions, the above coupling satisfies the condition. For the $u$-quark mass, we must consider a higher dimensional operator than Eq. (\ref{eq:dmass}),
\dis{
\sim\frac{1}{M_s^3} {\bf 35}_{U_1} {\overline{\bf 7}} _{T_5^+} {\overline{\bf 7}}_{T_6,\rm BEH} \langle {\one}_{T_5^-,\rm BEH}\rangle \langle {\one}_{T_5^0,\rm BEH}\rangle \langle {\one}_{T_2^0,\rm BEH}\rangle.
}
It is because $u^c$ appears in $T_5^+$, requiring another field carrying another Wilson shift $-$ to remove the Wilsone shift +.
Thus, there exists a possibility that $m_u<m_d$. It is a new mechanism for the inverted 1st family quark mass structure.
\subsection{Missing partner mechanism}
\label{subsec:Missingpartner}
At the \antiSD~level, we assume that one pair $\Phi_{[A]}=\overline{\bf 7}$ (giving mass to the $t$ quark) and $\Phi^{[A]}= {\bf 7}$ (giving mass to the $b$ quark) are survibing down to low energy. The missing partner mechanism is discussed in this setup.
In a sense, the absence of
$ {\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}\cdot\overline{\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}$ is not guaranteed at field theory level. In the MSSM, it is related to the $\mu$ problem, ``Why there does not exists $H_uH_d$ at the GUT scale'' \cite{KimNilles84}. Some interesting solutions with hidden-sector quarks exist \cite{CKN92,CM93}. These solutions are based on the Peccei-Quinn (PQ) symmetry with the very light axion \cite{Baer15}. In the effective SUSY framework language, the superpotential $W$ should not allow $\mu H_uH_d$ by assigning a nonvanishing PQ quantum number to the combination $H_uH_d$. But, the global PQ symmetry is spoiled by gravity \cite{Barr92}. We may resort to some discrete subgroup, e.g. matter parity \cite{Ibanez92}, of a U(1) gauge symmetry \cite{KraussWilczek}. Suppose assigning the mother gauge charges of $H_u$ and $H_d$ as $Q(H_u)=Q(H_d)=1$ such that the matter parity forbids $H_uH_d$ at the GUT scale. But we must allow the $t$-quark mass at the cubic order. It means, $t$ and $t^c$ carry the mother gauge charge, $Q(t)=Q(t^c)=-\frac12$ for example. In string compactification, we do not worry the gravity spoil of global symmetries. Just string selection rules are enough to consider the coupling. It has been noted that some string compactifications do not lead to quadratic term in $W$ as in $\Z_3$ \cite{CM93}, but in non-prime orbifolds the absence of $\overline{\bf 7} \cdot {\bf 7} $ must be studied case by case. In our example discussed above, the coupling $ {\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}\cdot\overline{\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}$ is not allowed because ${\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}$ is located in $T_3$, and $\overline{\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}$ is located in $T_6$. But, GUTs need the doublet-triplet splitting that in the same GUT scale BEH multiplet the colored fields are superheavy while $H_u$ and $H_d$ remain light. In the absence of the coupling $ {\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}\cdot\overline{\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}$,
the missing partner mechanism of \antiSD\, is realized. Consider the coupling,
\dis{
&\frac{1}{M_s}\, \epsilon^{ABCDEFG}\, \Phi_{[AB]}\Phi_{[CD]}\Phi_{[EF]} \Phi_{[G]},~{\rm and/or} \\
&\frac{1}{M_s^2}\, \epsilon^{ABCDEFG}\, \Phi_{[AB]}\Phi_{[CD]} \Phi_{[E]} \langle \Phi'_{[F]} \rangle \langle \Phi''_{[G]} \rangle , \label{eq:mPartner}
}
where $\Phi' $ and $\Phi''$ obtain string scale VEVs, and $\Phi_{[AB]}=\Phi_{[45]}$ of Eq. (\ref{eq:mPartner}) are essential for separating the color and weak parts. The BEH bosons $H_u$ and $H_d$ are in $\Phi_{[A]}$ and $\Phi^{[A]}$, respectively. Equation (\ref{eq:mPartner}) makes colored scalars heavy, viz.
\dis{
&\Phi^{[23]} \Phi^{[1]} \,\langle\Phi^{[45]}\rangle \,\langle\Phi^{[67]}\rangle , \\
&\Phi^{[23]} \Phi^{[1]} \,\langle\Phi^{[45]}\rangle \langle \Phi'^{[6]} \rangle \langle \Phi''^{[7]} \rangle , \label{eq:missingPartner}
}
where $\Phi^{[1]}$ is $Q_{\rm em}=-\frac13$ colored boson whose partner is $\Phi^{[23]}$. The color-weak separating VEV $\langle\Phi^{[45]}\rangle\approx \Mg\sim M_s$ is the key making the colored scalar heavy. In the same multiplet $\Phi^{[A]}$, the BEH doublet $H_d$ is present at $\Phi^{[4]}$ and $\Phi^{[5]}$. But, the indices 4 and 5 are already used for the GUT scale VEV, hence $H_d$ does not find a partner in $\Phi^{[AB]}$. This is the missing partner mechanism we realize in \antiSD.
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:Conclusion}
In this paper, we proposed unification of families in string compactification. Here, we suggested anti-SU($N$) scheme \cite{Kim80} where the adjoint representation of SU($N$) is not needed for breaking the GUT group down to SU(3)$_c\times$U(1)$_{\rm em}$. It is pointed out that the anti-SU($N$) scheme has a merit in string compactification and can even save the SO(32) heterotic string theory for many phenomenological purposes.
The minimal model for UGUTF is SU(7) GUT with the representation $ [\,3\,]+ 2\,[\,2\,]+8\,[\,\bar{1}\,]$. We show it explicitly that this representation is realized in the $\Z_{12-I}$ orbifold compactification of $\EE8$ heterotic string.
The large top quark mass is possible in \antiSD, where $t^c$ is in $\overline{\bf 7}=[\,\bar{1}\,]$. In the example discussed, $\overline{\bf 7}$'s in $T_3$ contain $t^c$ and $c^c$. The cubic coupling $\Psi^{[AB]}_{R,T_3} \Psi_{[A]R,T_3}\Phi_{[B]R,T_6,BEH}$ gives a dimension-3 superpotential for the $t$ mass. This cubic coupling is the only possible dimension 3 superpotential in our model and hence only $m_t$ is expected to be of order the electroweak scale. Other fermion masses are much smaller than $m_t$. We also presented an argument why there is an inverted mass ratio in the u-quark family. It is because $u^c$ is located in $T_5^+$ which requires another Wilson line shifted singlet field.
Finally, we presented the missing partner mechanism in string compactification. The key assumption, the absence of the coupling ${\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}\cdot\overline{\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}$ in the superpotential, is achieved here by locating ${\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}$ and $\overline{\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}$ separately in $T_3$ and $T_6$. Then, it is shown that the missing partner mechanism works for $H_u$ and $H_d$ in $\overline{\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}$ and ${\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}$. The colored particles in $\overline{\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}$ and ${\bf 7}_{\rm BEH}$ find their partners in $\overline{\bf 21}_{\rm BEH}$ and ${\bf 21}_{\rm BEH}$ and obtain superheavy masses.
Here, we neglected the details of singlet vacuum expectation values, toward removing vectorlike representations, though the singlet VEVs have been widely used in other string compactification papers toward the MSSM \cite{KKK07}. In this sense, the \antiSD~presented in this paper may be an aethetic choice toward a desirable UGUTF. Other physics implications such as the quark and lepton mass textures, dark matter, and very light axions, including SU(7) singlet representations, will be presented elsewhere.
\acknowledgments{This work is supported in part by the National Research Foundation (NRF) grant funded by the Korean Government (MEST) (No. 2005-0093841) and by the IBS (IBS-R017-D1-2014-a00). }
\section*{Appendix: \antiSD~GUT in $\Z_{12-I}$}\label{sec:Appendix}
In this Appendix, we list up the remaining non-singlet states not included in Sec. \ref{sec:SU7Model} where $U, T_3$, and $T_6$ are discussed. We only show the sectors containing SU(7) or SU(4)$'$ nonsinglets. They are listed up in the order of $T_4, T_1, T_2,$ and $T_{5}$.
\subsubsection{Twisted sector $T_1\, \left( \delta_{\rm vec}^1=\frac{1}{12}\right)$}
The masslessness condition for $ 2{c}_1$ requires $(p_{\rm vec}+ \phi_s)^2=\frac{66}{144}-$(oscillator contributions). Oscillator conribution from the right mover is $2\delta^1=\frac{24}{144}=2\cdot\frac{1}{12}$.
\begin{itemize}
\item One index spinor form for $V^1_{0}$:
for the spinor,
\dis{
&V_0=\left(\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{ 12},\,\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{12} ;\, \frac{+5}{12}\right)
\left(\frac{4}{12},\, \frac{4}{12},\, \frac{4}{12},\,\frac{4}{12},\, 0,\, \frac{4}{12},\, \frac{7}{12},\, \frac{3}{12}\right)',~V^2_0=\frac{338}{144}\\[0.2em]
&P=\left(\underline{-++++++}; -\right)
\left(--------\right)',~P\cdot V_0=\frac{-30}{12},\\[0.2em]
&P+V_0=\left(\underline{\frac{-11}{12},\,\frac{1}{12},\,\frac{1}{ 12},\,\frac{ 1}{12},\,\frac{1}{12},\,\frac{1}{12},\,\frac{1}{12}} ;\, \frac{-1}{12}\right)
\left( \frac{-2}{12},\, \frac{-2}{12},\, \frac{-2}{12},\, \frac{-2}{12},\, \frac{-6}{12},\, \frac{-2}{12},\, \frac{1}{12},\, \frac{-3}{12}\right)' , ~{ (P+V_0)\cdot a_3\ne 0 },\label{eq:T1eq0}
}
we have $(P+V_0)^2=\frac{194}{144}$. The masslessness condition for $2\tilde{c}_1$ requires $(P+ V^a)^2=\frac{210}{144}-$(oscillator contributions). Note that $(1/2)\phi_s^2-(1/2) V_0^2=-\frac{148}{12}=-13+\frac{+2/3}{12}$. The oscillator contribution is $\frac{16}{144}=2\cdot \frac{2/3}{12}$. So we need $-\Delta_4^N$ to cancel $\frac{+2/3}{12}$ in $(1/2)\phi_s^2-(1/2) V_0^2$.
These are shown in Table
\ref{tab:T1OneZeroVecSpin}.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|c|c|ccc|c|c| }
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
Chirality & $\tilde s$& $-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s$& $-p_{\rm vec}\cdot \phi_s,P\cdot V_0$& $(1/2)\phi_s^2$,&$ -(1/2) V_0^2 $,& $\Delta_{1}^N[\delta^1],
\Delta_{1}^N[-\delta^1]
$ &$\Theta_0\,( {\cal P}_4^N)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\ominus=L$& $(---)$ & $\frac{+5}{12}$ & $~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+6}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$\frac{-457}{72}$ & $ \frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $\frac{+12}{12}\,(4),\frac{+10}{12}\,(2)$ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$ & $ \color{red} (-++)$& $0$ &$~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+6}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$ \frac{-169}{72}$& $\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}] $& $ \frac{+7}{12}\,(0),\frac{+5}{12}\,(0)$ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (+-+)$ & $\frac{-1}{12}$ &$~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+6}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$\frac{-457}{72}$& $\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $ \frac{+6}{12}\,(2),\frac{+4}{12}\,(3)$ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $\color{red} (++-)$ &$\frac{-4}{12}$&$~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+6}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$\frac{-457}{72}$&$\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $ \frac{+3}{12}\,(0),\frac{+1}{12}\,(0)$ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=L$& $(+++)$ & $\frac{-5}{12}$ & $~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+6}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$\frac{-457}{72}$ & $ \frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $\frac{+2}{12}\,(2),\frac{0}{12}\,(4)$ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=L$ & $ \color{red} (+--)$& $0$ &$~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+6}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$ \frac{-457}{72}$& $\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}] $& $\frac{+7}{12}\,(0),\frac{+5}{12}\,(0)$ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=L$& $ (-+-)$ & $\frac{+1}{12}$ &$~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+6}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$\frac{-457}{72}$& $\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $ \frac{+8}{12}\,(3),\frac{+6}{12}\,(2)$ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=L$& $\color{red} (--+)$ &$\frac{+4}{12}$&$~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+6}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$\frac{-457}{72}$&$\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $\frac{+11}{12}\,(0),\frac{+9}{12}\,(0)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{One index spinor from $V_0^1$: Chiralities and multiplicities are $ 11\left( \Phi_{[A] L} +\Phi_{[A] R}\right)$. } \label{tab:T1OneZeroVecSpin}
\end{table}
\end{itemize}
\begin{itemize}
\item One index vector form for $V^2_{0}$: we have
\dis{
&2V_0=\left(\frac{-5}{6},\,\frac{-5}{6},\,\frac{-5}{6},\,\frac{-5}{6},\,\frac{-5}{6},\,\frac{-5}{6},\,\frac{-5}{6} ;\, \frac{+5}{6}\right)
\left(\frac{4}{6},\, \frac{4}{6},\, \frac{4}{6},\,\frac{4}{6},\, 0,\, \frac{4}{6},\, \frac{7}{6},\, \frac{ 3}{6}\right)',~V^2_0=\frac{ 338}{144},\\[0.2em]
&P =( {1,1,1,1,1,1,1};-1)(\underline{0,-1,-1,-1},0,-1, -1, -1)' ,~P\cdot V_0=\frac{-65}{12}\\[0.2em]
&P +2V_0=\left( {\frac{1}{6},\,\frac{1}{6},\,\frac{1}{6},\,\frac{1}{6},\,\frac{1}{6},\,\frac{1}{6},\,\frac{1}{6} } ; \frac{-1}{6}\right)
\left( \underline{\frac{2}{3},\, \frac{-1}{3},\, \frac{-1}{3},\, \frac{-1}{3}},\,0,\, \frac{-1}{3},\,\frac{1}{6},\, \frac{-1}{2}\right)',~{ (P_2+2V_0)\cdot a_3\ne 0.}
}
Note that $(P +2V_0)^2=\frac{50}{36}=\frac{216}{144}-\frac{16}{144}$, which needs $\frac{16}{144}=2\cdot\frac{2/3}{12}$ as an oscillator contribution with $\Delta_2^N=\frac{2/3}{12}$. We have $(2/2)\phi_s^2-(2/2)V_0^2=-\frac{296}{144}=-2-\frac{2/3}{12}$. So, we need $+\Delta_2^N$. Massless states are presented in Table \ref{tab:T2ZeroVec}.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|c|c|ccc|c|c| }
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
Chirality & $\tilde s$& $-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s$& ${\rm -}p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s ,~P\cdot V_0$& $(2/2)\phi_s^2$,&$ -(2/2) V_0^2 $,& $\Delta_{2}^N[\delta^2],\Delta_{2}^N[-\delta^2] $ &$\Theta_0\,( {\cal P}_2^N)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (---)$ & $\frac{+5}{12}$ & $\frac{+9}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24} $ &$\frac{-169}{24}$ & $\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+2}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-2}{12}] $& $\frac{+1}{12}\,(0),\frac{+9}{12}\,(0) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$ & $ (-++)$& $0$ &$\frac{+9}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$ \frac{-169}{24}$ &
$\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+2}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-2}{12}] $ &$\frac{+8}{12}\,(3),\frac{+4}{12}\,(3) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $ \color{red}(+-+)$ & $\frac{-1}{12}$ &$\frac{+9}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$&
$\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+2}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-2}{12}] $ &$\frac{+7}{12}\,(0),\frac{+3}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (++-)$ &$\frac{-4}{12}$&$\frac{+9}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$&
$\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+2}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-2}{12}] $ &$\frac{+4}{12}\,(3),\frac{0}{12}\,(4) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ \color{red} (+++)$& $\frac{-5}{12}$ &$\frac{+9}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$ & $\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+2}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-2}{12}] $&$\frac{+3}{12}\,(0),\frac{-1}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&& && \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ (+--)$& $0$ &$\frac{+9}{12}, \frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$ &$\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+2}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-2}{12}] $ & $ \frac{+8}{12}\,(3),\frac{+4}{12}\,(3) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $(-+-)$& $\frac{+1}{12}$ &$\frac{+9}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$ &$\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+2}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-2}{12}] $&$\frac{+9}{12}\,(0),\frac{+5}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$& $ (--+)$ & $\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\frac{+9}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$& $\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+2}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-2}{12}] $&$\frac{+12}{12}\,(4),\frac{+8}{12}\,(3) $ \\[0.15em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{One index vector from $V_0^2$: Chiralities and multiplicities, $ 13\left(\Phi_{[A]L} +\Phi_{[A]R} \right)$. } \label{tab:T2ZeroVec}
\end{table}
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Twisted sector $T_5\, (\delta^5=\frac{1}{12})$}
\begin{itemize}
\item One index spinor form for $V^5_{+}$:
\dis{
&5V_+=\left( \frac{-5}{12},\, \frac{-5}{12},\, \frac{-5}{12},\, \frac{-5}{12},\, \frac{-5}{12},\, \frac{-5}{12},\, \frac{-5}{12} ; \,\frac{45}{12}\right)
\left(0,\,0,\, 0,\, 0,\, 0,\, \frac{20}{12},\, \frac{135}{12},\, \frac{-45}{12} \right)',~V_+^2 =\frac{914 }{144}, \\[0.2em]
&P=(\underline{-++++++ }; 7-)(0,0,0,0,0,-2,-11 , 4)',~P\cdot V_+=\frac{-375}{12}=\frac{-3}{12}, \\[0.2em]
&P+5V_+=\left(\underline{\frac{-11}{12},\,\frac{ 1}{12},\,\frac{1}{ 12},\,\frac{ 1}{12},\,\frac{ 1}{12},\,\frac{ 1}{12},\,\frac{ 1}{12}} ;\, \frac{ 3}{12}\right)
\left( 0,\,0,\, 0,\, 0,0, \frac{-4}{12},\, \frac{3}{12},\, \frac{ 3}{12}\right)', ~ (P+5V_0)\cdot a_3\ne 0,\label{eq:T5qn}
}
which gives $(P+5V_+)^2=\frac{170}{144}$, and the oscillator contribution of $\frac{40}{144}=2\frac{5/3}{12} $ is needed.
Note that $(5/2)\phi_s^2 -(5/2) V_+^2=\frac{-18-4/3}{12}$, which means we select $ \Delta_{5}^N[\delta^5]$ and $ \Delta_{5}^N[ -\delta^5]$. The total gauge shift is even but it is even due to (odd shift) from E$_8$ and (odd shift) from E$_8'$. Thus, the gauge quantum numbers must be the opposite of Eq. (\ref{eq:T5qn}). These are shown in Table
\ref{tab:T5PlusSpin}.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|c|c|ccc|c|c| }
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
Chirality & $\tilde s$& $-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s$& $p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s ,P\cdot V_+$& $(5/2)\phi_s^2$,&$ -(5/2) V_+^2 $,& $ \Delta_{4}^N[\delta^5], \Delta_{5}^N[ -\delta^5]$ &$\Theta_0\,( {\cal P}_5^N)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (---)$ & $\frac{+5}{12}$ & $\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{-2285}{144}$ & $\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $\frac{+9}{12}\,(0),\frac{+7}{12}\,(0) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\ominus=L$ & $ \color{red}(-++)$& $0$ &$\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144}$&$ \frac{-2285}{144}$ &
$\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$ &$\frac{+4}{12}\,(3),\frac{+2}{12}\,(2) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $(+-+)$ & $\frac{-1}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{-2285}{144}$&
$\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$ &$\frac{+3}{12}\,(0),\frac{+1}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\ominus=L$& $ \color{red}(++-)$ &$\frac{-4}{12}$&$\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{-2285}{144}$&
$\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}] $ &$\frac{0}{12}\,(4),\frac{-2}{12}\,(2) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ (+++)$& $\frac{-5}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{-2285}{144}$& $\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$&$\frac{-1}{12}\,(0),\frac{-3}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&& && \\[-1.05em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ \color{red} (+--)$& $0$ &$\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{-2285}{144}$ &$\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$ &
$\frac{+4}{12}\,(3),\frac{+2}{12}\,(2) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\oplus=R$ & $(-+-)$& $\frac{+1}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{-2285}{144}$ &$\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$&$\frac{+5}{12}\,(0),\frac{+3}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\oplus=R$& $ \color{red} (--+)$ & $\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-3}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{-2285}{144}$& $\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}] $&$\frac{+8}{12}\,(3),\frac{+6}{12}\,(2) $ \\[0.15em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{One index spinor from $V_+^5$: Chiralities and multiplicities, ${\color{red}\Psi^{[A]}_{L, 1} }\oplus 10\left(\Phi^{[A]}_{L, 1} +\Phi^{[A]}_{R, 1} \right)$. } \label{tab:T5PlusSpin}
\end{table}
\end{itemize}
\subsection{SU(4)$'$ spectra from twisted sectors $T$}
\subsubsection{Twisted sector $T_6$\,$(\delta^6=0)$}
\begin{itemize}
\item Hidden index vector form for $V^6_{0}$:
we have
\dis{
&6V_0=\left(\frac{-5}{2},\,\frac{-5}{2},\,\frac{-5}{2},\,\frac{-5}{2},\,\frac{-5}{2},\,\frac{-5}{2},\,\frac{-5}{2} ;\, \frac{+5}{2}\right)
\left(\frac{4}{ 2},\, \frac{4}{ 2},\, \frac{4}{ 2},\,\frac{4}{ 2},\, 0,\, \frac{4}{ 2},\, \frac{7}{ 2},\, \frac{ 3}{ 2}\right)',~V^2_0=\frac{ 338}{144}\\[0.2em]
&P =(5+, 5+, 5+, 5+, 5+, 5+, 5+ ;5-)(\underline{-1,-2,-2,-2},0,-2,-3,-1)',~ P\cdot V_0=\frac{-160 }{12},\\[0.2em]
&P +6V_0=\left( 0^8\right)\left(\underline{1,0,0,0},0,0,\frac{ 1}{2},\frac{ 1}{2} \right)',~(P+6V_0)\cdot a_3=0,
}
which saturates the needed masslessness condition $\frac32$ of $T_6$, which are tabulated in Table \ref{tab:T6OneHid}.
$P$ is odd under both $E_8$ and $E_8'$, we complex conjugate the $E_8'$ quantum numbers.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|c|c|ccc|c|c| }
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
Chirality & $\tilde s$& $-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s$& $-p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s,P\cdot V_0$& $(6/2)\phi_s^2$,&$ -(6/2) V_0^2 $,& $\Delta_{6}^N[\delta^6]$ &$\Theta_0\,( {\cal P}_6^N)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (---)$ & $\frac{+5}{12}$ & $\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24} $ &$\frac{-169}{24}$ & $0 [0] $& $\frac{+5}{12}\,(0)$ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$ & $\color{red}(-++)$& $0$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$ \frac{-169}{24}$ &
$0 [0] $ &$\frac{0}{12}\,(4) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $(+-+)$ & $\frac{-1}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$&
$0 [0]$ &$\frac{-1}{12}\,(0)$ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $ \color{red} (++-)$ &$\frac{-4}{12}$&$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$&
$0 [0]$ &$\frac{-4}{12}\,(3) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ (+++)$& $\frac{-5}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}
{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$& $0 [0]$&$\frac{-5}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&& && \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ \color{red} (+--)$& $0$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$ &$0 [0]$ &
$\frac{0}{12}\,(4) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $(-+-)$& $\frac{+1}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$ &$0 [0]$&$ \frac{+1}{12}\,(0)$ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$& $ \color{red} (--+)$ & $\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$& $0 [0]$&$\frac{+4}{12}\,(3)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{ Hidden index spinor from $V_0^6$: Chiralities and multiplicities, $ 7\left(\Phi^{[\alpha'] }_L +\Phi^{[\alpha'] } _R \right)$. } \label{tab:T6OneHid}
\end{table}
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Twisted sector $T_4 \, ( \delta^4=0 )$}
\begin{itemize}
\item Hidden index vector form for $V^4_{0}$:
\dis{
& 4V_0 = \left(\frac{-5}{3},\,\frac{-5}{3},\,\frac{-5}{3},\,\frac{-5}{3},\,\frac{-5}{3},\,\frac{-5}{3},\,\frac{-5}{3} ;\, \frac{5}{3}\right)
\left( \frac{4}{3},\,\frac{4}{3},\,\frac{4}{3},\, \frac{4}{3},\,0,\,\frac{4}{3},\, \frac{7}{3},\,\frac{3}{3} \right)',~~V^2_0=\frac{338}{144},\\[0.2em]
&P =\left( \frac{3}{2},\frac{3}{2},\frac{3}{2},\frac{3}{2},\frac{3}{2},\frac{3}{2},\frac{3}{2} ; \frac{-3}{2} \right)\left( \underline{-2,-1,-1,-1},0,-1,-2,-1\right)',~P_2\cdot V_0=\frac{-101 }{12}=\frac{-5}{12},\\[0.2em]
&P +4V_0= \left( \frac{-1}{6},\frac{-1}{6},\frac{-1}{6},\frac{-1}{6},\frac{-1}{6},\frac{-1}{6},\frac{-1}{6} ; \frac{1}{6} \right)
\left(\underline{\frac{ -2}{3}, \frac{ 1}{3}, \frac{ 1}{3}, \frac{ 1}{3}},0, \frac{ 1}{3}, \frac{ 1}{3}, 0 \right)',~(P_2+4V_0)\cdot a_3 \ne 0.
\label{eq:T4Zero}
}
Since the shift is $(\rm odd)\times(odd)$ under $\EE8$, we interchange the SU(4)$'$ gauge quantum numbers. Note $(P_2+4V_0)^2=\frac{44}{36}=\frac{48}{36}-\frac{4 }{36}$. The oscillator contribution of $2\cdot\frac{2/3}{12}$ is needed. Using $-(4/2)(V_0^2-\phi_s^2)=\frac{-49-1/3}{12}$, we choose $-\Delta_4^N$.
Table \ref{tab:T4ZeroVecHid}.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|c|c|ccc|c|c| }
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
Chirality & $\tilde s$& $-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s$& $-p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s,P\cdot V_0$& $(4/2)\phi_s^2$,&$ -(4/2) V_0^2 $,& $-\Delta_{4}^N[\delta^4]$ &$\Theta_0\,( {\cal P}_6^N)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\ominus=L$& $\color{red} (---)$ & $\frac{+5}{12}$ & $\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24} $ &$\frac{-169}{24}$ & $\frac{-2/3}{12}[0]$& $\frac{+12}{12}\,(4)$ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$ & $(-++)$& $0$ &$\frac{+14}{12},~~~~~\frac{-5}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{36}$&$ \frac{-169}{36}$ &
$\frac{-2/3}{12}[0] $ &$\frac{+7}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $\color{red}(+-+)$ & $\frac{-1}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$&
$\frac{-2/3}{12}[0]$ &$\frac{+6}{12}\,(2)$ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (++-)$ &$\frac{-4}{12}$&$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$&
$\frac{-2/3}{12}[0]$ &$\frac{+3}{12}\,(0) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ \color{red}(+++)$& $\frac{-5}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}
{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$& $\frac{-2/3}{12}[0]$&$\frac{+2}{12}\,(2) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&& && \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ (+--)$& $0$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$ &$\frac{-2/3}{12}[0]$ &
$\frac{+7}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$ & $\color{red}(-+-)$& $\frac{+1}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$ &$\frac{-2/3}{12}[0]$&$ \frac{+8}{12}\,(3)$ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=R$& $ (--+)$ & $\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~~\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{24}$&$\frac{-165}{24}$& $\frac{-2/3}{12}[0]$&$\frac{+11}{12}\,(0)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Hidden sector vector from $V_0^4$: Chiralities and multiplicities, $ {\color{red}\Psi^{[\alpha']}_{L}}\oplus 5\left(\Phi^{[\alpha']}_{L}+\Phi^{[\alpha']}_{R} \right)$. } \label{tab:T4ZeroVecHid}
\end{table}
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Twisted sector $T_1\, (\delta^1=\frac{1}{12})$}
\begin{itemize}
\item Hidden index spinor form for $V^1_{0}$:
for the spinor,
\dis{
&V_0=\left(\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{ 12},\,\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{12},\,\frac{-5}{12} ;\, \frac{+5}{12}\right)
\left(\frac{4}{12},\, \frac{4}{12},\, \frac{4}{12},\,\frac{4}{12},\, 0,\, \frac{4}{12},\, \frac{7}{12},\, \frac{3}{12}\right)',~V^2_0=\frac{338}{144}\\[0.2em]
&P=\left( {+++++++}; -\right)
\left(\underline{+---},----\right)',~P\cdot V_0=\frac{-31}{12}=\frac{+5}{12},\\[0.2em]
&P+V_0=\left( {\frac{1}{12},\,\frac{1}{12},\,\frac{1}{ 12},\,\frac{ 1}{12},\,\frac{1}{12},\,\frac{1}{12},\,\frac{1}{12}} ;\, \frac{-1}{12}\right)
\left( \underline{\frac{10}{12},\, \frac{-2}{12},\, \frac{-2}{12},\, \frac{-2}{12}},\, \frac{-6}{12},\, \frac{-2}{12},\, \frac{1}{12},\, \frac{-3}{12}\right)' , ~ (P+V_0)\cdot a_3\ne 0 ,\label{eq:T1eq0}
}
we have $(P+V_0)^2=\frac{170}{144}=\frac{210}{144}-\frac{40}{144}$. Reverse the gauge quantum numbers. Note that $(1/2)\phi_s^2-(1/2) V_0^2=-\frac{148}{12}=-12+\frac{-1/3}{12}$. The oscillator contribution is $\frac{40}{144}=2\cdot \frac{5/3}{12}$. So we need $-\Delta_4^N=\frac{-5/3}{12}$ to cancel $\frac{+2/3}{12}$ in $(1/2)\phi_s^2-(1/2) V_0^2$.
These are shown in Table
\ref{tab:T1HidZeroSpin}.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|c|c|ccc|c|c| }
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
Chirality & $\tilde s$& $-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s$& $-p_{\rm vec}\cdot \phi_s,P\cdot V_0$& $(1/2)\phi_s^2$,&$ -(1/2) V_0^2 $,& $\Delta_{1}^N[\delta^1],
\Delta_{1}^N[-\delta^1]
$ &$\Theta_0\,( {\cal P}_4^N)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
$\ominus=L$& $(---)$ & $\frac{+5}{12}$ & $~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+5}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$\frac{-169}{72}$ & $ \frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $\frac{+9}{12}\,(0),\frac{+7}{12}\,(0)$ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$ & $ \color{red} (-++)$& $0$ &$~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+5}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$ \frac{-169}{72}$& $\frac{-5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}] $& $ \frac{+4}{12}\,(3),\frac{+2}{12}\,(2)$ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (+-+)$ & $\frac{-1}{12}$ &$~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+5}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$\frac{-169}{72}$& $\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $\frac{+3}{12}\,(0),\frac{+1}{12}\,(0)$ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $\color{red} (++-)$ &$\frac{-4}{12}$&$~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+5}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$\frac{-169}{72}$&$\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $\frac{0}{12}\,(4),\frac{-2}{12}\,(2)$ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=L$& $(+++)$ & $\frac{-5}{12}$ & $~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+5}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$\frac{-169}{72}$ & $ \frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $\frac{-1}{12}\,(0),\frac{-3}{12}\,(0)$ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=L$ & $ \color{red} (+--)$& $0$ &$~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+5}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$ \frac{-169}{72}$& $\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}] $& $\frac{+4}{12}\,(3),\frac{+2}{12}\,(2)$ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=L$& $ (-+-)$ & $\frac{+1}{12}$ &$~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+5}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$\frac{-169}{72}$& $\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $ \frac{+5}{12}\,(0),\frac{+3}{12}\,(0)$ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\oplus=L$& $\color{red} (--+)$ &$\frac{+4}{12}$&$~~\frac{0}{12},~~~~~~\frac{+5}{12}$ &$\frac{21}{72} $ &$\frac{-169}{72}$&$\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{-2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $\frac{+8}{12}\,(3),\frac{+6}{12}\,(2)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{ Hidden index spinor from $V_0^1$: Chiralities and multiplicities are ${\color{red}\Psi_{[\alpha']L} } \oplus10\left( \Phi_{[\alpha'] L} +\Phi_{[\alpha'] R}\right)$. } \label{tab:T1HidZeroSpin}
\end{table}
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Twisted sector $T_5\, (\delta^5=\frac{1}{12})$}
\begin{itemize}
\item Hidden index vector form for $V^5_{0}$: we have
\dis{
&5V_0=\left(\frac{-25}{12},\,\frac{-25}{12},\,\frac{-25}{ 12},\,\frac{-25}{12},\,\frac{-25}{12},\,\frac{-25}{12},\,\frac{-25}{12} ;\, \frac{+25}{12}\right)
\left(\frac{20}{12},\, \frac{20}{12},\, \frac{20}{12},\,\frac{20}{12},\, 0,\, \frac{20}{12},\, \frac{35}{12},\, \frac{15}{12}\right)',~V^2_0=\frac{ 338}{144}\\[0.2em]
&P_2=( {2,2,2,2,2,2,2 }; -2)(\underline{5-,3-,3-,3-},+ ,3-,5-,3- )',~P\cdot V_0=\frac{-456}{12}=\frac{0}{12}, \\[0.2em]
&P_2+5V_0=\left(\underline{\frac{-1}{12},\,\frac{-1}{12},\,\frac{-1}{ 12},\,\frac{-1}{12},\,\frac{-1}{12},\,\frac{-1}{12},\,\frac{-1}{12}} ;\, \frac{+1}{12}\right)
\left( \underline{ \frac{-10}{12},\, \frac{2}{12},\,\frac{2}{12} ,\, \frac{2}{12}},\,\frac{ 6}{12},\, \frac{2}{12},\, \frac{5}{12},\, \frac{-3}{12}\right)',~
}
which gives $(P_1+5V_0)^2=\frac{194}{144}=\frac{210}{144}-\frac{16}{144}$. The oscillator contribution of $2\cdot\frac{2/3}{12}$ is needed. Massless states are shown in Table
Table \ref{tab:T5HidZeroSpin}.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|c|c|ccc|c|c| }
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
Chirality & $\tilde s$& $-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s$& $p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s ,P\cdot V_0$& $(5/2)\phi_s^2$,&$ -(5/2) V_0^2 $,& $ \Delta_{4}^N[\delta^5], \Delta_{5}^N[ -\delta^5]$ &$\Theta_0\,( {\cal P}_5^N)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (---)$ & $\frac{+5}{12}$ & $\frac{+18}{12},~~~~\frac{0}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{- 845}{144}$ & $\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $\frac{+11}{12}\,(0),\frac{+9}{12}\,(0) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\ominus=L$ & $ \color{red}(-++)$& $0$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~\frac{0}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144}$&$ \frac{- 845}{144}$ &
$\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$ &$\frac{+6}{12}\,(2),\frac{+4}{12}\,(3) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $(+-+)$ & $\frac{-1}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~\frac{0}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{- 845}{144}$&
$\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$ &$\frac{+5}{12}\,(0),\frac{+3}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\ominus=L$& $ \color{red}(++-)$ &$\frac{-4}{12}$&$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~\frac{0}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{- 845}{144}$&
$\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}] $ &$\frac{2}{12}\,(2),\frac{0}{12}\,(4) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ (+++)$& $\frac{-5}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~\frac{0}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{- 845}{144}$& $\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$&$\frac{+1}{12}\,(0),\frac{-1}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&& && \\[-1.05em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ \color{red} (+--)$& $0$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~\frac{0}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{- 845}{144}$ &$\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$ &
$\frac{+6}{12}\,(2),\frac{+4}{12}\,(3) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\oplus=R$ & $(-+-)$& $\frac{+1}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~\frac{0}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{- 845}{144}$ &$\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$&$\frac{+7}{12}\,(0),\frac{+5}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\oplus=R$& $ \color{red} (--+)$ & $\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},~~~~\frac{0}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{- 845}{144}$& $\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+5/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}] $&$\frac{+10}{12}\,(2),\frac{+8}{12}\,(3) $ \\[0.15em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{One index spinor from $V_0^5$: Chiralities and multiplicities, ${\color{red}\Psi_{[\alpha']L } }\oplus 10\left(\Phi_{[\alpha']L } +\Phi_{[\alpha']R } \right)$. } \label{tab:T5HidZeroSpin}
\end{table}
\item Hidden index spinor form for $V^5_{+}$:
\dis{
&5V_+=\left( \frac{-5}{12},\, \frac{-5}{12},\, \frac{-5}{12},\, \frac{-5}{12},\, \frac{-5}{12},\, \frac{-5}{12},\, \frac{-5}{12} ; \,\frac{45}{12}\right)
\left(0,\,0,\, 0,\, 0,\, 0,\, \frac{20}{12},\, \frac{135}{12},\, \frac{-45}{12} \right)',~V_+^2 =\frac{914 }{144}, \\[0.2em]
&P=(+++++++ ; 7-)(\underline{1,0,0,0},0,-2,-11 , 4)',~P\cdot V_+=\frac{-376}{12}=\frac{- 4}{12}, \\[0.2em]
&P+5V_+=\left( {\frac{ 1}{12},\,\frac{ 1}{12},\,\frac{1}{ 12},\,\frac{ 1}{12},\,\frac{ 1}{12},\,\frac{ 1}{12},\,\frac{ 1}{12}} ;\, \frac{ 3}{12}\right)
\left( \underline{1,0,0,0},0, \frac{-4}{12},\, \frac{3}{12},\, \frac{ 3}{12}\right)', ~ (P+5V_0)\cdot a_3\ne 0 \label{eq:T5qn}
}
which gives $(P+5V_+)^2=\frac{194}{144}=\frac{210}{144}-\frac{16}{144}$. The oscillator contribution of $2\cdot\frac{2/3}{12}$ is needed.
Note that $(5/2)\phi_s^2 -(5/2) V_+^2=\frac{-181-2/3}{12}$, which means we select $ \Delta_{5}^N[\delta^5]$ and $ \Delta_{5}^N[ -\delta^5]$. Massless states are shown in Table
\ref{tab:T5HidPlusSpin}.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|c|c|ccc|c|c| }
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.15em]
Chirality & $\tilde s$& $-\tilde{s}\cdot\phi_s$& $p_{\rm vec}\cdot\phi_s ,P\cdot V_+$& $(5/2)\phi_s^2$,&$ -(5/2) V_+^2 $,& $ \Delta_{4}^N[\delta^5], \Delta_{5}^N[ -\delta^5]$ &$\Theta_0\,( {\cal P}_5^N)$ \\[0.15em]
\hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\ominus=L$& $ (---)$ & $\frac{+5}{12}$ & $\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{-2285}{144}$ & $\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$& $\frac{+7}{12}\,(0),\frac{+5}{12}\,(0) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\ominus=L$ & $ \color{red}(-++)$& $0$ &$\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144}$&$ \frac{-2285}{144}$ &
$\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$ &$\frac{+2}{12}\,(2),\frac{-2}{12}\,(2) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.25em]
$\ominus=L$& $(+-+)$ & $\frac{-1}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{-2285}{144}$&
$\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$ &$\frac{+1}{12}\,(0),\frac{-3}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.15em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\ominus=L$& $ \color{red}(++-)$ &$\frac{-4}{12}$&$\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{-2285}{144}$&
$\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$ &$\frac{-2}{12}\,(2),\frac{-6}{12}\,(2) $ \\ [0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ (+++)$& $\frac{-5}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{-2285}{144}$& $\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$&$\frac{-3}{12}\,(0),\frac{-7}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&& && \\[-1.05em]
$\oplus=R$ & $ \color{red} (+--)$& $0$ &$\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{-2285}{144}$ &$\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$ &
$\frac{+2}{12}\,(2),\frac{-2}{12}\,(2) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\oplus=R$ & $(-+-)$& $\frac{+1}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{-2285}{144}$ &$\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}]$&$\frac{+3}{12}\,(0),\frac{-1}{12}\,(0) $ \\[0.1em] \hline &&&&&&& \\[-1.05em]
$\oplus=R$& $ \color{red} (--+)$ & $\frac{+4}{12}$ &$\frac{+18}{12},\frac{-4}{12}$ &$\frac{105}{144} $ &$\frac{-2285}{144}$& $\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{+1}{12}],\frac{+2/3}{12}[\frac{-1}{12}] $&$\frac{+6}{12}\,(2),\frac{+2}{12}\,(2) $ \\[0.15em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Hidden sector $V_+^5$: massless states are $ 8\left(\Phi^{[\alpha']}_{L } +\Phi^{[\alpha']}_{ R } \right)$. } \label{tab:T5HidPlusSpin}
\end{table}
\end{itemize}
|
\section{Introduction}
The last decade has seen an increasing interest in chimera states in dynamical
networks \cite{LAI09,MOT10,MAR10,OME10a,OME12a,MAR10b,WOL11a,BOU14,PAN15}. It was shown that they are not limited to
phase oscillators, but can be found in a large variety of different systems including time-discrete maps~\cite{OME11},
time-continuous chaotic models~\cite{OME12}, neural systems~\cite{OME13,HIZ13,VUE14a}, and Boolean networks
\cite{ROS14a}.
Moreover, chimera states were found in systems with higher spatial dimensions~\cite{OME12a,SHI04,MAR10,PAN13,PAN15,PAN15a}.
Together with the initially reported chimera states, which consist of one coherent and one incoherent domain, new types
of these peculiar states having multiple incoherent regions~\cite{SET08,OME13,MAI14,XIE14,VUE14a}, as well as
amplitude-mediated~\cite{SET13,SET14}, and pure amplitude chimera and chimera death states~\cite{ZAK14} were discovered.
In many systems, the form of the coupling defines the possibility to obtain chimera states. The nonlocal coupling has
generally been assumed to be a necessary condition for chimera states to evolve in coupled systems. However, recent
studies have shown that even global all-to-all coupling~\cite{SET14,YEL14,SCH14g,BOE15}, as well as more complex
coupling topologies allow for the existence of chimera states~\cite{KO08,SHA10,LAI12,YAO13,ZHU14,OME15}. Furthermore,
time-varying network structures can give rise to alternating chimera states \cite{BUS15}.
The important question of the main features that give rise to chimera states in coupled systems has been widely discussed, but no conclusive answer has been given yet.
In systems of phase oscillators, the value of the phase lag parameter $\alpha$, which occurs in the coupling function, is crucial. In nonlocally coupled systems, the range of the coupling and its strength play the key role. If the local dynamics of each unit is described by a two- or higher dimensional system, then the interaction scheme between the units plays an important role, i.e., which variable is coupled to which variable of the other nodes. Chimera states have also been shown to be robust against inhomogeneities of the local dynamics and coupling topology~\cite{LAI10,OME15}.
Possible applications of chimera states in natural and technological systems include the phenomenon of unihemispheric sleep~\cite{RAT00}, bump states in neural systems~\cite{LAI01,SAK06a}, power grids~\cite{FIL08}, or social systems~\cite{GON14}.
Many works considering chimera states have mostly been based on numerical results. A deeper bifurcation analysis~\cite{OME13a} and even a possibility to control chimera states~\cite{SIE14c,BIC14} were obtained only recently.
The experimental verification of chimera states was first demonstrated in optical~\cite{HAG12} and chemical~\cite{TIN12,NKO13} systems. Further experiments involved mechanical~\cite{MAR13}, electronic~\cite{LAR13,GAM14} and electrochemical~\cite{SCH14a, WIC13} oscillator systems, Boolean networks~\cite{ROS14a}, the optical comb generated by a passively mode-locked quantum dot laser~\cite{VIK14}, and superconducting quantum interference devices~\cite{LAZ15}.
In previous investigations of chimera states, usually the character of the local node dynamics has been
considered as fixed. In the current study, we address the issue of the impact of the local dynamics. We analyze the
properties of chimera states, when the dynamics of individual
oscillators smoothly changes from sinusoidal to nonlinear relaxation oscillations. For this reason, we choose the Van
der Pol oscillator to describe the dynamics of each node. The Van der Pol oscillator~\cite{POL26} has a long history of
being used in both the physical and biological sciences, as a generic model for electrical circuits~\cite{ZAK13} and
action potentials of neurons, respectively.
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\includegraphics[height=\linewidth, angle=270]{Figure1_ome15a}
\caption{Snapshots of the variables $u_k$ (upper panels), mean phase velocities $\omega_k$ (middle panels), and snapshots in the phase space $(u_k,v_k)$ (bottom panels, limit cycle of the uncoupled unit shown black). (a)~$r=0.35$, $\sigma=0.05$, (b)~$r=0.2$, $\sigma=0.09$, (c)~$r=0.13$, $\sigma=0.09$, (d)~$r=0.1$, $\sigma=0.09$. Other parameters: $N=1000$, $b_1 = 1$, $b_2 =0.1$, and $\varepsilon =0.2$.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure*}
\section{The model}
\label{sec:model}
In our study, we consider a system of nonlocally coupled Van der Pol oscillators with ring topology, where each element
of the system interacts with a fixed range of its neighbors in both directions:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\ddot{u}_k = & \varepsilon (1-u_k^2)\dot{u}_k - u_k \\
& + \dfrac{\sigma}{2R} \sum\limits_{j=k-R}^{j=k+R} \left[ b_1(u_j-u_k) + b_2(\dot{u}_j-\dot{u}_k)\right],\\
\end{aligned}
\label{Eq1}
\end{equation}
with $k=1,...,N$ where all indices are taken modulo $N$, $\varepsilon$ is the bifurcation parameter of the individual
oscillator, $\sigma$~denotes the strength of the coupling, $R$ is the number of coupled neighbors (in each direction),
and $b_1,b_2$ are the interaction parameters.
For such a form of coupling it is convenient to consider the ratio $r=R/N$, which we denote as a coupling range.
The uncoupled Van der Pol oscillator has a stable trivial steady state $u=0$ for $\varepsilon<0$ and exhibits a supercritical Hopf bifurcation at $\varepsilon=0$. Here we consider $\varepsilon>0$.
Introducing a new variable $ v_k=\dot{u}_k$, Eq.~(\ref{Eq1}) can be rewritten in the form of a two-dimensional system:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\dot{u}_k = & v_k\\
\dot{v}_k = & \varepsilon (1-u_k^2)v_k - u_k \\
& +\dfrac{\sigma}{2R} \sum\limits_{j=k-R}^{j=k+R} \left[ b_1(u_j-u_k) + b_2(v_j-v_k)\right].\\
\end{aligned}
\label{Eq2}
\end{equation}
The form of the coupling in the system~Eq.~(\ref{Eq1}) or (\ref{Eq2}) is inspired from biological systems, describing interaction of the cells or pattern generation in locomotion~\cite{LOW03,LOW06}. A similar form of the coupling is also used in mechanics~\cite{STO00}. The cross-couplings between the $u$- and the $v$-variable play an important role, they were shown to be necessary for the existence of chimera and multi-chimera states in systems of nonlocally coupled FitzHugh-Nagumo oscillators~\cite{OME13}.
The dynamics of the system Eq.~(\ref{Eq2}) is determined by five parameters: $\varepsilon$ defines the dynamics of each
individual unit, and the parameters $\sigma$, $R$, $b_1$, and $b_2$ specifies the coupling. In order to find suitable
values for some of the system parameters in the regime where Eq.~(\ref{Eq2}) can describe chimera states, we will use
the experience from simpler systems of coupled Kuramoto phase oscillators. For this reason we transform our system using the phase averaging technique on a rotating frame for slowly varying amplitude $r_k$ and phase
$\theta_k$: $u_k(t)=r_k(t) \sin (t+\theta_k(t))$ and $v_k(t)=r_k(t) \cos (t+\theta_k(t))$. As a result, we obtain the approximate system
\begin{equation}
\label{Eq_phaseampl}
\begin{aligned}
\dot{r}_k = & \dfrac{\varepsilon}{8}r_k \left[ \left( 4-\dfrac{2\sigma}{\varepsilon R} (2R+1)b_2 \right)-r_k^2 \right]
\\
& +\dfrac{\sigma}{4R} \sqrt{b_1^2 + b_2^2} \sum\limits_{j=k-R}^{k+R} r_j \cos(\theta_k - \theta_j + \alpha)\\
\dot{\theta}_k = & \dfrac{\sigma}{4R} (2R+1)b_1 \\
& -\dfrac{\sigma}{4R} \sqrt{b_1^2+b_2^2} \sum\limits_{j=k-R}^{k+R}\dfrac{r_j}{r_k} \sin(\theta_k - \theta_j + \alpha)
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
with $\alpha=\arctan (b_1/b_2)$, $b_2>0$, and $k=1,...,N.$
The parameter $\alpha$ in the system~(\ref{Eq_phaseampl}) can be associated with the phase lag parameter in the systems
of coupled phase oscillators~\cite{ABR04}. This parameter is crucial for the appearance of chimera states in the phase
oscillator network. In~\cite{OME10a} it was shown that a value of the phase lag parameter close to but slightly
less than $\pi/2$ allows for the existence of chimera states.
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\includegraphics[height=0.8\linewidth, angle=270]{Figure2_ome15a}
\caption{Stability regimes for multiple chimera states.
(a)~$\varepsilon =0.2$, black squares marked by A-D show parameter values corresponding
to panels (a)-(d) in Fig.~\ref{fig1}. The insets show snapshots of coherent spatial profiles for parameter values $A^*(r=0.35, \sigma=0.12; K=0)$, $B^*(r=0.2, \sigma=0.28; K=1)$, $C^*(r=0.13, \sigma=0.34; K=2)$, $D^*(r=0.1, \sigma=0.38; K=3)$; (b)~$\varepsilon =0.4$. Other parameters as in Fig.~\ref{fig1}.}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure*}
In the following, using the experience from the phase oscillator network, we fix the interaction parameters to be
$b_1=1$ and $b_2=0.1$, such that $\alpha\approx 1.47$ is close to $\pi/2$. With this parameter choice,
we will focus further on the original system Eq.~(\ref{Eq2}), and vary the parameter~$\varepsilon$ that defines the type
of local dynamics of each element, as well as the coupling parameters $\sigma$ and $r$ describing the strength and the
range of the coupling, respectively.
\section{The impact of local dynamics}
\label{sec:impact}
Varying the bifurcation parameter~$\varepsilon$ results in a change of the character of the local node dynamics.
If~$\varepsilon$ is small, the uncoupled individual elements of the system perform harmonic oscillations on a limit
cycle, which is approximately a circle. With increasing~$\varepsilon$, the individual limit cycle becomes distorted and
changes its form to relaxation oscillations.
Figure~\ref{fig1} demonstrates examples of chimera states for the system of $N=1000$ elements, $\varepsilon=0.2$, and decreasing coupling range. The upper panels depict snapshots of the variables $u_k$ for fixed time $T=50000$. As initial conditions we use randomly distributed phases on the circle $u^2+v^2=4$, i.e., around the limit cycle of the uncoupled system, which is approximately a circle of radius~$2$.
One can clearly distinguish coherent and incoherent domains, a characteristic signature of chimera states.
Elements that belong to the incoherent domain are scattered along the limit cycle, as shown with red points in the bottom panels of Fig.~\ref{fig1} where the black line denotes the limit cycle of the uncoupled unit with corresponding value $\varepsilon=0.2$.
The individual nodes perform a nonuniform rotational motion, but neighboring oscillators are not phase-locked. To illustrate this, the middle panels of Fig.~\ref{fig1} show the mean phase velocities for each oscillator calculated as $\omega_k = 2 \pi M_k/\Delta T$, $k=1,...,N$, where $M_k$ is the number of complete rotations around the origin performed by the $k$-th node during the time interval $\Delta T$. Throughout the paper we use $\Delta T=50000$ for the calculation of the mean phase velocities~$\omega_k$ corresponding to several thousand periods. The values of $\omega_k$ lie on a continuous curve and the interval of constant $\omega_k$ corresponds to the coherent domain, where neighboring elements are phase-locked. This mean phase velocity profile is a clear indication of chimera states and similar to the case of coupled Kuramoto phase oscillators~\cite{KUR02a,ABR04}.
In addition to chimera states with one incoherent domain [Fig.~\ref{fig1}(a)], we observe chimera states with multiple
incoherent domains shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1}(b)-(d), i.e., multi-chimera states. In the following, we will use the
notation $n$-chimera for a chimera state with $n$ coherent and $n$ incoherent domains. In analogy with networks of
phase oscillators, here we observe chimera states where the number of incoherent domains is even. The number of
incoherent domains increases with decreasing coupling range.
Figure~\ref{fig2}(a) shows the stability regimes for chimera states with one and multiple incoherent domains in the
plane of coupling range~$r$ and coupling strength~$\sigma$ for $\varepsilon=0.2$. Indeed, for large coupling range, we
observe the stability regime for chimera states with one incoherent domain, and regimes for chimera states with two,
four, and six incoherent domains follow subsequently with decreasing coupling range. The overlaps of these regimes are
characterized by multistability, when each of the chimera states can be obtained in the system depending on the choice
of the initial conditions. The regimes shown in the diagram are obtained by starting from the chimera states shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig1}, and using this pattern as initial condition for the neighboring parameter set, and so forth with a step size of $\Delta r=0.01$ and $\Delta\sigma=0.01$. Black
squares denoted by A-D show values of the parameters $(r,\sigma)$ that correspond to the examples presented in
Fig.~\ref{fig1}(a)-(d), respectively.
For larger coupling strength~$\sigma$, we observe coherent states in the system~(\ref{Eq2}). They are characterized by the wavenumber~$K$ defining the number of maxima (minima) in the spatial profile, and $K=0$ corresponds to complete in-phase synchronization. The wavenumber increases with decreasing coupling radius, and exemplary snapshots are shown in the insets of Fig.~\ref{fig2}(a). For large coupling strength~$\sigma$, the system is characterized by high multistability, and depending upon initial conditions one can obtain coherent solutions with different wavenumber.
In our system there exist two different types of chimeras, amplitude-mediated chimeras and pure phase chimeras, and these are generated by different bifurcation mechanisms. The amplitude-mediated 2-, 4-, 6-chimeras (Fig.~2(a), snapshots in Fig.~1(b),(c),(d), top panel) are generated from smooth, completely coherent spatial profiles of wavenumbers $K=1,2,3$, respectively, by a coherence-incoherence bifurcation with decreasing coupling strength as indicated by the insets in Fig.~2(a).
At the onset of chimeras the smooth coherent profiles break up into spatially coherent domains corresponding to the upper and the lower parts of these profiles, and incoherent domains in between. Therefore these incoherent domains occur in pairs (2-, 4-, 6-chimeras). Such coherence-incoherence bifurcations have also been observed for other local dynamics, e.g., logistic maps and R{\"o}ssler systems \cite{OME11}, the cosine map \cite{HAG12}, and Stuart-Landau oscillators \cite{ZAK14}. In contrast, the pure phase chimeras (1-chimera in Fig.~2(a),(b))
arise from completely in-phase synchronized ($K=0$) profiles.
The shift of the regimes for (multiple) $n$-chimeras to smaller coupling range $r$ with increasing $n$
is typical for various nonlocally coupled systems \cite{OME11,OME12,OME13,ZAK14,HAG12}.
For small~$\varepsilon$, the limit cycle of each individual Van der Pol oscillator is close to a circle, corresponding to sinusoidal oscillations, and the similarities to the chimera states in a system of phase oscillators are clearly revealed.
However, the hybrid solutions we observe in the system of coupled Van der Pol oscillators demonstrate chimera behavior both for phases and amplitudes. This can be seen in the bottom panels of Fig.~\ref{fig1}, where red dots denoting the snapshot of all nodes deviate in their amplitudes slightly from the limit cycle of the uncoupled unit (black line).
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\includegraphics[height=0.8\linewidth, angle=270]{Figure3_ome15a}
\caption{Stability regimes for multiple chimera states. (a)~$\varepsilon =0.8$, black triangles marked by
E-G show parameter values corresponding to the panels (a)-(c) in Fig.~\ref{fig4}; (b)~$\varepsilon =1.5$, black circles
marked by H-J denote parameter values corresponding to the panels (a)-(c) in Fig.~\ref{fig5}. Other parameters as in
Fig.~\ref{fig1}.}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure*}
Figure~\ref{fig2}(b) depicts the stability regimes for chimera states in the system~(\ref{Eq2}) with~$\varepsilon=0.4$. Compared to the case of ~$\varepsilon=0.2$, the regimes for the chimera states with multiple incoherent domains become larger, and chimera states in this case can be obtained for a wider range of coupling strength~$\sigma$.
The reason why the regions in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(b) ($\varepsilon=0.4$) are larger than those in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(a) ($\varepsilon=0.2$) is related to the following qualitative argument: If the coefficient $\varepsilon$ of the nonlinear term in Eq.~(1) is increased, the coefficient $\sigma$ of the coupling term has to be scaled up accordingly to balance the nonlinear term. Hence as $\varepsilon$ is increased the chimera regions extend to larger values of $\sigma$.
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\includegraphics[height=0.8\linewidth, angle=270]{Figure4_ome15a}
\caption{Snapshots of the variables $u_k$ (upper panels), mean phase velocities $\omega_k$ (middle
panels), and snapshots in the phase space $(u_k,v_k)$ (bottom panels, limit cycle of the uncoupled unit shown black).
(a)~$r=0.17$, $\sigma=0.8$, (b)~$r=0.35$, $\sigma=0.3$, (c)~$r=0.25$, $\sigma=0.2$. Other parameters as in
Fig.~\ref{fig3}(a).}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure*}
When the parameter~$\varepsilon$ is increased, the limit cycle of the individual uncoupled Van der Pol oscillators
deforms, and the dynamics on the cycle becomes of slow-fast type. Further increasing $\varepsilon$ leads to strongly
nonlinear relaxation oscillations. This will be discussed in the following.
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\includegraphics[height=0.8\linewidth, angle=270]{Figure5_ome15a}
\caption{Snapshots of the variables $u_k$ (upper panels), mean phase velocities $\omega_k$ (middle
panels), and snapshots in the phase space $(u_k,v_k)$ (bottom panels, limit cycle of the uncoupled unit shown black).
(a)~$r=0.4$, $\sigma=0.1$, (b)~$r=0.22$, $\sigma=0.1$, (c)~$r=0.17$, $\sigma=0.1$. Other parameters as in
Fig.~\ref{fig3}(b).}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure*}
Figure~\ref{fig3}(a) depicts the stability regimes for system~(\ref{Eq2}) with $\varepsilon=0.8$. Compared to the cases
of smaller $\varepsilon$, there are several qualitative differences in the stability regimes of chimera states. First,
chimera states can be observed for a much larger range of coupling strength~$\sigma$. Second, chimera states with one
incoherent part cannot be observed in the system any more: for large coupling range we observe chimera states with four
incoherent parts, and furthermore with decreasing coupling range the multiplicity of the incoherent domains of the
chimera states increases. Black triangles denoted by E, F, and G show values for the parameter pairs $(r,\sigma)$ that
correspond to examples of chimera states depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig4}(a)-(c), respectively.
The peculiarity of the diagram presented in Fig.~\ref{fig3}(a) is the presence of two separate regimes for chimera
states with four incoherent domains. Analyzing this diagram in more detail, one can see that there are two qualitatively
different regions. The first region appears for large coupling strengths, and contains stability regimes for chimera
states with two and four incoherent domains (yellow region containing point E and blue region). These states can be
characterized by strong amplitude dynamics, and the maximum values of the mean phase velocity profile correspond to the
coherent domains of chimera states. The example presented in Fig.~\ref{fig4}(a) [corresponding to point E in
Fig.~\ref{fig3}(a)] depicts these features. Compared with Fig.~{\ref{fig1}} for small~$\varepsilon$, we notice that the
chimera states shown there also show distinct variations along the limit cycle, and the coherent domains of the chimera
states correspond to the maximum in the mean phase velocity profiles.
The second, qualitatively different part of the diagram in Fig.~\ref{fig3}(a) includes three regions for small coupling
strengths (yellow including point F, green, and gray). These regions form a similar sequence with increasing
multiplicity of the chimera starting from four incoherent parts. However, they exhibit
a qualitative difference. Inspecting Fig.~\ref{fig4}(b) and~(c), which show examples that correspond to the parameter
pairs $(r,\sigma)$ denoted by F and G,
one can notice that the amplitude dynamics becomes weaker in these cases, and the network solution is close to the limit cycle of the uncoupled node shown as black line in the bottom panels. Moreover, the minimum of the mean phase velocities profiles now corresponds to the coherent domains of the chimera states.
The difference between Fig.~\ref{fig4}(a) on one hand, and Fig.~\ref{fig4}(b) and (c) on the other hand is due to two different types of chimeras.
The 2-, 4-, 6-chimeras in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(a),(b) and Fig.~\ref{fig3}(a)~(point~E), and the chimeras in Fig.~\ref{fig3}(F,G,H,I,J) belong to two different types of chimeras: Fig.~\ref{fig2}(a),(b) and Fig.~\ref{fig3}(a), point E (corresponding to phase portraits shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1}(b),(c),(d) and Fig.~\ref{fig4}(a)) correspond to amplitude-mediated chimeras with strong amplitude-phase coupling, whereas Fig.~\ref{fig3}(a), points F,G and Fig.~\ref{fig3}(b) (corresponding to phase portraits shown in Fig.~\ref{fig4}(b),(c) and Fig.~\ref{fig5}(a),(b),(c)) correspond to pure phase chimeras similar to the ones found for Kuramoto phase oscillators, and since the phase oscillator model can generally be obtained from amplitude-phase models in the weak coupling limit, they occur in the stability diagram (Fig.~\ref{fig3}(a)) only for small coupling strength (points F,G), as opposed to the amplitude-mediated chimeras (point E). This difference is visible in the phase portraits of Figs.~1,4,5 (bottom panels), where the spread of the various oscillators around the cycle of the uncoupled oscillator (black cycle) is large for amplitude-mediated chimeras, and very small
for pure phase chimeras where the phase of the cycle is the only dynamical degree of freedom. The difference also shows up in the smaller amplitude variation of the mean phase velocity in the middle panels of Fig.~\ref{fig4}(b),(c) (pure phase chimeras) as compared to Fig.~\ref{fig4}(a), and in the inverted $\omega_k$ profiles: the coherent regions correspond to the minima (Fig.~\ref{fig4}(b),(c)) and maxima (Fig.~\ref{fig4}(a)), respectively.
Further increase of the parameter $\varepsilon$ of individual Van der Pol oscillators leads to an even stronger
deformation of the limit cycle. In the $(r,\sigma)$ parameter plane the stability regimes for chimera states with four
and more incoherent domains can be observed as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig3}(b) for $\varepsilon=1.5$. The effect of the
coexistence of two qualitatively different types of chimera states is not present there any more, in contrast to the
case of~$\varepsilon=0.8$. Only the second type of the chimera states is observed in the systems now, and the stability
regimes are enlarged towards larger coupling strengths.
Figure~\ref{fig5} depicts examples of multi-chimera states that correspond to the parameter pairs~$(r,\sigma)$ denoted by H,I, and J in Fig.~\ref{fig3}(b). The coherent domains of the chimera states correspond to the minimum of the mean phase velocity profile, and all oscillators stay very close to the limit cycle of the single uncoupled unit, thus the amplitude dynamics of the chimera states in the systems with large~$\varepsilon$ is not as pronounced as in the networks with small~$\varepsilon$.
We conclude that the nonlinearity of the local dynamics indeed strongly influences chimera states in system~(\ref{Eq2}).
The character of the amplitude dynamics, the frequencies of the oscillators belonging to the coherent and incoherent
domains of the chimera states, i.e., the mean phase velocity profiles, and the stability regimes in the coupling
parameter plane undergo a qualitative change with variation of the parameter~$\varepsilon$. Stronger nonlinearity
(larger~$\varepsilon$) results in the dominance of multi-chimera states with weak amplitude dynamics.
\section{Time-delayed coupling}
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Figure6_ome15a}
\caption{Space-time plots of $u_k$ for different values of time delay: (a)~$\tau=1$, (b)~$\tau=3$, (c)~$\tau=6$. Other parameters: $N=1000$, $b_1 = 1$, $b_2 =0.1$, $r=0.4$, $\sigma=0.1$, $\varepsilon =1.5$. Initial conditions as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig5}(a). Transients of 2000 time units are skipped.}
\label{fig6}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\includegraphics[height=0.8\linewidth, angle=270]{Figure7_ome15a}
\caption{Snapshots of the variables $u_k$ (upper panels), mean phase velocities $\omega_k$ (middle
panels), and snapshots in the phase space $(u_k,v_k)$ (bottom panels, limit cycle of the uncoupled unit shown black).
(a)~$\tau=1$, (b)~$\tau=3$, (c)~$\tau=6$. Other parameters: $N=1000$, $b_1 = 1$, $b_2 =0.1$, $r=0.4$, $\sigma=0.1$, $\varepsilon =1.5$.}
\label{fig7}
\end{figure*}
Together with the character of the local dynamics, the coupling between the individual units plays an important role for
the properties of the chimera states. Time-delayed coupling if compared to the instantaneous one represents a more
realistic way to model the interaction between the coupled units. Usually, the coupling range and strength influence the
multiplicity of coherent domains in chimera states. However, it has been shown for phase oscillator networks that time
delay can also induce multi-chimeras \cite{SET08}. The existence of chimera states in systems with time-delayed
couplings has been also reported in~\cite{OME08,NKO13,MA10,SHE09,SHE10}. In particular, for coupled phase oscillator
systems it has been found that chimeras are robust to small time delays and delay distributions \cite{MA10} and can
become unstable depending on the value of delay \cite{SHE09}. Here we consider a model that includes not only phase
but also amplitude dynamics, and show how time delay in the coupling affects chimera
states that exist in the undelayed system. We demonstrate that by varying the delay value one can both conserve and eliminate chimera patterns.
Let us consider Eq.~(\ref{Eq2}) modified by time-delayed coupling:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\dot{u}_k(t) = & v_k(t)\\
\dot{v}_k(t) = & \varepsilon [1-u_k^2(t)]v_k(t) - u_k(t) \\
& +\dfrac{\sigma}{2R} \sum\limits_{j=k-R}^{j=k+R} \left\{ b_1\left[u_j(t-\tau)-u_k(t)\right]+ \right.\\
& \left. + b_2 \left[v_j(t-\tau)-v_k(t)\right]\right\}\\
\end{aligned}
\label{Eq_delay}
\end{equation}
wth $k=1,...,N$ modulo $N$, where $\tau$ is the delay time.
Using the chimera state with four incoherent domains, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig5}(a), as initial condition, i.e., as the
history in the interval $[-\tau,0]$, we fix all system parameters corresponding to this solution, and show exemplary
space-time patterns of Eq.~(\ref{Eq_delay}) for different time delays. The period of a single uncoupled oscillator is
close to $2\pi$, and we neglect the transients of $2000$ time units. For small time delay ($\tau=1$), we observe a coherent
traveling wave solution shown in Fig.~\ref{fig6}(a). When the time delay is close to half the oscillation period
($\tau=3$), the chimera pattern is stable and we continue to observe a chimera state with four incoherent domains as
shown in Fig.~\ref{fig6}(b). A larger time delay ($\tau=6$), which is close to the period of a single oscillator, leads
to complete synchronization of all oscillators, see Fig.~\ref{fig6}(c). Figure~\ref{fig7} depicts snapshots of the variable $u_k$ (upper panels), the same snapshots in the phase plane $(u_k,v_k)$ together with the limit cycle of uncoupled oscillator, and the corresponding mean phase velocity profiles (middle panels), for the solutions shown in Fig.~\ref{fig6}.
The explanation for the effect of delay is that the delay time interacts with the intrinsic timescale (oscillation period) giving rise to resonance phenomena as found generally for delayed feedback control of steady states, deterministic limit cycles, and noise-induced oscillations, if the delay is an integer multiple or a half-integer multiple of the intrinsic timescale \cite{SCH07}. Delay has a favorable effect on chimeras if $\tau$ is a half-integer multiple, and a favorable (stabilizing) effect on the synchronized oscillations if it is an integer multiple, and may induce traveling waves if it fits with neither condition. In case of the chimera (Fig.~\ref{fig7}(b)), the delay leads to much longer transients, so that with the same length of time interval used for the calculation of the mean phase velocity as without delay, the profiles are more smeared out, but qualitatively similar.
Our numerical evidence shows similar results for other values of the bifurcation parameter~$\varepsilon$. For chimera states with one or two incoherent domains and sinusoidal character of the oscillations, small delay can lead not only to traveling wave solutions, but also to chimera states with higher number of incoherent domains.
These examples demonstrate that time delay introduced in the coupling can either suppress or preserve the chimera patterns depending upon the value of the delay time relative to the intrinsic oscillation period.
\section{Conclusion}
In the current study we have demonstrated how the character of the local oscillator dynamics influences chimera states
in networks of nonlocally coupled Van der Pol oscillators. Changing the bifurcation parameter of the single oscillators
allows us to interpolate continuously between sinusoidal and strongly nonlinear relaxation oscillations. We have shown
that nonlinearity facilitates multi-chimera states.
For small values of the bifurcation parameter~$\varepsilon$ (sinusoidal oscillations) chimera states are characterized by lower multiplicity and more pronounced amplitude dynamics, and the maxima in the mean phase velocity profiles correspond to the coherent domains. Moving towards the relaxation oscillation regime, with increasing~$\varepsilon$, leads to a
higher multiplicity of chimera states, but weaker amplitude dynamics. In contrast to the previous case, the coherent domains correspond to the minima of the mean phase velocity profiles, i.e., the profiles are flipped. We have also found that time delay in the coupling strongly affects the chimera patterns in the system, and can lead to chimera suppression and the formation of traveling waves and complete synchronization.
We have presented (multi-) chimera states of different type: (i)~pure phase chimeras, which are similar to those found for Kuramoto phase oscillators or weakly coupled amplitude-phase models, and (ii)~amplitude-mediated chimeras with strong amplitude-phase coupling.
Our findings give new insight into the intriguing phenomena of chimera states, and demonstrate that the character of the local dynamics has a strong influence on the chimera patterns in the whole network. These results could be useful from the point of view of applications dealing with different kinds of oscillators, as they can be realized, e.g., in electronic circuits.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This work was supported by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft in the framework of Collaborative Research Center SFB 910.
PH acknowledges support by BMBF (grant no. 01Q1001B) in the framework of BCCN Berlin.
\end{acknowledgments}
\bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1}
|
\section{Introduction}
\medskip
After the long awaited discovery of the Higgs particle, it was assumed that this new scalar particle would be instrumental as a handle that could open a portal for New Physics (NP). Unfortunately, it was found that this scalar resembles very much the SM Higgs particle with SM-like couplings up to the present precision. In this sense it will possibly be a long-term task to find some clear evidence of NP in this direction. In the meanwhile, other portals for NP, like those constructed upon rare B decays can open new directions in these searches. Recently, it was found that one of those rare B decays, $B \to K^* (\to K \pi) \mu^+\mu^-$, seems particularly promising. Its full 4-body angular distribution provides sensitivity to many different Wilson coefficients, of electromagnetic, semileptonic and scalar operators (including their chiral counterparts). It thus will help to draw a picture of the flavour sector of the fundamental theory that lies beyond the SM. A large variety of angular observables \cite{9907386,0502060, 0805.2525, 0811.1214, 1006.5013,1105.0376,1106.3283, 1202.4266, 1207.2753, 1303.5794}
will allow to test some of the above-mentioned Wilson coefficients with an unprecedented precision.
The keypoint in this type of searches for NP is to find the cleanest possible procedure to extract the interesting short distance electroweak information disentangling it from any possible QCD polluting source.
At leading order (LO) one can classify observables in form factor independent (FFI) and form factor dependent ones (FFD).
Some time ago, a procedure \cite{1202.4266} was proposed to factorize the information contained in the 4-body angular distribution into products of a set of FFI observables times FFD ones like the longitudinal polarization fraction ($F_{L}$). The short distance information can then be extracted from the less QCD-polluted FFI observables, which were named clean or optimized observables $P_i^{(\prime)}$ \cite{1207.2753,1303.5794}. The first of them, named $P_1$ or $A_T^2$ \cite{0502060}, was designed to detect the presence of right-handed currents (RHC). Soon after, other observables followed, like $A_T^{re}$ \cite{1106.3283} (or $P_2$ \cite{1202.4266}) that correspond to the clean version of $A_{FB}$, and $P_3$ sensitive to the presence of NP weak phases. The set was completed by the $P_i^\prime$ observables with $i=4,5,6,8$. Particularly interesting are the observables $P_4^\prime$ and $P_5^\prime$ that represent the interference between the longitudinal amplitude of the $K^*$ with the parallel and the perpendicular one, respectively.
In these last observables at low $q^2$ ($q^2$ is the square of the invariant mass of the dilepton pair) but in the region above 5-6 GeV$^2$, the semileptonic operators dominate opening an excellent window to test them. In parallel, the observable $P_2$ testing the interference between perpendicular and parallel amplitudes, exhibits a window of sensitivity to these semileptonic coefficients in a different region, namely at the position of its maximum around 2 GeV$^2$\cite{1502.00920} and at the position of its zero near 4 GeV$^2$.
In 2013 in a ground-breaking effort going beyond traditional analyses (studying only $F_L$, $A_{FB}$ and the branching ratio) and borrowing techniques from different fields, LHCb presented the first analysis of this set of optimized observables \cite{lhcb}. A first interpretation of this measurement presented in \cite{understanding} pointed out a {\it coherent pattern} of small and large tensions in different observables, mainly in $P_2$ (and $A_{FB}$) and $P_5^\prime$ that could be explained under the hypothesis that the coefficient $C_9$ of the semileptonic operator and possibly also the coefficient $C_7$ of the electromagnetic operator receive a NP contribution.
The main outcome of the analysis in Ref.\cite{understanding} based on the data from the observables
\begin{itemize} \item[i)] $P_{1,2}$, $P_{4,5,6,8}^\prime$, $A_{FB}$ of $B \to K^* \mu^+\mu^-$ in the $q^2$ bins [0.1,2], [2,4.3], [4.3,8.68], [14.18,16], [16,19],
\item[ii)] radiative and dileptonic B decays: ${\cal B}_{B \to X_s \gamma}$, ${\cal B}_{B \to X_s \mu^+\mu^-}$, ${\cal B}_{B_s \to \mu^+\mu^-}$, $A_I(B \to K^* \gamma)$,
\end{itemize}
was to find that the deviations from the SM values of the Wilson coefficients, $C_i^{\rm NP}=C_i-C_i^{\rm SM}$, at 68.3$\%$ C.L. lie within the following ranges:
\begin{eqnarray} \label{pat}
C_9^{\rm NP}&\in&[-1.6,-0.9], \quad\quad\quad\;\, C_7^{\rm NP}\in[-0.05,-0.01], \quad\quad\quad
C_{10}^{\rm NP}\in[-0.4,1.0], \nonumber\\
C_9^{\prime }&\in&[-0.2,0.8], \quad\quad\quad\quad C_7^{\prime \rm NP}\in[-0.04,0.02],\quad\quad\quad\;\; C_{10}^{\prime }\in[-0.4,0.4].
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $C_9^{\rm NP}$ is consistent with zero (SM) only above 3$\sigma$, $C_7^{\rm NP}$ is consistent with the SM at 2$\sigma$, while the rest are consistent with the SM already at 1$\sigma$. In this solution one observes that $C_9^{\rm NP}+C_9^\prime<0$, $C_7^{\rm NP}<0$ and $C_{10}^{\rm NP}$ seems to show a mild preference for positive values due to ${\cal B}_{Bs \to \mu^+\mu^-}$. Remarkably, different groups \cite{1308.1501,1310.2478,1310.3887} using different observables, techniques and statistical approaches also confirmed the large contribution to $C_9^{\rm NP}$ of order $25\%$ with respect to the SM value. It was also claimed by some groups \cite{1308.1501,Hambrock:2013zya} using, for instance, the low-recoil 1fb$^{-1}$ data on $B^+ \to K^+\mu^+\mu^-$ \cite{Aaij:2012vr} that at the same time also the chirally flipped semileptonic coefficient was getting a large NP contribution such that $C_9^\prime + C_9^{\rm NP} \simeq 0$ in order to have a SM-like BR for the $B^+ \to K^+ \mu^+\mu^-$ mode. However, this scenario was in conflict \cite{understanding,1311.3876} with the anomaly in $P_5^\prime$ (4$\sigma$ deviation in the third bin of $P_5^\prime$) that required $C_9^\prime$ to be zero or small such that $C_9^{\rm NP}+ C_9^\prime<0$ in order not to increase this anomaly. Fortunately an updated result from LHCb with 3fb$^{-1}$ data on $B^+ \to K^+ \mu^+\mu^-$ and $B^0 \to K^0 \mu^+\mu^-$ \cite{Aaij:2014pli} has solved this tension since both modes point in the low-q$^2$ and large-q$^2$ region to the solution $C_9^{\rm NP}+C_9^{\prime}<0$ in agreement with the anomaly in $P_5^\prime$.
In summary, the present situation exhibits a coherent pattern of deviations in $B \to K^*\mu^+\mu^-$, $B^+ \to K^+ \mu^+\mu^-$, $B^0 \to K^0 \mu^+\mu^-$ but also $B_s \to \phi \mu^+\mu^-$ and the radiative and dileptonic observables mentioned above, pointing to the semileptonic coefficient $C_9$ as the main responsible, with all other coefficients not deviating significantly from zero and playing a less important role. It is important to emphasize already at this point that this conclusion obviously does not preclude the possibility that the new data can switch on with enough significance other Wilson coefficients.
Our main goal here will be to discuss all new corrections that we have included in our predictions \cite{1407.8526} and in parallel analyse
alternative explanations that has been raised to explain some of the deviations suggesting possible tests or cross checks to discriminate them from a NP solution.
The outline of the proceedings is the following: in Section 2 we discuss the theoretical framework at low $q^2$ where the strongest deviations from the SM have been found by LHCb. In Section 3 we detail our method to include
factorizable and non-factorizable (including charm-loop) corrections. We also suggest some tests to check the presence of huge charm-loop contributions and comment on some of the possible consistency tests that can be done on data. Section 4 is devoted to S-wave pollution. In Section 5 we comment on and explore other scenarios. Finally we conclude in Section 6. We provide in an appendix our most accurate predictions for the optimized basis of observables in various bins and in two different parametrizations including all corrections discussed before based on the method developed in \cite{1407.8526}.
\section{Theoretical Framework at low-$q^2$}
\medskip
In this section we will focus on the theoretical framework used to describe the large-recoil region where the strongest deviations have been observed. Still for completeness we will also comment at the end of this section on some aspects concerning the size of possible uncertainties that might affect either the large or the low recoil region.
A keypoint in the evaluation of the angular observables is to keep track of the correlations among form factors. In the large-recoil region there are basically two approaches:
\begin{itemize}
\item ``Improved QCDF approach": In this framework \cite{1303.5794} the large-recoil symmetries between form factors are used to implement the dominant correlations among them. This is a transparent and general approach that is easy to cross-check and valid for any form factor parametrization (e.g. for the light-cone sum rules parametrizations \cite{KMPW} or \cite{bz}). The symmetries allow the 7 form factors to be written in terms of only two, so called soft form factors $\xi_{\perp,\|}$ \cite{9812358}:
\begin{eqnarray} \label{correlations}
\frac{m_B}{m_B+m_{K^*}}{V(q^2)} = \frac{m_B+m_{K^*}}{2E}{A_1(q^2)}
={T_1(q^2)} = \frac{m_B}{2 E} {T_2(q^2)} = {\xi_\bot(E)}, \nonumber \\[2mm]
\frac{m_{K^*}}{E} {A_0(q^2)} =
\frac{m_B+m_{K^*}}{2E} {A_1(q^2)} - \frac{m_B-m_{K^*}}{m_B}{A_2(q^2)}
= \frac{m_B}{2E} {T_2(q^2)} - {T_3(q^2)} = {\xi_\|(E)}.
\end{eqnarray}
Then the soft form factors can be computed in a specific parametrization.
In \cite{1407.8526} we employed this approach considering all symmetry breaking corrections to the relations Eq.(\ref{correlations}). Our predictions take into account factorizable and non-factorizable $\alpha_s$ corrections computed within QCDF \cite{0412400,0008255,0106067}, as well as factorizable and non-factorizable power corrections, discussed in Sec.3, including charm-loop effects. The analytic structure of the large-recoil correlations led to the construction of the FFI observables $P_i$ and $P_i^{CP}$ \cite{0502060,1202.4266,1207.2753,1303.5794} that exhibit a sensitivity to the soft form factor suppressed in $\alpha_s$ or $\Lambda/m_b$.
All bins are traditionally considered in our analysis.
\item ``Ball-Zwicky Form Factor approach": Here a specific set of full form factors (Ball-Zwicky \cite{bz}) is used. Factorizable $\alpha_s$ and factorizable power corrections are automatically included with correlations associated to this particular parametrization. All other corrections have to be included and/or estimated exactly as in the previous approach, non-factorizable $\alpha_s$ correction taken from QCDF (here also soft form factors are necessary), non-factorizable power corrections (see \cite{straubnew}) and charm-loop effects. This approach has been employed in \cite{1308.1501} where
the basis $S_i$ and $A_i$ \cite{buras} is used and only bins below 6 GeV$^2$ are considered.
\end{itemize}
Both approaches are useful and complementary, should converge and give comparable results and error sizes. Of course, both methods can be used to compute both type of observables $P_i$ and $S_i$. For a comparison one can apply the general first approach (QCDF) to the particular form factor parametrization (BZ) used in the second one and the observables studied in the second approach \cite{straubnew}. We will show an example of this comparison in Sec. 3.1.
In the low-$q^2$ region, where we focused the previous discussion, the large set of observables measured provide a nice cross-check of the observed deviations.
For this reason we think it is important to consider all available bins.
Sometimes it is stated that in bins beyond 6 GeV$^2$ soft-gluon corrections to the virtual charm-loop could have a large impact.
However, there are two important remarks: first, the partial soft-gluon charm correction computed in Ref. \cite{KMPW} is found to be positive implying that its effect is to enlarge and not reduce the anomaly, requiring an even larger NP contribution to compensate for it. Second, it is manifest in the plots of Fig. 5 and 7 of Ref. \cite{KMPW} that the impact is moderate up to 8 GeV$^2$. For some amplitudes ($M_3$) it is even smaller than the impact at very low $q^2$. In our predictions we take this calculation as an estimate of the effect and allow both signs for this correction as explained later on. In any case it is advisably to cut the experimental data at 8 GeV$^2$ where the impact of the charm-loop contribution calculated in \cite{KMPW} is still moderate.
In the large-$q^2$ region, one of the main sources of uncertainty and model dependence is related to the treatment of the observed set of resonances by LHCb in the data of the partner channel $B^+ \to K^+ \mu^+\mu^-$. This observation prevents one from taking small bins afflicted by the resonance structures. In \cite{buchalla} a quantitative estimate of duality violation is given. Unavoidably, one needs to use a model for this estimate, still the result is that the integrated single low recoil bin gets a duality-violation impact of a few percent (5 $\%$ in \cite{pirjol} or 2$\%$ in \cite{buchalla}). On top of that, there is certainly an impact from the choice of the starting point for the integrated bin that might coincidence with the position of a resonance. It is thus under debate how large this violation should be taken and where to start the long bin. In \cite{buchalla} the estimate for $B \to K\mu^+\mu^-$ is given for $q^2 \geq 15$ GeV$^2$ while first data on $B \to K^* \mu^+\mu^-$, where a similar problem will arise, starts at 14.18 GeV$^2$. An interesting exercise to show how sensitive and dependent on the starting point the result is, was done in \cite{1310.3887}. There lattice form factors were used to analyze the low-recoil region for $B \to K^* \mu^+\mu^-$ and $B_s \to \phi \mu^+\mu^-$. It was found that if the two bins were taken the best fit value was given by a solution with $C_9^{NP}$ negative and $C_9^\prime$ positive (both with a significance slightly above 1 $\sigma$), while if only the last bin was used (starting at 16 GeV$^2$) the result on $C_9^{NP}$ was practically unaffected while $C_9^\prime$ became consistent with zero. In this sense again it would be interesting that the new data on $B \to K^* \mu^+\mu^-$ starts at 15 GeV$^2$ or above as it has been done for the 3 fb$^{-1}$ data of $B \to K \mu^+\mu^-$.
\section{Methodology beyond QCDF and alternative explanations}
\medskip
In this section we discuss in detail the method to include factorizable and non-factorizable power corrections (including charm-loops) that we used for our predictions\cite{1407.8526}. We also provide some tests to show the robustness of the predictions and point out possible ways to check, using the new data, some alternative explanations (huge charm loops) proposed to explain one of the deviations. We also discuss model independent relations between observables that allow to perform clear tests on the data, assuming the absence of new CP violating phases beyond the SM.
\subsection{\bf Factorizable power corrections}
\medskip
The decomposition of a full form factor contains in general three pieces,
\begin{equation}F(q^2)= F^{\rm soft}(\xi_{\perp,\|}(q^2)) + \Delta F^{\alpha_s}(q^2) + \Delta F^{\Lambda}(q^2),\label{decomposition}\end{equation} where the first piece includes the soft form factors that implement automatically the dominant correlations among form factor given in Eq.(\ref{correlations}), $\Delta F^{\alpha_s}(q^2)$ represents the known QCDF correction induced by hard gluons, and $\Delta F^{\Lambda}(q^2)$ are the factorizable power corrections of ${\cal O}(\Lambda/m_b)$. Following \cite{jaeger} we parametrize the latter correction, which is expected to be small compared to hadronic uncertainties, as an expansion in $q^2$:
\begin{equation}\Delta F^{\Lambda}(q^2)= a_F + b_F \frac{q^2}{m_B^2} + c_F \frac{q^4}{m_B^4}+...\label{param}\end{equation}
The decomposition (\ref{decomposition}) is not unique, one can always reshuffle the contributions among the different terms. It is necessary to fix a renormalization scheme, namely define $\xi_{\perp,\|}$ in terms of full form factors. Our implementation of this correction \cite{1407.8526} makes particularly emphasis on two aspects. The first aspect is the importance of respecting the correlations among {\it all} the parameters of Eq.(\ref{param}) of different form factors. There are exact kinematical relations at $q^2=0$, like $T_1(0)=T_2(0)$ implying $a_{T1}=a_{T2}$, but also correlations among the $a_{F_i}$, $b_{F_i}$ and $c_{F_i}$ coefficients that originate from the definition of the soft form factors in terms of the full form factors. For this reason it is very important to always work consistently within a form factor parametrization at a time not mixing them. The second aspect is the relevance of choosing the most appropriate scheme. The choice of scheme determines which part of the ${\cal O}(\alpha_s,\Lambda/m_b)$ correction
will remain in the function $\Delta F^{\alpha_s}$ or $\Delta F^{\Lambda}$ and which part will be absorbed in to the $F^{\rm soft}(\xi_{\perp,\|}(q^2))$. While the perturbative $\Delta F^{\alpha_s}$ correction can be computed explicitly in each scheme, the lack of a full control of the correlations among the errors of $\Delta F^{\Lambda}$ induces a scheme dependence at order ${\cal O}(\Lambda/m_b)$ on the otherwise scheme independent observables. In this situation a proper choice of scheme is mandatory in such a way that the effects of unknown power corrections get absorbed as much as possible into the soft form factors in order not to artificially inflate uncertainties . A simple example illustrates this point: assume an observable that only depends on a single form factor $F_1$. A good scheme would be the one that takes this form factor directly as input, so that all power corrections are absorbed and would not appear from the beginning. A bad scheme would fix as input another form factor $F_2$, and in the process of relating it to $F_1$ unknown power corrections would be introduced increasing the uncertainty of the result artificially. Our choice to determine the soft form factor $\xi_{\perp}(q^2)$ is given by \begin{equation}
\xi_{\perp}(q^2)\,\equiv\,\frac{m_B}{m_B+m_{K^*}}V(q^2).
\label{eq:xiV}
\end{equation}
This definition eliminates all corrections to the form factor $V$ leading to $\Delta V^{\alpha_s}(q^2)=\Delta V^{\Lambda}(q^2)=0$. A different choice consists in defining $\xi_{\perp}(q^2)$ from $T_1$ like in \cite{jaeger} leads to larger uncertainties in $P_5^\prime$.
The soft form factor $\xi_{\parallel}$ can be defined as
\begin{equation}
\xi_{\parallel}(q^2)\,\equiv\,\frac{m_B+m_{K^*}}{2E}A_1(q^2)\,-\,\frac{m_B-m_{K^*}}{m_B}A_2(q^2),
\label{eq:xiA12}
\end{equation}
as done for example in Ref.~\cite{0412400}. This definition
minimizes power corrections in the form factors $A_{1,2}$ by correlating $\Delta A_1^{\alpha_s}(q^2),\Delta A_1^{\Lambda}(q^2)$
with $\Delta A_2^{\alpha_s}(q^2)$ and $\Delta A_2^{\Lambda}(q^2)$. Another possible determination of this form factor uses the form factor $A_0(q^2)$ \cite{jaeger}, albeit perfectly acceptable as a choice this FF does not enter by construction any of the optimized observables.
In our computation we first determine the parameters $a_F,b_F$ and $c_F$ such that the central value of the full form factor is exactly reproduced. We perform a fit to these parameters and keep the correlated (non-zero) central values obtained: ${\hat a_F}, {\hat b_F}, {\hat c_F}$.
We have applied this procedure to two different form factor determinations KMPW \cite{KMPW} and BZ \cite{bz}, taking always one at each time to respect correlations. This induces a shift in the central values as compared to the previous predictions in \cite{understanding}.
For the errors associated to the factorizable power corrections we take $\Delta F^{\Lambda} \sim F \times {\cal O}(\Lambda/m_b) \sim 0.1 F$ which amounts to assign an error of order 100$\%$ with respect to the fitted central values ${\hat a_F}, {\hat b_F}$ and ${\hat c_F}$. Finally, we vary the parameters within the range ${\hat a_F}-\Delta {\hat a_F} \leq a_F \leq {\hat a_F} +\Delta {\hat a_F}$ and similarly for $b_F$ and $c_F$. Note that our error estimate for the factorizable power corrections is solely based on dimensional arguments and exhibits a marginal dependence on the form factor parametrization used.
Finally to close this section on factorizable power corrections we compare the results obtained using the two different approaches (QCDF versus Ball-Zwicky FF)\footnote{We will not include charm-loop effects in this comparison in our prediction because we only computed them for KMPW and not for BZ. In the same way we will not take it into account in \cite{jaeger}} . Let us take, for instance, the bin [2,4.3] for the observable $S_5$ using the improved QCDF approach for the particular case of the BZ parametrization. Our prediction from \cite{1407.8526} for this observable is $S_{5 \, BZ}^{[2,4.3]}=-0.17 \pm 0.04$. Now we compare this prediction with the one in the recent paper \cite{straubnew} obtained using the different method based on the correlated BZ form factors. The result there is $S_5^{[2,4.3]}=-0.17 \pm 0.04$ exactly the same.\footnote{Notice that if we use the KMPW parametrization our prediction becomes $S_{5 \, KMPW}^{[2,4.3]}=-0.17^{+0.08}_{-0.06}$ where the difference comes as it is well known from the larger hadronic form factor errors in KMPW, while the error associated with factorizable power corrections is similar in size as with BZ form factors. This is the parametrization we take for our predictions.} This perfect agreement is remarkable given the different treatment of the error associated to factorizable power corrections.
However, if one does the same exercise using the value of $P_5^\prime$ in the same bin given in \cite{jaeger} and transforming it into a prediction for $S_5$ {\it assuming zero error} from $F_L$, one gets $S_{5 \, JC}^{[2,4.3]}=-0.11^{+0.13}_{-0.11}$ with the error being a factor of 3 larger as compared to the predictions from \cite{straubnew} and \cite{1407.8526}. We have also done the same exercise for the [1-6] bin of $S_5$ with identical outcome (see \cite{talk} for further details).
\subsection{\bf Non-Factorizable power corrections}
\medskip
Concerning non-factorizable contributions, we will separate the non-perturbative contributions appearing at subleading order in the $1/m_b$ expansion into two types. First we will single out the hadronic contribution not related to Wilson coefficients steaming from the piece of the three hadronic ${\cal T}_i(q^2)$ that parametrize the matrix element $\langle K^* \gamma^*|H_{eff}|B\rangle$. We obtain it taking the limit ${\cal T}_i^{\rm had} = {\cal T}_i|_{C_7^{(\prime)}\to0}$.
Finally, we multiply each of these amplitudes, that will serve as a normalization, with a complex $q^2$-dependent factor
\begin{equation}
{\cal T}_i^{\rm had}\to \big(1+r_i(q^2)\big) {\cal T}_i^{\rm had},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation} r_i(s) = r_i^a e^{i\phi_i^a} + r_i^b e^{i\phi_i^b} (s/m_B^2) + r_i^c e^{i\phi_i^c} (s/m_B^2)^2. \end{equation}
We define our central values as the ones with $r_i(q^2)\equiv0$, and estimate the uncertainties from non-factorizable power corrections
by varying $r_i^{a,b,c}\in [0,0.1]$ and $\phi_i^{a,b,c} \in [-\pi,\pi]$ independently, corresponding to a
$\sim 10\%$ correction with an arbitrary phase. The uncertainties for each observable are then obtained by performing a random
scan and taking the maximum deviation from the central values to each side, to obtain upward and
downward error bars. A separated discussion of the treatment of non-factorizable contributions coming from charm loops is given in next section.
\subsection{\bf Charm-loop pollution}
\medskip
Part of the $c{\bar c}$-loop contributions have been already included in the non-factorizable contributions (hard-gluon exchange). The remaining long-distance contributions from $c{\bar c}$ loops are still under debate. We will rely for these corrections on the partial computation \cite{KMPW}. It is important to remark that the soft-gluon contribution of \cite{KMPW} coming from 4-quark and penguin operators induces a {\it positive} contribution to $C_9^{\rm eff}$ whose effect is to enhance the anomaly. We are interested only in the long-distance contribution $\delta C_9^{\rm LD}(q^2)$, so we subtract the perturbative LO part and include the shift due to a different reference value for $m_c$ (see \cite{1407.8526} for more details on the procedure used). In order to be conservative, and in particular given the discussion on the sign of this contribution, we use the result of \cite{KMPW}
as an order of magnitude estimate, including it as
\begin{equation}
{\cal C}_{9} \to {\cal C}_{9} + s_i \delta C_9^{\rm LD}(q^2)\ ,
\end{equation}
with $s_i$ scanned in the range $[-1,1]$ individually for each amplitude $M_i$, with $i=1,2,3$
(remember that the result of the calculation is $s_i=1$).
In an attempt of explaining mainly $P_5^\prime$, the possibility of a huge charm contribution has been proposed \cite{zwicky}. As will be explained below the fundamental problem of this explanation is to focus on a single observable,
while it is important to consider the global picture and the combined input from all observables that can put in serious difficulty this explanation. At a practical level this explanation transfers the responsibility of the deviation from $C_9^{\rm NP}$ to a modified $Y(q^2)$ (with a prefactor) and adds a similar function (and prefactor) also to $C_9^\prime$. Here
$Y(q^2)$ is the 4-quark contribution to the effective Wilson coefficient $C_9^{\rm eff}$.
While $C_9^{\rm NP}$ is a global and constant effect entering all bins, the modified $Y(q^2)$ is a $q^2$ dependent function that is expected to give a small contribution around 2 GeV$^2$.
Several examples of the impact of an hypothetical parametrization for this function were presented in \cite{zwicky}. All the illustrative examples shown there are disfavoured for some observable, either $P_2$, $P_5^\prime$ or $P_1$, this shows the importance of performing a global analysis.
It is precisely the question of a global versus a local $q^2$ dependent effect
which discriminates between a NP scenario and a charm-loop effect.
For instance, as explained in \cite{1502.00920} the position of the maximum of the observable $P_2$ is practically unaffected by a hypothetical large charm contribution if one takes into account the experimental constraint on the zero of $P_2$ (the same as $A_{FB}$). This implies that while the shift in the position of the zero of $P_2$ could be explained with this hypothetical huge contribution, this is not the case for the maximum. On the contrary, a $C_9^{NP}$ contribution would shift in a precise way {\it both} the position of the maximum and the position of the zero of $P_2$. Present data seems to prefer a shift of both maximum and zero in contrast to the hypothetical large charm contribution. If new data confirms the double shift, the claim about a huge charm-loop contribution will be challenged.
A second fundamental problem of a large charm explanation is the recently measured
$R_K$ \cite{1406.6482}. It is clear that, given its universal character that does not distinguish muons from electrons,
the charm loop cannot explain $R_K$, while the same NP scenario that is favoured by the anomaly in $B \to K^*\mu^+\mu^-$ can explain it if NP couples only to muons \cite{ghosh}. Finally, the strong $q^2$ dependence of the charm loop proposed in \cite{zwicky} tends to generate more than one zero in the region of low $q^2$ for $P_2$ and $P_5^\prime$ (see plots of Fig.12 in \cite{zwicky}). If no second zero is found, many of those solutions will be severely constrained. If ${P_5^{\prime}}_{[6,8]}$ is equal or above ${P_5^{\prime}}_{[4,6]}$, it would provide a positive test in favour of this alternative explanation, and an important negative test otherwise.
\subsection{\bf Large statistical fluctuation and consistency tests on data}
\medskip
Another possible explanation of the strong deviation in the third bin of $P_5^\prime$ is the possibility of a purely statistical fluctuation or an isolated experimental problem in that bin. This is possible and very plausible if one decouples the third bin of $P_5^\prime$ from tensions in the rest of observables.
The aim behind the paper \cite{nicola} was to explore if it is possible to establish a connection between different observables under reasonable and well defined assumptions, but independently of any effective Hamiltonian computation, just relying on symmetry arguments of the distribution. If such a relation exists and is confirmed by experimental data, the anomaly in $P_5^\prime$ cannot be considered as an isolated problem.
A simple but powerful relation obtained in \cite{nicola} under the assumption of real Wilson coefficients shows that
\begin{equation} [P_4^{\prime 2} + \beta^2 P_5^{\prime 2}]_{q^2=q_0^2}=1 + \eta(q_0^2), \end{equation}
where $q_0^2$ is the position of the zero of $P_2$ and $\eta(q_0^2) \sim 10^{-3}$ if no RHC are present. This equation establishes a non-trivial link between the zero of $P_2$ and the anomaly in $P_5^\prime$. If the position of the zero of $P_2$ is at a higher $q^2$ value than predicted by the SM (${q_0^{2}}_{SM}=4$ GeV$^2$), then
taking into account that the measured $P_4^\prime$ has a strong positive slope towards 1, the value of $P_5^\prime(q_0^2)$ should be close to 0.
This implies that
the small value of $P_5^\prime$ in that region and the shift of the zero of $A_{FB}$ are two sides of the same coin. This establishes a strong link between two observables based on symmetries \cite{1202.4266,1005.0571}.
Also the more general relation \cite{nicola} \begin{equation}\label{relation} P_2 = \frac{1}{2} \left[ P_4^\prime P_5^\prime + \frac{1}{\beta} \sqrt{(-1 + P_1 + P_4^{\prime 2}) (-1 -P_1 + \beta^2 P_5^{\prime 2})}\right], \end{equation}
together with exact bounds like \cite{nicola} \begin{equation} P_5^{\prime 2}-1 \leq P_1 \leq 1-P_4^{\prime 2},\label{bound}\end{equation} allows to perform several tests on the data. Let us briefly mention some of them:
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)] A comparison between the measured value of $P_2$ and the value obtained from Eq.(\ref{relation}) using the measured values of $P_1$ and $P_{4,5}^\prime$ show an excellent agreement for the second bin (see Fig.1). The third bin shows a tension of 2.4$\sigma$ between the measured value of $P_2$ and the one obtained from Eq.(\ref{relation}).
This implies that data on the third bin should change either in $P_2$ or in $P_1$, $P_{4,5}^\prime$ to get a better consistency between the measured and the obtained value from the other measurements.
\item[ii)] The exact bound Eq.(\ref{bound}) implies that, if one writes $P_4^\prime =1 + \delta$ in the third large recoil bin, then $P_1 \leq -2 \delta + {\cal O}(\delta^2)$. If $P_1$ is positive (as data suggest) in that third bin, $\delta$ should be negative and $P_4^\prime$ be slightly below 1. This is consistent with data given the large error bars, although the higher positive values of $P_1$ would be in tension with that bound.
\item[iii)] Finally, the first low-recoil bin [14.18-16.00] GeV$^2$ shows a large discrepancy of 3.7$\sigma$ between the measured value for $P_2$ and the
value obtained from the data on $P_1$, $P_4^\prime$ and $P_5^\prime$. In this case, it is very plausible that the responsible of this disagreement can be traced to the value of $P_4^\prime$ in that bin.
\end{itemize}
A simple consequence for data in the third bin, pointed out in \cite{1407.8526} (see Appendix A3), can be easily found by combining i) and ii).
$P_2$ has a zero at $q_0^2$,implying that $P_2 = - \epsilon$ (with $\epsilon>0$) for $q^2 > q_0^2$, and from Eq.(\ref{relation}) it follows that
\begin{equation} P_5^\prime < -2 \frac{\epsilon}{1+\delta} \label{order}. \end{equation}
This implies that one should naturally expects $P_5^\prime$ to be below $P_2$ in that region, and this is the reason for the tension of 2.4$\sigma$ found in Fig.1. Consequently we expect that new data should rearrange the third bins of $P_2$ and $P_5^\prime$ making more manifest the ordering of these two observables.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[height=6cm,width=8cm]{p2compare.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{label} Comparison between the measured value of $P_2$ (blue cross) and the value obtained from the measurements of $P_1$, $P_{4,5}^\prime$ using Eq.(\ref{relation}) (green cross). Gray band is SM.}
\end{figure}
\section{S-wave pollution}
\medskip
Another source of pollution is due to events from the S-wave decay $B\to K_0^*(\to K\pi) \mu^+\mu^-$ where $K_0^*$ is a scalar resonance and its interference with the P-wave decay $B \to K^*(\to K\pi)\mu^+\mu^-$.
In Ref.~\cite{1207.4004} a detailed and complete calculation of the S-wave background was performed and it was concluded that any observable will unavoidably suffer from its pollution. While this conclusion is correct in the case of uniangular distributions, it does not apply to full or folded distributions where the P- and the S-wave parts can be separated according to their different angular dependence. As shown in Ref.~\cite{1209.1525}, S-wave pollution can easily be avoided for the $P_i^{(\prime)}$ observables if folded distributions are used instead of uniangular ones. A discussion of the experimental implications of the S-wave contribution was presented in Ref.~\cite{1210.5279} (see also Ref.~\cite{1307.0947}). A parametrization of these terms were given in \cite{1303.5794} together with a set of bounds on their size. Recently, it has been shown in \cite{1502.00920} using the symmetries of the distribution that only 4 (out of 6) of such parameters are independent and the explicit correlations among the over-complete six observables have been provided.
\section{\bf $Z^\prime$ particle, other scenarios and the importance of considering all bins}
\medskip
In \cite{understanding} the existence of a $Z^\prime$ boson was proposed as a possible explanation of the large negative contribution to $C_9$, with couplings $\Delta_R^{sb} \sim 0$ (in the notation of \cite{defazio1,defazio2}) not to give contributions to $C_9^\prime$, with $\Delta _L^{sb}$ having the same phase as $V_{tb} V_{ts}^*$ to avoid large contributions to the $B_s$ mixing phase $\phi_s$, and a left-right symmetric coupling to muons $\Delta^{\mu}=\Delta_L^{\mu\mu}=\Delta_R^{\mu\mu}$ not to contribute to $C_{10}$. Finally, the constraint coming from $\Delta m_s$ fixes the flavour-changing coupling $\Delta_L^{sb}$. A particle with couplings to muons $\Delta^{\mu}$ of order 0.1-0.2 and with a mass around 1-2 TeV would give the right contribution to $C_9$. Of course, this is an ad-hoc model and moreover, some of the coefficients that were taken to be zero in the first dataset may be switched on with more data. Later on there have been several attempts to embed a $Z^\prime$ particle inside specific models (see \cite{zprime1,zprime2,zprime3,zprime4}).
Recently, using a large set of observables it was confirmed in \cite{straubnew} that a solution with $C_9^{\rm NP}<0$ gives the best fit. In their analysis for the $B \to K^*\mu^+\mu^-$ mode the authors of \cite{straubnew} do not use the long [1-6] bin which has a lower sensitivity to some Wilson coefficients but smaller bins (two out of the three possible bins). Another interesting outcome of this work \cite{straubnew}, is the proposal of a second possible solution. There it is found that $C_9^{\rm NP}=-C_{10}^{\rm NP}$ could also provide an explanation (with only slightly worse $\chi^2$ as compared to a fit where only $C_9^{\rm NP}$ is switched on, see Table 2 in \cite{straubnew}) with all other coefficients switched off. This solution is an interesting possibility from a model-building point of view, but also because it would introduce NP in a cleaner coefficient $C_{10}$ (notice that this coefficient cannot receive any charm contribution). More in general, it has been found in \cite{grinstein}, under the assumption that the scale of NP is well above the electroweak scale, that if one imposes that the operators of the effective lagrangian originate from manifestly $SU(3)_c \times SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$ invariant high-scale operators, in the process of integrating the heavy degrees of freedom a set of relations between the coefficients of the effective operators arises at low scale. In particular, no tensor contribution are generated and scalar and pseudoscalar coefficients are correlated. The remaining semileptonic coefficients are still independent in general, but functions of the coefficients of the high scale operators. If some of those coefficients of the dimension 6 operators vanish, the coefficients at the low-scale would become correlated.
We have performed an exploratory scan analysis of the scenario $C_9^{\rm NP}=-C_{10}^{\rm NP}$, considering all three bins of the relevant observables $P_1$, $P_2$, $P_{4,5}^\prime$ together with ${\cal B}_{Bs \to \mu^+\mu^-}$, and taking 2$\sigma$ for the theory errors and enlarging the experimental errors of the third bins to 2$\sigma$ to cover possible changes in the data (see Section 3.4 and Fig. 1). The result of this very preliminary analysis is:
\begin{itemize}
\item If only the first two bins of $B \to K^* \mu^+\mu^-$ for the relevant observables (and $B_s \to \mu^+\mu^-$) are included we find points that fulfill the constraints \begin{equation} \quad C_9^{\rm NP}=-C_{10}^{\rm NP}<0, \quad C_i^{\prime}=0, \end{equation} confirming the result in \cite{straubnew} using our method and observables. Notice that this only proves that points exist that fulfill the constraints, but we did not test the quality of the fit for this exploratory scan. Of course, one should check if those points survive constraints from other observables like $B \to K\mu^+\mu^-$ as it was done in \cite{straubnew}. \item On the other hand, if also
the third bins for the relevant observables are included in the scan (not included in \cite{straubnew}), all the previous points disappear. The reason is easy to understand: in the same way as a large $C_9^\prime >0$ substantially worsens the anomaly (3rd bin) in $P_5^\prime$, also a positive $C_{10}^{\rm NP}$ tends to enhance the anomaly. This suggests the need to switch one other coefficients like $C_9^\prime$, $C_{10}^\prime$.
\end{itemize}
The new 3 fb$^{-1}$ data on $B \to K^* \mu^+\mu^-$ could easily confirm or erase and draw completely new scenarios.
\section{Conclusions and Outlook}
\medskip
Using a basis of optimized observables LHCb released in 2013 the 1 fb$^{-1}$ data of $B \to K^*\mu^+\mu^-$ which exhibited a set of coherent tensions focused mainly in the observables $P_2$ and $P_5^\prime$.
The analysis in \cite{understanding} using all large-recoil and low-recoil bins pointed clearly to a large negative NP contribution to the Wilson coefficient $C_9$, and with less significance also to a negative contribution to $C_7$, while all other coefficients were consistent with the SM. Later on, analyses done by other groups using different observables and methods \cite{1308.1501,1310.2478, 1310.3887, straubnew} and including the new 3 fb$^{-1}$ data of $B \to K \mu^+\mu^-$ and $B_s \to \phi \mu^+\mu^-$ confirmed this general pattern.
Here we have discussed additional subleading corrections that we included in the theoretical predictions given in \cite{1407.8526} to confront the new data. Particular emphasis has been put on factorizable and non-factorizable (specially coming from charm loops) power corrections. It is important to control these factorizable power corrections because they affect all $P_i$ and all $S_i$ observables if computed from QCDF approach as done in \cite{1407.8526,jaeger}. We have given details on our method to include the factorizable power corrections based on model-independent correlations and using an adequate scheme to define soft form factors. Moreover, we have explicitly shown using the example of the observable $S_5$ that the predictions obtained using two different methods to deal with those corrections \cite{1407.8526} and \cite{straubnew} (including correlations in a specific form factor parametrization or using symmetries to include the dominant ones together with dimensional arguments) are in excellent agreement.
We suggest simple tests to be done on the new data to test an alternative explanation that was suggested to explain the $P_5^\prime$ anomaly by the presence of huge charm-loop contributions. The simplest one consists in a comparison between the bins [4,6] and [6,8] of $P_5^\prime$. Moreover, the confirmation of the $R_K$ tension that could be explained simultaneously with the anomaly in $B \to K^* \mu^+\mu^-$ within the same NP scenario \cite{ghosh} (with couplings only to muons) but not via a large charm-loop contribution, would further challenge this alternative explanation.
We have also presented tests to perform on data, like comparing the measured value of $P_2$ with the one obtained from the measured values of $P_1$, $P_{4,5}^\prime$ that indicates that
future data should evolve such that the order of the bins between $P_5^\prime$ and $P_2$ in the region above 4 GeV$^2$ should flip, with $P_2$ moving above $P_5^\prime$.
Finally, we have done an exploratory scan using only a subset of relevant observables to see if we could find solutions consistent with the scenario $C_9^{\rm NP}=-C_{10}^{\rm NP}$ and $C_9^\prime=C_{10}^\prime=0$ recently proposed
in \cite{straubnew}. While we confirmed that
this scenario is perfectly viable if only the first two bins in $B \to K^*\mu^+\mu^-$ are taken into account (in agreement with \cite{straubnew}), we could not find solutions once the third bins are included.
We expect/hope that the new data can help to find the next step in the path towards NP and start switching on with sufficient significance other Wilson coefficients besides $C_9^{\rm NP}$.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
J.V. is funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) within research unit FOR 1873 (QFET). J.M. and L.H. acknowledge support from FPA2011-25948, 2014 SGR 1450.
\section*{References}
\medskip
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
One of the most important tasks at the LHC is to search for physics effects
beyond the Standard Model (SM), where the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard
Model (MSSM)~\cite{mssm,HaK85,GuH86} is one of the leading candidates.
Supersymmetry (SUSY) predicts two scalar partners for all SM fermions as well
as fermionic partners to all SM bosons.
Another important task of the LHC is the investigation of the mechanism
of electroweak symmetry breaking.
The most frequently studied realizations are the Higgs mechanism within the
SM and within the MSSM. Contrary to the case of the SM, in the MSSM two
Higgs doublets are required.
This results in five physical Higgs bosons instead of the single Higgs
boson in the SM. In lowest order these are the light and heavy
${\cal CP}$-even Higgs bosons, $h$ and $H$, the ${\cal CP}$-odd Higgs boson,
$A$, and two charged Higgs bosons, $H^\pm$. Within the MSSM with complex
parameters (cMSSM), taking higher-order corrections into account, the
three neutral Higgs bosons mix and result in the states
$h_i$ ($i = 1,2,3$)~\cite{mhiggsCPXgen,Demir,mhiggsCPXRG1,mhiggsCPXFD1}.
The Higgs sector of the cMSSM is described at the tree-level by two
parameters:
the mass of the charged Higgs boson, $\MHp$, and the ratio of the two
vacuum expectation values, $\tb \equiv \TB = v_2/v_1$.
Often the lightest Higgs boson, $h_1$ is identified with the particle
discovered at the LHC~\cite{ATLASdiscovery,CMSdiscovery} with a mass
around $\sim 125\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
If the mass of the charged Higgs boson is assumed to be larger than
$\sim 200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ the four additional Higgs bosons are roughly mass
degenerate, $\MHp \approx \mh2 \approx \mh3$ and referred to as the
``heavy Higgs bosons''.
Discovering one or more of those additional Higgs bosons would be an
unambiguous sign of physics beyond the SM and could yield important
information about their possible supersymmetric origin.
If SUSY is realized in nature and the charged Higgs-boson mass is
$\MHp \lesssim 1.5\,\, \mathrm{TeV}$, then the heavy Higgs bosons could be detectable
at the LHC~\cite{ATLAS-HA,CMS-HA} (including its high luminosity upgrade,
HL-LHC, see \citere{holzner} and references therein) and/or at a future
linear $e^+e^-$ collider such as the ILC~\cite{ILC-TDR,teslatdr,ilc} or
CLIC~\cite{CLIC}. (Results on the combination of LHC and ILC results can
be found in \citere{lhcilc}.)
The discovery potential at the HL-LHC goes up to \order{1\,\, \mathrm{TeV}} for
large $\tb$ values and somewhat lower at low $\tb$ values.
At an $e^+e^-$ linear collider the heavy Higgs
bosons are pair produced, and the reach is limited by the center of mass
energy, $\MHp \lesssim \sqrt{s}/2$, roughly independent of $\tb$.
Details about the discovery process(es) depend strongly
on the cMSSM parameters (and will not be further discussed in this paper).
In the case of a discovery of additional Higgs bosons a subsequent
precision measurement of their properties will be crucial determine
their nature and the underlying (SUSY) parameters.
In order to yield a sufficient accuracy, one-loop corrections to the
various Higgs-boson decay modes have to be considered.
Decays to SM fermions have been evaluated at the full one-loop level
in the cMSSM in \citere{hff}, see also \citere{hff0} as well as
\citeres{deltab,db2l} for higher-order SUSY corrections.
Decays to (lighter) Higgs bosons have been evaluated at the full
one-loop level in the cMSSM in \citere{hff}, see also \citeres{hhh,hAA}.
Decays to SM gauge bosons (see also \citere{hVV-WH}) can be evaluated
to a very high precision using the full SM one-loop
result~\cite{prophecy4f} combined with the appropriate effective
couplings~\cite{mhcMSSMlong}.
The full one-loop corrections in the cMSSM listed here together with
resummed SUSY corrections have been implemented into the code
\FH~\cite{feynhiggs,mhiggslong,mhiggsAEC,mhcMSSMlong,Mh-logresum}.
Corrections at and beyond the one-loop level in the MSSM with real
parameters (rMSSM) are implemented into the code
\HDECAY~\cite{hdecay,hdecay2}.
Both codes were combined by the LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group to
obtain the most precise evaluation for rMSSM Higgs boson decays to SM
particles and decays to lighter Higgs bosons~\cite{YR3}.
The (heavy) MSSM Higgs bosons can (if kinematically allowed) also decay
to SUSY particles, \ie to charginos, neutralinos and scalar fermions.
In \citere{benchmark4} it was demonstrated that the SUSY particle modes
can dominate the decay of the heavy Higgs bosons.
The lightest neutral Higgs boson, on the other hand, can have a
substantial branching ratio into the lightest neutralino,
$h_1 \to \neu1\neu1$, where the $\neu1$ constitutes the Dark Matter
candidate in the MSSM~\cite{EHNOS}. Bounds on $\mneu1$ often assume an
underlying SUSY grand unified theory, based on a simple Lie
group. Dropping these assumptions hardly any bound on $\mneu1$ can be
placed directly (see, e.g., \citere{masslessx} and references therein),
and the decay $h_1 \to \neu1\neu1$ is kinematically possible. In order
to determine the Dark Matter properties a precision measurement of this
process at the LHC or a future $e^+e^-$ collider will be necessary.
Higher-order contributions to MSSM Higgs boson decays to scalar fermions
have been evaluated in various analyses over the last decade. For
calculations in the rMSSM, see \citeres{Asfsf_1L,Phisqsq_1L,Phisqsq_als_2}
and references therein.
More recently, the results of \citere{Asfsf_1L} were made public in the
code \HFOLD~\cite{hfold}, using a pure \DRbar\ renormalization for the
calculation.
In \citere{Phisqsq_als_3} the \order{\alpha_s} corrections to Higgs boson
decays to scalar quarks were re-analyzed and included into the code \HDECAY.
Within the cMSSM a full one-loop calculation of Higgs boson decays to
scalar fermions has recently been published in \citere{HiggsDecaySferm} and
will be included into the code \FH.
These results were obtained in a renormalization
scheme~\cite{MSSMCT,SbotRen,Stop2decay,mhcMSSMlong,LHCxC,LHCxN,LHCxNprod},
which has been shown to yield stable results over nearly the full cMSSM
parameters space.
In this work we take another step in the direction of completion
of the calculation of \textit{all} two-body decays at the one-loop level
in the cMSSM in this stable and reliable renormalization scheme: we
calculate all two-body decay modes of the Higgs bosons to charginos and
neutralinos in the cMSSM. More specifically, we calculate the full
one-loop corrections to the partial decay widths
\begin{alignat}{3}
\label{eq:hchacha}
&\Gamma(\hChaDecay) &\qquad & (i = 1,2,3;\, c,\cpri = 1,2)\,, \\
\label{eq:hneuneu}
&\Gamma(\hNeuDecay) &\qquad & (i = 1,2,3;\, n,\npri = 1,2,3,4)\,, \\
\label{eq:Hpmneucha}
&\Gamma(\HpmDecay) &\qquad & (n = 1,2,3,4;\, c = 1,2)\,,
\end{alignat}
where $\chapm{c}$ ($\neu{n}$) denotes the charginos
(neutralinos).
While we have calculated the decay of all Higgs bosons, in the numerical
evaluation below, we will concentrate on the heavy Higgs bosons, $h_{2,3}$
and $H^\pm$, but also show results for $h_1 \to \neu1\neu1$.
The evaluation of the channels \refeqs{eq:hchacha} -- (\ref{eq:Hpmneucha})
is based on a full one-loop calculation, \ie including electroweak (EW)
corrections, as well as soft and hard QED radiation. For ``mixed'' decay
modes, we evaluate in addition the two ``${\cal CP}$-versions'' $(c \ne \cpri)$
of \refeq{eq:hchacha} and the two ``${\cal CP}$-versions'' of \refeq{eq:Hpmneucha},
which give different results for non-zero complex phases.
We restricted ourselves to a version of our renormalization scheme which
is valid for $|M_1| < |M_2|, |\mu|$ and $M_2 \neq \mu$ (where $M_1$ and
$M_2$ denote the soft SUSY-breaking parameter of the $U(1)$ and $SU(2)$
gauginos, and $\mu$ is the Higgs mixing parameter) to simplify the
analysis, even though we are able to switch to other parameter regions,
see the discussion in \citeres{LHCxC,LHCxN,LHCxNprod}
(see also \citere{onshellCNmasses}).
Higher-order contributions to MSSM Higgs boson decays to charginos and
neutralinos have been evaluated in various analyses over the last decade.
In \citere{AHn2n2c1c1} the leading Yukawa corrections to
$A/H \to \neu2\neu2, \chap1\cham1$ in the rMSSM have been evaluated,
employing an on-shell (OS) scheme
(referring to \citere{denner}, but without providing further details).
Next, in \citere{AHc12c12} the full one-loop corrections
to $A/H \to \chap{\cind}\cham{\cpri}$ ($c,\cpri = 1,2$) have been
presented in the rMSSM (again without details about the OS like
scheme). An effective Lagrangian approach for heavy neutral Higgs boson
decays in the rMSSM was published in \citere{AHnnccLeff}. The full one-loop
corrections to all heavy Higgs decays to charginos and neutralinos in
the rMSSM in the \DRbar\ scheme was published in the code
\HFOLD~\cite{hfold}. More recently also evaluations of Higgs boson
decays to charginos and neutralinos in the cMSSM became available.
In \citere{hHAcc-cMSSM} the decays $h_i \to \chap{\cind}\cham{\cpri}$,
($i = 1,2,3;\, c,\cpri = 1,2$) were presented, together with a short
discussion of different renormalization schemes (see \refse{sec:chaneu})
and brief analysis of the dependence on the phases of $\mu$, $M_1$ and the
trilinear Higgs stop coupling, $\At$.
The decays $h_i \to \neu{\nind}\neu{\npri}$
($i = 1,2,3;\, n,\npri = 1,2,3,4$) were calculated in \citere{dissAF},
where the numerical analysis concentrated on $h_{2,3} \to \neu2\neu2$
and the dependence on the phase of $\At$. The latter two references
are close to the calculations presented in this paper. Small differences
in the renormalization in the chargino/neutralino sector exist (see
\refse{sec:chaneu} and \citere{LHCxN}), where we use consistently the
scheme detailed in \citere{MSSMCT} for \textit{all} two-body decays
\textit{simultaneously}. In our numerical analysis we focus on the
one parameter
with a possible complex phase entering at the tree-level, $M_1$, see the
discussion in \refse{sec:calc}. A short numerical comparison with the
literature, in particular with \citeres{hfold,hHAcc-cMSSM,dissAF},
will be given in \refse{sec:comparisons}.
\medskip
In this paper we present a full one-loop calculation
for all two-body decay channels of the Higgs bosons into charginos
and neutralinos in the cMSSM, taking into account soft and hard QED
radiation. In \refse{sec:renorm} we briefly review the
relevant sectors of the cMSSM. Details about the calculation can be
found in \refse{sec:calc}, and the numerical results for all decay
channels are presented in \refse{sec:numeval}
(including comments on comparisons with results from other groups).
The conclusions can be found in \refse{sec:conclusions}.
It is planned to implement the evaluation of the branching ratios of the
heavy Higgs bosons into the Fortran code
\FH~\cite{feynhiggs,mhiggslong,mhiggsAEC,mhcMSSMlong,Mh-logresum},
together with an automated choice of the renormalization scheme valid
for the full cMSSM parameter space.
\section{The complex MSSM}
\label{sec:renorm}
The channels (\ref{eq:hchacha}) -- (\ref{eq:Hpmneucha}) are calculated
at the one-loop level, including soft and hard QED radiation.
This requires the simultaneous renormalization of several sectors of
the cMSSM: the Higgs and gauge boson sector as well as the
chargino/neutralino sector. In the following subsections we very
briefly review these sectors and their renormalization.
\subsection{The Higgs- and gauge-boson sector}
\label{sec:higgs}
The Higgs- and gauge-boson sector follow strictly \citere{MSSMCT} and
references therein (see especially \citere{mhcMSSMlong}).
This defines in particular the counterterm $\delta\tb \equiv \dTB$,
as well as the counterterms for the $Z$~boson mass, $\delta\MZ^2$, and
for the sine of the weak mixing angle, $\delta\SW$
(with $\SW = \sqrt{1 - \CW^2} = \sqrt{1 - \MW^2/\MZ^2}$,
where $\MW$ denotes the $W$~boson mass).
\subsection{The chargino/neutralino sector}
\label{sec:chaneu}
The chargino/neutralino sector is also described in detail in
\citere{MSSMCT} and references therein, see in particular
\citeres{LHCxC,LHCxN,LHCxNprod}. In this paper we use the so called
``CCN'' scheme, \ie OS conditions for two charginos and one
neutralino, which we chose to be the lightest one.
Renormalizing the two charged states OS, \ie ensuring that
they have the same mass at the tree- and at the loop-level is
(in general) crucial for the cancellation of the IR divergencies.
In the notation of \citere{MSSMCT} we used:
\begin{align*}
\Code{\$InoScheme = CCN[1]} \qquad
\text{fixed CCN scheme with on-shell } \neu1\,.
\end{align*}
\noindent
This defines in particular the counterterm $\delta\mu$, where $\mu$
denotes the Higgs mixing parameter.
This scheme yields numerically stable results for
$|M_1| < |M_2|, |\mu|$ and $M_2 \neq \mu$, \ie the lightest neutralino
is bino-like and defines the counterterm for
$M_1$~\cite{LHCxC,LHCxN,LHCxNprod,onshellCNmasses}. In the numerical
analysis this mass pattern holds. Switching to a different mass pattern,
e.g.\ with $|M_2| < |M_1|$ and/or $M_2 \sim \mu$ requires to switch to a
different renormalization scheme~\cite{MSSMCT,onshellCNmasses}. While
these schemes are implemented into the \FA/\FC\ framework~\cite{MSSMCT},
so far no automated choice of the renormalization scheme has been
devised. For simplicity we stick to the CCN[1] scheme with a matching
choice of SUSY parameters, see \refse{sec:paraset}.
Since both chargino masses $\mcha{1,2}$ and the lightest neutralino mass
$\mneu{1}$ have been chosen as independent parameters, the one-loop
masses of the heavier neutralinos $\neu{n}$ ($n$ = 2,3,4) are obtained
from the tree-level ones via the shifts \cite{dissAF}
\begin{alignat}{1}
\Delta \mneu{n}
&= -\Re \bigg\{\mneu{n} \LP \SE{\neu{n}}^L(\mneu{n}^2)
+ \frac{1}{2} \LB
\dZm{\neu{}}^L + \dbZm{\neu{}}^L
+ \dZm{\neu{}}^R + \dbZm{\neu{}}^R
\RB_{nn} \RP \notag \\
&\hspace{1.6cm} + \SE{\neu{n}}^{SL}(\mneu{n}^2)
- \mneu{n} \LB \dZm{\neu{}}^L + \dbZm{\neu{}}^L \RB_{nn}
- \LB \delta \matr{M}_{\neu{}} \RB_{nn}
\bigg\}\,,
\label{eq:Deltamneu}
\end{alignat}
where the renormalization constants $\dZm{}$ and $\dbZm{}$ can be
found in \citere{MSSMCT}.
For all externally appearing neutralino masses we use the (shifted)
``on-shell'' masses:
\begin{align}
\mneu{n}^\mathrm{os} &= \mneu{n} + \Delta \mneu{n}\,.
\label{eq:mneuOS}
\end{align}
In order to yield UV-finite results we use the tree-level values $\mneu{n}$
for all internally appearing neutralino masses in loop calculations.
\subsection{The fermion/sfermion sector}
\label{sec:sfermion}
To be in accordance with \citere{HiggsDecaySferm}, we use shifted
(s)fermion masses in the loop corrections.
As requirement for these shifts one needs the renormalization of the
fermion/sfermion sector:
\begin{itemize}
\item
The renormalization of the fermion sector is described in
detail in \citere{MSSMCT} and references therein.
For simplification we use the \DRbar\ renormalization for all
three generations of down-type quarks \textit{and} leptons,
again in the notation of \citere{MSSMCT}:
\begin{align*}
\Code{UVMf1[4,\,\uscore] = UVDivergentPart} &\qquad
\text{\DRbar\ renormalization for $m_d$, $m_s$, $m_b$} \\
\Code{UVMf1[2,\,\uscore] = UVDivergentPart} &\qquad
\text{\DRbar\ renormalization for $m_e$, $m_\mu$, $m_\tau$}
\end{align*}
\item
The renormalization of the sfermion sector differs
slightly from the one described in \citere{MSSMCT}.
For the squark sector we follow \citeres{SbotRen,Stop2decay}
(which agrees with the renormalization scheme used in
\citeres{LHCxC,LHCxN,Gluinodecay,Stau2decay})
and the slepton sector can be found in \citere{HiggsDecaySferm}.
Concerning our notation we denote as
$M_{\tilde{Q}_g, \tilde{L}_g, \tilde{U}_g, \tilde{D}_g, \tilde{E}_g}$,
the ``diagonal'' soft SUSY-breaking parameters for the $SU(2)$ squark,
slepton doublet, the u-, d-type squark singlet, and the e-type
slepton singlet, respectively, where $g$ is the generation index.
Furthermore we use $A_{\Fu_g,\Fd_g,\Fe_g}$ for the trilinear Higgs-scalar
u-, d-, e-type fermion couplings, respectively.
\end{itemize}
\section{Calculation of loop diagrams}
\label{sec:calc}
In this section we give some details about the calculation of the
higher-order corrections to the partial decay widths of Higgs bosons.
Sample diagrams for the decays $\hChaDecay$
($i = 1,2,3;\, c,\cpri = 1,2$), $\hNeuDecay$ ($i = 1,2,3;\, n,\npri = 1,2,3,4$)
and $\Hpdecay$ ($n = 1,2,3,4;\, c = 1,2$) are shown in \reffis{fig:hchacha},
\ref{fig:hneuneu} and \ref{fig:Hpneucha}, respectively.
Not shown are the diagrams for real (hard and soft) photon radiation.
They are obtained from the corresponding tree-level diagrams by
attaching a photon to the electrically charged particles.
The internal generically depicted particles in \reffis{fig:hchacha},
\ref{fig:hneuneu} and \ref{fig:Hpneucha} are labeled as follows:
$F$ can be a SM fermion $f$, chargino $\cha{c}$, neutralino $\neu{n}$;
$S$ can be a sfermion $\Sf_s$ or a Higgs (Goldstone) boson $h_i$ $(G)$;
$V$ can be a photon $\gamma$ or a massive SM gauge boson, $Z$ or $W^\pm$.
For internally appearing Higgs bosons no higher-order
corrections to their masses or couplings are taken into account;
these corrections would correspond to effects beyond one-loop order.%
\footnote{
We found that using loop corrected Higgs boson masses
in the loops leads to a UV divergent result.
}
For external Higgs bosons, as discussed in \citere{mhcMSSMlong}, the
appropriate $\hat{Z}$~factors are applied and OS masses
(including higher-order corrections) are used~\cite{mhcMSSMlong},
obtained with
\FH~\cite{feynhiggs,mhiggslong,mhiggsAEC,mhcMSSMlong,Mh-logresum}.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\framebox[15cm]{\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{hchacha}}
\caption{
Generic Feynman diagrams for the decay $\hChaDecay$
($i = 1,2,3;\, c,\cpri = 1,2$).
$F$ can be a SM fermion, chargino, neutralino;
$S$ can be a sfermion or a Higgs/Goldstone boson;
$V$ can be a $\gamma$, $Z$, $W^\pm$.
Not shown are the diagrams with a $h_i$--$Z$ or $h_i$--$G$
transition contribution on the external Higgs boson leg.
}
\label{fig:hchacha}
\vspace{1em}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\framebox[15cm]{\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{hneuneu}}
\caption{
Generic Feynman diagrams for the decay $\hNeuDecay$
($i = 1,2,3;\, n,n^\prime=1,2,3,4$).
$F$ can be a SM fermion, chargino, neutralino;
$S$ can be a sfermion or a Higgs/Goldstone boson;
$V$ can be a $Z$ or $W^\pm$.
Not shown are the diagrams with a $h_i$--$Z$ or $h_i$--$G$
transition contribution on the external Higgs boson leg.
}
\label{fig:hneuneu}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\framebox[15cm]{\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{Hpneucha}}
\caption{
Generic Feynman diagrams for the decay $\Hpdecay$
($n = 1,2,3,4;\, c = 1,2$).
(It should be noted that all arrows are inverted in case of a $H^-$ decay.)
$F$ can be a SM fermion, chargino, neutralino;
$S$ can be a sfermion or a Higgs/Goldstone boson;
$V$ can be a $\gamma$, $Z$, $W^\pm$.
Not shown are the diagrams with a $H^\pm$--$W^\pm$ or $H^\pm$--$G^\pm$
transition contribution on the external Higgs boson leg.
}
\label{fig:Hpneucha}
\vspace{1em}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Also not shown are the diagrams with a Higgs boson--gauge/Goldstone
self-energy contribution on the external Higgs boson leg.
They appear in the decay $\hChaDecay$, \reffi{fig:hchacha}
and $\hNeuDecay$, \reffi{fig:hneuneu}, with a $h_i$--$Z/G$
transition and in the decay $\HpmDecay$, \reffi{fig:Hpneucha},
with a $H^\pm$--$W^\pm$/$G^\pm$ transition.%
\footnote{
From a technical point of view, the $H^\pm$--$W^\pm$/$G^\pm$ transitions
have been absorbed into the respective counterterms, while the
$h_i$--$Z/G$ transitions have been calculated explicitly.
}
Furthermore, in general, in \reffis{fig:hchacha} -- \ref{fig:Hpneucha}
we have omitted diagrams with self-energy type corrections of external
(on-shell) particles. While the contributions from the real parts of
the loop functions are taken into account via the renormalization
constants defined by OS renormalization conditions, the
contributions coming from the imaginary part of the loop functions can
result in an additional (real) correction if multiplied by complex
parameters. In the analytical and numerical evaluation, these diagrams
have been taken into account via the prescription described in
\citere{MSSMCT}.
Within our one-loop calculation we neglect finite width effects that
can help to cure threshold singularities. Consequently, in the close
vicinity of those thresholds our calculation does not give a reliable
result. Switching to a complex mass scheme \cite{complexmassscheme}
would be another possibility to cure this problem, but its application
is beyond the scope of our paper.
The diagrams and corresponding amplitudes have been obtained with \FA\
\cite{feynarts}. The model file, including the MSSM counterterms,
is largely based on \citere{MSSMCT}, however adjusted to match exactly
the renormalization prescription described in \refse{sec:renorm}.
The further evaluation has been performed with \FC\ and \LT\
\cite{formcalc}.
\subsubsection*{Ultraviolet divergences}
As regularization scheme for the UV divergences we
have used constrained differential renormalization~\cite{cdr},
which has been shown to be equivalent to
dimensional reduction~\cite{dred} at the one-loop\ level~\cite{formcalc}.
Thus the employed regularization scheme preserves SUSY~\cite{dredDS,dredDS2}
and guarantees that the SUSY relations are kept intact, \eg that the
gauge couplings of the SM vertices and the Yukawa couplings of the
corresponding SUSY vertices also coincide to one-loop\ order in the SUSY limit.
Therefore no additional shifts, which might occur when using a different
regularization scheme, arise.
All UV divergences cancel in the final result.
\subsubsection*{Infrared divergences}
The IR divergences from diagrams with an internal photon have
to cancel with the ones from the corresponding real soft radiation.
In the case of QED we have included the soft photon contribution
following the description given in \citere{denner}.
The IR divergences arising from the diagrams involving a $\gamma$
are regularized by introducing a photon mass parameter, $\lambda$.
All IR divergences, \ie all divergences in the limit $\lambda \to 0$,
cancel once virtual and real diagrams for one decay channel are added.
\subsubsection*{Tree-level formulas}
For completeness we show here also the formulas that have been
used to calculate the tree-level decay widths:
\begin{align}
\label{HpmTree}
\Gamma^{\rm tree}(\HpmDecay) &= \Big[ \LP
|C(H^\pm, \neu{n}, \cha{c})_L|^2
+ |C(H^\pm, \neu{n}, \cha{c})_R|^2 \RP
(\MHp^2 - \mneu{n}^2 - \mcha{c}^2) \notag \\
&\qquad - 4\, \Re \LV C(H^\pm, \neu{n}, \cha{c})_L^*\,
C(H^\pm, \neu{n}, \cha{c})_R \RV\,
\mneu{n}\, \mcha{c} \Big] \times \notag \\
&\mathrel{\phantom{=}}
\frac{\lambda^{1/2}(\MHp^2,\mneu{n}^2,\mcha{c}^2)}
{16\, \pi\, \MHp^3} \qquad
(c = 1,2;\, n = 1,2,3,4)\,, \\
\label{hChaTree}
\Gamma^{\rm tree}(\hChaDecay) &= \Big[ \LP
|C(h_i, \cham{\cind}, \chap{\cpri})_L|^2
+ |C(h_i, \cham{\cind}, \chap{\cpri})_R|^2 \RP
(\mh{i}^2 - \mcham{\cind}^2 - \mchap{\cpri}^2) \notag \\
&\qquad - 4\,
\Re \LV C(h_i, \cham{\cind}, \chap{\cpri})_L^*\,
C(h_i, \cham{\cind}, \chap{\cpri})_R \RV\,
\mcham{\cind}\, \mchap{\cpri} \Big] \times \notag \\
&\mathrel{\phantom{=}}
\frac{\lambda^{1/2}(\mh{i}^2,\mcham{\cind}^2,\mchap{\cpri}^2)}
{16\, \pi\, \mh{i}^3} \qquad
(i = 1,2,3;\, c,\cpri = 1,2)\,, \\
\label{hNeuTree}
\Gamma^{\rm tree}(\hNeuDecay) &= \Big[ \LP
|C(h_i, \neu{n}, \neu{\npri})_L|^2
+ |C(h_i, \neu{n}, \neu{\npri})_R|^2 \RP
(\mh{i}^2 - \mneu{\nind}^2 - \mneu{\npri}^2) \notag \\
&\qquad - 4\,
\Re \LV C(h_i, \neu{\nind}, \neu{\npri})_L^*\,
C(h_i, \neu{\nind}, \neu{\npri})_R \RV\,
\mneu{\nind}\, \mneu{\npri} \Big] \times \notag \\
&\mathrel{\phantom{=}}
\frac{\lambda^{1/2}(\mh{i}^2,\mneu{\nind}^2,\mneu{\npri}^2)}
{16\, \pi\, \mh{i}^3} \qquad
(i = 1,2,3;\, n,\npri = 1,2,3,4)\,,
\end{align}
where $\lambda(x,y,z) = (x - y - z)^2 - 4yz$.
The couplings $C(a, b, c)$ can be found in the \FA~model
files, see \citere{feynarts-mf}.
$C(a, b, c)_{L,R}$ denote the part of the coupling which
is proportional to $(\unity \mp \gamma_5)/2$.
For the later interpretation of the results in the numerical analysis the
following should be kept in mind. In \refeqs{hChaTree}, (\ref{hNeuTree})
the couplings of the Higgs to charginos/neutralinos result in a relative
plus (minus) sign between the two terms (in the first and second line of
each equation, respectively) for $h_i$ being a ${\cal CP}$-odd (${\cal CP}$-even) Higgs,
leading to an enhancement (suppression) of the decay width.
In case of equal final state masses ($c = \cpri$ or $n = \npri$) one finds
in \FA\ convention%
\footnote{
It should be noted that the convention for Feynman rules in
\citere{HaK85} and in \citere{feynarts-mf} differ by a
global factor of $-i$, which would formally lead to
$C(h_i, \ino{}, \ino{})_L = +C(h_i, \ino{}, \ino{})^*_R$.
However, the physics outcome remains, of course, unchanged.
}%
~$C(h_i, \ino{}, \ino{})_L = -C(h_i, \ino{}, \ino{})^*_R =:
C(h_i, \ino{}, \ino{})$,
and the general structure of the tree-level decay width simplifies
for \textit{real} parameters to
\begin{align}
\label{hOddTree}
\Gamma^{\rm tree}(h_i \to \ino{} \ino{}) &=
\frac{|C(h_i, \ino{}, \ino{})|^2}{8\, \pi}
\LB \mh{i}^2 - 4\, m_{\ino{}}^2 \RB^{(1/2)}
\qquad \text{for $h_i$ ${\cal CP}$-odd}\,, \\
\label{hEvenTree}
\Gamma^{\rm tree}(h_i \to \ino{} \ino{}) &=
\frac{|C(h_i, \ino{}, \ino{})|^2}{8\, \pi\, \mh{i}^2}
\LB \mh{i}^2 - 4\, m_{\ino{}}^2 \RB^{(3/2)}
\qquad \text{for $h_i$ ${\cal CP}$-even}\,.
\end{align}
The latter decay width exhibits a $p$-wave suppression.
\section{Numerical analysis}
\label{sec:numeval}
In this section we present the comparisons with results from other groups
and our numerical analysis of the light and heavy Higgs boson decay
channels into charginos and neutralinos in the cMSSM.
In the various figures below we show the partial decay widths and their
relative correction at the tree-level (``tree'') and at the one-loop
level (``full'').
\subsection{Comparisons}
\label{sec:comparisons}
We performed exhaustive comparisons with results from other groups
for Higgs boson decays into charginos and neutralinos.
Most of these comparisons were restricted to the MSSM with real
parameters.
\begin{itemize}
\item
A comparison with \citere{AHn2n2c1c1} (in the rMSSM) gave an overall
qualitative agreement for the decays $H/A \to \chap1 \cham1$, as was
to be expected, because that work took into account only the
leading Yukawa corrections and used a different renormalization
scheme. On the other hand, we omit a comparison with the results for
$H/A \to \neu2 \neu2$ of \citere{AHn2n2c1c1}, because in their set-up
neutralino masses were used as input parameters, which is rather
difficult to adapt to our numerical analysis set-up.
\item
For the comparison with \citere{AHc12c12} we calculated the decays
$A/H \to \chap1 \cham1$ at $\order{\alpha(\MZ)}$, using their input
parameters as far as possible. We found good (qualitative) agreement
with \citere{AHc12c12} (where the calculation was restricted to the
rMSSM). We successfully reproduced their Figs.~2, 4, 5 and~6, where
only a small difference remains due to the different renormalization
schemes, see also \refta{tab:Ibrahim} with differences below 5\%.
\item
We performed a numerical comparison with \citere{AHnnccLeff} for the
decay $H/A \to \chap{1} \cham{1}$ at $\order{\alpha(\MZ)}$ (in the rMSSM),
see \refta{tab:Ibrahim}, where the columns for \citere{AHc12c12}
and \citere{AHnnccLeff} where taken over from Tab.~1 of the first
article in \citere{AHnnccLeff}. Their set-up differs from ours in the
renormalization of the chargino/neutralino sector, leading to different
loop corrections.
Furthermore they used an ``effective one-loop Lagrangian''.
Nevertheless, using their input parameters as far as possible, we found
differences below the 10\%~level.
\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{\label{tab:Ibrahim}
Comparison of the 1-loop corrected partial decay widths
(in GeV) with \citere{AHnnccLeff}.
}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{llrrr}
\toprule
Process & Mass & \citere{AHc12c12} & \citere{AHnnccLeff} & \FT \\
\midrule
$A^0 \to \chap1 \cham1$ & $M_A = 700$ & 0.85 & 0.80 & 0.83 \\
$A^0 \to \chap1 \cham1$ & $M_A = 800$ & 1.00 & 0.91 & 0.96 \\
$H^0 \to \chap1 \cham1$ & $M_H = 800$ & 0.63 & 0.58 & 0.64 \\
$H^0 \to \chap1 \cham1$ & $M_H = 900$ & 0.73 & 0.70 & 0.75 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\end{table}
\item
A numerical comparison with the program \HFOLD~\citere{hfold}
at the benchmark point SPS1a` (proposed in the SPA project~\cite{spa})
can be found in \refta{tab:hfold}.
Only for this point sufficient details about the chargino/neutralino
masses was available for a numerical comparison.
In \refta{tab:hfold} we show the full one-loop results
of \HFOLD, using \DRbar\ masses for the internal and external
particles, corresponding to the full \DRbar\ renormalization used in
the code (where the renormalization scale was set to $1\,\, \mathrm{TeV}$~\cite{spa}).
Our results, labeled \FT, are evaluated using our
renormalization scheme, but inserting the \HFOLD\ \DRbar\ masses.
In the tree-level results we find more than 10 digits agreement and
in the full results we find agreement of 3\% -- 15\% (7\% on average).
\HFOLD\ also offers to switch to (the recommended) OS masses
for the external particles. In this case, we are including in our
calculation $\mneu{2}^\mathrm{os}$ as described in \refse{sec:chaneu},
\refeq{eq:mneuOS}, but using the same OS Higgs boson masses as in
\HFOLD. With it the agreement between the two calculations is
11\% on average (5\% -- 22\%).
\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{\label{tab:hfold}
Comparison of the 1-loop corrected partial decay widths
(in $10^{-1}\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$) with \HFOLD.
}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lrrcrr}
\toprule
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{OS masses} & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\DRbar\ masses} \\
\cmidrule{2-3}\cmidrule{5-6}
Process & \HFOLD & \FT & & \HFOLD & \FT \\
\midrule
$H^0 \to \neu1 \neu1$ & 0.1381 & 0.1648 & & 0.1046 & 0.1229 \\
$H^0 \to \neu1 \neu2$ & 0.4584 & 0.4908 & & 0.2690 & 0.2828 \\
$H^0 \to \neu2 \neu2$ & 0.2061 & 0.2259 & & 0.0117 & 0.0111 \\
$H^0 \to \chap1 \cham1$ & 0.5262 & 0.5672 & & 0.0345 & 0.0332 \\
$A^0 \to \neu1 \neu1$ & 0.2044 & 0.2404 & & 0.1704 & 0.2016 \\
$A^0 \to \neu1 \neu2$ & 0.9693 & 1.0248 & & 0.7334 & 0.7750 \\
$A^0 \to \neu2 \neu2$ & 1.1652 & 1.0747 & & 0.3966 & 0.3791 \\
$A^0 \to \chap1 \cham1$ & 2.8604 & 2.6454 & & 1.0236 & 0.9928 \\
$H^+ \to \neu1 \chap1$ & 1.2981 & 1.4307 & & 0.9333 & 0.9996 \\
$H^+ \to \neu2 \chap1$ & 0.0063 & 0.0081 & & 0.0026 & 0.0030 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\end{table}
\item
Decays of $h_{2,3}$ to charginos in the cMSSM at the full one-loop
level have been numerically compared with \citere{hHAcc-cMSSM} using their
latest \FA/\FC\ model file implementation. We found overall agreement
better than 1\% in the loop corrections for real and complex parameters.%
\footnote{
It should be noted that the original code used for \citere{hHAcc-cMSSM}
is no longer available~\cite{aoife}, where we found some numerical
differences with the results shown in \citere{hHAcc-cMSSM} in the case
of complex parameters.
}
\item
$h_{2,3}$ boson decays into $\neu2 \neu2$ in the cMSSM have been analyzed
in \citere{dissAF}. Again we had to use here the latest \FA/\FC\ model
file implementation of \citere{hHAcc-cMSSM} (which bases mainly on code
from \citere{dissAF}) for the same reasons as described in the
previous item. In comparison with that model file \cite{hHAcc-cMSSM} we
found overall agreement better than 2\% in the loop corrections for real
and complex parameters.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Parameter settings}
\label{sec:paraset}
The renormalization scale $\mu_R$ has been set to the mass of the
decaying Higgs boson. The SM parameters are chosen as follows;
see also \cite{pdg}:
\begin{itemize}
\item Fermion masses (on-shell masses, if not indicated differently):
\begin{align}
m_e &= 0.510998928\,\, \mathrm{MeV}\,, & m_{\nu_e} &= 0\,\, \mathrm{MeV}\,, \notag \\
m_\mu &= 105.65837515\,\, \mathrm{MeV}\,, & m_{\nu_{\mu}} &= 0\,\, \mathrm{MeV}\,, \notag \\
m_\tau &= 1776.82\,\, \mathrm{MeV}\,, & m_{\nu_{\tau}} &= 0\,\, \mathrm{MeV}\,, \notag \\
m_u &= 68.7\,\, \mathrm{MeV}\,, & m_d &= 68.7\,\, \mathrm{MeV}\,, \notag \\
m_c &= 1.275\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\,, & m_s &= 95.0\,\, \mathrm{MeV}\,, \notag \\
m_t &= 173.21\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\,, & m_b &= 4.18\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\,.
\end{align}
According to \citere{pdg}, $m_s$ is an estimate of a so-called
"current quark mass" in the \MSbar\ scheme at the scale
$\mu \approx 2\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$. $m_c \equiv m_c(m_c)$ and $m_b \equiv m_b(m_b)$
are the "running" masses in the \MSbar\ scheme.%
\footnote{
It should be noted, that in the analysis below, we use the \DRbar\
mass $m_b^{\DRbar}$ from Eq.(19) of \citere{HiggsDecaySferm}.
}
$m_u$ and $m_d$ are effective parameters, calculated through the hadronic
contributions to
\begin{align}
\Delta\alpha_{\text{had}}^{(5)}(M_Z) &=
\frac{\alpha}{\pi}\sum_{f = u,c,d,s,b}
Q_f^2 \Bigl(\ln\frac{M_Z^2}{m_f^2} - \frac 53\Bigr) \sim 0.027723\,.
\end{align}
\item Gauge boson masses\index{gaugebosonmasses}:
\begin{align}
M_Z = 91.1876\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\,, \qquad M_W = 80.385\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\,.
\end{align}
\item Coupling constant\index{couplingconstants}:
\begin{align}
\alpha(0) = 1/137.0359895\,.
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
The Higgs sector quantities (masses, mixings, etc.) have been
evaluated using \FH\ (version 2.10.2)
\cite{feynhiggs,mhiggslong,mhiggsAEC,mhcMSSMlong,Mh-logresum}.
\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{\label{tab:para}
MSSM parameters for the initial numerical investigation; all parameters
(except of $\TB$) are in GeV (calculated masses are rounded to 1 MeV).
In our analysis $M_{\tilde Q_3}$, $M_{\tilde U_3}$, $M_{\tilde D_3}$,
$M_{\tilde L_3}$ and $M_{\tilde E_3}$ are chosen such that the values of
$\mstop1$, $\mstop2$, $\msbot2$, $\mtausneu$ and $\mstau2$ are realized.
For the sfermion sector the shifts in $M_{\tilde Q, \tilde D}(\Sd_g)$ and
$M_{\tilde L, \tilde E}(\Se_g)$ as defined in \citere{HiggsDecaySferm} are
taken into account. The values for the trilinear sfermion Higgs
couplings, $A_{\Fu_g,\Fd_g,\Fe_g}$ ($g = 1,2,3$; identical for all~$g$)
are chosen such that charge- and/or color-breaking minima are
avoided~\cite{ccb}. It should be noted that for the first and second
generation of sfermions we chose instead $M_{\tilde L, \tilde E} = 1500\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$
and $M_{\tilde Q, \tilde U, \tilde D} = 2000\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$. For the neutralino sector
the shifts in \refeq{eq:Deltamneu} are taken into account.
}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lrrrrrrrrrrrrr}
\toprule
Scen. & $\TB$ & $\mu$ & $A_{\Fu_g}$ & $A_{\Fd_g}$ & $A_{\Fe_g}$ & $|M_1|$ &
$M_2$ & $M_3$ & $\mstop1$ & $\mstop2$ & $\msbot2$ & $\mtausneu$ & $\mstau2$ \\
\midrule
SX & 10 & 500 & 1200 & 600 & 1000 & 300 & 600 & 1500
& 394 & 771 & 582 & 280 & 309 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\begin{tabular}{lrrrrr}
\toprule
Scen. & S1 & S2 & S3 & S4 & S5 \\
$\MHp$ & 700 & 900 & 1000 & 1200 & 1400 \\
\midrule
$\mh1$ & 123.487 & 123.509 & 123.517 & 123.529 & 123.539 \\
$\mh2$ & 694.483 & 895.594 & 996.769 & 1195.095 & 1397.300 \\
$\mh3$ & 695.425 & 896.931 & 996.818 & 1197.407 & 1398.600 \\
$\mstau1$ & 282.705 & 282.573 & 282.517 & 282.420 & 282.336 \\
$\msbot1$ & 513.733 & 513.621 & 513.578 & 513.509 & 513.455 \\
$\mneu1$ & 295.269 & 295.269 & 295.269 & 295.269 & 295.269 \\
$\mneu2$ & 476.772 & 476.763 & 476.759 & 476.753 & 476.748 \\
$\mneu3$ & 496.992 & 496.988 & 496.986 & 496.983 & 496.980 \\
$\mneu4$ & 632.326 & 632.324 & 632.324 & 632.323 & 632.322 \\
$\mcha1$ & 472.534 & 472.534 & 472.534 & 472.534 & 472.534 \\
$\mcha2$ & 632.167 & 632.167 & 632.167 & 632.167 & 632.167 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
We emphasize again that the analytical calculation has been done for
\textit{all} decays into charginos/neutralinos. Results are shown for
some representative numerical examples. The parameters are chosen
according to the scenarios, SX (X = 1,2,...,5), shown in \refta{tab:para},
unless otherwise noted.
The scenarios are defined such that a maximum number of decay modes are
open simultaneously to permit an analysis of all channels, \ie not picking
specific parameters for each decay. For the same reason we do not demand
that the lightest Higgs boson has a mass around $\sim 125\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$, although
for most of the parameter space this is given.
For the light Higgs we will show the variation with
$\MHp$, $|\mu|$, $M_1$ and $\varphi_{M_1}$
(where the latter denotes the phase of the gaugino mass parameter $M_1$),
whereas for the heavy Higgs bosons we will analyze the variation of
$\MHp$ and $\varphi_{M_1}$.
The numerical results shown in the next subsections are of course
dependent on choice of the SUSY parameters. Nevertheless, they give an
idea of the relevance of the full one-loop corrections. Channels
(and their respective one-loop corrections) that may look unobservable
due to the smallness of their decay width in the plots shown below,
could become important if other channels are kinematically forbidden.
\subsection{Full one-loop results for varying \boldmath{$\MHp$},
\boldmath{$M_1$}, and \boldmath{$\varphi_{M_1}$}}
\label{sec:full1L}
The results shown in this and the following subsections consist of
``tree'', which denotes the tree-level value and of ``full'', which
is the partial decay width including \textit{all} one-loop corrections
as described in \refse{sec:calc}.
We restrict ourselves to the analysis of the decay widths themselves,
since the one-loop effects on the branching ratios are strongly
parameter dependent, as discussed in the previous subsection.
When performing an analysis involving complex parameters it should be
noted that the results for physical observables are affected only by
certain combinations of the complex phases of the parameters $\mu$,
the trilinear couplings $A_f$ and the gaugino mass parameters
$M_{1,2,3}$~\cite{MSSMcomplphasen,SUSYphases}.
It is possible, for instance, to rotate the phase $\varphi_{M_2}$ away.
Experimental constraints on the (combinations of) complex phases
arise, in particular, from their contributions to electric dipole
moments of the electron and the neutron (see \citeres{EDMrev2,EDMPilaftsis}
and references therein), of the deuteron~\cite{EDMRitz} and of heavy
quarks~\cite{EDMDoink}.
While SM contributions enter only at the three-loop level, due to its
complex phases the MSSM can contribute already at one-loop order.
Large phases in the first two generations of sfermions can only be
accommodated if these generations are assumed to be very heavy
\cite{EDMheavy} or large cancellations occur~\cite{EDMmiracle};
see, however, the discussion in \citere{EDMrev1}.
A review can be found in \citere{EDMrev3}.
Accordingly (using the convention that $\varphi_{M_2} = 0$, as done in this paper),
in particular, the phase $\varphi_{\mu}$ is tightly constrained~\cite{plehnix},
while the bounds on the phases of the third generation trilinear couplings
are much weaker. Setting $\varphi_{\mu} = 0$ and $\varphi_{A_f} = 0$ leaves us with
$\varphi_{M_1}$ as the only complex valued parameter.
Since now the complex gaugino mass parameter $M_1$ can appear in the
couplings, contributions from absorptive parts of self-energy type
corrections on external legs can arise. The corresponding formulas
for an inclusion of these absorptive contributions via finite wave
function correction factors can be found in \citeres{MSSMCT,Stop2decay}.
We begin the numerical analysis with partial decay widths of $H^\pm$
evaluated as a function of $\MHp$, starting at $\MHp = 600\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$
up to $\MHp = 1.6\,\, \mathrm{TeV}$, which roughly coincides with the reach of
the LHC for high-luminosity running as well as an $e^+e^-$ collider
with a center-of-mass energy up to $\sqrt{s} \sim 3\,\, \mathrm{TeV}$~\cite{CLIC}.
Then we turn to the $h_i$ ($i = 1,2,3$) decays.
Finally, it should be noted that we expect from the tree-level
formulas \refeqs{HpmTree} -- (\ref{hNeuTree}) that the decay widths
increase (roughly) linearly with the corresponding Higgs boson masses.
\subsubsection{\boldmath{$H^\pm$} decays into charginos/neutralinos}
\label{Hpdecays}
In \reffis{fig:Hneu1cha1} -- \ref{fig:Hneu4cha2} we show the results
for the processes $\HpmDecay$ ($n = 1,2,3,4;\, c = 1,2$) as a function
of $\MHp$ and as a function of the relevant complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$.
These are of particular interest for LHC
analyses~\cite{stopstophiggs-LHC,Higgsincascades}
(as emphasized in \refse{sec:intro}).
The various visible (or hardly visible) dips/thresholds occurring for
different values of $\MHp$ in the plots are summarized in
\refta{tab:cthreshold}, labeled TC1 to TC7.
\medskip
We start with the decay $H^\pm \to \neu1 \cha1$.
In the left plot of \reffi{fig:Hneu1cha1} the first (small) dip
is the threshold TC1, see \refta{tab:cthreshold}.
The second (large) dip is an effect due to the threshold TC2.
The third ``apparently single'' dip is in reality two dips coming
from the thresholds TC3 and TC4.
The fourth (small) dip is the threshold TC5 and the last
(large) one is the threshold TC6.
The size of the corrections of the partial decay widths can be
especially large very close to the production threshold%
\footnote{
It should be noted that a calculation very close to the production
threshold requires the inclusion of additional (nonrelativistic)
contributions, which is beyond the scope of this paper.
Consequently, very close to the production threshold our calculation
(at the tree- and loop-level) does not provide a very accurate
description of the decay width.
}
from which on the considered decay mode is kinematically possible.
Away from this production threshold relative corrections of $\sim +10\%$
are found.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:Hneu1cha1} we show the results for
the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied for $\MHp = 1000\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$. The full
corrections are up to $\sim +13\%$ at $\varphi_{M_1} = 180^\circ$.
At $\varphi_{M_1} = 90^\circ$ the $H^+$ ($H^-$) full corrections reach
$\sim +12\%$ ($\sim +10\%$). Clearly visible is the ${\cal CP}$-asymmetry
for the decays of the $H^+$ and $H^-$, which can reach the level of
several per-cent.
\medskip
In \reffi{fig:Hneu1cha2} we show the results for $H^\pm \to \neu1 \chapm2$.
The tree-level decay width $\Gamma(H^\pm \to \neu1 \chapm2)$ is accidently
very small for the parameter set chosen, see \refta{tab:para}.
Because of this smallness, the relative size of the one-loop correction
becomes larger than the tree-level result, and can even turn the
decay width, $\propto |\cMt|^2 + 2\Re\{\cMt^*\, \cMl^{}\}$, negative.
Therefore, in this case we added $|\cMl|^2$ to the full
one-loop result to obtain a positive decay width.
In the left plot the first (large) spike is the threshold
TC2, see \refta{tab:cthreshold} enhanced through the two-loop
contribution $|\cMl|^2$ (\ie without the explicit two-loop correction
the spike would be a ``usual dip'').
The second ``apparently single spike'' (hardly visible) is (again) in
reality the two thresholds TC3 and TC4.
The next (apparently single) ``dip'' is in reality two steps
(anomalous thresholds, see \citere{tHooft}) traced back to the
$C$-functions
$C_{0,1,2}(\MHp^2,\mcha2^2,\mneu1^2,\mneu4^2,\mcha1^2,\mh1^2)$ at
$\MHp \approx 1126\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ and
$C_{0,1,2}(\MHp^2,\mcha2^2,\mneu1^2,\mcha2^2,\mneu2^2,\MW^2)$ at
$\MHp \approx 1129\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.%
\footnote{
In addition both steps are contorted through
the higher order contributions $|\cMl|^2$.
}
Not visible (in the plot) is a spike, which is the threshold TC5.
The last spike is the threshold TC6.
Relative corrections of $\sim -90\%$ are found at $\MHp = 1000\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$
(see \refta{tab:para}), where it should be kept in mind that the
tree-level is already accidentally very small and thus loop corrections
can have a relatively large impact.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:Hneu1cha2} the results are shown for
S3\ as a function of $\varphi_{M_1}$. At $\varphi_{M_1} = 180^\circ$ the full
corrections reach $\sim -55\%$, again related to the accidentally
small tree-level result. At $\varphi_{M_1} = 90^\circ$ the $H^+$
($H^-$) full corrections reach $\sim -59\%$ ($\sim -62\%$), showing
a small ${\cal CP}$-asymmetry.
\medskip
Next, in \reffi{fig:Hneu2cha1} the results for $H^\pm \to \neu2 \cha1$
are displayed. In the left plot the results are shown as a function
of $\MHp$. The four visible dips here are exactly the same as in
\reffi{fig:Hneu1cha1} (described above), beginning at $\MHp = 976\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
Relative corrections of $\sim +33\%$ ($\sim +21\%$) are found at
$\MHp = 1000\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ ($\MHp = 1400\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$), see \refta{tab:para}.
In the right plot the results are displayed as a function of $\varphi_{M_1}$
in S3, \ie for $\MHp = 1000\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
One can see that the size of the tree-level as well as the corrections
to the partial decay width vary substantially with the complex phase
$\varphi_{M_1}$. For all $\varphi_{M_1}$ the full corrections lie between
$+29\%$ and $+70\%$.%
\footnote{
It should be noted that the loop corrections can reach
$+70\%$ of the tree results because at $\varphi_{M_1} = 180^\circ$
the tree-level decay width is accidently small, see the
right plot of \reffi{fig:Hneu2cha1}.
}
At $\varphi_{M_1} = 90^\circ$ the $H^+$ ($H^-$) full one-loop corrections
reach $\sim +29\%$ ($\sim +48\%$), \ie the ${\cal CP}$-asymmetry is
rather large with $\sim \pm 19\%$.
\medskip
The decay $H^\pm \to \neu2 \cha2$ is shown in \reffi{fig:Hneu2cha2}.
In the left plot the results are shown as a function of $\MHp$.
The first (hardly visible) dip is (again) the threshold
TC5, see \refta{tab:cthreshold} and the second (large) one is
the threshold TC6.
The decay width turns out to be relatively large at \order{1\,\, \mathrm{GeV}}.
Relative corrections of $\sim +6\%$ ($\sim +4\%$) are found at
$\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ ($\MHp = 1400\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$), see \refta{tab:para}.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:Hneu2cha2} the results are displayed
as a function of $\varphi_{M_1}$ in S4, \ie for $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
The full corrections at $\varphi_{M_1} = 180^\circ$ reach $\sim +7\%$.
On the other hand it can be seen that the variation with $\varphi_{M_1}$
and the ${\cal CP}$-asymmetries ($\sim \pm 0.1\%$) are rather small.
\medskip
Next, in \reffi{fig:Hneu3cha1} the results for $H^\pm \to \neu3 \cha1$
are displayed. In the left plot the results are shown as a function
of $\MHp$. Here the four visible dips are the same as in
\reffi{fig:Hneu1cha1}, beginning at $\MHp = 976\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
Relative corrections of $\sim -18\%$ ($\sim -10\%$) are found at
$\MHp = 1000\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ ($\MHp = 1400\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$), see \refta{tab:para}.
In the right plot the results are displayed as a function of $\varphi_{M_1}$
in S3. One can see that again the tree-level results as well as
the size of the corrections to the partial decay width vary substantially
with the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$. The full corrections can reach
$\sim -24\%$ and the ${\cal CP}$-asymmetry is found to be small at the level
of $\sim \pm 2\%$.
\medskip
In \reffi{fig:Hneu3cha2} we show the results for $H^\pm \to \neu3 \chapm2$.
In the left plot (with $\MHp$ varied) the dip is (again) the threshold
TC6, see \refta{tab:cthreshold}. The decay width is found to be of
the same order as for $H^\pm \to \neu2\cha2$. One-loop corrections of
$\sim +5\%$ ($\sim +4\%$) are found at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ in S4\
($\MHp = 1400\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ in S5), see \refta{tab:para}.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:Hneu3cha2} the results are shown for
S4\ as a function of $\varphi_{M_1}$. At $\varphi_{M_1} = 180^\circ$ the full
corrections reach $\sim +5\%$. At $\varphi_{M_1} = 90^\circ$ the $H^+$
($H^-$) full corrections reach $\sim +6\%$ ($\sim +5\%$), \ie the
${\cal CP}$-asymmetries are at the level of $\sim \pm 1\%$.
\medskip
We finish the charged Higgs-boson analysis with the decays
involving the heaviest neutralino in \reffis{fig:Hneu4cha1}
and \ref{fig:Hneu4cha2}, showing the results for
$\Gamma(H^\pm \to \neu4\cha1)$ and $\Gamma(H^\pm \to \neu4\cha2)$, respectively.
In the left plot of \reffi{fig:Hneu4cha1} the first dip
(not visible in the plot) is the threshold TC4, see \refta{tab:cthreshold}.
The second (small) dip is (again) the threshold TC5 and the third
(large) dip is the threshold TC6.
The first step (not visible in the plot) at $\MHp \approx 1136\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$
is the anomalous threshold of the $C$-functions
$C_{0,1,2}(\MHp^2,\mcha1^2,\mneu4^2,\mneu3^2,\mcha2^2,\MZ^2)$.
The second anomalous threshold at $\MHp \approx 1340\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ is
caused by
$C_{0,1,2}(\mneu4^2,\MHp^2,\mcha1^2,m_b^2,\msbot1^2,\mstop2^2)$.
The last dip (also not visible) is the threshold TC7.
The decay width is again found at \order{1\,\, \mathrm{GeV}} with relative
corrections of $\sim +6\%$ in S4\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:Hneu4cha1} we show the complex phase
$\varphi_{M_1}$ varied at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$. The full corrections are up to
$\sim +6\%$ at $\varphi_{M_1} = 180^\circ$. Here the asymmetries are extremely
small and hardly visible.
\medskip
Finally, we discuss the decay $H^\pm \to \neu4\cha2$ in
\reffi{fig:Hneu4cha2}.
The overall size of this decay width (with real phases)
is (accidentally) very small around $1 \times 10^{-3}\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
Consequently, the loop corrections, can be larger than the tree-level
result. In the left plot the results are shown as a function of $\MHp$.
The (small) dip is the threshold TC6, see \refta{tab:cthreshold}.
Relative corrections of $\sim +56\%$ are found at $\MHp = 1400\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$
(see \refta{tab:para}).
In the right plot the results are displayed as a function of $\varphi_{M_1}$
in S5. One can see that the size of the corrections to the partial
decay width vary substantially with the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$.
For all $\varphi_{M_1}$ the full corrections deviate between $+40\%$
and $+146\%$. (The latter value is reached at $\varphi_{M_1} = 180^\circ$
where the tree is extremely small $\sim 1 \times 10^{-4}\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.)
At $\varphi_{M_1} = 90^\circ$ the $H^+$ ($H^-$) full one-loop corrections
reach $\sim +40\%$ ($\sim +103\%$), \ie the ${\cal CP}$-asymmetries are
very large with $\sim \pm 60\%$.
\medskip
Overall, for the charged Higgs boson decays to a chargino/neutralino
pair we observe, as expected, an increasing decay width $\propto \MHp$.%
\footnote{
An exception are the loop corrections in the left plot of
\reffi{fig:Hneu1cha2}, because there we added $|\cMl|^2$.
}
The full one-loop corrections reach a level of $10\%$ for decay widths
of \order{1\,\, \mathrm{GeV}}. The variation with $\varphi_{M_1}$ is found largest for very
small decay widths, but can reach the level of $10-50\%$ for widths
at or below the $1\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$~level. The ${\cal CP}$-asymmetries exceed the level
of a few per-cent only for very small decay widths.
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{\label{tab:cthreshold} Thresholds in charged Higgs boson decays.}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lrr}
\toprule
TC1: & $\MHp \approx \phantom{0}907\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ & $\mstop1 + \msbot1 = \MHp$ \\
TC2: & $\MHp = \phantom{0}976\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ & $\mstop1 + \msbot2 = \MHp$ \\
TC3: & $\MHp \approx \phantom{}1105\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ & $\mcha1 + \mneu4 = \MHp$ \\
TC4: & $\MHp \approx \phantom{}1108\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ & $\mcha2 + \mneu2 = \MHp$ \\
TC5: & $\MHp \approx \phantom{}1135\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ & $\mcha2 + \mneu3 = \MHp$ \\
TC6: & $\MHp \approx \phantom{}1284\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ & $\mstop2 + \msbot1 = \MHp$ \\
TC7: & $\MHp \approx \phantom{}1353\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ & $\mstop2 + \msbot2 = \MHp$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\clearpage
\newpage
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.Hneu1cha1.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.Hneu1cha1.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:Hneu1cha1}
$\Gamma(H^\pm \to \neu1 \chapm1)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S3\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\vspace{6em}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.Hneu1cha2.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.Hneu1cha2.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:Hneu1cha2}
$\Gamma(H^\pm \to \neu1 \chapm2)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S3\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.Hneu2cha1.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.Hneu2cha1.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:Hneu2cha1}
$\Gamma(H^\pm \to \neu2 \chapm1)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S3\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\vspace{6em}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.Hneu2cha2.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.Hneu2cha2.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:Hneu2cha2}
$\Gamma(H^\pm \to \neu2 \chapm2)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S4\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.Hneu3cha1.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.Hneu3cha1.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:Hneu3cha1}
$\Gamma(H^\pm \to \neu3 \chapm1)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S3\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\vspace{6em}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.Hneu3cha2.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.Hneu3cha2.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:Hneu3cha2}
$\Gamma(H^\pm \to \neu3 \chapm2)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S4\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.Hneu4cha1.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.Hneu4cha1.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:Hneu4cha1}
$\Gamma(H^\pm \to \neu4 \chapm1)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S4\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\vspace{6em}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.Hneu4cha2.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.Hneu4cha2.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:Hneu4cha2}
$\Gamma(H^\pm \to \neu4 \chapm2)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S5\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\newpage
\subsubsection{\boldmath{$h_i$} decays into charginos and neutralinos}
\label{hndecays}
We now turn to the decay modes $\hChaDecay$ ($i = 2,3;\, c,\cpri = 1,2$)
and $\hNeuDecay$ ($i = 1,2,3;\, n,\npri = 1,2,3,4$).
Results are shown in the \reffis{fig:hcha1cha1} -- \ref{fig:hneu3neu4}.
Before discussing every figure in detail, it should be noted that
there is a subtlety concerning the mixture of the $h_i$ bosons.
Depending on the input parameters, the higher-order corrections to the
three neutral Higgs boson masses can vary substantially.
The mass ordering $\mh1 < \mh2 < \mh3$ (as performed automatically by
\FH), even in the case of real parameters, can yield a heavy ${\cal CP}$-even
Higgs mass higher \textit{or} lower than the (heavy) ${\cal CP}$-odd Higgs mass.
Such a transition in the mass ordering (or ``mass crossing'') is
accompanied by an abrupt change in the Higgs mixing matrix
$\matr{\hat Z}$.%
\footnote{In our case the $Z$-factor matrix is given by
$\hat{Z}_{ij} \equiv \Code{ZHiggs[\Vi,\,\Vj]}$, see \citere{MSSMCT}
(and \citere{mhcMSSMlong}), which contributes at tree-level.
Furthermore $\matr{\hat{Z}}$ is calculated by \FH\ which uses
$\mb(\mb)$ and tree-level sfermion masses instead of the shifted
masses, causing a slight displacement in the threshold position.
}
For our input parameters (see \refta{tab:para}) there are two (possible)
crossings. The first (called ``MC1'' below) appears at
$\MHp \approx 1006\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$. Before the crossing we find
$h_2 \sim H$ ($h_3 \sim A$), whereas after the crossing it changes to
$h_2 \sim A$ ($h_3 \sim H$). The second crossing (called ``MC2'') is
found at $\MHp \approx 1532\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$, \ie the changing of the mixture from
$h_2 \sim A$ ($h_3 \sim H$) to $h_2 \sim H$ ($h_3 \sim A$).
Very close to the mass crossings the $\matr{\hat Z}$~matrix can
yield small numerical instabilities. As an example, for
$1532\,\, \mathrm{GeV} \lesssim \MHp \lesssim 1536\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ the $\matr{\hat Z}$~matrix
causes structures appearing similar to ``usual'' dips from thresholds
(see also the discussion in \citere{HiggsDecaySferm}).
All the dips/thresholds (some are hardly visible) appearing in the
figures below are listed in \refta{tab:nthreshold},
labeled as TN1 to TN13.
\subsubsection*{\boldmath{$h_i$} decays into charginos}
In this subsection we analyze the decays of the heavy neutral Higgs
bosons into charginos. We start with the decay $\hchaechae$ (i = 2,3)
as shown in \reffi{fig:hcha1cha1}.
The left plot shows the results as a function of $\MHp$, whereas in the
right plot we present the decay widths as a function of $\varphi_{M_1}$ in S4.
We show separately the results for the $h_2$ and $h_3$ decay widths.
In the left plot of \reffi{fig:hcha1cha1} the first ``apparently single''
dip in the $h_2$ decay (upper lines) is in reality coming from the
thresholds TN6 and TN7, see \refta{tab:nthreshold}.
The second (large) dip is the threshold TN10.
The last ``apparently single'' dip is in reality coming from the
thresholds TN11 and TN12.
The ``step'' (anomalous threshold) at $\MHp \approx 1310\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$
could be traced back to the $C$-functions
$C_{0,1,2}(\mcha1^2,\mh2^2,\mcha1^2,m_b^2,\mstop{\sind}^2,\mstop{\spri}^2)$
with $\sind \ne \spri$.
Away from the production threshold relative corrections of $\sim -3\%$
are found in S4\ (see \refta{tab:para}) for the $h_2$ decay.
The loop corrections increase with increasing $\MHp$ and reach
$\sim -10\%$ in S5.
In case of the $h_3$ decay the dips are the same as for $h_2$ and the
relative corrections are only $\sim -2\%$ in S4\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
The two mass crossings MC1 and MC2 are clearly visible at
$\MHp \approx 1006\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ and $\MHp \approx 1532\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ as described above,
where $h_2$ and $h_3$ change their role. Between MC1 and MC2 we find
$\Gamma(h_2 \to \champ1\chapm1) > \Gamma(h_3 \to \champ1\chapm1)$,
outside it is vice versa, as can be clearly observed in the left plot
of \reffi{fig:hcha1cha1}.
The suppression of the ${\cal CP}$-even decay (lower lines) vs.\ the
${\cal CP}$-odd decay (upper lines) is clearly visible, where at threshold
the behavior follows \refeqs{hOddTree}, (\ref{hEvenTree}).
After the threshold the decays grow roughly linear with the Higgs
boson masses.
We now turn to the phase dependence of the decay width shown in S4,
\ie for $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$, where the right plot in \reffi{fig:hcha1cha1}
shows the dependence of $\Gamma(\hchaechae)$ on $\varphi_{M_1}$. Since $M_1$ does
not appear in the chargino mass matrix, the effects of varying its phase
enter only via loop corrections and are extremely small.
The relative corrections in S4\ are the same as in the left plot.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.hcha1cha1.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.hcha1cha1.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:hcha1cha1}
$\Gamma(\hchaechae)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S4\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\medskip
The results for $\Gamma(\hchazchaz)$, as shown in the left plot of
\reffi{fig:hcha2cha2} are smaller by roughly a factor of 2 \wrt
$\Gamma(\hchaechae)$, largely related to the kinematic suppression.
At $\MHp = 1400\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ the full one-loop corrections to the $h_2$
decay reach $\sim +4\%$. For the decay of the $h_3$ at
$\MHp = 1400\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ we find full corrections at the level of less
than $+1\%$. As in the upper left plot one can observe the MC2
with an ``interchange'' of $h_2$ and $h_3$.
The same suppression of the ${\cal CP}$-even vs.\ the ${\cal CP}$-odd decay,
as in \reffi{fig:hcha1cha2} is clearly visible.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:hcha2cha2} we show the complex phase
$\varphi_{M_1}$ varied at $\MHp = 1400\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$. The variation with $\varphi_{M_1}$ is
extremely small (for the same reasons as explained above),
therefore the full relative corrections in S5\ are the same as in
the left plot, see above.
\medskip
The results for the ``mixed'' decay, $\Gamma(\hchaechaz)$, are shown in
\reffi{fig:hcha1cha2}, where in the left (right) plot we show the
dependence on $\MHp$ ($\varphi_{M_1}$). In the left plot the first dip in
the $h_2$ decay (lower lines) is the threshold TN10,
see \refta{tab:nthreshold}.
The remaining dip (at $\MHp \approx 1268\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$) is caused by the two
thresholds TN11 and TN12.
At $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ the full one-loop corrections to the $h_2$ decay
reach $\sim +20\%$. Now we turn to the corresponing $h_3$ decay.
The first dip (hardly visible in the upper lines) is the threshold TN8.
The second dip is the same as for the $h_2$ decay, see above.
For the decay of $h_3$ at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ we find full corrections
at the level of $+10\%$. As in \reffi{fig:hcha1cha1} one can observe
the MC2 with an ``interchange'' of $h_2$ and $h_3$.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:hcha1cha2} one can see that the variation
with $\varphi_{M_1}$ is again very small with tiny ${\cal CP}$-asymmetries and the same
corrections as in the left plot (for the same reasons as explained above).
\medskip
Overall, for the neutral Higgs decays to a chargino pair we observe,
again as expected, an increasing decay width $\propto \MHp$, as $\mh{2,3}$
increase nearly linearly with our input parameter $\MHp$.
The full one-loop corrections reach a level of $10\%$ for decay widths
being of \order{1\,\, \mathrm{GeV}}, and they can reach up to $20\%$ in the ``mixed''
decay mode. The variation with $\varphi_{M_1}$ is found to be negligible, as
expected, since $M_1$ enters only via the loop corrections.
\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{\label{tab:nthreshold} Thresholds in neutral Higgs boson decays.}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lrr}
\toprule
TN1: & $\MHp \approx\phantom{0}805\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ &
$\mneu1 + \mneu3 = \mh2 \approx\phantom{0}799\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
TN2: & $\MHp \approx\phantom{0}948\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ &
$\mcha1 + \mcha1 = \mh3 \approx\phantom{0}945\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
TN3: & $\MHp \approx\phantom{0}954\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ &
$\mneu2 + \mneu2 = \mh3 \approx\phantom{0}951\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
TN4: & $\MHp \approx\phantom{}1092\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ &
$\msbot1 + \msbot2 = \mh2 \approx\phantom{}1086\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
TN5: & $\MHp \approx\phantom{}1107\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ &
$\mcha1 + \mcha2 = \mh3 \approx\phantom{}1105\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
TN6: & $\MHp \approx\phantom{}1108\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ &
$\mcha1 + \mcha2 = \mh2 \approx\phantom{}1105\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
TN7: & $\MHp \approx\phantom{}1112\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ &
$\mneu2 + \mneu4 = \mh2 \approx\phantom{}1108\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
TN8: & $\MHp \approx\phantom{}1138\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ &
$\mneu3 + \mneu4 = \mh3 \approx\phantom{}1135\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
TN9: & $\MHp \approx\phantom{}1168\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ &
$\mstop1 + \mstop2 = \mh3 = \phantom{}1165\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
TN10: & $\MHp \approx\phantom{}1171\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ &
$\mstop1 + \mstop2 = \mh2 = \phantom{}1165\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
TN11: & $\MHp \approx\phantom{}1268\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ &
$\mcha2 + \mcha2 = \mh2 \approx\phantom{}1264\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
TN12: & $\MHp \approx\phantom{}1268\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ &
$\mneu4 + \mneu4 = \mh2 \approx\phantom{}1265\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
TN13: & $\MHp \approx\phantom{}1545\,\, \mathrm{GeV}\quad$ &
$\mstop2 + \mstop2 = \mh2 = \phantom{}1542\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\end{table}
\clearpage
\newpage
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.hcha2cha2.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.hcha2cha2.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:hcha2cha2}
$\Gamma(\hchazchaz)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S5\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\vspace{6em}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.hcha1cha2.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.hcha1cha2.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:hcha1cha2}
$\Gamma(\hchaechaz)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S4\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\newpage
\subsubsection*{\boldmath{$h_i$} decays into neutralinos}
Next we consider $h_i$ decays into neutralinos with equal indices.
First, we present the decay $h_1 \to \neu1 \neu1$ in \reffi{fig:h1neu1neu1}.
Bounds on $\mneu1$ often assume an underlying GUT based on a simple Lie
group, leading to $M_1 = 5/3 (\SW/\CW)^2 M_2$. If the latter assumption is
dropped, hardly any direct bound on $\mneu1$ can be placed~\cite{masslessx}.
Therefore, we also treat $M_1$ as an independent parameter.
The decay $h_1 \to \neu1\neu1$ constitutes an invisible decay of the light
Higgs boson, where bounds based on a combination of LHC and Tevatron data
yield an upper bound on an invisible branching ratio of
$\sim 40\%$~\cite{BRinv}. Since the $\neu1$ constitutes a perfect Dark
Matter candidate in the MSSM~\cite{EHNOS}, in order
to determine the Dark Matter properties a precision measurement of this
process at the LHC or a future $e^+e^-$ collider will be necessary.
Consequently, a precise prediction of
$\Gamma(h_1 \to \neu1\neu1)$ is of particular interest.
\medskip
In the upper left plot of \reffi{fig:h1neu1neu1} we show the results for
$\MHp$ varied in S1, but with $|M_1| = 50\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ as the base scenario.
The full loop corrections are $\sim +25\%$ at $\MHp = 700\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ in the upper
left plot. $\varphi_{M_1}$ is varied in the upper right plot.
One can observe a strong dependence of the decay width on $\varphi_{M_1}$, which
can change by a factor of 8. The largest loop corrections are
found as $\sim +31\%$ for $\varphi_{M_1} = 72^\circ, 288^\circ$ and $\sim +59\%$ at
$\varphi_{M_1} = 180^{\circ}$. In the lower left plot of \reffi{fig:h1neu1neu1}
we show the decay width with $M_1$ varied. Close to $M_1 = 0$ the
lightest neutralino becomes massless. For not too small values a decay
width of $\sim 10^{-4}\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ can be observed, going to zero at the
kinematic threshold. The one-loop corrections reach up to $\sim +30\%$
at $M_1 = 20\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$. Finally, in the lower right plot $|\mu|$ is varied,
and the decay width drops down to $\sim 10^{-5}\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ for $\mu > 600\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$
and with corrections between $\sim +6\%$ and $\sim +28\%$.
\bigskip
We now turn to the decays of the heavy neutral Higgs bosons.
In \reffi{fig:hneu1neu1} we present the results for the decays
$\hneueneue$ ($i = 2,3$). The dependence on $\MHp$ is shown in the
left plot, whereas the dependence on $\varphi_{M_1}$ for $\MHp = 700\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$
is given in the right plot.
We start with $\Gamma(\hneueneue)$ in the left plot.
The first dip (lower lines) in the $h_2$ decay is the threshold
TN1, see \refta{tab:nthreshold}.
The second dip (hardly visible in the upper lines) is the threshold
TN4.%
\footnote{
It should be noted that this threshold enter
\textit{into the tree-level} only via the
$\matr{\hat{Z}}$~matrix contribution.
These effects propagate also into the loop corrections via
$2 \Re \{\cMt^*\, \cMl^{}\}$.
Furthermore $\matr{\hat{Z}}$ is calculated by \FH\ which uses
$\mb(\mb)$ and tree-level sfermion masses instead of the shifted
masses, causing a slight displacement in the threshold position.
}
The third ``apparently single'' dip is (again) in reality coming from
the thresholds TN6 and TN7.
The fourth (large) dip is the threshold TN10.
The last ``apparently single'' dip is in reality coming from the
thresholds TN11 and TN12.
The full loop corrections are $\sim +11\%$ at $\MHp = 700\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
Also shown in this plot is the decay $h_3 \to \neu1\neu1$.
The first dip (upper lines) is in reality coming from the thresholds
TN2 and TN3. The second dip (lower lines) in the $h_3$
decay is the threshold TN5. The third dip (lower lines) is
the threshold TN8 and the last dip is the threshold TN9.
The full relative corrections reach $\sim +10\%$ at $\MHp = 700\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
The suppression of the ${\cal CP}$-even decay
(lower lines, going with \refeq{hEvenTree} at threshold,
and then roughly linear with $\mh2$) vs.\ the ${\cal CP}$-odd decay
(upper lines, going with \refeq{hOddTree} at threshold,
and then roughly linear with $\mh3$) is again clearly visible.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:hneu1neu1} we show the $h_2$
decay with the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied at $\MHp = 700\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
The variation with $\varphi_{M_1}$ is found to be very large,
changing the decay width by up to a factor of~5 where the
full relative
corrections are up to $\sim +20\%$ at $\varphi_{M_1} = 180^{\circ}$ for S1.
The $h_3$ decay with the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ shows also a very
large variation at $\MHp = 700\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ and the loop corrections reach
up to $\sim +19\%$ at $\varphi_{M_1} = 180^\circ$.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.h1neu1neu1.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.h1neu1neu1.eps}
\\[2em]
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{AbsM1.h1neu1neu1.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{AbsMUE.h1neu1neu1.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:h1neu1neu1}
$\Gamma(h_1 \to \neu1 \neu1)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown
with parameters chosen according to S1\ (see \refta{tab:para}) but
here with $|M_1| = 50\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
The upper left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The upper right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied.
The lower left (right) plot shows $M_1$ ($|\mu|$) varied.
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\medskip
In \reffi{fig:hneu2neu2} we show the decays $\hneuzneuz$, in full
analogy to \reffi{fig:hneu1neu1}. The same behavior of $h_2$ and
$h_3$ concerning MC1 and MC2, as well as the ${\cal CP}$-even and
${\cal CP}$-odd decay can be observed.
The dips (some are hardly visible) are the same as already described
in \reffi{fig:hneu1neu1} beginning at $\MHp \approx 1092\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$,
see above. The full relative corrections for the $h_2$ ($h_3$) decay
are $\sim -18\%$ ($\sim +10\%$) at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$, \ie S4.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:hneu2neu2} we show the variation
of $\Gamma(h_2 \to \neu2\neu2)$ with $\varphi_{M_1}$ at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
Here the loop corrections can vary between $\sim -18\%$ for
$\varphi_{M_1} = 0^\circ, 360^\circ$ and $\sim -13\%$ at
$\varphi_{M_1} = 180^{\circ}$. The $h_3$ decay with $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied reach
$\sim +11\%$ for $\varphi_{M_1} \sim 90^\circ, 270^{\circ}$ in S4.
\medskip
Next, in \reffi{fig:hneu3neu3} we present the decays $\hneudneud$,
in full analogy to \reffi{fig:hneu1neu1}. The same behavior of
$h_2$ and $h_3$ concerning MC1 and MC2 and the ${\cal CP}$-even/-odd
decay can be observed. The dips (some are hardly visible)
are again the same as described in \reffi{fig:hneu1neu1} beginning
at $\MHp \approx 1092\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$, see above.
The ``knee'' at $\MHp \approx 1545\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ (red line) is the threshold
TN13 (see \refta{tab:nthreshold}) in the $C$-functions
$C_{0,1,2}(\mneu3^2,\mh2^2\mneu3^2,m_t^2,\mstop2^2,\mstop2^2)$.
The full one-loop corrections for the $h_2$ decay are $\sim +172\%$
at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$. This strange behavior is a numerical effect
caused by an interplay of anomalous thresholds in
$C_{0,1,2}(\mneu3^2,\mh2^2,\mneu3^2,m_t^2,\mstop{\sind}^2,\mstop{\spri}^2)$
($\sind \ne \spri$) with the effects induced by the Higgs mixing matrix
$\matr{\hat Z}$.
This effect is absent in the decay of the $h_3$, where we find the full
relative corrections at the level of $\sim +25\%$ for $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:hneu3neu3} we show the variation of
$\Gamma(h_2 \to \neu3\neu3)$ with $\varphi_{M_1}$ at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$
(i.e.\ at an ``extreme'' point for the $h_2$ decay).
Here (for the same reasons as in the left plot) the loop corrections
reach $\sim +111\%$ at $\varphi_{M_1} = 180^{\circ}$.
Also in the right plot of \reffi{fig:hneu3neu3} we show
$\Gamma(h_3 \to \neu3\neu3)$ with $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied in S4.
Here the loop corrections can reach $\sim +26\%$ at
$\varphi_{M_1} = 90^{\circ}, 270^{\circ}$.
\medskip
In \reffi{fig:hneu4neu4} we present the decays $\hneuvneuv$, again
in full analogy to \reffi{fig:hneu1neu1}. The same behavior of $h_2$
and $h_3$ concerning MC2 and the ${\cal CP}$-even/-odd decay can
be observed. The full relative corrections for the $h_2$ decay are
$\sim +4\%$ at $\MHp = 1400\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$, \ie S5, while the $h_3$ decay
shows relative corrections less than $+1\%$ at $\MHp = 1400\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:hneu4neu4} we show
$\Gamma(h_{2,3} \to \neu4\neu4)$ at $\MHp = 1400\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
For both decays the variation of $\varphi_{M_1}$ is very small, \ie the
loop corrections reach the same values (in S5) as in the left plot.
\bigskip
We now turn to the neutral Higgs decays to neutralinos with different
indices. In this case, contrary to the decay into identical charginos,
the ${\cal CP}$-asymmetries are also zero, due to the Majorana nature of the
neutralinos.
In \reffi{fig:hneu1neu2} we present the decay $\hneueneuz$.
In the left plot we show the results as a function of $\MHp$.
The dips are (again) the same as already described in
\reffi{fig:hneu1neu1} beginning at $\MHp \approx 948\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$, see above.
The full relative corrections for the $h_2$ decay are $\sim +9\%$
at $\MHp = 900\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ (\ie S2). The full one-loop corrections for
the $h_3$ decay at $\MHp = 900\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ reach $+7\%$.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:hneu1neu2} we show the $h_i$ decay
with the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied at $\MHp = 900\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
The variation with $\varphi_{M_1}$ is found to be very large and the loop
corrections vary between $\sim +9\%$ for $\varphi_{M_1} \sim 0^\circ$ and
$\sim +6\%$ at $\varphi_{M_1} = 90^{\circ}$.
We also show the $h_3$ decay in the right plot of \reffi{fig:hneu1neu2}
with $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied at $\MHp = 900\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$. The variation with $\varphi_{M_1}$
is yet larger than in the $h_2$ case. The full corrections can reach
$\sim +10\%$ at $\varphi_{M_1} = 180^{\circ}$.
The general behavior can be understood as follows. For $\varphi_{M_1} = 0^\circ$
one finds ${\cal CP}(h_2 \neu1\neu2) = -{\cal CP}(h_3 \neu1\neu2) = +1$, leading
to the above discussed suppression of the $h_2$ decay, see
\refeqs{hOddTree}, (\ref{hEvenTree}).
Going to $\varphi_{M_1} = 180^\circ$ changes the ${\cal CP}$-nature of the $\neu1$,
leading to ${\cal CP}(h_2 \neu1\neu2) = -{\cal CP}(h_3 \neu1\neu2) = -1$ and the
corresponding suppression of the $h_3$ decay.
\medskip
In \reffi{fig:hneu1neu3} we present the decay $\hneueneud$.
It should be noted that the decay $\hneueneud$ \textit{looks} quite
similar to \reffi{fig:hneu1neu2} but with an interchange of $h_2$
with $h_3$. In the left plot we show the results as a function of
$\MHp$. The dips are (again) the same as already described in
\reffi{fig:hneu1neu1} beginning at $\MHp \approx 948\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$, see above.
The full one-loop corrections for the $h_2$ decay reach $\sim +7\%$
at $\MHp = 900\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ (\ie S2).
The relative corrections for the $h_3$ decay at $\MHp = 900\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$
are $+14\%$.
In comparison with \reffi{fig:hneu1neu2} one can observe an
``inversion'' of the relative size of the decays widths of the $h_2$ and
the $h_3$ (green/red lines vs.\ blue/purple lines). This ``inversion''
is due to the fact that ${\cal CP}(\neu1\neu2) = -{\cal CP}(\neu1\neu3)$.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:hneu1neu3} we show the $h_i$ decay
with the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied at $\MHp = 900\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
This variation is (again) found to be very large, as can be seen in
the right plot. The loop corrections for the $h_2$ decay can reach
$\sim +9\%$ at $\varphi_{M_1} = 180^{\circ}$.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:hneu1neu3} we show also the $h_3$
decay with $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied at $\MHp = 900\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$. There the loop
corrections vary between $\sim +14\%$ for $\varphi_{M_1} \sim 0^\circ$ and
$\sim +7\%$ at $\varphi_{M_1} = 90^{\circ}$.
Again the ``inversion'' (as in the left plot) can be observed.
\medskip
In \reffi{fig:hneu1neu4} we present the results for $\Gamma(\hneueneuv)$
as a function of $\MHp$ in the left plot.
The tree-level decay width is accidently very small for the parameter
set chosen, see \refta{tab:para}. Because of this smallness, the
relative size of the one-loop correction becomes larger then the
tree-level, and can even turn negative. Therefore, in this case we
added $|\cMl|^2$ to the full one-loop result to obtain a positive
decay width. The dips are (again) the same as already described in
\reffi{fig:hneu1neu1} beginning at $\MHp \approx 948\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$, see above.
The anomalous thresholds (``steps'' in the red line)
could be traced back to the $C$-functions at
\begin{align*}
\MHp \approx 1020\,\, \mathrm{GeV}: \qquad &
C_{0,1,2}(\mh2^2,\mneu4^2,\mneu1^2,\mneu3^2,\mneu3^2,\MZ^2)\,, \\
\MHp \approx 1026\,\, \mathrm{GeV}: \qquad &
C_{0,1,2}(\mh2^2,\mneu4^2,\mneu1^2,\mcha2^2,\mcha1^2,\MW^2)\,, \\
\MHp \approx 1031\,\, \mathrm{GeV}: \qquad &
C_{0,1,2}(\mneu1^2,\mh2^2,\mneu4^2,m_b^2,\msbot2^2,\msbot1^2)\,, \\
\MHp \approx 1035\,\, \mathrm{GeV}: \qquad &
C_{0,1,2}(\mh2^2,\mneu4^2,\mneu1^2,\mneu4^2,\mneu2^2,\mh1^2)\,, \\
\MHp \approx 1182\,\, \mathrm{GeV}: \qquad &
C_{0,1,2}(\mneu1^2,\mh2^2,\mneu4^2,m_t^2,\mstop2^2,\mstop1^2)\,,
\end{align*}
(in this order).
The full relative corrections for the $h_2$ ($h_3$) decay are
$\sim -77\%$ ($\sim -93\%$) at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ (\ie S4).
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:hneu1neu4} we show $\Gamma(\hneueneuv)$
with the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
Here (for the same reasons as in the left plot) the loop corrections
can be larger than the tree-level (and for consistency with the left
plot we also add $|\cMl|^2$ here).
The loop corrections for the $h_2$ decay vary between $\sim -77\%$
at $\varphi_{M_1} \sim 0^\circ, 360^\circ$ and $\sim -44\%$ at
$\varphi_{M_1} = 180^{\circ}$.
The loop corrections for the $h_3$ decay vary between $\sim -93\%$
at $\varphi_{M_1} \sim 0^\circ, 360^\circ$ and $\sim -78\%$ at
$\varphi_{M_1} = 180^{\circ}$.
\medskip
In \reffi{fig:hneu2neu3} we present the decay $\hneuzneud$.
In the left plot we show the results as a function of $\MHp$.
The dips (some are hardly visible) are again the same as already
described in \reffi{fig:hneu1neu1} beginning at $\MHp \approx 1092\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$,
see above.
The full relative corrections for the $h_2$ decay reach up to
$\sim +59\%$ at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ (\ie S4).
The loop corrections for the $h_3$ decay at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$
are $\sim -14\%$.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:hneu2neu3} we show the $h_i$ decay
with the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$.
For the $h_2$ decay the variation of $\varphi_{M_1}$ is very small, \ie the
loop corrections reach (in S4) the same values ($\sim +59\%$) for
all $\varphi_{M_1}$. The variation of $\varphi_{M_1}$ in the $h_3$ decay is also
small with corrections at the level of $\sim -14\%$.
\medskip
In \reffi{fig:hneu2neu4} we show the decay $\hneuzneuv$.
In the left plot we show the results as a function of $\MHp$.
The dips are (again) the same as already described in
\reffi{fig:hneu1neu1} beginning at $\MHp \approx 1171\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$,
see above.
The full relative corrections for the $h_2$ decay reach up
to $\sim +15\%$ at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$, \ie S4.
The loop corrections for the $h_3$ decay at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$
are $\sim +9\%$
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:hneu2neu4} the $h_i$ decay is shown
with the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied in S4.
For both decays the variation of $\varphi_{M_1}$ is very small, as expected,
since $\neu2$ and $\neu4$ are determined largely by $M_2$ and $\mu$
in the neutralino mass matrix (for the parameters chosen as in
\refta{tab:para}). The loop corrections for the $h_2$ ($h_3$) decay
reach $\sim +16\%$ ($\sim +9\%$) at $\varphi_{M_1} = 180^{\circ}$.
\medskip
The final decays involving neutralinos are shown in \reffi{fig:hneu3neu4}.
The results as a function of $\MHp$ are given in the left plot.
The dips are (again) the same as already described in
\reffi{fig:hneu1neu1} beginning at $\MHp \approx 1171\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$, see above.
The full relative corrections are only $\sim +3\%$ at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$
(\ie S4). The full relative corrections at $\MHp = 1200\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$ reach
$+6\%$.
In comparison with \reffi{fig:hneu2neu4} one can observe (again) an
``inversion'' of the relative size of the decays widths of the $h_2$ and
the $h_3$, due to the fact that ${\cal CP}(\neu2\neu4) = -{\cal CP}(\neu3\neu4)$.
In the right plot of \reffi{fig:hneu3neu4} we show the $h_i$ decay
with the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied in S4.
For both decays the variation of $\varphi_{M_1}$ is again very small,
since both neutralinos are largely determined by $\mu$ (for the
parameters chosen as in \refta{tab:para}).
The full one-loop corrections are the same as for the left plot.
\medskip
Overall, for the neutral Higgs decays to a neutralino pair we observed,
again as expected, an increasing decay width $\propto \mh{i}$.%
\footnote{
Exceptions are the $h_1 \to \neu1 \neu1$ decay
(see the upper left plot of \reffi{fig:h1neu1neu1}),
since $\mh1$ depends only very weakly on $\MHp$.
The next exception are the corrections to the $h_2$ decay
in the left plot of \reffi{fig:hneu3neu3} (red line),
due to an accidental interplay of anomalous thresholds with the
effects induced by the Higgs mixing matrix $\matr{\hat Z}$.
The final exception can be observed in the corrections to the
$h_2$ decay in the left plot of \reffi{fig:hneu1neu4} (red line),
because of the additional 2-loop corrections $|\cMl|^2$
(see the discussion of \reffi{fig:hneu1neu4} above).
}
The full one-loop corrections reach a level of $10-20\%$ for decay widths
of \order{1\,\, \mathrm{GeV}}. The variation with $\varphi_{M_1}$ is found largest in cases
where the ${\cal CP}$-nature of the decay depends strongly on the phase,
there then changes by a factor of~5 or more can be observed.
\clearpage
\newpage
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.hneu1neu1.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.hneu1neu1.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:hneu1neu1}
$\Gamma(\hneueneue)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S1\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\vspace{6em}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.hneu2neu2.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.hneu2neu2.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:hneu2neu2}
$\Gamma(\hneuzneuz)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S4\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.hneu3neu3.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.hneu3neu3.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:hneu3neu3}
$\Gamma(\hneudneud)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S4\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\vspace{6em}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.hneu4neu4.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.hneu4neu4.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:hneu4neu4}
$\Gamma(\hneuvneuv)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S5\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.hneu1neu2.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.hneu1neu2.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:hneu1neu2}
$\Gamma(\hneueneuz)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S2\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\vspace{6em}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.hneu1neu3.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.hneu1neu3.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:hneu1neu3}
$\Gamma(\hneueneud)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S2\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.hneu1neu4.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.hneu1neu4.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:hneu1neu4}
$\Gamma(\hneueneuv)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S4\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\vspace{6em}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.hneu2neu3.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.hneu2neu3.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:hneu2neu3}
$\Gamma(\hneuzneud)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S4\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.hneu2neu4.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.hneu2neu4.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:hneu2neu4}
$\Gamma(\hneuzneuv)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S4\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\vspace{6em}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{MHp.hneu3neu4.eps}
\hspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,height=7.5cm]{PhiM1.hneu3neu4.eps}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{\label{fig:hneu3neu4}
$\Gamma(\hneudneuv)$.
Tree-level and full one-loop corrected partial decay widths are shown.
The left plot shows the partial decay width with $\MHp$ varied.
The right plot shows the complex phase $\varphi_{M_1}$ varied with parameters
chosen according to S4\ (see \refta{tab:para}).
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\newpage
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
We evaluated all partial decay widths corresponding to a two-body
decay of the MSSM Higgs bosons to charginos and neutralinos,
allowing for complex parameters.
In the case of a discovery of additional Higgs bosons a subsequent
precision measurement of their properties will be crucial determine
their nature and the underlying (SUSY) parameters.
In order to yield a sufficient accuracy, one-loop corrections to the
various Higgs-boson decay modes have to be considered.
In this work we take another step in the direction of completion
of the calculation of \textit{all} two-body decays at the one-loop level
in the cMSSM in this stable and reliable renormalization scheme: we
calculated all two-body decay modes of the Higgs bosons to charginos and
neutralinos in the cMSSM.
The decay modes are given in \refeqs{eq:hchacha} -- (\ref{eq:Hpmneucha}).
The evaluation is based on a full one-loop calculation of all decay
channels, also including hard and soft QED radiation.
We restricted ourselves to a version of our renormalization scheme which
is valid for $|M_1| < |M_2|, |\mu|$ and $M_2 \neq \mu$ (where $M_1$ and
$M_2$ denote the soft SUSY-breaking parameter of the $U(1)$ and $SU(2)$
gauginos, and $\mu$ is the Higgs mixing parameter) to simplify the
analysis, even though our set-up allows to switch to other parameter
regions, possibly implying a different renormalization,
see the discussion in \citeres{LHCxC,LHCxN,LHCxNprod}.
We first reviewed the relevant sectors including some details on the
one-loop renormalization procedure of the cMSSM,
which are relevant for our calculation. In most cases we follow
\citere{MSSMCT}. However, in the scalar fermion sector, where we differ
from \citere{MSSMCT} the relevant details are indicated.
We have discussed the calculation of the one-loop diagrams, the
treatment of UV and IR divergences that are canceled by the inclusion
of (hard and soft) QED radiation.
We have checked our result against the literature, and in most
cases we have found good agreement, once our set-up was changed to the
one used in the existing analyses.
While the analytical calculation has been performed for \textit{all}
decay modes to charginos and neutralinos, in the numerical analysis
we mostly concentrated on the decays of the heavy Higgs bosons, with
$h_1 \to \neu1\neu1$ being the only channel analyzed for the light
neutral Higgs boson.
For the analysis we have chosen a parameter set that allows
simultaneously a maximum number of two-body chargino/neutralino decay modes.
In the analysis either the charged Higgs boson mass or the phase of
$M_1$ has been varied.
For $\MHp$ we investigated an interval starting at $\MHp = 600\,\, \mathrm{GeV}$
up to $\MHp = 1.6\,\, \mathrm{TeV}$, which roughly coincides with the reach of
the LHC for high-luminosity running as well as an $e^+e^-$ collider
with a center-of-mass energy up to $\sqrt{s} \sim 3\,\, \mathrm{TeV}$.
In our numerical scenarios we compared the tree-level partial decay
widths with the full one-loop corrected partial decay widths.
We concentrated on the analysis of the decay widths themselves, since
the size of the corresponding branching ratios (and thus the size of
their one-loop effects) is highly parameter dependent.
We found sizable corrections of $\sim 10\%$ in many channels,
sometimes going up to $\sim 20\%$. Even larger corrections are only
found in cases where the tree-level result is accidentally small and
thus the decay likely not observable. Corrections at the $10-20\%$ level
have also been found for the decay $h_1 \to \neu1\neu1$, which could
constitute an important channel for the determination of the Dark Matter
properties in the cMSSM. Consequently, the full one-loop
corrections should be taken into account for the interpretation of the
searches for charginos/neutralinos as well as for any future precision
analyses of those decays.
The tree-level results, but also the size of the full one-loop
corrections often depend strongly on the complex phase analyzed,
$\varphi_{M_1}$.
The one-loop contributions can vary by a factor of $\sim 2$ as a
function of the complex phase.
Neglecting the phase dependence could lead to a wrong impression of
the relative size of the various decay widths.
In the cases where a decay and its complex conjugate final state
are possible, \ie the charged Higgs decays
we have evaluated both decay widths independently.
The asymmetries, as a byproduct of our calculation, turn out to be
relatively small, at the level of a few per-cent.
The numerical results we have shown are, of course, dependent on the choice
of the SUSY parameters. Nevertheless, they give an idea of the relevance
of the full one-loop corrections.
Decay channels (and their respective one-loop corrections) that may look
unobservable due to the smallness of their decay width in our numerical
examples could become important if other channels are kinematically
forbidden.
Following our analysis it is evident that the full one-loop corrections
are mandatory for a precise prediction of the various branching ratios.
The full one-loop corrections should be taken into account in any precise
determination of (SUSY) parameters from the decay of (heavy) MSSM Higgs
bosons.
It is planned to implement the evaluation of the branching ratios of the
(heavy) Higgs bosons into the Fortran code \FH,
together with an automated choice of the renormalization scheme valid
for the full cMSSM parameter space.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
We thank A.~Bharucha, T.~Hahn and F.~von~der~Pahlen for helpful discussions.
The work of S.H.\ is supported in part by CICYT (grant FPA 2013-40715-P)
and by the Spanish MICINN's Consolider-Ingenio 2010 Program under grant
MultiDark CSD2009-00064.
\newcommand\jnl[1]{\textit{\frenchspacing #1}}
\newcommand\vol[1]{\textbf{#1}}
|
\section*{Motivation}
Yoneda completeness was introduced in \cite{Wagner1997} and \cite{Bonsangue1998} to unify metric and order theoretic notions of completeness. More precisely, the goal was to find a natural notion of completeness for non-symmetric distances that reduces to Cauchy completeness in the metric case and directed completeness in the partial order case. We aim to take this further by showing that, even in more general distance spaces, Yoneda completeness can still be characterized by several different combinations of metric and directed completeness.
We draw our inspiration from a perhaps surprising source, namely C*-algebra semicontinuity theory (see \cite{AkemannPedersen1973} and \cite{Brown1988}). Various order relations in C*-algebras can be composed with the metric to form non-symmetric distances, although they are never mentioned explicitly in the C*-algebra literature. This is unfortunate, as non-symmetric distances could simplify and generalize certain aspects of C*-algebra theory. In particular this rings true for C*-algebra semicontinuity theory, where some sophisticated C*-algebraic machinery can be replaced by the elementary net manipulations that we describe here. This will also no doubt have applications to distance spaces that arise in other areas of algebra and analysis.
\section*{Outline}
In \autoref{P} we give the basic the definitions and theory of (pre-)Cauchy nets, ball and hole topologies, non-symmetric distances and supremums. We take \cite{Wagner1997} and \cite{Bonsangue1998} as our primary references although our approach is slightly more general, e.g. we deal with distances rather than hemimetrics and nets rather than sequences. Although to keep things simple, the range of our distance functions will always be the positive extended real line $[0,\infty]$ as in \cite{Bonsangue1998}, rather than the more general quantales considered in \cite{Wagner1997}. For the completeness notions we consider, see \autoref{YC} and \autoref{edcomplete} respectively.
In \autoref{Completeness}, we construct several closely related sequences and subsets from a given Cauchy net $(x_\lambda)$. Their consequences regarding completeness are collected at the end in \autoref{Yc}. We finish with a simple application to formal balls in \autoref{KW}, showing that \autoref{Yc} \eqref{Yc1a} generalizes the Kostanek-Waszkiewicz theorem.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{P}
We make the following standing assumption.
\[\textbf{$\mathbf{d}$ and $\mathbf{e}$ are functions from $X\times X$ to $[0,\infty]$.}\]
\subsection{Nets}
The nets $(x_\lambda)\subseteq X$ we will be concerned with are defined as follows.
\begin{align}
\lim_\gamma\liminf_\delta\mathbf{d}(x_\gamma,x_\delta)=0\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad(x_\lambda)\text{ is \emph{$\mathbf{d}$-reflexive}}.\\
\lim_\gamma\limsup_\delta\mathbf{d}(x_\gamma,x_\delta)=0\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad(x_\lambda)\text{ is \emph{$\mathbf{d}$-pre-Cauchy}}.\\
\label{Cauchy}\lim_{\gamma\prec\delta}\mathbf{d}(x_\gamma,x_\delta)=0\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad(x_\lambda)\text{ is \emph{$\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy}}.
\end{align}
Just to be clear, by a net we mean a set indexed by a directed set $\Lambda$, i.e. there is a (possibly non-reflexive) transitive relation $\mathbin{\prec}\subseteq\Lambda\times\Lambda$ satisfying $\forall\gamma,\delta\ \exists\lambda\ (\gamma,\delta\prec\lambda)$, with limits inferior and superior defined by
\begin{align*}
\liminf_\lambda r_\lambda&=\lim_\gamma\inf_{\gamma\prec\lambda}r_\lambda.\\
\limsup_\lambda r_\lambda&=\lim_\gamma\sup_{\gamma\prec\lambda}r_\lambda.
\end{align*}
And in \eqref{Cauchy} we consider $\prec$ itself as a directed subset of $\Lambda\times\Lambda$ ordered by $\prec\times\prec$.
The above nets can also be characterized by a filter $\Phi^\mathbf{d}\subseteq\mathscr{P}(X\times X)$ defined from $\mathbf{d}$. Specifically, for $\mathbin{\prec}\subseteq[0,\infty]\times[0,\infty]$ and $\epsilon\in[0,\infty]$, define $\mathbin{\prec^\mathbf{d}_\epsilon}\subseteq X\times X$ by
\[x\prec^\mathbf{d}_\epsilon y\quad\Leftrightarrow\quad\mathbf{d}(x,y)\prec\epsilon.\]
Taking the usual $<$ on $[0,\infty]$ for $\prec$, we define
\[\Phi^\mathbf{d}=\{\mathbin{\preceq}:\epsilon>0\text{ and }\mathbin{<^\mathbf{d}_\epsilon}\,\subseteq\,\mathbin{\preceq}\,\subseteq\, X\times X\}.\]
So $\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}=\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}_0}=\bigcap\Phi^\mathbf{d}$ and
\begin{align*}
\forall\mathbin{\preceq}\in\Phi^\mathbf{d}\ \exists\alpha\ \forall\gamma\succ\alpha\ \forall\beta\ \exists\delta\succ\beta\ (x_\gamma\preceq x_\delta)\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad(x_\lambda)\text{ is \emph{$\mathbf{d}$-reflexive}}.\\
\forall\mathbin{\preceq}\in\Phi^\mathbf{d}\ \exists\alpha\ \forall\gamma\succ\alpha\ \exists\beta\ \forall\delta\succ\beta\ (x_\gamma\preceq x_\delta)\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad(x_\lambda)\text{ is \emph{$\mathbf{d}$-pre-Cauchy}}.\\
\forall\mathbin{\preceq}\in\Phi^\mathbf{d}\ \exists\alpha\ \forall\gamma\succ\alpha\ \hspace{16pt}\forall\delta\succ\gamma\ (x_\gamma\preceq x_\delta)\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad(x_\lambda)\text{ is \emph{$\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy}}.
\end{align*}
We immediately see that
\begin{center}
$\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy$\quad\Rightarrow\quad\mathbf{d}$-pre-Cauchy$\quad\Rightarrow\quad\mathbf{d}$-reflexive.
\end{center}
Denote the finite subsets of $\Lambda$ by $[\Lambda]^{<\omega}$, i.e. with $|F|$ denoting $F$'s cardinality,
\[[\Lambda]^{<\omega}\ =\ \{F\subseteq\Lambda:|F|<\omega\}.\]
\begin{prp}\label{preCauchysub}
Any $\mathbf{d}$-pre-Cauchy net $(x_\lambda)\subseteq X$ has a $\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy subnet.
\end{prp}
\begin{proof}
If $\Lambda$ is finite then it has a maximum $\gamma$, which means the single element net $x_\gamma$ is a $\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy subnet. Otherwise, define a map $f:[\Lambda]^{<\omega}\rightarrow\Lambda$ recursively as follows. Let $f(\{\lambda\})=\lambda$, for all $\lambda\in\Lambda$. As $(x_\lambda)$ is $\mathbf{d}$-pre-Cauchy, given any other $F\in[\Lambda]^{<\omega}$ we can take $f(F)\in\Lambda$ such that, for all $E\subsetneqq F$, $f(E)\prec f(F)$ and
\[\mathbf{d}(x_{f(E)},x_{f(F)})\leq\underset{\lambda}{\lim\sup}\,\mathbf{d}(x_{f(E)},x_\lambda)+2^{-|F|}.\]
Then $(x_{f(F)})$ is a $\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy subnet of $(x_\lambda)$ w.r.t. $\subsetneqq$ on $[X]^{<\omega}$.
\end{proof}
When $\mathbf{d}$ is a metric, there is usually only one type of net of interest as
\begin{align*}
\text{$\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy}\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad\text{$\mathbf{d}$-pre-Cauchy}.\\
\text{$\mathbf{d}$-reflexive}\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad\text{arbitrary},\quad\text{if $X$ is totally bounded}.
\end{align*}
On the other hand, for any partial order $\mathbin{\preceq}\subseteq X\times X$,
\[\text{$\preceq$-Cauchy}\quad\Leftrightarrow\quad\text{eventually increasing},\]
when we identify $\preceq$ with its characteristic function (as we do from now on)
\[\preceq(x,y)=\begin{cases}0&\text{if }x\preceq y\\ \infty&\text{otherwise}\end{cases}\]
(e.g. $\leq^\mathbf{d}$ is identified with $\infty\mathbf{d}$, taking $\infty0=0$).
In this case there are simple examples of non-Cauchy pre-Cauchy sequences \textendash\, see \cite{Wagner1997} Remark 2.11.
\subsection{Topology} For any $\mathbin{\prec}\subseteq X\times X$, we define
\begin{align*}
x\prec\quad&=\quad\{y\in X:x\prec y\}.\\
\prec x\quad&=\quad\{y\in X:y\prec x\}.
\end{align*}
Define the open upper/lower balls/holes with centre $c\in X$ and radius $\epsilon$ by
\begin{align*}
c^\bullet_\epsilon\quad=\quad c\mathrel{<^\mathbf{d}_\epsilon}\quad&=\quad\{x\in X:\mathbf{d}(c,x)<\epsilon\}.\\
c_\bullet^\epsilon\quad=\hspace{13pt}\mathrel{<^\mathbf{d}_\epsilon}c\quad&=\quad\{x\in X:\mathbf{d}(x,c)<\epsilon\}.\\
c^\circ_\epsilon\quad=\hspace{13pt}\mathrel{>^\mathbf{d}_\epsilon}c\quad&=\quad\{x\in X:\mathbf{d}(x,c)>\epsilon\}.\\
c_\circ^\epsilon\quad=\quad c\mathrel{>^\mathbf{d}_\epsilon}\quad&=\quad\{x\in X:\mathbf{d}(c,x)>\epsilon\}.
\end{align*}
Let $X^\bullet$, $X_\bullet$, $X^\circ$, $X_\circ$, $X^\bullet_\bullet$, $X^\bullet_\circ$, $X^\circ_\bullet$ and $X^\circ_\circ$ denote the topologies generated by the corresponding balls and holes, i.e. by arbitrary unions of finite intersections. Denote convergence by $\barrow$, $\arrowb$, $\carrow$, $\arrowc$, etc. so, for any net $(x_\lambda)\subseteq X$,
\begin{align*}
x_\lambda\barrow x\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad\forall c\in X\ \lim\sup\mathbf{d}(c,x_\lambda)\leq\mathbf{d}(c,x).\\
x_\lambda\arrowb x\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad\forall c\in X\ \lim\sup\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,c)\leq\mathbf{d}(x,c).\\
x_\lambda\carrow x\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad\forall c\in X\ \lim\inf\ \mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,c)\geq\mathbf{d}(x,c).\\
x_\lambda\arrowc x\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad\forall c\in X\ \lim\inf\ \mathbf{d}(c,x_\lambda)\geq\mathbf{d}(c,x).
\end{align*}
Most of the literature on non-symmetric distances has focused on ball topologies (one of the few places hole topologies are mentioned is \cite{Goubault2013} Exercise 6.2.11). However, it is really the hole topologies that are more intimately connected to the $\leq^\mathbf{d}$ order structure. The double hole topology also defines our central concept.
\begin{dfn}\label{YC}
$X$ is \emph{$\mathbf{d}$-complete} if every $\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy net has a $X^\circ_\circ$-limit.
\end{dfn}
This was called $\liminf$-completeness in \cite{Wagner1997} and just completeness in \cite{Bonsangue1998}, although the original formulations differ somewhat from \autoref{YC} \textendash\, see the comments after \autoref{preCauchyconvergence}. These days it is usually called Yoneda completeness to distinguish it from other similar notions (e.g. Smyth completeness where $X^\bullet_\bullet$ is considered instead of $X^\circ_\circ$ \textendash\, see \cite{Smyth1988}) but these will not be discussed here.
Let us point out that, while $\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy nets depend only $\Phi^\mathbf{d}$, the double hole topology $X^\circ_\circ$ depends crucially on $\mathbf{d}$, i.e. $\mathbf{d}$-completeness is not a `uniform property'. Below we will use uniform concepts where possible, but the inherent non-uniform nature of $\mathbf{d}$-completeness means there is a limit to how much this can be done.
\subsection{Distances} For $x\in X$, define $x\mathbf{d},\mathbf{d}x:X\rightarrow[0,\infty]$ by
\begin{align*}
x\mathbf{d}(y)&=\mathbf{d}(x,y).\\
\mathbf{d}x(y)&=\mathbf{d}(y,x).
\end{align*}
The composition of $\mathbf{d}$ and $\mathbf{e}$ is defined by
\[\mathbf{d}\circ\mathbf{e}(x,y)=\inf_{z\in X}(x\mathbf{d}+\mathbf{e}y)(z).\]
We call $\mathbf{d}$ a \emph{distance} if
\[\mathbf{d}\leq\mathbf{d}\circ\mathbf{d}.\tag{$\triangle$}\label{tri}\]
This implies $\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}\circ\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}\,\subseteq\,\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}$, i.e. $\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}$ is transitive. As in \cite{Goubault2013} Definition 6.1.1, we call $\mathbf{d}$ a \emph{hemimetric} if $\leq^\mathbf{d}$ is also reflexive, i.e. a preorder.
Non-hemimetric distances have rarely been considered until now. Requiring $\leq^\mathbf{d}$ to be reflexive may seem harmless, but there are indeed natural distances for which this fails, e.g. $\mathbf{d}(x,y)=x(1-y)$ on $[0,1]$ or its extension to the positive unit ball of an arbitrary C*-algebra. There are also natural constructions which preserve \eqref{tri} but not $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-reflexivity. For example, just as one extends $\mathbf{d}$ to a distance on subsets of $X$ in the Hausdorff-Hoare construction (see \cite{Goubault2013} Lemma 7.5.1), one can extend $\mathbf{d}$ to a distance on nets in $X$ as in \cite{Wagner1997} Proposition 2.6 by
\begin{equation}\label{HH}
\mathbf{d}((x_\lambda),(y_\gamma))=\limsup_\lambda\liminf_\gamma\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,y_\gamma).
\end{equation}
However, even if $\leq^\mathbf{d}$ is reflexive on $X$, $\leq^\mathbf{d}$ may not be reflexive on all nets. Indeed
\[(x_\lambda)\text{ is $\mathbf{d}$-reflexive}\quad\Leftrightarrow\quad(x_\lambda)\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda).\]
Moreover, the extra generality comes at little cost. So let us now on assume that
\[\mathbf{d}\textbf{ and $\mathbf{e}$ are arbitrary distances on }X.\]
Now hole limits of $\mathbf{d}$-reflexive $(x_\lambda)\subseteq X$ can be characterized as follows.
\begin{align}
\label{arrowc}x_\lambda\arrowc x\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,x)\rightarrow0.\\
\label{carrowc}x_\lambda\carrowc x\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad x_\lambda\carrowb x\leq^\mathbf{d}x.
\end{align}
\begin{proof}\
\begin{itemize}
\item[\eqref{arrowc}] If $x_\lambda\arrowc x$ then $\lim_\gamma\mathbf{d}(x_\gamma,x)\leq\lim_\gamma\liminf_\lambda\mathbf{d}(x_\gamma,x_\lambda)=0$. If $\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,x)\rightarrow0$ then $\mathbf{d}(c,x)\leq\lim\inf\mathbf{d}(c,x_\lambda)+\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,x)=\lim\inf\mathbf{d}(c,x_\lambda)$, for any $c\in X$.
\item[\eqref{carrowc}] If $\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,x)\rightarrow0$ then $\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,c)\leq\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,x)+\mathbf{d}(x,c)\rightarrow\mathbf{d}(x,c)$ so $x_\lambda\arrowb x$. If $x_\lambda\carrow x$ too then $\mathbf{d}(x,x)\leq\liminf\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,x)=0$, i.e. $x\leq^\mathbf{d}x$. Conversely, if $x_\lambda\arrowb x\leq^\mathbf{d}x$ then $\limsup\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,x)\leq\mathbf{d}(x,x)=0$, i.e. $\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,x)\rightarrow0$.\qedhere
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
For an example of $\mathbf{d}$-reflexive $x_\lambda\carrowb x\nleq^\mathbf{d}x$, take any $x_\lambda\rightarrow0<x$ in $[0,\infty)$ where, for the distance $\mathbf{d}$, we simply consider the coordinate projection $\mathbf{d}(y,z)=z$.
In \cite{Goubault2013} Definition 7.1.15, any $x$ which satisfies $\mathbf{d}(x,y)=\limsup\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,y)$, for all $y\in X$, is called a \emph{$\mathbf{d}$-limit} of $(x_\lambda)$ (these are called \emph{forward limits} in \cite{Bonsangue1998} before Proposition 3.3 and just \emph{limits} in \cite{KunziSchellekens2002} Definition 11). In general, $\mathbf{d}$-limits are not true limits in any topological sense, as they are not preserved by taking subnets. But for $\mathbf{d}$-pre-Cauchy nets, $\mathbf{d}$-limits are $X^\circ_\bullet$-limits, i.e. the limit superior will be a limit, as shown below and in \cite{Wagner1997} Theorem 2.26.
\begin{prp}\label{Clim}
For $\mathbf{d}$-pre-Cauchy $(x_\lambda)$ and $y\in X$, $\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,y)$ and $\mathbf{d}(y,x_\lambda)$ converge.
\end{prp}
\begin{proof} As $(x_\lambda)$ is $\mathbf{d}$-pre-Cauchy,
\begin{align*}
\limsup\limits_\lambda\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,y)&\leq\limsup\limits_\lambda\liminf\limits_\gamma\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,x_\gamma)+\mathbf{d}(x_\gamma,y)=\liminf\limits_\gamma\mathbf{d}(x_\gamma,y).\\
\liminf_\lambda\mathbf{d}(y,x_\lambda)&\geq\liminf_\lambda\limsup_\gamma\mathbf{d}(y,x_\gamma)-\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,x_\gamma)=\limsup_\gamma\mathbf{d}(y,x_\gamma).\qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{preCauchyconvergence}
Any $\mathbf{d}$-pre-Cauchy net converges in $X^\bullet$, $X^\circ$, $X_\bullet$ or $X_\circ$ iff it has a subnet that converges in the same topology.
\end{cor}
For distance $\mathbf{d}$, we could thus replace $\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy nets with $\mathbf{d}$-pre-Cauchy nets in \autoref{YC}, by \autoref{preCauchysub} and \autoref{preCauchyconvergence}. And for hemimetric $\mathbf{d}$, \autoref{YC} agrees with the $\mathbf{d}$-limit definition of Yoneda completeness in \cite{Goubault2013} Definition 7.4.1. We prefer $X^\circ_\circ$-limits to $X^\circ_\bullet$-limits/$\mathbf{d}$-limits for the following reasons.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $X^\circ_\circ$ seems more natural for general distances (e.g. $\mathbf{d}(x,y)=y$ noted above).
\item $X^\circ_\circ$ is self-dual, making it clear that the asymmetry in $\mathbf{d}$-completeness comes from the nets being considered rather than the topology.
\item $X^\circ_\circ$ already arises naturally in various situations (although this does not appear to be widely recognized), e.g. as the usual product topology for products of bounded intervals, as the Wijsman topology for subsets of $X$, and as the weak operator topology for projections on a Hilbert space.
\end{enumerate}
If $\mathbf{d}$ is a metric then limits of $\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy nets are the same in $X^\circ_\circ$ and $X^\bullet=X_\bullet$. Thus $\mathbf{d}$-completeness generalizes the usual notion of metric completeness. If we consider (the characteristic function of) a partial order $\mathbin{\preceq}\subseteq X\times X$ then $X^\circ_\circ$-limits of increasing nets are precisely their supremums, so $\mathbf{d}$-completeness also generalizes directed completeness. Our main thesis is that, even in more general distances spaces, $\mathbf{d}$-completeness is a combination of metric and directed completeness. To make this precise we need to extend the usual order theoretic notion of supremum.
\subsection{Supremums} For $Y\subseteq X$ define
\begin{align*}
Y\mathbf{d}&=\sup y\mathbf{d}.\\
\mathbf{d}Y&=\inf\mathbf{d}y.
\end{align*}
Also define $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}x\ \Leftrightarrow\ Y\subseteq(\leq^\mathbf{d}x)$. We define \emph{$\mathbf{d}$-supremums} of $Y\subseteq X$ by
\[x=\text{$\mathbf{d}$-$\sup Y$}\qquad\Leftrightarrow\qquad x\mathbf{d}=Y\mathbf{d}\quad\text{and}\quad Y\leq^\mathbf{d}x.\]
Note $=$ is a slight abuse of notation, as $\mathbf{d}$-supremums are only unique up to the equivalence relation $x\leq^\mathbf{d}y\leq^\mathbf{d}x$. Also, we could replace $x\mathbf{d}=Y\mathbf{d}$ with $x\mathbf{d}\leq Y\mathbf{d}$, as $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}x\Rightarrow Y\mathbf{d}\leq x\mathbf{d}$. Alternatively, we could replace $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}x$ with $x\leq^\mathbf{d}x$ as $x\mathbf{d}=Y\mathbf{d}$ implies $x\leq^\mathbf{d}x\,\Leftrightarrow\, x\mathbf{d}(x)=0\,\Leftrightarrow\, Y\mathbf{d}(x)=0\,\Leftrightarrow\, Y\leq^\mathbf{d}x$.
Note $\mathbf{d}$-supremums are $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-supremums, as $x\mathbf{d}=Y\mathbf{d}$ implies $\infty x\mathbf{d}=\infty Y\mathbf{d}$. However, unless we place some extra condition on $\mathbf{d}$, the converse can fail e.g. if $\mathbf{d}(r,s)=(r-s)_+$ (where $r_+=r\vee0$) on $X=[0,1)\cup\{2\}$ then we see that \linebreak $2=\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}$-$\sup[0,1)\neq\mathbf{d}$-$\sup[0,1)$, as $\sup_{x\in[0,1)}\mathbf{d}(x,0)=1\neq2=\mathbf{d}(2,0)$. Indeed, in general $\mathbf{d}$-supremums depend crucially on $\mathbf{d}$, not just $\leq^\mathbf{d}$ or even $\Phi^\mathbf{d}$.
One such condition would be `every closed lower ball has a maximum'. In fact, something weaker suffices. Specifically, consider the following functions on $[0,\infty]$.
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{d}^\bullet(r)&=\sup_{x\in X}\inf_{y\leq^\mathbf{d}x^\bullet_r}\mathbf{d}(x,y).\\
\mathbf{d}_\bullet(r)&=\sup_{x\in X}\inf_{x_\bullet^r\leq^\mathbf{d}y}\mathbf{d}(y,x).
\end{align*}
Also let $\mathbf{I}$ denote the identity on $[0,\infty]$ so
\[\mathbf{d}_\bullet\leq\mathbf{I}\quad\Leftrightarrow\quad\sup_{y\in Y}\mathbf{d}(y,x)=\inf_{Y\leq^\mathbf{d}y}\mathbf{d}(y,x)\text{ whenever }x\in X\supseteq Y.\]
\begin{prp}\label{Xcompdirected}
If $\mathbf{d}_\bullet\leq\mathbf{I}$ then $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-supremums are $\mathbf{d}$-supremums.
\end{prp}
\begin{proof}
Assume $Y\subseteq X$ and $z=\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}$-$\sup Y\neq\mathbf{d}$-$\sup Y$ so $\sup_{y\in Y}\mathbf{d}(y,x)<\mathbf{d}(z,x)$, for some $x\in X$. As $\mathbf{d}_\bullet\leq\mathbf{I}$, we have $w\in X$ with $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}w$ and $\mathbf{d}(w,x)<\mathbf{d}(z,x)$. But then $z=\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}$-$\sup Y\leq^\mathbf{d}w$ so $\mathbf{d}(z,x)\leq\mathbf{d}(w,x)$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
We also need to generalize directedness. Specifically, for $Y\subseteq X$ we define
\[Y\text{ is \emph{$\mathbf{d}$-directed}}\quad\Leftrightarrow\quad\forall F\in[Y]^{<\omega}\inf_{y\in Y}F\mathbf{d}(y)=0.\]
By \eqref{tri}, $[Y]^{<3}$ suffices. Also define $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)\,\Leftrightarrow\,\mathbf{d}(y,x_\lambda)\rightarrow0$, for all $y\in Y$, so
\begin{align*}
Y\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)\subseteq Y\quad&\Rightarrow\quad (x_\lambda)\text{ is $\mathbf{d}$-pre-Cauchy}.\\
\exists(x_\lambda)\ Y\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)\subseteq Y\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad Y\text{ is $\mathbf{d}$-directed}.
\end{align*}
Indeed, if $Y$ is $\mathbf{d}$-directed then, for $F\in[Y]^{<\omega}$ and $\epsilon>0$, take $y_{F,\epsilon}\in Y$ with $F\mathbf{d}(y_{F,\epsilon})<\epsilon$, so $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}(y_{F,\epsilon})\subseteq Y$, ordering $[Y]^{<\omega}\times(0,\infty)$ by $\subseteq\times\geq$.
\begin{dfn}\label{edcomplete}
$X$ is \emph{$\mathbf{e}$-$\mathbf{d}$-complete} if every $\mathbf{e}$-directed $Y\subseteq X$ has a $\mathbf{d}$-supremum.
\end{dfn}
If $\mathbin{\preceq}\subseteq X\times X$ is a partial order, $\preceq$-$\preceq$-completeness is directed completeness. Thus both $\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-completeness and $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-completeness are valid generalizations. But if $\mathbf{d}$ is a metric then every $\mathbf{d}$-directed subset contains at most $1$ element, which makes $X$ trivially $\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-complete. So, unlike $\mathbf{d}$-completeness, $\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-completeness does not generalize metric completeness. In general, $\mathbf{d}$-completeness is a stronger notion, as we now show.
\begin{prp}\label{a1lim}
If $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)\subseteq Y$ and $x\in X$ then
\begin{align}
x_\lambda\arrowc x\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad Y\leq^\mathbf{d}x.\label{a1holelim}\\
x_\lambda\carrow x\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad x\mathbf{d}\leq Y\mathbf{d}.\label{a1limhole}\\
x_\lambda\carrowc x\quad &\Leftrightarrow\quad x=\mathbf{d}\text{-}\sup Y.\label{a1doubleholelim}
\end{align}
\end{prp}
\begin{proof}
\item{\eqref{a1holelim}} If $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}x$ then $\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,x)=0$, for all $\lambda$, so $x_\lambda\arrowc x$, by \eqref{arrowc}. While if $x_\lambda\arrowc x$ and $y\in Y$ then $\mathbf{d}(y,x)\leq\liminf\mathbf{d}(y,x_\lambda)=0$, as $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)$, i.e. $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}x$.
\item{\eqref{a1limhole}} If $x\mathbf{d}\leq Y\mathbf{d}$ then, as $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)$, for any $z\in X$ we have
\[\mathbf{d}(x,z)\leq\sup_{y\in Y}\mathbf{d}(y,z)\leq\sup_{y\in Y}\liminf(\mathbf{d}(y,x_\lambda)+\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,z))=\liminf\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,z).\]
While if $x_\lambda\carrow x$ then $x\mathbf{d}(z)=\mathbf{d}(x,z)\leq\liminf\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,z)\leq Y\mathbf{d}(z)$, for all $z\in X$.
\item{\eqref{a1doubleholelim}} See \eqref{a1holelim} and \eqref{a1limhole}.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
If $X$ is $\mathbf{d}$-complete then $X$ is $\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-complete.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
For any $\mathbf{d}$-directed $Y\subseteq X$, take $(x_\lambda)$ with $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)\subseteq Y$. By \autoref{preCauchysub}, we may revert to a Cauchy subnet (which still satisfies $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)$). As $X$ is $\mathbf{d}$-complete, $x_\lambda\carrowc x$, for some $x\in X$. By \eqref{a1doubleholelim}, $x$ is a $\mathbf{d}$-supremum of $Y$.
\end{proof}
For $\mathbf{d}$-pre-Cauchy $(x_\lambda)\subseteq X$, it will also be convenient to define
\begin{align*}
(x_\lambda)\mathbf{d}&=\lim x_\lambda\mathbf{d}.\\
\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)&=\lim\mathbf{d}x_\lambda.
\end{align*}
It then follows immediately from the definitions that
\begin{align*}
x_\lambda\arrowc x\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad\mathbf{d}x\leq\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda).\\
x_\lambda\carrow x\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad x\mathbf{d}\leq(x_\lambda)\mathbf{d}.\\
x_\lambda\carrowb x\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad x\mathbf{d}=(x_\lambda)\mathbf{d}.
\end{align*}
\begin{prp}
If $Y$ is $\mathbf{d}$-directed and $(x_\lambda)\subseteq X$ is $\mathbf{d}$-pre-Cauchy then
\[Y\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)\quad\Leftrightarrow\quad\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)\leq\mathbf{d}Y.\]
\end{prp}
\begin{proof}
If $y\in Y\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)$ and $x\in X$ then $\mathbf{d}(x,x_\lambda)\leq\mathbf{d}(x,y)+\mathbf{d}(y,x_\lambda)\rightarrow\mathbf{d}(x,y)$, i.e. $\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)\leq\mathbf{d}y$, for all $y\in Y$, so $\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)\leq\mathbf{d}Y$. While if $\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)\leq\mathbf{d}Y$ and $y\in Y$ then $\lim\mathbf{d}(y,x_\lambda)\leq\mathbf{d}Y(y)=0$, as $Y$ is $\mathbf{d}$-directed, i.e. $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)$.
\end{proof}
\section{Cauchy Nets}\label{Completeness}
In this section we make the following standing assumption
\[(x_\lambda)\subseteq X\textbf{ is $\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy}.\]
For our first result we could assume `every closed upper ball has a minimum'. As in \autoref{Xcompdirected}, we can weaken this to $\mathbf{d}^\bullet\leq\mathbf{I}$, but here even $\mathbf{d}^\bullet\precapprox\mathbf{I}$ suffices, where $\precapprox$ is `uniform subequivalence'. Specifically, for $f,g:X\rightarrow[0,\infty]$, define
\begin{align*}
\sup_{g(x)\leq r}f(x)\ &=\ ^f\!/\!_g(r)\\
f\precapprox g\ &\Leftrightarrow\ ^f\!/\!_g(r)\rightarrow0.
\end{align*}
So $\mathbf{d}^\bullet\precapprox\mathbf{I}\ \Leftrightarrow\ \lim\limits_{r\rightarrow0}\mathbf{d}^\bullet(r)=0\ \Leftrightarrow\ \forall\,\mathbin{\preceq}\in\Phi^\mathbf{d}\ \exists\,\mathbin{\precsim}\in\Phi^\mathbf{d}\ \forall x\in X\ \exists y\leq^\mathbf{d}\hspace{-3pt}(x\precsim)\ x\preceq y$.
\begin{thm}\label{Cauchytodirected}
If $\mathbf{d}^\bullet\precapprox\mathbf{I}$ then we have $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-directed $Y\subseteq X$ with
\[Y\mathbf{d}=(x_\lambda)\mathbf{d}\qquad\text{and}\qquad\mathbf{d}Y=\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda).\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
As $\mathbf{d}^\bullet\precapprox\mathbf{I}$, i.e. $\lim_{r\rightarrow0}\mathbf{d}^\bullet(r)=0$, we can define $r_n\downarrow0$ with $\mathbf{d}^\bullet(2r_{n+1})<r_n$.
As $(x_\lambda)$ is $\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy, we can define $f:[\Lambda]^{<\omega}\rightarrow\Lambda$ as follows. Let $f(\{\lambda\})=\lambda$ and, given $F\in[\Lambda]^{<\omega}$ with $|F|>1$, take $f(F)\succ f(E)$, for all $E\subsetneqq F$, such that
\[\sup_{f(F)\prec\lambda}\mathbf{d}(x_{f(F)},x_\lambda)<r_{|F|}.\]
As $\mathbf{d}^\bullet(2r_{|F|})<r_{|F|-1}$, we can take $y_F\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_{f(F)})^\bullet_{2r_{|F|}}$ with $\mathbf{d}(x_{f(F)},y_F)<r_{|F|-1}$. If $F\subsetneqq G$ then $\mathbf{d}(x_{f(F)},y_G)\leq\mathbf{d}(x_{f(F)},x_{f(G)})+\mathbf{d}(x_{f(G)},y_G)<2r_{|F|}$ and hence $y_G\in(x_{f(F)})^\bullet_{2r_{|F|}}$ so $y_F\leq^\mathbf{d}y_G$. Thus $Y=\{y_F:F\in[\Lambda]^{<\omega}\}$ is $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-directed. For $\lambda\succ f(F)$, $x_\lambda\in(x_{f(F)})^\bullet_{r_{|F|}}\subseteq(x_{f(F)})^\bullet_{2r_{|F|}}$ so $y_F\leq^\mathbf{d}x_\lambda$. Thus $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda)$ so
\[Y\mathbf{d}\leq(x_\lambda)\mathbf{d}\qquad\text{and}\qquad\mathbf{d}Y\geq\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda).\]
Also $\mathbf{d}(x_{f(F)},y_F)\leq r_{|F|-1}\rightarrow0$ so
\[Y\mathbf{d}\geq(x_\lambda)\mathbf{d}\qquad\text{and}\qquad\mathbf{d}Y\leq\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda).\qedhere\]
\end{proof}
Thus $\mathbf{d}$-completeness follows from $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-completeness when $\mathbf{d}^\bullet\precapprox\mathbf{I}$. As noted after \autoref{edcomplete}, consideration of metric $\mathbf{d}$ shows we can not drop the condition $\mathbf{d}^\bullet\precapprox\mathbf{I}$. But it does suggest we might replace $\mathbf{d}^\bullet\precapprox\mathbf{I}$ with metric completeness. More precisely, letting $\mathbf{d}^\mathrm{op}(x,y)=(y,x)$ and $\mathbf{d}^\vee=\mathbf{d}\vee\mathbf{d}^\mathrm{op}$, we might ask if
\begin{equation}\label{q1}
\text{$\mathbf{d}$-complete}\qquad\Leftrightarrow\qquad\text{$\leq^\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-complete}\quad\text{and}\quad\text{$\mathbf{d}^\vee$-complete}?
\end{equation}
In general, the answer is no, as the following simple example shows.
Consider the sequence $(f_m)$ in $[0,\infty]^\mathbb{N}$ defined by
\[f_m(n)=\begin{cases}\infty &\text{if }n<m,\\ 0 &\text{if }n=m\\ 1/n &\text{if }n>m,\end{cases}\]
Set $X=\{f_m:m\in\mathbb{N}\}$ and $\mathbf{d}(f,g)=\sup(f(n)-g(n))_+$. Then $\leq^\mathbf{d}$ and $\mathbf{d}^\vee$ become identified with $=$ so $X$ is trivially $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-complete and $\mathbf{d}^\vee$-complete, even though $(f_m)$ is $\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy with no $X^\circ_\circ$-limit in $X$ ($f_m\carrowc f_\infty$ in $[0,\infty]^\mathbb{N}$ but $f_\infty\notin X$).
Thus if we are to have any hope of proving \eqref{q1}, we need some extra condition. We could use $\mathbf{d}_\bullet\leq\mathbf{I}$ as in \autoref{Xcompdirected} or the significantly weaker assumption `every open lower ball is directed'. Again, we can even describe slightly weaker conditions that suffice if we consider the following functions on $[0,\infty]$.
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}(r) &=\sup_{x\in X}\sup_{F\in[x_\bullet^r]^{<\omega}}\inf_{F\leq^\mathbf{d}y}\mathbf{d}(y,x).\\
\mathbf{d}_\Phi(r) &=\sup_{x\in X}\sup_{F\in[x_\bullet^r]^{<\omega}}\sup_{\mathbin{\preceq}\in\Phi^\mathbf{d}}\inf_{F\preceq y}\mathbf{d}(y,x).
\end{align*}
\begin{align}
\text{So}\quad\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}\leq\mathbf{I}\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}[0,r)\subseteq[0,r),\text{ for all }r\in(0,\infty).\nonumber\\
\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad x_\bullet^r\text{ is $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-directed, for all }x\in X\text{ and }r\in(0,\infty).\label{xbr}\\
\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad\sup_{y\in F}\mathbf{d}(y,x)=\inf_{F\leq^\mathbf{d}y}\mathbf{d}(y,x),\text{ for all }x\in X\text{ and finite }F\subseteq X.\nonumber
\end{align}
In general, $\mathbf{d}_\Phi\leq\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}\leq\mathbf{d}_\bullet$, but $\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}$ can be much smaller than $\mathbf{d}_\bullet$. For example, if $X=\mathrm{c}_0(\mathbb{R})=\{f\in\mathbb{R}^\mathbb{N}:f(n)\rightarrow0\}$ and $\mathbf{d}(f,g)=\sup(f(n)-g(n))_+$ then $\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}\leq\mathbf{I}$ even though $\mathbf{d}_\bullet(r)=\infty$, for all $r>0$. However, $\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}$ and $\mathbf{d}_\Phi$ often coincide.
\begin{prp}\label{dFdF}
If $\mathbf{d}$ is a hemimetric, $X$ is $\mathbf{d}^\vee\!$-complete and $\mathbf{d}_\Phi\precapprox\mathbf{I}$ then $\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}=\mathbf{d}_\Phi$.
\end{prp}
\begin{proof}
For any $r\in[0,\infty]$, $x\in X$, finite $F\subseteq x^r_\bullet$ and $\epsilon>0$, we take $(\epsilon_n)$ with $0<\epsilon_n<2^{-n}\epsilon$ and $\mathbf{d}_\Phi(\epsilon_n)<2^{-n}\epsilon$, for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$. Now take $x_1\in X$ with $\mathbf{d}(x_1,x)<\mathbf{d}_\Phi(r)$ and $\sup_{z\in F\cup\{x\}}\mathbf{d}(z,x_1)<\epsilon_1$. We can then take $x_2\in X$ with $\mathbf{d}(x_2,x_1)<\mathbf{d}_\Phi(\epsilon_1)<\frac{1}{2}\epsilon$ and $\sup_{z\in F\cup\{x,x_1\}}\mathbf{d}(z,x_2)<\epsilon_2$. Continuing in this way we obtain $(x_n)$ with $\mathbf{d}^\vee(x_{n+1},x_n)<2^{-n}\epsilon$, for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$. As $X$ is $\mathbf{d}^\vee$-complete, we have $y\in X$ with $\mathbf{d}^\vee(x_n,y)\rightarrow0$ so $F\leq^\mathbf{d}y$ and $\mathbf{d}(y,x)<\mathbf{d}_\Phi(r)+\epsilon$ so $\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}\leq\mathbf{d}_\Phi$.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{CDS}
If $X$ is $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-complete and $\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}\leq\mathbf{I}$ then we have $\mathbf{d}^\vee\!$-Cauchy $(y_n)$ with
\[(x_\lambda)\mathbf{d}=(y_n)\mathbf{d}\qquad\text{and}\qquad\lim_{\lambda,n}\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,y_n)=0.\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Instead of $\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}\leq\mathbf{I}$, we can work with a slightly even weaker condition
\begin{equation}\label{weakcond}
0\in\overline{\{r\in(0,\infty):\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}[0,r)\subseteq[0,r)\}},
\end{equation}
which means we have $r_n\downarrow0$ with $\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}[0,r_n)\subseteq[0,r_n)$, for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$. Then we have $(r^m_n)$ with $\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}(r^m_n)<r^{m+1}_n<r_n$, for all $m\in\mathbb{N}$ (taking $\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}(r_n^0)=0$). Set
\[\epsilon_n^m=\tfrac{1}{2}(r_n^m-\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}(r_n^{m-1})).\]
Again define a map $f:[\Lambda]^{<\omega}\rightarrow\Lambda$ such that, for all $\lambda\in\Lambda$, $f(\{\lambda\})=\lambda$, for all $F\in[\Lambda]^{<\omega}$ with $|F|>1$ and all $E\subsetneqq F$, $f(E)\prec f(F)$ and
\[\sup_{f(F)\prec\lambda}\mathbf{d}(x_{f(F)},x_\lambda)<\min_{1\leq n<|F|}\epsilon_n^{|F|-n},\]
For any $n\in\mathbb{N}$, let $\Lambda_n=\{F\in[\Lambda]^{<\omega}:|F|>n\}$ and define $(y^n_F)_{F\in\Lambda_n}$ recursively as follows. When $|F|=n+1$, let $y^n_F=x_{f(F)}$ so if $F\subsetneqq G$ then
\[\mathbf{d}(y^n_F,x_{f(G)})<\epsilon_n^1<r_n^1.\]
When $|G|=n+2$, we take $y^n_G$ with $y^n_F\leq^\mathbf{d}y^n_G$, for all $F\subsetneqq G$ with $|F|=n+1$, and
\[\mathbf{d}(y^n_G,x_{f(G)})<\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}(r_n^1)+\epsilon^2_n.\]
As $\mathbf{d}(x_{f(G)},x_{f(H)})<\epsilon^2_n$, whenever $G\subsetneqq H$ and $|G|=n+2$,
\[\mathbf{d}(y^n_G,x_{f(H)})\leq\mathbf{d}(y^n_G,x_{f(G)})+\mathbf{d}(x_{f(G)},x_{f(H)})<\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}(r_n^1)+2\epsilon^2_n=r_n^2.\]
For $|H|=n+3$, take $y^n_H$ with $y^n_G,x_{f(G)}\leq^\mathbf{d}y^n_H$, for $G\subsetneqq H$ with $|G|=n+2$, and
\[\mathbf{d}(y^n_H,x_{f(H)})<\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}(r_n^2)+\epsilon^3_n.\]
Continuing in this way we obtain increasing $(y^n_F)$ with $\mathbf{d}(y^n_F,x_{f(F)})<r_n$ and $x_{f(F)}\leq^\mathbf{d}y^n_G$, for all $F\in\Lambda_{n+1}$ and $F\subsetneqq G$. As $X$ is $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-complete, $(y^n_F)$ has $\mathbf{d}$-supremum $y^n$. For all $m,n\in\mathbb{N}$ and $F\in\Lambda_{\max(m,n)+1}$, we have
\[\mathbf{d}(y^m_F,y^n)\leq\mathbf{d}(y^m_F,y^n_F)\leq\mathbf{d}(y^m_F,x_{f(F)})<r_m\]
and hence $\mathbf{d}(y^m,y^n)\leq r_m$, so $(y^n)$ is $\mathbf{d}^\vee$-Cauchy.
For any $\epsilon>0$, we have $r_n<\epsilon$ for all sufficiently large $n\in\mathbb{N}$. Then, for any $z\in X$ and all sufficiently large $F\in[\Lambda]^{<\omega}$,
\[\mathbf{d}(y^n,z)\leq\mathbf{d}(y^n_F,z)+\epsilon\leq\mathbf{d}(x_{f(F)},z)+r_n+\epsilon<\mathbf{d}(x_{f(F)},z)+2\epsilon,\]
so $(y^n)\mathbf{d}\leq(x_\lambda)\mathbf{d}$. For all sufficiently large $F\in[\Lambda]^{<\omega}$, $\sup_{f(F)\prec\lambda}\mathbf{d}(x_{f(F)},x_\lambda)<\epsilon$ so, as $x_{f(G)}\leq^\mathbf{d}y^n$ when $F\subsetneqq G\in\Lambda_n$,
$\mathbf{d}(x_{f(F)},y^n)<\epsilon$ and $\lim\limits_{\lambda,n}\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,y^n)=0$.
\end{proof}
Above we obtained symmetric $\mathbf{d}^\vee$ and transitive $\leq^\mathbf{d}$ from $\mathbf{d}$. But in practice it often happens the other way around, i.e. we compose symmetric $\mathbf{e}$ with transitive $\preceq$ to obtain $\mathbf{d}=\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\preceq}$ (\eqref{tri} is not automatic but follows from e.g. $\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\preceq}=\mathbin{\preceq}\circ\mathbf{e}$).
\begin{qst}\label{mainq}
If $\mathbf{d}=\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}$ for a metric $\mathbf{e}$ then does
\[\text{$\leq^\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-complete}\quad\text{and}\quad\text{$\mathbf{e}$-complete}\qquad\Rightarrow\qquad\text{$\mathbf{d}$-complete}?\]
\end{qst}
Unlike with \eqref{q1}, we do not know of a counterexample. Indeed, an answer to \autoref{mainq} would likely shed some light on an old problem from \cite{AkemannPedersen1973} and \cite{Brown1988} for C*-algebra $A$, namely whether every strongly lower semicontinuous element of $A^{**}_\mathrm{sa}$ can be obtained from $A_\mathrm{sa}$ as a monotone limit. However, we can give a positive answer to \autoref{mainq} if we assume $\mathbf{e}$-separability, i.e. $\mathbf{e}Y=0$ for some countable $Y\subseteq X$, or consider $\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-completeness instead of $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-completeness.
Again we work with a weaker assumption than $\mathbf{d}=\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\leq}^\mathbf{d}$ which depends only on $\Phi^\mathbf{d}$ and $\Phi^\mathbf{e}$. Specifically, note $\mathbf{d}\precapprox\mathbf{e}\,\Leftrightarrow\,\Phi^\mathbf{d}\subseteq\Phi^\mathbf{e}$ and define
\[\mathbf{e}\circ\Phi^\mathbf{d}=\sup\limits_{\preceq\in\Phi^\mathbf{d}}\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\preceq}=\sup\limits_{\preceq\in\Phi^\mathbf{d}}\inf\limits_{z\preceq y}\mathbf{e}(x,z)=\sup\limits_{\epsilon>0}\inf\limits_{z<^\mathbf{d}_\epsilon y}\mathbf{e}(x,z).\]
\begin{thm}\label{ded}
If $X$ is $\mathbf{e}$-complete and $\mathbf{e}\circ\Phi^\mathbf{d}\precapprox\mathbf{d}\precapprox\mathbf{e}=\mathbf{e}^\mathrm{op}$ then $\mathbf{e}\circ\Phi^\mathbf{d}=\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}$,
\begin{equation}\label{dedeq}
Y\mathbf{d}=(x_\lambda)\mathbf{d}\qquad\text{and}\qquad\mathbf{d}Y=\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda),
\end{equation}
for $\mathbf{d}$-directed $Y\subseteq X$. If $X$ is $\mathbf{e}$-separable then we can choose $Y$ to be $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-directed.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
For $\mathbf{e}\circ\Phi^\mathbf{d}=\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}$, we argue as in the proof of \autoref{dFdF}. Specifically, for any $x,y\in X$ and $\epsilon>0$, take $\epsilon_n\downarrow0$ with $^{\mathbf{e}\circ\Phi^\mathbf{d}}\!/\!_\mathbf{d}(\epsilon_n)<2^{-n}\epsilon$, for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$. Now take $z_1\in X$ with $\mathbf{e}(x,z_1)<\mathbf{e}\circ\Phi^\mathbf{d}(x,y)+\epsilon$ and $\mathbf{d}(z_1,y)<\epsilon_1$. Thus $\mathbf{e}\circ\Phi^\mathbf{d}(z_1,y)<\frac{1}{2}\epsilon$ and we can take $z_2\in X$ such that $\mathbf{e}(z_1,z_2)<\frac{1}{2}\epsilon$ and $\mathbf{d}(z_2,y)<\epsilon_2$. Continuing in this way we obtain a sequence $(z_n)\subseteq X$ such that, for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$,
\[\mathbf{e}(z_n,z_{n+1})\leq2^{-n}\epsilon\qquad\text{and}\qquad\mathbf{d}(z_n,y)<\epsilon_n\rightarrow0.\]
As $X$ is $\mathbf{e}$-complete, $\mathbf{e}(z_n,z)\rightarrow0$, for some $z\in X$, so
\[\mathbf{e}(x,z)\leq\mathbf{e}(x,z_1)+\mathbf{e}(z_1,z)\leq\mathbf{e}\circ\Phi^\mathbf{d}(x,y)+2\epsilon\]
As $\mathbf{e}=\mathbf{e}^\mathrm{op}$, $\mathbf{e}(z,z_n)\rightarrow0$ so, as $\mathbf{d}\precapprox\mathbf{e}$, $\mathbf{d}(z,z_n)\rightarrow0$. Then $z\leq^\mathbf{d}y$ follows from $\mathbf{d}(z,y)\leq\mathbf{d}(z,z_n)+\mathbf{d}(z_n,y)\rightarrow0$. As $\epsilon>0$ was aribtrary, $\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}=\mathbf{e}\circ\Phi^\mathbf{d}$.
As $(x_\lambda)$ is Cauchy, we can take a subnet and $(s_\lambda),(t_\lambda)\subseteq(0,\infty)$ such that
\begin{align*}
\sup_{\lambda<\delta}\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda,x_\delta)&<s_\lambda\rightarrow0.\\
^{\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}}\!/\!_\mathbf{d}(s_\lambda)&<t_\lambda\rightarrow0.
\end{align*}
Define $\gamma_\lambda^n$ and $x_\lambda^n\leq^\mathbf{d}x_{\gamma_\lambda^n}$ recursively as follows. First set $\gamma_\lambda^1=\lambda$ and $x_\lambda^1=x_\lambda$. Then, for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$, take $\gamma_\lambda^{n+1}>\gamma_\lambda^n$ such that $^{\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}}\!/\!_\mathbf{d}(s_{\gamma_\lambda^{n+1}}),s_{\gamma_\lambda^{n+1}}<2^{-n}t_\lambda$. As $\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda^n,x_{\gamma_\lambda^{n+1}})\leq\mathbf{d}(x_{\gamma_\lambda^n},x_{\gamma_\lambda^{n+1}})<s_{\gamma_\lambda^n}$ and $^{\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}}\!/\!_\mathbf{d}(s_{\gamma_\lambda^n})<2^{1-n}t_\lambda$, we can take $x^{n+1}_\lambda\leq^\mathbf{d}x_{\gamma_\lambda^{n+1}}$ such that $\mathbf{e}(x^n_\lambda,x^{n+1}_\lambda)<2^{1-n}t_\lambda$. For each $\lambda$, $(x_\lambda^n)$ is $\mathbf{e}$-Cauchy so $\mathbf{e}$-completeness implies that $\mathbf{e}(x_\lambda^n,y_\lambda)\rightarrow0$, for some $y_\lambda\in X$.
For any $\lambda$ and $\epsilon>0$, we can take $n$ with $2^{1-n}t_\lambda<\epsilon$ so $\mathbf{e}(x_\lambda^n,y_\lambda)<2\epsilon$ and $\mathbf{d}(x_{\gamma_\lambda^n},x_\delta)<s_{\gamma_\lambda^n}<\epsilon$, for any $\delta\succ\gamma_\lambda^n$. For all sufficiently large $\delta$, we also have $t_\delta<\epsilon$ so $\mathbf{e}(x_\delta,y_\delta)<2\epsilon$ and hence
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{d}(y_\lambda,y_\delta)&\leq\mathbf{d}(y_\lambda,x_\lambda^n)+\mathbf{d}(x_\lambda^n,x_{\gamma_\lambda^n})+\mathbf{d}(x_{\gamma_\lambda^n},x_\delta)+\mathbf{d}(x_\delta,y_\delta)\\
&\leq{}^\mathbf{d}\!/\!_\mathbf{e}(2\epsilon)+0+\epsilon+{}^\mathbf{d}\!/\!_\mathbf{e}(2\epsilon).
\end{align*}
As $\mathbf{d}\precapprox\mathbf{e}$, $Y=\{y_\lambda:\lambda\in\Lambda\}$ is $\mathbf{d}$-directed. As $\mathbf{e}(x_\lambda,y_\lambda)<2t_\lambda\rightarrow0$, \eqref{dedeq} follows.
If $X$ is $\mathbf{e}$-separable then $\mathbf{e}$ is a pseudometric, as $\mathbf{e}=\mathbf{e}^\mathrm{op}$. Thus $Y$ is also $\mathbf{e}$-separable and can be replaced by a countable subset. Then we can replace $(x_\lambda)$ with a $\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy sequence $(x_n)\subseteq Y$ with $Y\leq^\mathbf{d}(x_n)$.
Take $(s^m_n),(t^m_n)\subseteq(0,\infty)$ such that, for all $m,n\in\mathbb{N}$,
\[s^m_n<2^{-m-n},\quad{}^\mathbf{d}\!/\!_\mathbf{e}(s^m_n)<t^m_{n-1}\quad\text{and}\quad ^{\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}}\!/\!_\mathbf{d}(t^m_n)<s^{m+1}_n\]
(define and $(s^m_1)_{m\in\mathbb{N}}$ first then $(t^m_1)_{m\in\mathbb{N}}$, $(s^m_2)_{m\in\mathbb{N}}$ etc.). Take a subsequence $(x_n)$ with $\mathbf{d}(x_n,x_{n+1})<t^1_n$, for all $n$, and define $y^m_n$ with $\mathbf{d}(y^m_n,y^m_{n+1})<t^m_n$, for all $m$, recursively as follows. First let $y^1_n=x_n$, for all $n$. Assume $y^m_n$ is defined for all $n$ and fixed $m$. For each $n$, we can take $y^{m+1}_n\leq^\mathbf{d}y^m_{n+1}$ with $\mathbf{e}(y^m_n,y^{m+1}_n)<s^{m+1}_n$ as
\[\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}(y^m_n,y^m_{n+1})\leq{}^{\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}}\!/\!_\mathbf{d}(\mathbf{d}(y^m_n,y^m_{n+1}))\leq{}^{\mathbf{e}\circ\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}}\!/\!_\mathbf{d}(t^m_n)<s^{m+1}_n.\]
Thus $\mathbf{d}(y^{m+1}_n,y^{m+1}_{n+1})\leq\mathbf{d}(y^m_{n+1},y^{m+1}_{n+1})\leq{}^\mathbf{d}\!/\!_\mathbf{e}(\mathbf{e}(y^m_{n+1},y^{m+1}_{n+1}))\leq{}^\mathbf{d}\!/\!_\mathbf{e}(s^{m+1}_{n+1})<t^{m+1}_n$.
For all $m,n\in\mathbb{N}$, $\mathbf{e}(y^m_n,y^{m+1}_n)<s_n^{m+1}<2^{-m-n}$ so, as $X$ is $\mathbf{e}$-complete, we have $y_n\in X$ with $\lim_m\mathbf{e}(y^m_n,y_n)=0$. As $\mathbf{d}\precapprox\mathbf{e}=\mathbf{e}^\mathrm{op}$ and $y^{m+1}_n\leq^\mathbf{d}y^m_{n+1}$,
\[\mathbf{d}(y_n,y_{n+1})\leq\liminf_m(\mathbf{d}(y_n,y^{m+1}_n)+\mathbf{d}(y^{m+1}_n,y^m_{n+1})+\mathbf{d}(y^m_{n+1},y_{n+1}))=0,\]
i.e. $y_n\leq^\mathbf{d}y_{n+1}$ so $Y=\{y_n:n\in\mathbb{N}\}$ is $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-directed. Lastly, \eqref{dedeq} follows from
\[\mathbf{e}(x_n,y_n)=\lim_m\mathbf{e}(x_n,y^m_n)<{\textstyle\sum\limits_{m=2}^\infty}s^m_n<{\textstyle\sum\limits_{m=2}^\infty}2^{-m-n}<2^{-n}\rightarrow0.\qedhere\]
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{Yc} $X$ is $\mathbf{d}$-complete if any of the following hold.
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{Yc1a} $X$ is $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-complete and $\mathbf{d}^\bullet\,\precapprox\mathbf{I}$.
\item\label{Yc1b} $X$ is $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-complete, $\mathbf{d}^\vee\!$-complete and $\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}\leq\mathbf{I}$.
\item\label{Yc2a} $X$ is\hspace{10pt}$\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-complete, $\mathbf{e}$-complete and $\mathbf{e}\circ\Phi^\mathbf{d}\precapprox\mathbf{d}\precapprox\mathbf{e}=\mathbf{e}^\mathrm{op}$.
\item\label{Yc2b} $X$ is $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-complete, $\mathbf{e}$-complete, $\mathbf{e}$-separable and $\mathbf{e}\circ\Phi^\mathbf{d}\precapprox\mathbf{d}\precapprox\mathbf{e}=\mathbf{e}^\mathrm{op}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof} If $\mathbf{d}^\bullet\,\precapprox\mathbf{I}$ then, for any $\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy $(x_\lambda)$, we have $Y\subseteq X$ with $Y\mathbf{d}=(x_\lambda)\mathbf{d}$, by \autoref{Cauchytodirected}. If $X$ is also $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-complete then we have $x=\mathbf{d}$-$\sup Y$ and hence $x\mathbf{d}=Y\mathbf{d}=(x_\lambda)\mathbf{d}$ so $x_\lambda\carrowb x\leq^\mathbf{d}x$, i.e. $x_\lambda\carrowc x$, by \eqref{carrowc}. This proves \eqref{Yc1a} and likewise \eqref{Yc1b} follows from \autoref{CDS}, while \eqref{Yc2a} and \eqref{Yc2b} follow from \autoref{ded}.
\end{proof}
Note in \autoref{Yc} \eqref{Yc1b}, if $\mathbf{d}$ is a hemimetric then we can replace $\mathbf{d}_\mathbf{F}$ with $\mathbf{d}_\Phi$ for a formally weaker assumption (even weaker if we consider \eqref{weakcond}), by \autoref{dFdF}.
For a simple application of \autoref{Yc} \eqref{Yc1a}, we consider the space of `generalized formal balls' of $X$. Specifically, identify $X$ with $X\times\{0\}$ and extend $\mathbf{d}$ to $X\times\mathbb{R}$ by
\[\mathbf{d}((x,r),(y,s))=(\mathbf{d}(x,y)+r-s)_+.\]
For any $x,y\in X$, $r,s\in\mathbb{R}$ and $t\in[0,\infty)$,
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{d}(x,y)+r-s\leq t\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad\mathbf{d}((x,r),(y,s))\leq t.\\
\Leftrightarrow\quad\mathbf{d}(x,y)+r-t-s\leq0\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad(x,r-t)\leq^\mathbf{d}(y,s).\\
\Leftrightarrow\quad\mathbf{d}(x,y)+r-(t+s)\leq0\quad&\Leftrightarrow\quad(x,r)\leq^\mathbf{d}(y,t+s).
\end{align*}
So finite radius closed upper balls have minimums and likewise for lower balls, i.e.
\[\overline{(x,r)}^\bullet_t\ =\ (x,r-t)\!\leq^\mathbf{d}\qquad\text{and}\qquad\leq^\mathbf{d}\!(y,t+s)\ =\ \overline{(y,s)}_\bullet^t.\]
Thus $\mathbf{d}^\bullet\leq\mathbf{I}$ and $\mathbf{d}_\bullet\leq\mathbf{I}$. And $\mathbf{d}^\bullet\leq\mathbf{I}$ still applies to $X\times\mathbb{R}_-$, where $\mathbb{R}_-=(-\infty,0]$.
\begin{thm}[\cite{KostanekWaszkiewicz2011} Theorem 7.1]\label{KW}
The following are equivalent.
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{KW1} $X$ is $\mathbf{d}$-complete.
\item\label{KW2} $X\times\mathbb{R}_-$ is $\mathbf{d}$-complete.
\item\label{KW3} $X\times\mathbb{R}_-$ is $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-complete.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}\
\begin{itemize}
\item[\eqref{KW1}$\Rightarrow$\eqref{KW2}] If $(x_\lambda,r_\lambda)$ is $\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy then, as $(r-s)_+\leq\mathbf{d}((x,r),(y,s))$ and $\mathbb{R}_-$ is bounded above by $0$, $(r_\lambda)$ must be Cauchy (for the usual metric on $\mathbb{R}$). Thus $r_\lambda\rightarrow r$ for some $r\in\mathbb{R}_-$, and hence $(x_\lambda)$ is $\mathbf{d}$-Cauchy. Thus $x_\lambda\carrowc x$, for some $x\in X$, and hence $(x_\lambda,r_\lambda)\carrowc(x,r)$ in $X\times\mathbb{R}_-$.
\item[\eqref{KW2}$\Rightarrow$\eqref{KW1}] Identify $X$ with $X\times\{0\}$.
\item[\eqref{KW2}$\Rightarrow$\eqref{KW3}] Immediate.
\item[\eqref{KW3}$\Rightarrow$\eqref{KW2}] We claim that any $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-supremum $(x,r)$ of $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-directed $(x_\lambda,r_\lambda)$ in $X\times\mathbb{R}_-$ remains a $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-supremum in $X\times\mathbb{R}$. Indeed, say $(x_\lambda,r_\lambda)\leq^\mathbf{d}(y,s)\in X\times\mathbb{R}$, for all $\lambda$. As $X\times\mathbb{R}_-$ is $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-complete, we have $(z,t)=\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}$-$\sup(x_\lambda,r_\lambda-s)$ in $X\times\mathbb{R}_-$, so $(z,t+s)=\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}$-$\sup(x_\lambda,r_\lambda)=(x,r)$ and hence $(x,r-s)=\mathbin{\leq^\mathbf{d}}$-$\sup(x_\lambda,r_\lambda-s)$. Also $(x_\lambda,r_\lambda-s)\leq^\mathbf{d}(y,0)$, for all $\lambda$, so $(x,r-s)\leq^\mathbf{d}(y,0)$ and hence $(x,r)\leq^\mathbf{d}(y,s)$, proving the claim. Thus $(x,r)=\mathbf{d}$-$\sup(x_\lambda,r_\lambda)$ in $X\times\mathbb{R}$, by \autoref{Xcompdirected}, and hence in $X\times\mathbb{R}_-$. This shows that $X\times\mathbb{R}_-$ is $\leq^\mathbf{d}$-$\mathbf{d}$-complete and hence $\mathbf{d}$-complete, by \autoref{Yc} \eqref{Yc1a}.\qedhere
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
|
\subsection{Major Implications}
In this paper we show that replication of the slowest tasks in a job (the stragglers) is a powerful way to reduce latency in large-scale parallel computing. We characterize the trade-off between latency and computing cost for a set of replication strategies called single-fork policies. The policy used in practical systems such as MapReduce belongs to this set of single-fork policies. A non-intuitive insight we get from this analysis is that in certain scenarios it is possible to reduce latency and cost simultaneously. We also propose a heuristic algorithm to find the scheduling policy which achieves a good trade-off between latency and cost. Experiments on Google Traces data show that policies found by the heuristic algorithm can give a better latency-cost trade-off than the back-up tasks option used in MapReduce.
\subsection{Future Perspectives}
Although we focus on single-fork policies in this work, the analysis can be extended to multi-fork policies where the scheduler can add or kill replicas at multiple instances during the execution. We also plan to consider queueing of tasks at machines and analyze the percentile latency in addition to the expected value considered here. Another future direction is to analyze the performance of approximate computing where only a subset of the tasks of a job are required to be completed, for example information retrieval and machine learning applications.
In this work, we assume prior knowledge of the execution time distribution $F_X$ when designing the task replication strategy. An interesting research direction is to develop an adaptive scheduling algorithm that simultaneously estimates the distribution and schedules task replication. This shares some similarity to the celebrated multi-arm bandit problem, with an exploration-exploitation trade-off between estimating the distribution $F_X$, and using the current estimate to design a task replication policy.
Our analytical framework can be used in other applications where the response time of the components is stochastic. For example, in crowdsourcing, each worker can take a variable amount of time to complete a task. Then the overall latency can be modeled in the same way as our work, with the cost function being equal to the number of workers \cite{wang_thesis_2014}.
\subsection{Notation}
\label{sec:scheduling_notation}
First, we define some notation used in this paper. Lower-case letters (e.g., $x$) denote a particular value of the corresponding random variable, which is denoted in upper-case letters (e.g., $X$). We denote the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of $X$ by $F_X(x)$. Its complement, the tail distribution is denoted by
\begin{equation*}
\bar{F}_X(x) \triangleq 1 - F_X(x).
\end{equation*}
which may be more convenient to use than the {c.d.f.}\ sometimes. We denote the upper end point of $F_X$ by
\begin{equation}
\CDUpper{F_X} \triangleq \sup \SetDef{x}{F_X(x) < 1} .
\label{eq:def_support}
\end{equation}
For {i.i.d.}\ random variables $X_1, X_2, \cdots, X_n$, we define $X_{j:n}$ as the $j$-th order statistic, i.e., the $j$-th smallest of the $n$ random variables.
\subsection{System Model}
\label{sec:sys_model}
Consider a job consisting of $n$ \emph{parallel tasks}, where $n$ is large. Analysis of real-world trace data shows that it is common for a job to contain hundreds or even thousands of tasks~\cite{reiss_towards_2012}. We assume the executing time of each task on a computing node is independent and identically distributed ({i.i.d.}) according to $F_X$, where $F_X$ is the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of random variable $X$.
The distribution $F_X$ accounts for the variability in the machine response due to various factors such as congestion, queuing, virtualization etc. We consider that there is an unlimited pool of machines such that each new task (or new replica) is assigned to a new machine. Hence, the execution time of a task can be assumed to be i.i.d.\ across machines.
Since we assume an unlimited pool of machines, the delay due to queueing of tasks at machines is small and can be subsumed as a constant additive term in the execution time $X$. Also, we do not consider the dependence of the task execution time on the size of the task itself. But it can be accounted for similarly by adding a constant delay (fixed across tasks of the same job) to the expected completion time of the job defined in \Cref{sec:scheduling_metrics}.
\subsection{Scheduling Policy}
A {scheduling policy} or \emph{scheduler} assigns tasks to different machines, possibly at different time instants. We assume that the scheduler receives instantaneous feedback notifying it when a machine finishes its assigned task. But there is \emph{no intermediate feedback} indicating the status of processing of a task. When the scheduler receives notification that at least one replica of each of the $n$ tasks has finished, it \emph{kills all} the residual running replicas. It can also use the feedback to decide when to selectively launch or kill replicas in order to reduce the overall job completion time.
The times when the scheduler launches or kills replicas could be pre-determined (static policy) or be dependent on the feedback about the execution of other tasks in the job (dynamic policy). We focus our attention on a set of dynamic policies called single-fork policies, defined as follows.
\begin{definition}[Single-fork Scheduling policy]
A {single-fork scheduling policy} $\SingleFork{p,r,l}$ launches a single replica of all $n$ tasks at time $0$. It waits until $(1-p)n$ tasks finish and then for each of the $pn$ straggling tasks, chooses one of the following two actions:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{replicate without relaunching ($l=0$):} launch $r$ new replicas;
\item \textbf{replicate with relaunching ($l=1$):} kill the original copy and launch $r+1$ new replicas.
\end{itemize}
When the earliest replica of a task is executed, all the other replicas are terminated.
\end{definition}
We use $l$ to denote the number of original replicas of each task remaining after the forking point. Hence $l=0$ when the original replica is killed and restarted, and $l=1$ otherwise. Note that in for both the relaunching ($l=0$) and no relaunching ($l=1$) cases there are a total of $r+1$ replicas running after the forking point. The effect of $r$ and $l$ on the replication of straggling tasks is illustrated in \Cref{fig:single_fork_relaunching}.
For simplicity of notation we assume that $p$ is such that $pn$ is an integer. We note that $p=0$ corresponds to running $n$ tasks in parallel and waiting for all to finish, which is the baseline case without any replication or relaunching.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\tikzscalep{0.65}
\addtikz{single_fork_eg_no_relaunch}
\caption{Single fork with no relaunching ($l=1$)}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\tikzscalep{0.65}
\addtikz{single_fork_eg_relaunch}
\caption{Single fork with relaunching ($l=0$)}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Illustration of single-fork policies with and without relaunching.}
\label{fig:single_fork_relaunching}
\end{figure}
\begin{remark}[Backup tasks in MapReduce]
\label{rem:single_fork_mapreduce}
The idea of `backup' tasks used in Google's MapReduce ~\cite{dean_mapreduce:_2008}, is a special case of the single-fork policy. Following our notation, it corresponds to $r=1$ and $l=1$. The value of $p$ is tuned dynamically and hence not specified in \cite{dean_mapreduce:_2008}.
\end{remark}
Although we focus on single-fork policies in this paper, the analysis can be generalized to multi-fork policies, where new replicas of straggling tasks are launched at multiple times during the execution of the job. Forking multiple times can give a better latency-cost trade-off, but could be undesirable in practice due to additional delay and complexity in obtaining new and killing existing replicas.
\subsection{Performance metrics}
\label{sec:scheduling_metrics}
Our objective is to find the best single-fork policy $\SingleFork{p,r,l}$ for a given task execution time distribution $F_X$. We now define the performance metrics of latency and resource usage that are used to evaluate different scheduling policies.
\begin{definition}[Expected Latency]
\label{def:latency}
The expected latency $\E{T}$ is the expected value of $T$, the time taken for at least one replica of each of the $n$ tasks to finish. It can be expressed as,
\begin{align}
\E{T} &= \mathbb{E} \left[ \max_{i \in \{1, 2, \dots, n\} } T_i \right], \label{eq:latency}
\end{align}
where $T_i$ is the minimum of the finish times of the replicas of task $i$, which depends on the scheduling policy used.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}[Expected Cost]
\label{def:cost}
The expected computing cost $\E{C}$ is the sum of the running times of all machines, normalized by $n$, the number of tasks in the job. The running time is the time from when the task is launched on a machine, until it finishes, or is killed by the scheduler.
\end{definition}
For a user of a cloud computing service such as the Amazon Web Service (AWS), which charges the user by time and number of machines used, the money paid by the user to rent the machines is proportional to $\E{C}$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\tikzscalep{0.9}
\addtikz{multi_task_scheduling_eg}
\end{center}
\caption{Illustration of $T$ and $C$ for a job with two tasks, and two replicas of each task. The latency $T = \max(8,10) = 10$, and the computing cost is $C = (8+6+10+5)/2 = 14.5$.}
\label{fig:multi_task_scheduling}
\end{figure}
\begin{example}
Suppose the scheduler launches $r$ replicas of each of the $n$ tasks at times $t_{i,j}$ for $j = 1, 2, \dots r$. Then the latency $T_i$ of the $i^{th}$ task is given by
\begin{align}
T_i &= \min_{1 \leq j \leq r} (t_{i,j} + X_{i,j}), \label{eq:task_latency}
\end{align}
where $X_{i,j}$ are i.i.d. draws from the execution time distribution $F_X$. The computing cost $C$ can be expressed as
\begin{align}
C &\triangleq \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \sum_{j=1}^{r} \posfunc{ T_i - t_{i,j} },
\label{eq:cost_cloud}
\end{align}
where $\posfunc{x} = \max(0,x)$.
\end{example}
\Cref{fig:multi_task_scheduling} illustrates the execution of a job with two tasks, and evaluation of the corresponding latency $T$ and cost $C$. Given two tasks, we launch two replicas of task 1 $t_{1,1} = 0$ and $t_{1,2} = 2$, and two replicas of task 2 at $t_{2,1} = 0$ and $t_{2,2} = 5$. The task execution times are $X_{1,1} = 8$, $X_{1,2} = 7$, $X_{2,1} = 11$, and $X_{2,2} = 5$. Machine $M_1$ finishes the task first at time $t=8$, $T_1 = 8$ and the second replica running on $M_2$ is terminated before it finishes executing. Similarly, machine $M_4$ finishes task $2$ at time $T_2 = 10$, and the replica running on $M_3$ is terminated. Thus the latency of the job is $T = \max\Set{T_1, T_2} = 10$. The cost is the sum of all running times normalized by $n$, i.e., $C = (8 + 6 + 10 + 5)/2 = 14.5$.
In this work we analyze the trade-off between $\E{T}$ and $\E{C}$ for the single-fork policy and provide insights into design of scheduling policies that achieve a good trade-off.
\subsection{Estimation of Latency and Cost Metrics}
\label{subsec:est_perf_metrics}
In Algorithm~\ref{algo:est_perf_metrics} we propose an algorithm to estimate $\E{T}$ and $\E{C}$ based on random sampling of distributions $F_X$ and $F_Y$. The estimates are denoted by $\tilde{T}$ and $\tilde{C}$ respectively.
We first construct empirical CDFs $\hat{F}_X$ and $\hat{F}_Y$ from experimental traces of start and finish times of tasks on a large cluster of machines. The traces need to sufficient to be capture the tail behavior of the distribution, which plays a key role in characterizing the latency-cost trade-off, as seen in \Cref{sec:single_fork}. To estimate the terms of $\E{T}$ and $\E{C}$ in \Cref{eq:latency_gen} and \Cref{eq:cost_gen} involving $F_X$, we draw $n$ i.i.d.\ samples from $\hat{F}_X$ and find the maximum and mean of the smallest $n(1-p)$ samples. Similarly, to estimate the terms in \Cref{eq:latency_gen} and \Cref{eq:cost_gen} involving $Y$, we draw $pn$ samples from $\hat{F}_Y$ and find the maximum and mean of the samples. The above steps are repeated $m$ times and $\tilde{T}$ and $\tilde{C}$ are set to means of the corresponding estimates from each step.
While it is possible to estimate $\tilde{T}$ and $\tilde{C}$ directly from traces of the execution time, we take the two-step approach of first finding the empirical CDFs $\hat{F}_X$ and $\hat{F}_Y$ and then estimating $\tilde{T}$ and $\tilde{C}$. This is because unlike samples of the task execution time $X$, the samples of the residual straggler execution time $Y$ (Lemma~\ref{lemma:cFY}) cannot be directly obtained from the traces of task execution time. Also, this two-step approach allows system designers to improve each of two estimates separately. For example, the CDFs $\hat{F}_X$ and $\hat{F}_Y$ can be smoothed using bootstrapping methods \cite{efron1986bootstrap}.
By the Central Limit Theorem we can show that the standard deviation of the error in estimating $\E{C}$, and the first term in $\E{T}$ converges to zero as $O(1/\sqrt{m n})$, where $m$ is the number of times the sampling procedure is repeated. But in general, the maximum order statistic term in $\E{T}$ converges to zero as $O(1/\sqrt{m})$, which is slower. Thus, the estimate of $\tilde{C}$ is more robust than that of $\tilde{T}$.
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\begin{algorithmic}
\State Initialize $p = 0$, $r^*= 0$, $l^*= 0$
\For{$i = 1, 2, \ldots k$}
\State \% For given $p$, optimize $l$ and $r$
\While { 1}
\State $\pi \gets \SingleFork{p,r^*,l^*}$
\State $\pi'_0 \gets \SingleFork{p, r^*+1,0}$
\State $\pi'_1 \gets \SingleFork{p, r^*+1,1}$
\If { $\tilde{T}(\pi'_1) + \mu \tilde{C}(\pi'_1) < \tilde{T}(\pi'_0) + \mu \tilde{C}(\pi'_0)$}
\State $\pi' \gets \pi'_1$
\Else
\State $\pi' \gets \pi'_0$
\EndIf
\State $\Delta_J \gets \tilde{T}(\pi')-\tilde{T}(\pi) + \mu (\tilde{C}(\pi')-\tilde{C}(\pi))$
\If {$\Delta_J < 0$}
\State $\pi \gets \pi'$
\Else
\State \textbf{break}
\EndIf
\EndWhile
\State
\State \% Gradient Descent on $p$
\State $ \SingleFork{p, r^*, l^*} \gets \pi$
\State $\pi' \gets \SingleFork{p+\Delta_p, r^*,l}$
\State $\Delta_J \gets \tilde{T}(\pi')-\tilde{T}(\pi) + \mu (\tilde{C}(\pi')-\tilde{C}(\pi))$
\State $p \gets p -\Delta_p \Delta_J $
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{Heuristic to Find Best Single-Fork Policy}
\label{algo:single_fork_heuristic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Heuristic Search for the Best Policy}
\label{subsec:heuristic_algo}
We now present a heuristic algorithm that uses traces of execution time to search for the best single-fork policy. This policy can be used to perform task replication in future jobs that have similar task execution time statistics. The best single-fork policy is said to be the policy that minimizes the objective function $J$ defined as,
\begin{align}
J &\triangleq \E{T} + \mu \E{C} \nonumber ,\\
& \approx \tilde{T} + \mu \tilde{C}. \label{eq:est_obj_func}
\end{align}
The parameter $\mu$ is the priority given to the minimizing the cost. Since we know only estimates $\tilde{T}$ and $\tilde{C}$ of the expected latency and cost from Algorithm~\ref{algo:est_perf_metrics}, we use the estimated objective function in \Cref{eq:est_obj_func}.
Algorithm~\ref{algo:single_fork_heuristic} gives the pseudo-code of the search for the best single-fork parameters $p$, $ r$ and $l$. For a given $p$, we first find the optimal $r$ and $l$, and then perform gradient descent on $p$. This is repeated for $k$ iterations. To optimize $r$ and $l$ we keep increasing $r$ by $1$ until the objective function decreases. For each $r$, we set $l$ to the value ($0$ or $1$) which gives a smaller $J$. The terms $\tilde{T}(\pi)$ and $\tilde{C}(\pi)$ are the latency and cost estimates for the policy $\pi = \SingleFork{p, r, l}$ found using Algorithm~\ref{algo:est_perf_metrics}.
The policy found by Algorithm~\ref{algo:single_fork_heuristic} may not be the true optimal single-fork policy due to the following error factors:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Error in the estimates of $\E{T}$ and $\E{C}$ from Algorithm~\ref{algo:est_perf_metrics}.
\item The gradient descent in $p$ could be slow and may not converge to the optimum in $k$ iterations. Also, note that $\E{T}$ and $\E{C}$ in \Cref{eq:latency_gen} and \Cref{eq:cost_gen} are convex in $r$, but not in $p$ and $l$. Thus, the algorithm is not guaranteed to converge to the optimal single-fork policy.
\item The task execution time statistics of future jobs may not match the empirical CDF $\hat{F}_X$ that was used to find the best policy in Algorithm~\ref{algo:single_fork_heuristic}.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Demonstration using Google Traces}
We now demonstrate the results of running Algorithm~\ref{algo:single_fork_heuristic} on Google Trace data \cite{web_google_cluster_data}. We use the traces to estimate the distribution $F_X$ and then run the heuristic algorithm on it to find the best single-fork policy.
The Google Trace data gives timestamps of events such as SCHEDULE, EVICT, FINISH, FAIL, KILL etc.\ for each of the tasks of computing jobs that are run on Google's machine clusters. We consider the difference between the SCHEDULE and FINISH timestamps as the task execution time, and construct the empirical distribution $\hat{F}_X$. Note that because we consider only the SCHEDULE and FINISH task, we are not accounting for the computing resources consumed due to failure or eviction of tasks.
\begin{figure}[t!b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{plots/google_trace_hist_1017}
\caption{Normalized histogram of the task execution times for a Google cluster job with $n=1017$ tasks.}
\label{fig:google_trace_hist}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{plots/google_trace_hist_488}
\caption{Normalized histogram of the task execution times for a Google cluster job with $n=488$ tasks.}
\label{fig:google_trace_hist_2}
\end{figure}
We consider two large Google cluster jobs with $n=1017$ and $n = 488$ tasks respectively. Their normalized histograms are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:google_trace_hist} and Fig.~\ref{fig:google_trace_hist_2}. Fig.~\ref{fig:google_trace_hist} shows heavy-tail behavior of task execution time, whereas Fig.~\ref{fig:google_trace_hist_2} has bimodal behavior with a very small percentage of tasks finishing in around $1400$ seconds.
Then we run Algorithm~\ref{algo:single_fork_heuristic} on the empirical $\hat{F}_X$ found using the histograms. We use $\Delta_p = 0.002$, $m = 500$ and $k=25$. The latency-cost trade-offs of the heuristic policies found by the algorithm are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:heuristic_result} and Fig.~\ref{fig:heuristic_result_2}. We also plot the estimated latency-cost trade-off for $r=1$ and $l=1$ as $p$ varies from $0$ to $1$. These are the parameters of the back-up tasks option in MapReduce as described in \Cref{rem:single_fork_mapreduce}.
We observe in Fig.~\ref{fig:heuristic_result} that the heuristic algorithm finds policies with $r >1$ that give lower latency for the same cost, than the policies with $r=1$ and $l=1$. We also observe that the latency reduction is more when $\mu$ is smaller, that is, the priority given to minimizing the cost is lower. But in Fig.~\ref{fig:heuristic_result_2}, the reduction in latency by adding additional replicas $r>1$ is very small as compared to the $r=1, l=1$ case because it has a lighter tail. In both Fig.~\ref{fig:heuristic_result} and Fig.~\ref{fig:heuristic_result_2} we observe that adding redundancy, that is $r \geq 1$ signficantly reduces latency for a small cost, in comparison with the baseline case ($p=0$), which is also equivalent to $r = 0, l=1$ with any $p$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{plots/ET_vs_EC_var_p_1017_v3}
\caption{The latency-cost trade-off of policies found by Algorithm~\ref{algo:single_fork_heuristic} with $\mu = 1, 2, 3$, for a Google cluster job with $1017$ tasks. The $r=1$ and $l=1$ (parameters of back-up tasks in MapReduce) trade-off is also shown for comparison. }
\label{fig:heuristic_result}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{plots/ET_vs_EC_var_p_488_v3}
\caption{The latency-cost trade-off of policies found by Algorithm~\ref{algo:single_fork_heuristic} with $\mu = 1, 2, 3$, for a Google cluster job with $488$ tasks. The $r=1$ and $l=1$ (parameters of back-up tasks in MapReduce) trade-off is also shown for comparison. }
\label{fig:heuristic_result_2}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Related prior work}
\label{subsec:prior_work}
The idea of replicating tasks in parallel computing has been recognized by system designers~\cite{ghare_improving_2005,cirne_efficacy_2007}, and first adopted at a large scale via the ``backup tasks'' in MapReduce~\cite{dean_mapreduce:_2008}. A line of systems work
\cite{zaharia_improving_2008, zaharia_sparrow, ananthanarayanan_reining_2010,ananthanarayanan_effective_2013}
further developed this idea to handle various performance variability issues in data centers.
While task replication has been studied in systems literature and also adopted in practice, there is not much work on careful mathematical analysis of replication strategies. In \cite{wang_efficient_2014} replication strategies are analyzed, mainly for the single task case. In this paper we consider task replication in a computing job consisting of a large number of tasks, which corresponds closely to today's large-scale cloud computing frameworks. We note that using replication or redundancy to reduce latency has also attracted attention in other contexts such as cloud storage and networking applications~\cite{joshi_coding_2012, joshi_delay-storage_2013, shah_when_2014, vulimiri_low_2013}.
\subsection{Our contributions}
To the best of our knowledge, we establish the first formal analysis of
task replication in jobs consisting of a large number of tasks, for the system model and relevant performance measures proposed. We analyze the trade-off between the latency and the cost of computing resources, and provide insights into design of task replication strategies.
In particular, we study a class of scheduling policies called single-fork policies and characterize how latency and resource usage depend on three parameters: when we replicate tasks, how many replicas are launched, and whether the original replicas are killed or not. We show that the tail of the execution time distribution (heavy, light or exponential tail) is the key factor that determines the choice of the task replication policy. In particular for heavy tail distributions e.g. Pareto, we identify scenarios where the latency and computing cost can be reduced simultaneously. We also propose a heuristic algorithm to find the best single-fork policy when it is hard to use the proposed analysis techniques for the empirical distribution of task execution time.
\subsection{Organization}
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In \Cref{sec:scheduling_formulation} we formulate
the problem, define the latency and cost metrics and introduce notation used in the paper. In \Cref{sec:single_fork} we provide a summary of the analysis of single-fork task replication policies. Then in \Cref{sec:heuristic} we describe a heuristic algorithm to find a good scheduling policy for execution time distributions for which we cannot find an analytical distribution that fits well. Proofs of the analysis are given in \Cref{sec:proof_single_fork}. In \Cref{sec:conc_remarks} we conclude with a discussion of the implications and future perspectives. Finally, results from order statistics and extreme value theory used in this work are given in the Appendix.
\section{Multi-fork policy analysis}
\label{sec:multi_fork}
In \Cref{sec:single_fork}, the single-fork policy replicate tasks at one time instant to speed up the
computation, i.e., fork once. In this section, we consider the policy that forks multiple times, i.e., the
multi-fork policy.
\begin{definition}[Multi-fork scheduling policy]
Given the execute time distribution $F_X$,
$\mathbf{p} = [p_1, \allowbreak p_2, \ldots, p_k]$,
$\br = [r_1, r_2, \ldots, r_k]$,
and
$\bl = [l_1, l_2, \ldots, l_k]$,
where $p_1 > p_2 > \ldots p_k$,
a {multi-fork scheduling policy} $\MultiFork{n, \mathbf{p}, \br, \bl; F_X}$ replicates each the remaining
tasks $r_i$ times when there are $n p_i$ unique tasks still unfinished, and takes
the result from the earliest finished copy.
Similar to the single-fork policy, when replicating an unfinished task, the scheduler
can choose to either terminate the current copy of unfinished task and relaunch a new
copy (relaunch, $l_i=0$),
or let the current copy continue to run (no relaunch, $l_i=1$).
\end{definition}
Our key result is that a multi-fork policy can be decomposed as multiple single-fork
policies, leading to the performance characterization in \Cref{thm:multi_fork}.
\begin{theorem}[Multi-fork policy performance]
\label{thm:multi_fork}
The latency and cost of a multi-fork scheduling policy
$\MultiFork{n, \mathbf{p}, \br, \bl; F_X}$ satisfy
\begin{align*}
\fLatency{\MultiFork{n,\mathbf{p},\br,\bl; F_X}}
&=
\sum_{i=1}^k \fTa{\SingleFork{nq_{i-1},q_i,r_i,l_i; F_{X^{(i)}}}}
\\
&\quad + \fTb{\SingleFork{nq_k, q_k, r_k, l_k; F_{X^{(k)}}}}
\\
\fCost{\MultiFork{n,\mathbf{p},\br,\bl; F_X}}
&=
\sum_{i=1}^k \fCa{\SingleFork{nq_{i-1},q_i,r_i,l_i; F_{X^{(i)}}}}
\\
&\quad + \fCb{\SingleFork{nq_k, q_k, r_k, l_k; F_{X^{(k)}}}}
\end{align*}
where
$\fTa{\cdot}$, $\fTb{\cdot}$, $\fCa{\cdot}$ and $\fCb{\cdot}$ are introduced in \Cref{sec:single_fork_def},
\begin{align*}
F_{X^{(i)}} &= \begin{cases}
F_X & i = 1
\\
g\left(F_{X^{(i-1)}}, r_i, l_i\right) & 2 \leq i \leq k
\end{cases},
\\
q_i &= \begin{cases}
1 & i =0
\\
p_i / q_{i-1} & 1 \leq i \leq k
\end{cases}
.
\end{align*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Given a multi-fork policy $\MultiFork{n, \mathbf{p}, \br, \bl; F_X}$,
after the first fork, we can view the remaining problem as a new scheduling
problem with $np_1$ unique tasks, each with execution time distribution
$F_{X^{(2)}} = g(F_X, r_1, l_1)$. Applying this recursively
after each fork completes the proof.
\end{proof}
We leave the topic of using \Cref{thm:multi_fork} to design multi-fork policies that achieve better trade-off
between latency and resource usage for future exploration.
\section{Central order statistics}
\label{sec:central_order_stats}
For an order statistic $\OSn{k}$, we called it a {central order statistic} if $k \approx np$ for some $p \in (0, 1)$. In this case, $\OSn{k}$ is asymptotically normal, concentrated around the $p$-th quantile of $X$, as indicated by the following result called the Central Value Theorem (Theorem 10.3 in \cite{david_order_2003}).
\begin{theorem}[Central Value Theorem]
\label{thm:central_order_stats}
Given $X_1, X_2, \allowbreak \ldots, \allowbreak X_n \stackrel{~\iid}{\sim} F$, if $0 < p < 1$ and $0 < f(x_p) < \infty$, where $x_p = \pquantile$, then
for $k = k(n)$ such that $k = np + \SmallO{\sqrt{n}}$,
\begin{equation*}
\OSn{k}
\stackrel{P}{\rightarrow}
\PGaussian{x_p}{\frac{p(1-p)}{n f^2(x_p)}}
\end{equation*}
where $f(\cdot)$ is the {p.d.f.}\ corresponds to $F$ and $\stackrel{P}{\rightarrow}$ denotes convergence in probability as $n \rightarrow \infty$.
\end{theorem}
\section{Extreme order statistics}
\label{sec:extreme_order_stats}
{Extreme value theory} (EVT) is an asymptotic theory of extremes, i.e., minima and maxima. It shows that if a distribution belongs to one of three families of distributions
\Cref{thm:domain_of_attractions}), then its maxima can be well characterized asymptotically as given by \Cref{thm:ev_thm}, which is also referred to as the Fisher-Tippett-Gnedenko Theorem (Theorem 1.1.3 in~\cite{haan_extreme_2006}).
\begin{theorem}[Extreme Value Theorem]
\label{thm:ev_thm}
Given $X_1$, $\ldots, X_n \allowbreak \stackrel{~\iid}{\sim} F$, if there exist sequences of constants
$a_n>0 $ and $b_n\in \mathbb{R}$ such that
\begin{align}
\label{eq:ev_dist}
\Prob{(\OSn{n}-b_n)/a_n \leq x} \rightarrow G(x)
\end{align}
as $n \rightarrow \infty$ and $G(\cdot)$ is a non-degenerate distribution.
The extreme value distribution $G(x)$ and the values of $a_n$ and $b_n$ depend on the domain of attraction (and hence the tail behavior) of $F_X$ given by \Cref{thm:domain_of_attractions}.
\begin{enumerate}
\item For $F_X \in \fDA{\Lambda}$,
\begin{align}
a_n &= \eta\left( F^{-1}(1-1/n) \right), \label{eqn:a_n_gumbel}\\
b_n &= F^{-1}(1-1/n) \label{eqn:b_n_gumbel}\\
G(x)& = \Lambda(x) = \exp\left\{-\exp\left(-x\right)\right\} \label{eq:gumbel_law}
\end{align}
where $\Lambda(x)$ is called the {Gumbel distribution}.
\item For $F_X \in \DAF$,
\begin{align}
a_n &= F^{-1}(1-1/n), \label{eqn:a_n_frechet} \\
b_n &= 0, \label{eqn:b_n_frechet} \\
G(x) &= \Phi_\xi(x) =\begin{cases}
0 & x \leq 0 \\
\exp\left\{-x^{-\xi}\right\} & x > 0
\end{cases}. \label{eq:frechet_law}
\end{align}
where $\Phi_\xi(x)$ is called the {Fr\'{e}chet\ distribution}.
\item For $F_X \in \DAW$,
\begin{align}
a_n &= \CDUpper{F} - F^{-1}(1-1/n),\\
b_n &= \CDUpper{F}, \\
G(x) &= \Psi_\xi(x) =\begin{cases}
\exp\left\{-\left( - x \right)^\xi\right\} & x<0, \\
1 & x\geq 0.
\end{cases} \label{eq:weibull_law}
\end{align}
where $\Psi_\xi(x)$ is called the {reversed-Weibull distribution}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}[Domains of attraction]
\label{thm:domain_of_attractions}
A distribution function $F_X$ has one of the following domains of attraction if it satisfies the conditions of the extreme value
distribution $G(x)$ if and only if
\begin{enumerate}
\item $F_X \in \fDA{\Lambda}$ if and only if there exists $\eta(x) > 0$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{x \rightarrow \CDUpper{F}^-} \frac{\bar{F}(x + t \eta(x))}{\bar{F}(x)} = e^{-t};
\end{equation*}
\item $F_X \in \DAF$ if and only if $\CDUpper{F} = \infty$ and
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{\ntoinf[x]} \frac{\bar{F}(tx)}{\bar{F}(x)} = t^{-\xi}, \quad t > 0;
\end{equation*}
\item $F_X \in \DAW$ if and only if $\CDUpper{F} < \infty$ and
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{x \rightarrow 0^+} \frac{\bar{F}(\CDUpper{F} - tx)}{\bar{F}(\CDUpper{F} - x)} = t^{\xi}, \quad t > 0;
\end{equation*}
\end{enumerate}
where $\CDUpper{x} = \sup \{ x : F_X(x) < 1 \}$, the upper end point of the distribution $F_X$.
\end{theorem}
Intuitively,
$F \in \fDA{\Lambda}$ corresponds to the case that $\bar{F}$ has an exponentially decaying tail,
$F \in \DAF$ corresponds to the case that $\bar{F}$ has heavy tail (such as
polynomially decaying),
and
$F \in \DAW$ corresponds to the case that $\bar{F}$ has a short tail with finite
upper bound.
\begin{lemma}[Expected Extreme Values]
\label{lemma:E_evt_dists}
\begin{align*}
\E{\Lambda} &= \gamma_\mathrm{EM},
\\
\E{\Phi_\xi} &= \begin{cases}
\Gamma\left( 1 - 1/\xi \right)
& \xi > 1 \\
+\infty & \mathrm{otherwise},
\end{cases} \\
\E{\Psi_\xi} &= -\Gamma\left( 1 + 1/\xi \right),
\end{align*}
where $\gamma_\mathrm{EM}$ is the Euler-Mascheroni constant\ and
$\Gamma(\cdot)$ is the Gamma function, i.e.,
\begin{equation*}
\Gamma(t) \triangleq \int_0^{\infty} x^{t-1} e^{-x} \, dx
.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
We can also characterize the limit distribution of the sample extreme $\OSn{1}$
analogously via \Cref{thm:domain_of_attractions} by
\begin{equation*}
X_{1:n} = \min\Set{X_1, \ldots, X_n} = - \max\Set{-X_1, \ldots, -X_n}.
\end{equation*}
It is worth noting that the distribution function for $-X$ may be in a different
domain of attraction from that of $X$.
\subsection{Latency and Cost Analysis for general $F_X$}
\vspace{1em}
\begin{proof}[Proof of \Cref{theorem:single_fork_gen}]
The expected latency $\E{T}$ can be divided into two parts: before and after replication.
\begin{align}
\E{T} &= \E{\Tstage{1}} + \E{\Tstage{2}}, \nonumber \\
&= \E{X_{(1-p)n:n} } + \E{ \max_{j=1, 2, \dots, pn} Y_j}, \nonumber \\
&= F_X^{-1}(1-p) + \E{Y_{pn:pn}}. \label{eqn:latency_1}
\end{align}
The time before forking $\Tstage{1}$ is the time until $(1-p)n$ of the $n$ tasks launched at time $0$ finish. Thus, its expected value $\E{\Tstage{1}}$ is the expectation of the $(1-p)n ^{th}$ order statistic $X_{(1-p)n:n}$ of $n$ i.i.d.\ random variables with distribution $F_X$. By the Central Value Theorem stated as \Cref{thm:central_order_stats}, for $n \rightarrow \infty$, this term goes to inverse CDF value $F_X^{-1}(1-p)$. At this forking point, the scheduler introduces replicas of the $pn$ straggling tasks. The distribution $F_Y$ of the residual execution time (minimum over the $r+1$ replicas) of each straggling task is given by Lemma~\ref{lemma:cFY}. Thus the term $\E{\Tstage{2}}$ in \Cref{eqn:latency_1} is the expected value of the maximum of $pn$ i.i.d.\ random variables with distribution $F_Y$.
Similarly, we can analyze the expected cost before and after forking. Recall from Definition~\ref{def:cost} that the expected cost $\E{C}$ is the sum of the running times of all machines, normalized by the number of tasks $n$.
\begin{align}
\E{C} &= \E{\Cstage{1}} + \E{\Cstage{2}} \label{eqn:cost_1} ,\\
\E{\Cstage{1}} &= \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^{(1-p) n} \E{\OSn{i}} + \frac{n p}{n} \E{ \Tstage{1}} \label{eqn:cost_2},\\
&= \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^{(1-p) n} F_X^{-1} \left(\frac{i}{n} \right) + p F_X^{-1}(1-p) \label{eqn:cost_3},\\
&= \int_{0}^{1-p} F_X^{-1}(h) dh + p F_X^{-1}(1-p) \label{eqn:cost_4},\\
\E{\Cstage{2}}
&= \frac{1}{n} \sum_{j=1}^{pn} (r+1) \E{Y_j} \label{eqn:cost_5},\\
&= (r+1) p \cdot \E{Y} . \label{eqn:cost_6}
\end{align}
The cost before forking $\E{\Cstage{1}}$ consists of two parts: the cost for the $(1-p)n$ tasks that finish first, and the cost for the $pn$ straggling tasks. The first term in \Cref{eqn:cost_2} is the sum of the expected values of the smallest $(1-p)n$ execution times. Using \Cref{thm:central_order_stats}, we can show that the $i^{th}$ term in the summation goes to $F_X^{-1}(i/n)$ as $n \rightarrow \infty$. Expressing the sum as an integral over $h = i/n$ we get the first term in \eqref{eqn:cost_4}. The second term in \eqref{eqn:cost_2}, is the normalized running time of the $pn$ straggling tasks before forking. Substituting $\E{\Tstage{1}}$ from \eqref{eqn:latency_1} and simplifying, we get \eqref{eqn:cost_4}.
The cost after forking, $\E{\Cstage{2}}$ is the normalized sum of the runtimes of the $r+1$ replicas of each of the $pn$ straggling tasks. By Lemma~\ref{lemma:cFY}, the residual execution time of the $j^{th}$ straggling task is $Y_j \sim F_Y$. Since the scheduler kills all replicas as soon as one replica finishes, the expected runtime for the $j^{th}$ straggling task is $(r+1) \E{Y_j}$. Thus, the cost in \eqref{eqn:cost_5} is the sum of $(r+1) \E{Y_j}$ over the $pn$ tasks, normalized by $n$. Since $Y_j$ are i.i.d, we can reduce this to \eqref{eqn:cost_6}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of \Cref{lemma:cFY}]
First consider the case where we relaunch ($l=0$) the original copy, and add $r$ replicas for each of the $pn$ straggling tasks. Thus, there are $r+1$ identical replicas of each task after forking. The residual execution time distribution $F_Y$ (after time $T^{(1)}$ when the replicas are added) of each task is the minimum of $r+1$ i.i.d.\ random variables with distribution $F_X$. Hence,
\begin{align}
\Pr(Y>y) &= \Pr( \min (X_1, X_2, \dots X_{r+1} ) > y ) ,\\
\fccdf[Y]{y} &= \fccdf[X]{y}^{r+1} \quad \text{ for } l = 0.
\end{align}
For the case without relaunching ($l=1)$, there is $1$ original replica and $r$ new replicas of each of the straggling tasks. Thus, the tail distribution $\fccdf[Y]{y} = 1- F_Y(y)$ is given by
\begin{align}
\Pr(Y>y) &= \Pr( X_1 > y \vert X_1 > T^{(1)}) \nonumber \\
& \quad \quad \cdot \Pr( \min (X_2,\dots X_{r+1} ) > y ) ,\\
\fccdf[Y]{y} &= \frac{\fccdf[X]{y +T^{(1)} }}{ \fccdf[X]{T^{(1)}}} \fccdf[X]{y}^{r}.
\end{align}
As the number of tasks $n \rightarrow \infty$ by \Cref{thm:central_order_stats} we know that $T^{(1)} \rightarrow F_X^{-1}(1-p)$. Hence we have,
\begin{align}
\fccdf[Y]{y} &= \frac{\fccdf[X]{y +F_X^{-1}(1-p) }}{p} \fccdf[X]{y}^{r} \quad \text{ for } l = 1 .
\end{align}
\end{proof}
To prove \Cref{lemma:stage2_latency}, we characterize the expected maximum of a large number of random variables using \Cref{thm:ev_thm}. First, we state Lemma~\ref{lemma:DA_FY} which implies that the domain of attraction (see Theorem~\ref{thm:domain_of_attractions}) of $F_Y$ is same as that of $F_X$.
\begin{lemma}[Domain of attraction for $F_Y$]
\label{lemma:DA_FY}
Given a single fork policy $\SingleFork{p,r,l; n}$ with $0 < p < 1$,
\begin{enumerate}
\item if $F_X \in \fDA{\Lambda}$, then $F_Y \in \fDA{\Lambda}$;
\item if $F_X \in \DAF$, then $F_Y \in \DAF[(r+1)\xi]$;
\item if $F_X \in \DAW$, then $F_Y \in \DAW[((1-l)r+1)\xi]$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
The proof follows from \Cref{lemma:cFY} and \Cref{thm:domain_of_attractions} and is omitted here.
\begin{proof}[Proof of \Cref{lemma:stage2_latency}]
We can use \Cref{lemma:DA_FY} to find the domain of attraction of $F_Y$. Then from \Cref{eq:ev_dist} we have
\begin{align*}
\E{\OSn[Y]{n}} = \tilde{a}_n \E{G(y)} + \tilde{b}_n,
\end{align*}
where $\E{G(y)}$ can be found using \Cref{thm:ev_thm} and \Cref{lemma:E_evt_dists}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Latency and Cost Analysis for Pareto $F_X$}
We prove \Cref{theorem:single_fork_pareto}, which evaluates the latency $\E{T}$ and computing cost $\E{C}$ metrics when the task execution time distribution $F_X$ is the Pareto, as defined in \eqref{eq:pareto_dist}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of \Cref{theorem:single_fork_pareto}]
From \Cref{theorem:single_fork_gen} we have
\begin{align}
\E{T} &= F_X^{-1}(1-p) + \E{ Y_{pn:pn}} \nonumber ,\\
&= x_m p^{-1/\alpha} + \tilde{a}_{pn} \E{ \Phi_{(r+1)\alpha}} \label{eqn:latency_pareto_1} ,\\
&= x_m p^{-1/\alpha} + \tilde{a}_{pn} \Gamma \left( 1- 1\frac{1}{(r+1)\alpha} \right) .\label{eqn:latency_pareto_2}
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\E{C} &= \int_{0}^{1-p} F_X^{-1}(h) dh + p F_X^{-1}(1-p) + (r+1) p \cdot \E{Y} ,\label{eqn:cost_pareto_1} \\
&= x_m \int_{0}^{1-p} (1-h)^{-1/\alpha} dh + p x_m p^{-1/\alpha} + (r+1) p \cdot \E{Y} ,\nonumber \\
&= x_m \frac{\alpha}{\alpha-1} [1 - p^{1-1/\alpha} ] + x_m p^{1-1/\alpha} + (r+1) p \cdot \E{Y} ,\nonumber \\
&= x_m \frac{\alpha}{\alpha-1} - x_m \frac{p^{1- 1/\alpha}}{\alpha-1} + (r+1) p \cdot \E{Y} .\label{eqn:cost_pareto_4}
\end{align}
To obtain \eqref{eqn:latency_pareto_1} we first observe that since $F_X$ is Pareto, by \Cref{thm:domain_of_attractions} it falls into the Fr\'{e}chet{} domain of attraction, i.e.\ $F_X \in \DAF[\alpha]$. Then using \Cref{lemma:DA_FY} we can show that $F_Y \in \DAF[(r+1)\alpha]$. Subsequently, using \Cref{thm:ev_thm} and \Cref{lemma:E_evt_dists} we get \eqref{eqn:latency_pareto_2}. To derive the expected cost \eqref{eqn:cost_pareto_4} we substitute $F^{-1}_X(h) = x_m (1-h)^{-1/\alpha}$ in the first and second terms in \eqref{eqn:cost_pareto_1} and simplify the expression.
To find $\tilde{a}_{pn}$ and $\E{Y}$ in \eqref{eqn:latency_pareto_2} and \eqref{eqn:cost_pareto_4} respectively we consider the cases of relaunching ($l=0$) and no relaunching ($l=1$) separately.
\textbf{Case 1: Relaunching ($l=0$)} \\
In the single-fork policy with relaunching ($l=0$), the scheduler waits for $(1-p)n$ tasks to finish and then relaunches each of the $pn$ straggler tasks on a new machine.
\begin{align}
Y &= \min( X_1, X_2, \dots X_{r+1} ) ,\nonumber \\
Y &\sim \PPareto{(r+1)\alpha}{x_m} . \label{eqn:Y_pareto_relaunch}
\end{align}
From \eqref{eqn:a_n_frechet} in \Cref{thm:ev_thm} we can evaluate $\tilde{a}_{pn}$ as follows
\begin{align*}
\tilde{a}_{pn} &= F_Y^{-1}\left(1- \frac{1}{pn} \right) ,\\
&= x_m (pn)^{1/\alpha} .
\end{align*}
And $\E{Y}$ of \eqref{eqn:Y_pareto_relaunch} can be evaluated as
\begin{align}
\E{Y} &= \frac{ (r+1) \alpha }{ (r+1) \alpha - 1} x_m .
\end{align}
\textbf{Case 2: No Relaunching ($l=1$)} \\
In the single-fork policy with no relaunching ($l=1$), the scheduler keeps the original copy, and adds $r$ additional replicas for each straggling task. Using \Cref{lemma:cFY} we can show that
\begin{align}
\bar{F}_Y(y) &= \frac{1}{p} \left( \frac{x_m}{y} \right)^{\alpha r} \left( \frac{x_m}{y + x_m p^{-1/\alpha}} \right)^{\alpha} .\label{eqn:Y_pareto_no_relaunch}
\end{align}
From \eqref{eqn:a_n_frechet} in \Cref{thm:ev_thm}, $\tilde{a}_{pn} = \bar{F}_Y^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{pn} \right)$, which simplifies to
\begin{align*}
(pn)^{1/\alpha} &= \left( 1 + \dfrac{\tilde{a}_{pn}}{x_m p^{-1/\alpha}} \right)\left( \dfrac{\tilde{a}_{pn}}{x_m} \right)^r ,
\end{align*}
which simplifies to \Cref{eq:tla_n_for_pareto_no_relaunching}.
The expected value of $Y$ can be found by numerically integrating $\bar{F}_Y(y)$ in \eqref{eqn:Y_pareto_no_relaunch} over its support.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:pareto_relaunching_vs_not}]
For given $r$, the expected latency is lower with relaunching when $p$ satisfies,
\begin{align*}
\E{T}^{(l=1)} &\geq \E{T}^{(l=0)} ,\\
\tilde{a}_{pn}^{(l=1)} &\geq \tilde{a}_{pn}^{(l=0)} ,\\
n^{1/\alpha} x_m ^{r+1} &\geq x_m p^{-1/\alpha} (pn)^{\frac{r}{(r+1) \alpha}} x_m^{r} + (pn)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}} x_m^{r+1} ,\\
1&\geq (pn)^{-1/(r+1)\alpha} + p^{1/\alpha} .
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:pareto_suboptimal_policies}]
Given $r$ and relaunching ($l=0$), the single-fork policy is sub-optimal in both $\E{T}$ and $\E{C}$ if $p$ satisfies
\begin{align*}
\frac{d \E{T} }{d p} \cdot \frac{ d \E{C}}{dp} &>0 .
\end{align*}
Substituting $\E{T}$ and $\E{C}$ from Theorem~\ref{theorem:single_fork_pareto} and simplifying, we get \Cref{eq:pareto_sub_optimal}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Latency and Cost Analysis for Shifted Exponential $\displaystyle F_X$}
\label{sec:shifted_exp_calc}
Now we prove \Cref{theorem:single_fork_sexp}, which gives the latency-cost trade-off when the distribution of the execution time $X$ is a shifted exponential given by \eqref{eq:shifted_exp_dist}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of \Cref{theorem:single_fork_sexp}]
\begin{align}
\E{T} &= F_X^{-1}(1-p) + \E{ Y_{pn:pn}} \nonumber ,\\
&= \Delta - \frac{1}{\lambda} \ln p + \tilde{a}_{pn} \E{ \Lambda} + \tilde{b}_{pn},\\
&= \Delta - \frac{1}{\lambda} \ln p + \tilde{a}_{pn} \gamma_\mathrm{EM} + \tilde{b}_{pn}.
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\E{C} &= \int_{0}^{1-p} F_X^{-1}(h) dh + p F_X^{-1}(1-p) + (r+1) p \cdot \E{Y}, \\
&= \int_{0}^{1-p}\left ( \Delta - \frac{1}{\lambda} \ln(1-h) \right) dh + p \left(\Delta - \frac{1}{\lambda} \ln p \right) \nonumber,\\
& \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad+ (r+1)p \cdot \E{Y} ,\\
&= \Delta + \frac{1}{\lambda} \left( p \ln p + (1-p) \right) + p \Delta - \frac{p}{\lambda} \ln p \nonumber ,\\
&\quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad+ (r+1)p \cdot \E{Y} ,\\
&= \Delta (1 + p) + \frac{1-p}{\lambda} + (r+1)p \cdot \E{Y} .
\end{align}
To find $\E{Y}$, $\tilde{a}_{pn}$ and $\tilde{b}_{pn}$ we consider the cases of relaunching ($l=0$) and no relaunching ($l=1$) separately.
\textbf{Case 1: Relaunching ($l=0$)}
\begin{align}
Y &= \min \Set{ X_1, X_2, \cdots X_{r+1} } \\
&\sim \PSExp{\Delta}{(r+1)\lambda} \\
\E{Y} &= \Delta + \frac{1}{(r+1)\lambda}
\end{align}
Based on \Cref{thm:domain_of_attractions}, for $ \eta(y) = 1/((r+1)\lambda)$ we have
\begin{align}
\lim_{y \rightarrow \CDUpper{F_Y}} \frac{\fccdf[Y]{y + u \eta(y)}}{\fccdf[Y]{y}}
&= e^{-u}.
\end{align}
By \Cref{thm:ev_thm} and \Cref{thm:domain_of_attractions}, the maximum of shifted exponential belongs to the Gumbel family with
\begin{align*}
\tilde{a}_{pn} &= \frac{1}{\lambda(1+r) },
\\
\tilde{b}_{pn} &= \finvccdf[Y]{1/n} = \Delta + \frac{\ln (pn) }{\lambda(r+1)}.
\end{align*}
\textbf{Case 2: No Relaunching ($l=1$)}
\label{sec:shifted_exp_no_relaunching}
In the case of no relaunching,
\[Y = \min\Set{\PExp{\lambda}, \Delta + \PExp{r\lambda}}.\]
Note that the first term does not include $\Delta$ because for large $n$ the original task would have run for at least $\Delta$ seconds. Thus the tail distribution of $Y$ is given by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:shifted_exp_Y}
\fccdf[Y]{y} &= \begin{cases}
e^{-\lambda y} & 0 < y < \Delta, \\
e^{\lambda r \Delta} e^{-\lambda(r+1)y} & y \geq \Delta.
\end{cases}
\end{align}
The expected value $\E{Y}$ is the integration of $\fccdf[Y]{y}$ over its support.
\begin{align*}
\E{Y} &= \int_{0}^{\Delta} e^{-\lambda y} dy + \int_{\Delta}^{\infty} e^{\lambda r \Delta} e^{-\lambda(r+1)y}, \\
&= \frac{1- e^{-\lambda \Delta}}{\lambda} + \frac{e^{-\lambda \Delta}}{ \lambda (r+1)} .
\end{align*}
By \Cref{thm:ev_thm} and \Cref{thm:domain_of_attractions} similar to the relaunching case we have
\begin{align*}
\tilde{a}_{pn} &= 1/\left[ \lambda(1+r) \right], \\
\tilde{b}_{pn} &= \finvccdf[Y]{1/n} = \frac{r}{r+1} \Delta + \frac{\ln (pn) }{\lambda(r+1)}.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of \Cref{lemma:relaunch_or_not}]
For the shifted exponential distribution it is clear that no relaunching always gives a lower latency. We now find conditions on $\lambda$ and $\Delta$ for which no relaunching gives lower cost. Define $\beta = \lambda \Delta$, then
\begin{alignat*}{2}
&& \lambda \E{C(l=1)}
& >
\lambda \E{C(l=0)},
\\
\Leftrightarrow\quad
&&
n + pn \left[
\lambda \Delta + r \left(1 - e^{-\lambda \Delta}\right)
\right]
& >
n + pn \lambda(r+2) \Delta,
\\ \Leftrightarrow\quad
&& \beta r + \beta - r + r e^{-\beta}
& < 0.
\end{alignat*}
And note that the function $g(\beta) = \beta r + \beta - r + r e^{-\beta}$ is
monotonically increasing since $g'(\beta) > 0$ for any $r \in \mathbb{Z^+}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Introduction}
\input{intro_v2}
\section{Problem Formulation}
\label{sec:scheduling_formulation}
\input{formulation}
\section{Single-fork policy analysis}
\label{sec:single_fork}
\input{single_fork_v2}
\section{Heuristic Algorithm}
\label{sec:heuristic}
\input{heuristic_v2}
\section{Proofs of Single-fork Analysis}
\label{sec:proof_single_fork}
\input{proof_single_fork}
\section{Concluding Remarks}
\label{sec:conc_remarks}
\input{concluding_remarks}
\bibliographystyle{plain}
\subsection{Performance characterization}
\label{sec:single_fork_calcs}
For a job with a large number of tasks $n$, the expected latency and cost can be expressed in terms of the single-fork policy parameters $p$, $r$ and $l$ as given by Theorem~\ref{theorem:single_fork_gen} below.
\begin{theorem}[Single-Fork Latency and Cost]
\label{theorem:single_fork_gen}
For a computing job with $n$ tasks, and task execution time distribution $F_X$, the latency and cost metrics as $n \rightarrow \infty$ are
\begin{align}
\E{T} &= F_X^{-1}(1-p) + \E{ Y_{pn:pn}} \label{eq:latency_gen},\\
\E{C} &= \int_{0}^{1-p} F_X^{-1}(h) dh + p F_X^{-1}(1-p) + (r+1) p \cdot \E{Y}, \label{eq:cost_gen}
\end{align}
where $F_Y$ is given by Lemma~\ref{lemma:cFY} below, and it is the distribution of the residual time after forking when the earliest replica of a straggling task finishes. The term $\E{Y_{pn:pn}}$ is the expected maximum of $pn$ i.i.d.\ random variables drawn from $F_Y$. Its behavior for $n \rightarrow \infty$ is given by Lemma~\ref{lemma:stage2_latency} below.
\end{theorem}
\begin{lemma}[Residual Straggler Execution Time]
\label{lemma:cFY}
As $n \rightarrow \infty$, the tail distribution $\bar{F}_Y$ of the residual execution time (after the forking point) of each of the $pn$ straggling tasks is
\begin{align}
\fccdf[Y]{y} =
\begin{cases}
\fccdf[X]{y}^{r+1} & \text{if } l = 0 ,\\
\frac{1}{p} \fccdf[X]{y}^r \fccdf[X]{y+F_X^{-1}(1-p)} & \text{if } l=1 .
\end{cases}
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:stage2_latency}
As $\ntoinf$, the asymptotic behavior of $\E{\OSn[Y]{pn}[pn]}$ is given by
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $F_Y \in \fDA{\Lambda}$,
\begin{align*}
\E{\OSn[Y]{pn}[pn]} &= \tilde{a}_{pn} \gamma_\mathrm{EM} + \tilde{b}_{pn},
\end{align*}
\item If $F_Y \in \DAF[(r+1) \xi]$,
\begin{align*}
\E{\OSn[Y]{pn}[pn]} &= \tilde{a}_{pn} \fGamma{1 - 1/[(r+1)\xi]},
\end{align*}
\item If $F_Y \in \DAW[((1-l)r+1) \xi]$,
\begin{align*}
\E{\OSn[Y]{pn}[pn]} &= \CDUpper{F_Y} - \tilde{a}_{pn} \fGamma{ 1 + 1/[((1-l)r+1)\xi]},
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
where $\fDA{\cdot}$ is the domain of attraction of $F_Y$ which can be determined using Lemma~\ref{lemma:DA_FY} and \Cref{thm:domain_of_attractions}. The terms $\tilde{a}_{pn}$ and $\tilde{b}_{pn}$ are the normalizing constants of $F_Y$ as given by \Cref{thm:ev_thm}, $\gamma_\mathrm{EM}$ is the Euler-Mascheroni constant, and $\Gamma(\cdot)$ is the Gamma function, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:f_gamma_def}
\Gamma(t) \triangleq \int_0^{\infty} x^{t-1} e^{-x} \, dx.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
The domain of attraction of a distribution depends on its tail behavior (exponential, heavy or light). For example, exponentially decaying distributions belong to $\fDA{\Lambda}$ while heavy tailed distributions belong to $\DAF$.
We now give a sketch of the proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem:single_fork_gen}. A detailed proof can be found in Section~\ref{sec:proof_single_fork}.
\begin{proof}[ Proof sketch of Theorem~\ref{theorem:single_fork_gen} ]
The expected latency of a single fork policy $\SingleFork{p,r,l; n}$ can be decomposed into two parts:
\begin{align}
\E{T} &= \E{\Tstage{1}} + \E{\Tstage{2}},
\end{align}
where, $\Tstage{1}$ is the time to execute the first $(1-p) n$ tasks and $\Tstage{2}$ is the time to execute the rest of the $p n$ tasks with replication. We evaluate each of these parts separately.
It is straightforward to see that $\Tstage{1}$ is the $((1-p)n)^{th}$ order statistic of $n$ i.i.d.\ random variables with distribution $F_X$. Thus its expected value is
\begin{align}
\E{\Tstage{1}} &= \E{\OSn{(1-p) n} },\\
&\approx F_X^{-1}(1-p) \quad \text{for large } n, \label{eq:cvt}
\end{align}
where \eqref{eq:cvt} follows from the Central Value Theorem (\Cref{thm:central_order_stats}) which states that the $((1-p)n)^{th}$ order statistic concentrates sharply around $F_X^{-1}(1-p)$ as $n \rightarrow \infty$.
After $n(1-p)$ tasks finish, the scheduler adds redundancy by launching replicas of the straggling tasks and waits for one replica to finish. We denote the residual execution time distribution of the straggling tasks by $F_Y$. It depends of $F_X$ and the parameters $r$, $p$ and $l$ of the scheduling policy as given by Lemma~\ref{lemma:cFY}. For example, for $r=2$ and $l= 0$, the tail of distribution $\bar{F}_Y = \bar{F}_X^2$, which is the minimum of two i.i.d.\ random variables with distribution $F_X$. The proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma:cFY} is given in Section~\ref{sec:proof_single_fork}.
The second part of the latency, $\Tstage{2}$ is the maximum of the times until each of the $pn$ straggling tasks finish. Thus, its expected value $\E{\Tstage{2}} = \E{ Y_{pn:pn}}$. The behavior of the maximum order statistic of a large number of random variables is given by the Extreme Value Theorem \Cref{thm:ev_thm}. We can use it to show that $\E{\Tstage{2}}$ is given by Lemma~\ref{lemma:stage2_latency}.
Thus we can evaluate the expected latency $\E{T} = \E{\Tstage{1}} + \E{\Tstage{2}}$. Similarly, the expected cost $\E{C}$ can be evaluated by decomposing it into two parts: before and after the replication of straggling tasks. The details can be found in the proof in \Cref{sec:proof_single_fork}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Examples of the Effect of Tail Behavior}
\label{sec:single_fork_egs}
We now demonstrate how the the tail of the distribution $F_X$ is a major factor in determining the trade-off between $\E{T}$ and $\E{C}$, and hence the choice of the best single-fork policy. We consider two canonical execution time distributions, the Pareto distribution (heavy tailed) and the Shifted Exponential distribution (exponential tail) and evaluate the latency-cost trade-off in \Cref{theorem:single_fork_gen} for them. One key insight from this analysis is that in certain regimes, it is possible to reduce latency while simultaneously reducing cost.
\subsubsection{Pareto execution time}
\label{sec:single_fork_pareto}
The cumulative distribution function of the Pareto distribution $\PPareto{\alpha}{x_m}$ is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:pareto_dist}
F(x; \alpha, x_m)
\triangleq
\begin{cases}
1 - \left( \frac{x_m}{x} \right)^\alpha & x \geq x_m,
\\
0 & x < x_m.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Pareto distribution is a heavy-tail distribution, with a polynomially decaying tail. It has been observed to fit task execution time distributions in data centers~\cite{reiss_towards_2012,dean_tail_2013}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\hspace{-0.3em}
\addpgfplot[0.58\linewidth]{pareto_ET_vs_n_cmp.tikz}
\caption{Comparison of the expected latency $\E{T}$ obtained from simulation (points) and analytical
calculations (lines) for the Pareto distribution $\PPareto{2}{2}$.}
\label{fig:pareto_sim_calc_cmp}
\end{figure}
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:single_fork_pareto}
For a computing job with $n$ tasks, if the execution time distribution of each task is $\PPareto{\alpha}{x_m}$, then as $n \rightarrow \infty$, the latency and cost metrics are
\begin{align}
\E{T} &= x_m p^{-1/\alpha} + \fGamma{1 - \frac{1}{(r+1)\alpha}} \tilde{a}_{pn},\\
\E{C} &= x_m \frac{\alpha}{\alpha-1} - x_m \frac{p^{1- 1/\alpha}}{\alpha-1} + (r+1) p \E{Y}.
\end{align}
The values of $\tilde{a}_{pn}$ and $\E{Y}$ depend on the relaunching parameter $l$, and are given as follows.
\textbf{Case 1: Relaunching ($l=0$)}
\begin{align}
\tilde{a}_{pn} &= (pn)^{\frac{1}{(r+1)\alpha}} x_m \label{eq:tla_n_pareto_relaunching} ,\\
\E{Y} &= \frac{(r+1)\alpha}{(r+1)\alpha-1} x_m .
\end{align}
\textbf{Case 2: No Relaunching ($l=1$)}\\
The term $\tilde{a}_{pn}$ is the solution to
\begin{align}
\label{eq:tla_n_for_pareto_no_relaunching}
n^{1/\alpha} x_m^{r+1} &= x_m p^{-1/\alpha}\tilde{a}_{pn} ^r + \tilde{a}_{pn} ^{r+1}.
\end{align}
and $\E{Y}$ is evaluated numerically as discussed in the proof.
\end{theorem}
The proof is given in Section~\ref{sec:proof_single_fork}. From this theorem we can infer that the latency $\E{T}$ grows polynomially $o(n^{\nicefrac{1}{\alpha(r+1)}})$ with $n$. This can be seen directly from \eqref{eq:tla_n_pareto_relaunching} for the case of relaunching ($l=0$). For the no relaunching case we know that $\tilde{a}_{pn}$ grows with $n$. Thus for large enough $n$, it should be greater than $x_m p^{-1/\alpha}$. Hence from \Cref{eq:tla_n_for_pareto_no_relaunching},
\begin{align}
n^{1/\alpha} x_m^{r+1} &\leq 2 \tilde{a}_{pn} ^{r+1}.
\end{align}
The $o(n^{\nicefrac{1}{\alpha(r+1)}})$ growth follows from this.
\Cref{fig:pareto_sim_calc_cmp} compares the latency obtained from simulation and analytical calculations for Pareto distribution, indicating latency obtained from analytical calculation is very close to the actual performance for $n\geq 100$, especially for the case with relaunching ($l=0$). In \Cref{fig:pareto_ET_and_EC_vs_p} we plot the expected latency and cost as $p$ varies, for different values of $r$ and $l$. The black dot is the baseline case ($p=0$), where no replication is used and we simply wait for the original copies of all $n$ tasks to finish. The baseline case is also equivalent to the policies with $r =0, l=1$ and any $p$.
\begin{figure}[bt]
\centering
\hspace{-0.3em}
\addpgfplot[0.58\linewidth]{pareto_ET_and_EC_vs_p_n400.tikz}
\caption{Expected latency and cloud user cost for a Pareto execution time
distribution $\PPareto{2}{2}$, given $n=400$.}
\label{fig:pareto_ET_and_EC_vs_p}
\end{figure}
In \Cref{fig:pareto_ET_and_EC_vs_p} we observe that a small amount of replication (small $p$ and $r$) can reduce latency significantly in comparison with the baseline case. But as $p$ increases further, the latency may increase (as observed for $r=0$) because of the second term in \eqref{eq:latency}. For a given $r$, relaunching leads to lower latency when $p$ satisfies the condition in Lemma~\ref{lem:pareto_relaunching_vs_not} below.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:pareto_relaunching_vs_not}
For given $r$, relaunching ($l=0$) gives lower latency $\E{T}$ than no relaunching ($l=1$) when $p$ satisfies,
\begin{equation}
p^{\nicefrac{1}{\alpha}} + (np)^{-\nicefrac{1}{(r+1)\alpha}} \leq 1,
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ is the shape parameter of the Pareto distribution, as given in \eqref{eq:pareto_dist}.
\end{lemma}
Intuition suggests that replicating earlier (larger $p$) and more (higher $r$) will increase the cost $\E{C}$. But \Cref{fig:pareto_ET_and_EC_vs_p} shows that this is not necessarily true. Since we kill all the machines running a task when one of its replicas finish, there is in fact a saving in the computing cost! However this benefit diminishes as $p$ and $r$ increase above a certain threshold.
\begin{figure}[bt]
\begin{center}
\addpgfplot[0.4\linewidth]{pareto_tradeoff_n400.tikz}
\end{center}
\caption{Expected latency $\E{T}$ versus the expected cost $\E{C}$ for $\PPareto{2}{2}$ and $n=400$, by varying $p$ along each curve in the range of $[0, 1]$. For small $p$, we can reduce both latency and cost simultaneously.
}
\label{fig:pareto_ET_vs_ECloud}
\end{figure}
\Cref{fig:pareto_ET_vs_ECloud} shows the latency versus the computing cost for different values of $r$ and $l$, with $p$ varying along each curve. Depending upon the latency requirement and limit on the cost, one can choose an appropriate operating point on this trade-off. This plot demonstrates the non-intuitive phenomenon that it is possible to reduce latency (from $70$ to about $15$ for $r=1$ and $r=2$ cases) with negative cost! In Lemma~\ref{lem:pareto_suboptimal_policies} we identify the values of $p$ for the relaunching $(l=0)$ case when the corresponding single-fork policy is sub-optimal in both $\E{T}$ and $\E{C}$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:pareto_suboptimal_policies}
For a given $r$ and relaunching ($l=0$), the range of $p$ for which the single-fork policy is sub-optimal is given by
\begin{align}
\left( \fGamma{1- \frac{1}{(r+1)\alpha}} n^{\nicefrac{1}{(r+1) \alpha}} - (r+1) p^{-\nicefrac{(r+2)}{(r+1)\alpha}} \right) \nonumber \\
\cdot \left( \frac{(r+1)^2 \alpha}{(r+1) \alpha -1} - \frac{p^{-1/\alpha}}{\alpha} \right) = 0 , \label{eq:pareto_sub_optimal}
\end{align}
where a policy $\SingleFork{p,r,l}$ is said to be sub-optimal if there exists another policy $\SingleFork{p',r,l}$ which gives lower $\E{T}$ and $\E{C}$ than $\SingleFork{p,r,l}$.
\end{lemma}
For example for the $r=1$ and relaunch ($l=0$) case, we can solve \Cref{eq:pareto_sub_optimal} to show that all
policies with $p < p_1^* \approx 0.05$ are sub-optimal, where $p_1^*$ is marked in
\Cref{fig:pareto_ET_vs_ECloud}. Similarly, for cases $r=0$ and $r=2$, the sub-optimal ranges $[0, p_0^*]$ and $[0, p_2^*]$ are shown respectively in \Cref{fig:pareto_ET_vs_ECloud}.
We conjecture that the convex hull of the curves for different $r$ and $l$ gives the optimal latency-cost trade-off. Points on the hull, which lie between some two curves can be achieved by time-sharing between the corresponding two policies.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\hspace{-0.3em}
\addpgfplot[0.58\linewidth]{exp_ET_vs_n_cmp.tikz}
\caption{Comparison of the expected latency $\E{T}$ obtained from simulation (points) and analytical
calculations (lines) for the Shifted Exponential distribution $\PSExp{1}{1}$.}
\label{fig:sexp_sim_calc_cmp}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Shifted Exponential execution time}
\label{sec:single_fork_exp}
We now analyze the latency-cost trade-off when the task execution time distribution $F_X$ is a Shifted Exponential Distribution $\PSExp{\Delta}{\lambda}$. Unlike the Pareto distribution which is heavy-tailed, shifted exponential has an exponentially decaying tail. Its cumulative distribution function is given by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:shifted_exp_dist}
F(x) = \begin{cases}
1 - e^{-\lambda (x-\Delta )}& \text{for } x \geq \Delta , \\
0 & \text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{align}
The special case $\Delta = 0$ corresponds to the pure exponential distribution, which is popular in queueing theory and scheduling due to its memoryless property. But it may not be suitable for modeling the execution time of a task, as a task seldom finishes instantaneously, and usually it is lower bounded by a constant delay due to machine start-up or task initialization. Hence we add the constant delay $\Delta$ and model the execution time using the $\PSExp{\Delta}{\lambda}$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:single_fork_sexp}
For a computing job with $n$ tasks, if the execution time distribution of each task is $\PSExp{\Delta}{\lambda}$, then as $n \rightarrow \infty$, the latency and cost metrics are
\begin{align}
\E{T} &= \frac{2r +l}{r+l}\Delta + \frac{1}{(r+1)\lambda} \left( \ln n - r \ln p + \gamma_\mathrm{EM} \right) ,\\
\E{C}
&=
\begin{cases}
\Delta + \frac{1}{\lambda} + p \left[
\Delta + r \frac{\left(1 - e^{-\lambda \Delta}\right)}{\lambda}
\right]
&
l = 1,
\\
\Delta+ \frac{1}{\lambda} + p (r+2) \Delta
&
l = 0.
\end{cases}
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
Similar to \Cref{fig:pareto_sim_calc_cmp}, \Cref{fig:sexp_sim_calc_cmp} compares the latency obtained from simulation and analytical calculations for the Shifted Exponential distribution, which again demonstrates the effectiveness of the asymptotic theory.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\hspace{-0.3em}
\addpgfplot[0.58\linewidth]{exp_ET_and_EC_vs_p_n400.tikz}
\caption{Expected latency and cost for a Shifted Exponential execution time
distribution $\PSExp{1}{1}$, given $n=400$.}
\label{fig:exp_ET_and_EC_vs_p}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\addpgfplot[0.4\linewidth]{exp_tradeoff_n400.tikz}
\end{center}
\caption{The trade-off between expected latency $\E{T}$ and expected cost $\E{C}$ for $\PSExp{1}{1}$ and $n=400$, by varying $p$ in the range of $[0.05, 0.95]$.}
\label{fig:exp_ET_vs_ECloud}
\end{figure}
We can draw the following observations from Theorem~\ref{theorem:single_fork_sexp}. Given $r$ and $l$, replicating earlier (larger $p$) gives an $\Theta(\ln p)$ decrease in latency, and a linear increase the cost. This is also illustrated in \Cref{fig:exp_ET_and_EC_vs_p} for execution time distribution $\PSExp{1}{1}$ and $n=400$. \Cref{fig:exp_ET_vs_ECloud} illustrates the latency-cost trade-off. Unlike \Cref{fig:pareto_ET_vs_ECloud} there is no range of $p$ for which both latency and cost decrease (or increase) simultaneously.
For the special case of $\Delta = 0$ by Theorem~\ref{theorem:single_fork_sexp}, the cost $\E{C} = \frac{1}{\lambda}$, which is independent of $p$ and $r$. But latency always reduces with $r$ and $p$. This suggests that we can achieve arbitrarily low latency without any increase in cost. Since this is not observed in practice, we can conclude that the pure exponential distribution is not a useful model for the task execution time.
For a given $p$ and $r$, relaunching always gives larger latency than no relaunching. But the cost may increase or decrease depending on the values of $\lambda$ and $\Delta$. \Cref{lemma:relaunch_or_not} below gives the set of the parameters for which latency and cost are strictly larger with relaunching.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:relaunch_or_not}
If $ \Delta > \beta^*/\lambda$, where $\beta^* > 0$ is the solution to
\begin{equation*}
\beta r + \beta - r + r e^{-\beta} = 0,
\end{equation*}
then relaunching leads to strictly larger latency and cloud computing cost than no
relaunching. In particular, $\beta^* < 1$, hence if $x_m \geq 1/\lambda$, then no relaunching
achieves better trade-off between latency and cost than relaunching.
\end{lemma}
|
\section*{Acknowledgments}
CGRW acknowledges the award of a STFC quota studentship. AB and MLB are
grateful to the European Research Council for support through the
award of an ERC Starting Independent Researcher Grant (EC FP7 grant
number 280127). MLB also thanks the STFC for the award of Advanced and
Halliday fellowships (grant number ST/I005129/1). The authors thank
Giampaolo Pisano and Luca Lamagna for providing the simulated LSPE
beam used in Section \ref{sec:balloon} plotted in Figure 1 of
\citet{2014MNRAS.442.1963W}.
Some of the results in this paper have been derived using
the {\sevensize HEALPix}~\citep{2005ApJ...622..759G} package.
{\color{black} We thank the referee for their useful comments.}
\bibliographystyle{mnras}
\section{Discussion} \label{sec:discuss}
We have developed two map-making algorithms to remove common
systematics that couple temperature to polarisation in differencing
CMB polarisation experiments. The result of the map-making algorithms
is the polarisation sky smoothed with the axisymmetric part of the
beam used. The systematics we consider are differential gain, pointing
and ellipticity of two detectors in a detector pair, all of which were
shown to be an issue in the BICEP2 experiment
\citep{2014arXiv1403.4302B}. The main issue with these systematics is
the leakage from temperature to polarisation that they
create. \citet{2008PhRvD..77h3003S} showed that the coupling from
temperature to polarisation of these systematics have spin-0,1 and 2
properties respectively. We used this understanding to develop the
algorithm used here.
The first algorithm, described in Section \ref{sec:psi_t_ext}, removes
the systematics by separating the Fourier modes of the systematics and
the Fourier mode of the polarisation, using equation
\eqref{eq:2d_for}. The technique requires a suitable scan
strategy. The angle coverage of the orientation of the telescope,
$\psi_{\rm t}$, must be extensive to allow for the different Fourier
modes to be distinguished. We have shown through simulations in
Section \ref{sec:epic_sims} that the EPIC \citep{2009arXiv0906.1188B}
scan strategy provides the required amount of angle coverage.
In Section \ref{sec:epic_sims} we demonstrated the effectiveness of the
algorithm through three simulations. Simulation 1 showed the ability of
the technique to remove differential gain and pointing when a HWP is
not used. Without a HWP the spin-2 systematic and the polarisation
signal are degenerate and, therefore, cannot be separated using this
technique. In this case we suggest using the methods proposed in
\citet{2014MNRAS.442.1963W} and \citet{2014arXiv1403.4302B}. The
technique however, can remove differential gain and pointing as they
have a different spin to the polarisation signal. In Section
\ref{sec:sim2} and \ref{sec:sim3} we presented simulations including a
HWP. In these simulations we showed that the technique can simultaneously
remove differential gain, pointing and ellipticity. {\color{black}The CMB dipole
can contribute to the leakage from temperature to polarisation.
We demonstrated in Section \ref{sec:sim4} that the map-making
algorithm can deal with this level of leakage.}
One draw back to this technique is an increase in the statistical
noise in the resultant (cleaned) $Q$ and $U$ maps. The level of the
noise increase is dependent on the scan strategy --- the more even the
$\psi_{\rm t}$ angle coverage, the lower the increase in noise. An
ideal experiment would suffer no increase in noise. At the other
extreme where the coverage is not large enough, the matrix in equation
\eqref{eq:2d_for} becomes singular and the effective increase in noise
is infinite. Through simulations we have shown that the increase in noise
power for simulation 3 is 12\% when compared to a binned map.
The second algorithm, described in Section \ref{sec:psi_t_lim},
removes the temperature to polarisation leakage by creating a model
for total leakage as a function of the orientation of the
telescope. The combined effect of the systematic is modelled as a
smooth function of the orientation angle. With this assumption we can
then describe the combined systematic $f(x)$ by a few Legendre
polynomials. Figure \ref{fig:leg_demo} shows that a spin-2 systematic
can accurately be reconstructed by the first three Legendre
polynomials, with a $\psi_{\rm t}$ range of 0.5 rads. This $\psi_{\rm
t}$ range was chosen to be representative of the LSPE scan strategy
\citep{2012SPIE.8446E..7AA}, where the maximum $\psi_{\rm t}$ range is
$\approx$0.5 rads. In Section \ref{sec:balloon}, we demonstrated that
the algorithm can remove the temperature to polarisation leakage from
differential gain, pointing and ellipticity in a simulation where the
LSPE scan strategy was used with a stepped HWP. As with the
extensive $\psi_{\rm t}$ range technique there is an increase in the
statistical noise of the polarisation maps when using this
technique. Through simulations we showed that the increase of noise
using the LSPE scan strategy was 12\%.
In Section \ref{sec:identify_sys} we have presented a method to
identify if systematics are present in a TOD. The extensive $\psi_{\rm
t}$ range algorithm separates the systematics into Fourier modes and
generates an estimate of the polarisation free of these
systematics. It also at the same time creates an estimate of the
systematic. We showed in Fig.~\ref{fig:sys_maps} the maps of the
systematics recovered from simulation 3 (see Section
\ref{sec:sim3}). These maps can be used to identify if a systematic is
present. However, the noise in the TOD and the relative size of the
systematic effect could render the reconstructed maps too noisy to see
the systematic easily. To increase the signal-to-noise, we suggest
calculating the cross-power spectrum of these systematic maps with the
temperature map. As the systematics we are considering are due to
temperature to polarisation leakage then, if the systematic is
present, we expect to see a non-zero cross-correlation. We showed the
cross-power spectrum between the systematic maps and the temperature
map created using the TOD in Fig.~\ref{fig:sys_cor}. This technique
can be used to identify if systematics are present. This is crucial to
test the validity of an experiment's polarisation maps, but could also
be used to identify whether a systematic must be removed using this
technique. Accounting only for those systematics that are actually
present in the TOD would minimise the increase in noise associated with
the correction algorithms developed in this work.
\section{Identifying Systematics}\label{sec:identify_sys}
The extensive $\psi_{\rm t}$ range map-making algorithm relies on
being able to remove systematics which have different Fourier modes
in $(\psi_{\rm t},~\psi_{\rm r})$ space to that of the polarisation
signal. As discussed in section \ref{sec:mapmaking_hwp}, the
map-making algorithm requires us to know that the systematics are present
in the TOD so that we can choose to include the correct Fourier modes in
equation \eqref{eq:2d_for} and create maps that are clean of those
systematics. We stress that we do not need to know the exact nature of the
systematic. For example, if the experiment is suffering from
differential pointing of the detector pair, at no point do we need to
know by how much or in what orientation the beams are
misaligned. Moreover, we do not require a temperature map to remove the
signal. This is an improvement over the method used in
\citet{2014arXiv1403.4302B}. We only need to know that the experiment
is suffering from differential pointing and therefore we know to
include the $\tilde{S}_{0,1}$ term in the analysis. One down side of
using this method to clean systematics is the increase in statistical
noise. Every term included in the analysis increases the statistical
noise of the recovered polarisation maps, and also the cross
correlation of Stokes $Q$ and $U$. The level of the increase is
dependent upon the scan strategy --- the more extensive $(\psi_{\rm t},
\psi_{\rm r})$ coverage the experiment has, the smaller the increase
of noise. We demonstrated this with simulations of the EPIC scan
strategy (see Section \ref{sec:sim_test}). The increase in the noise power
spectrum, going from a binned map to our map-making algorithm accounting for
all three systematics, was 12\%. This would be lower if not all
systematics were considered. With this increase of noise in mind it
would be undesirable to include terms needlessly, but we also do not
want to create a bias by neglecting a term if the systematic is present.
We now turn our attention to a practical process to determine whether
a potential systematic should be removed. We start by making a map of
the systematic. This is done in the same way that the $Q$ and $U$ maps
are made. The inversion of equation \eqref{eq:2d_for} will give us an
estimate for the $\tilde{S}_{n,m}$ terms we included. By taking the
real and imaginary parts of this we can make a map of our
systematics. Figure \ref{fig:sys_maps} shows maps of the systematics
recovered from simulation 3 described in Section \ref{sec:sim3}. We
also show the predictions for each systematic based on prior knowledge,
and finally, the difference between the prediction and recovered systematic
maps. This figure demonstrates how we can accurately recover the
systematics without any prior knowledge of the instrumental
imperfections or of the underlying temperature field.
\input{sections/fig/sys_map}
The top row of Figure \ref{fig:sys_maps} shows the map of differential
gain. As this is a spin-0 term there is only one non-trivial map to
show. The prediction is created by convolving the temperature field
with the beam and multiplying it by the size of the differential
gain. The difference is consistent with noise as a result of the noise
in the TOD. Rows 2 and 3 show maps of differential pointing. Being
spin-1, row 2 shows the error if the instrument was oriented with
$\psi_{\rm t}{=}0$ and row 3 shows the error if the telescope was
orientated with $\psi_{\rm t}{=}\pi/2$. The systematic error on a TOD
sample is simply a rotation of this spin-1 vector. The prediction is
created by using the first differential of the temperature map and
multiplying the results by half the angular size of the differential
pointing. Rows 4 and 5 are maps of the differential ellipticity. As
the differential ellipticity is a spin-2 systematic we are only able
to make the distinction between the systematic and the polarisation
using the HWP. The fields depicted in rows 4 and 5 are similar to the
Stokes $Q$ and $U$ fields respectively. The prediction was created by
using the underlying temperature field and the beam shape used in the
simulation. It was shown in \citet{2014MNRAS.442.1963W} that the
spin-2 systematic would have the form,
\begin{eqnarray} \Delta a^{E}_{\ell m} &=&
\sqrt{\frac{4\pi}{2\ell+1}}\Re(b^{\rm diff}_{\ell 2})a^T_{\ell
m},\\ \label{eq:TtoE_rm} \Delta a^{B}_{\ell m} &=&
i\sqrt{\frac{4\pi}{2\ell+1}} \Im(b^{\rm diff}_{\ell 2})a^T_{\ell
m}, \label{eq:TtoB_rm}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Delta a^{E}_{\ell m}$ and $\Delta a^{B}_{\ell m}$ are the $E$
and $B$-mode of the systematic, $a^T_{\ell m}$ is the spherical
harmonic decomposition of the temperature field and $b^{\rm
diff}_{\ell 2}$ is the second azimuthal mode of the spherical
harmonic decomposition of the difference of the two temperature beams
in the detector pair.
Figure \ref{fig:sys_maps} shows that the map-making algorithm can
correctly recover maps of the systematic errors. However, the maps are
noisy. One can imagine a situation where the noise level is too large
to see the systematic but there is a non-negligible effect on the
recovered $B$-mode power spectrum. This will be especially true when
many detectors are considered as the maps would have to be made for
each detector pair. However, since each of the systematics couple to
the temperature field, the recovered maps of the systematics will
correlate with the temperature field.
\input{sections/fig/sys_cor}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:sys_cor} we plot the cross-power spectrum between
systematic maps and the temperature map created using the TOD used in
the simulation, where we have also deconvolved for the beam. We have
over plotted $N_0C^T_\ell$, $N_1\ell C^T_\ell$, $N_2\ell^2C^T_\ell$,
where $N_i$ are normalisation factors calculated by minimising the
absolute residuals between the model and the cross-power
spectrum. This demonstrates the known result that the systematics are
simply the temperature field, or some derivative of the temperature
field. Even in a noisy systematic map the cross-power spectrum will
provide a valuable insight to the size of a systematic effect. We
recover a non-zero correlation because the systematics are present in
the TOD. If this were not the case and the TOD was clean then we would
find a cross-power spectrum consistent with zero. This provides us
with a recipe to test for the presence or absence of systematic
effects: if, in an experiment, this cross-power spectrum is shown to
be consistent with zero then the maps can be (re-)made not accounting
for this systematic. The resulting increase of noise in the map, with
respect to a binned map, would thus be kept to a minimum.
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
The CMB contains an incredible wealth of cosmological information. The
properties of the Universe can be probed at a number of different
epochs using the CMB. The very early universe can be probed through
the CMB's constraints on inflation parameters
\citep{2014A&A...571A..22P}. Physics before last scattering is
imprinted on the CMB as baryon acoustic oscillations, these
oscillations have been mapped to exquisite detail using both the
temperature power spectrum
\citep{2014A&A...571A...1P,2013ApJ...779...86S,2014JCAP...04..014D}
and the $E$-mode polarisation power spectrum {\color{black}
\citep{2014arXiv1411.1042C,2009ApJ...705..978B,2015arXiv150201582P}}. The large-scale
structure of the universe can also be probed via gravitational lensing
of the CMB. This effect has been measured using high resolution
temperature maps of the CMB
\citep{2014arXiv1412.7521B,2014JCAP...04..014D,2014A&A...571A..17P}.
The CMB $B$-mode polarisation power spectrum contains additional
information on two of these epochs. $B$-mode polarisation on large
angular scales provides us with the best insight into inflation by
placing a direct constraint on the tensor-to-scalar ratio. Tentative
measurements have been made in this area by BICEP2
\citep{2014arXiv1403.4302B}. {\color{black} However,
Galactic foreground emission from polarised dust has been
shown to be responsible for some and possibly all of the signal detected
\citep{2014arXiv1409.5738P,2015PhRvL.114j1301B}.}
The small scale $B$-mode power spectrum is a result of
gravitational lensing of the larger $E$-mode power spectrum, which has
in recent years been detected by a number of experiments
\citep{2014ApJ...794..171T,2013PhRvL.111n1301H}.
As the $B$-mode power spectrum is at least four orders of magnitude
below the temperature power spectrum any coupling between the two
signals due to instrumental imperfections must be carefully controlled
and/or removed. Approaches used in the literature to ensure the
validity of a polarisation map broadly fall within two categories. The
first of these relies on detailed simulations of the instrumental set
up and uses knowledge of the temperature sky to simulate the effects
of any imperfections on the recovered $B$-mode power spectrum. This
was done very successfully by the POLARBEAR collaboration in their
detection of the lensing $B$-modes \citep{2014ApJ...794..171T}. The
second category involves calculating the coupling by fitting the
parameters describing the imperfections, and then subtracting this
coupling using CMB temperature measurements. This technique was shown
to be effective in the analysis of BICEP2
(\citealt{2014arXiv1403.4302B}, see their figure 5). However, there is
a question as to whether this de-projection technique would work as
effectively with a more complex scan strategy. In addition, the
fitting procedure employed also removes some polarisation signal. This
results in a leakage of $E$-modes to $B$-modes which must be simulated
and removed in the power spectrum estimation
\citep{2015arXiv150200608B}. Here we present alternative novel
algorithms to identify and remove some of the systematics that are
problematic in CMB polarisation experiments. A key feature of our
approach is that it does not require {\it any} prior knowledge of the
telescope or CMB temperature field. In addition, since there is no
fitting involved, our techniques do not result in any leakage of
$E$-modes to $B$-modes.
\citet{2014MNRAS.442.1963W} suggested a map-making algorithm to remove
systematics for experiments where there is no half-wave-plate
(HWP). The method consists of two stages; first systematics of a
different spin to those we want to measure are removed (spin-0 for
temperature and spin-2 for polarisation), then a second cleaning
procedure is required to remove systematics of the same
spin. \citet{2014MNRAS.442.1963W} concentrated on beam
systematics. Consequently, the potential source of spin-2 systematics
that could couple temperature to polarisation that they considered was
the second azimuthal mode of the temperature beam. To remove this they
required knowledge of the beam to correctly predict this leakage from
a temperature map. This method is similar to that used by
\citet{2014arXiv1403.4302B} to remove temperature to polarisation
leakage from differential ellipticity.
One potential complication that the approaches just described suffer
from is the requirement to correctly characterise the ellipticity of
the beam and hence predict the resulting leakage to
polarisation. Conversely, the novel approaches that we present here
require minimal knowledge of the nature of the leakage. The methods
are appropriate for differencing experiments that use a stepped or
rotating HWP. One of the algorithms can be used even if a HWP is not
present. However, in this case only systematics of a different spin to
polarisation can be removed. Where a HWP is present, it can be used to
disentangle the spin-2 leakage from temperature to polarisation due
the ellipticity of the beam and the spin-2 polarisation signal. The
two methods differ in the scan strategies to which they can be
applied. One algorithm is suited to scan strategies where each map
pixel is seen at a range of telescope orientations, for example the
proposed EPIC scan strategy \citep{2009arXiv0906.1188B}. The other is
suitable for experiments where the range of orientation angles for
each pixel is limited, for example the LSPE scan strategy
\citep{2012SPIE.8446E..7AA}. There is no reason why the two methods
cannot be used on different portions of the same map. For example the
{\it Planck} scan strategy \citep{2014A&A...571A...1P} results in
good orientation coverage at the ecliptic poles where the first method
would be most suited and a limited range at the ecliptic plane where
the second method would be more appropriate.
We demonstrate that our techniques can also be used to remove
differential gain and pointing even in the absence of a HWP with a
suitable scan strategy. This does leave coupling caused by
differential ellipticity as without a HWP this coupling is
irreducible. In this case we advocate the previous methods of
\citet{2014MNRAS.442.1963W} and \citet{2014arXiv1403.4302B} to remove
this leakage.
Our techniques for removing systematics involve using a model for the
spin of the systematics, which is employed during map-making. This
provides us with $Q$ and $U$ maps that are free of the systematics
included in the model, but also maps of the systematics
themselves. We also demonstrate that our approach can be a useful
method for identifying if a systematic is present in an experiment, or
not.
The paper is organised as follow. Section \ref{sec:mapmaking_hwp}
describes the analytical framework for the algorithms to remove
systematics. Then in Section \ref{sec:sim_test} we demonstrate the use
of the algorithms on simulations, using realistic scan strategies and
time ordered data (TOD) which include instrumental noise. Section
\ref{sec:identify_sys} explains how the algorithm can be used to find
systematics and demonstrates the technique on a simulated TOD. Finally
in Section \ref{sec:discuss} we summarise our work.
\section{Map-making algorithms}\label{sec:mapmaking_hwp}
Our objective is to create maps free of systematic error due to the
imperfections in the instrumentation of an experiment. We assume the
HWP is ideal and situated at the end of the optical system (in
emission). The effect of the HWP is to simply rotate the angle of the
polarisation sensitivity of the beam (see,
e.g.~\citealt{2009MNRAS.397..634B}), leaving the shape of the
polarisation intensity and temperature beams unchanged. {\color{black}
The assumption of an ideal HWP is obviously not entirely
realistic. However, in practice a HWP would only ever be included in
an experiment if the systematic effects that they introduce are
smaller than the effects that they are designed to
mitigate. Relaxing the assumption of HWP ideality is something we
leave to further work.} We consider an experiment where a detector
pair is used to measure temperature and polarisation. {\color{black}
Each detector is sensitive to orthogonal polarisation directions.}
The two signals $d_1$ and $d_2$ are summed and differenced:
\begin{eqnarray}
S^{\rm add} &=& \frac{1}{2}(d_1 + d_2),\\
S^{\rm dif} &=& \frac{1}{2}(d_1 - d_2).\label{eq:dif_signal}
\end{eqnarray}
In an ideal experiment $S^{\rm add}$ would correspond to the
temperature of the pixel and $S^{\rm dif}$ the rotated polarisation,
the only effect of the beam would be to isotropically smooth the
temperature and polarisation fields.
We will concentrate on recovering
the polarisation of the pixel and therefore, we drop the superscript in
equation \eqref{eq:dif_signal} at
this stage. Therefore, the differenced signal, $S$, will be the
rotated polarisation of the pixel plus any systematics, the most
serious of which will couple temperature to polarisation. Some common
systematics include differential gain, differential pointing and
differential ellipticity of the detector pair. These systematics
transform as spin-0, spin-1 and spin-2 respectively with telescope
orientation $\psi_{\rm t}$. For a demonstration of the leakage angular
dependence see e.g.~fig 2 of \citet{2008PhRvD..77h3003S} where the
authors depict the monopole, dipole and quadrupole nature of the
different systematics. {\color{black}The differential gain is spin-0 as it
is simply a scaled temperature map. The differential pointing is spin-1
as the signal is a difference of the temperature map at two close points
in space. The leakage, to first order, is therefore proportional to the
derivative of the beam smoothed temperature field.
Differencing two elliptical Gaussians results in a quadrupole pattern. This quadrupole pattern
is then convolved with the sky to create a spin-2 systematic effect.
The systematic errors must be constant for this map-making algorithm
to be able to remove them. If the systematics change with time, a more
adaptive algorithm would need to be developed.}
With the HWP at the end of the optical system there is no dependence
of these systematics on the orientation of the HWP $\psi_{\rm h}$. The
detected differenced signal $S$ is therefore,
\begin{eqnarray}
S(\psi_{\rm h}, \psi_{\rm t}) &=& \Re\left[P e^{i2(\psi_{\rm t} + 2\psi_{\rm h})} + G + M e^{i\psi_{\rm t}} + E e^{i2\psi_{\rm t}}\right],\\
S(\psi_{\rm r}, \psi_{\rm t}) &=&\Re\left[P e^{i2\psi_{\rm r}} + G + M e^{i\psi_{\rm t}} + E e^{i2\psi_{\rm t}}\right] \label{eq:rot_sys},
\end{eqnarray}
where $P$ is the complex representation of the polarisation of the
pixel in terms of the Stokes parameters, $P=Q+iU$. $G, M$ and $E$ are
the temperature to polarisation leakage due to differential gain,
differential pointing and differential ellipticity respectively, and $\Re$
is the real part operator. The magnitudes and phases of the
systematics are dependent on the nature of the imperfections and the
underlying temperature field. Note however that the magnitudes and
phases are unimportant for this work. Here, only knowledge of the way they
transform with the telescope orientation is required in order to remove the
systematics. In equation \eqref{eq:rot_sys} we have made a coordinate
transformation $\psi_{\rm r} {=} \psi_{\rm t} {+} 2\psi_{\rm h}$. We
do this so that the polarisation and systematics are dependent on
different variables in our space.
The aim of this work is, therefore, to obtain an unbiased estimate of
$P$, given that the detected signal depends on the systematics as well
as polarisation. The two techniques which we present differ only in
the scan strategies that they can be applied to. We first present an
algorithm suitable for a scan strategy where the $\psi_{\rm t}$
coverage of a pixel is extensive. For example, the EPIC
\citep{2009arXiv0906.1188B} strategy is designed to maximise this
coverage. We then present a second method where the $\psi_{\rm t}$
coverage is limited. Balloon borne experiments such as LSPE
\citep{2012SPIE.8446E..7AA} will have limited $\psi_{\rm t}$
coverage. Such experiments often include a rotatable HWP in order to
obtain multiple polarisation crossing angles.
{\color{black} When a rotating or stepped HWP is included in an
experiment, whatever the scan strategy, the HWP can be used to
provide enough polarisation angle coverage such that detector
differencing is not required. As the differencing seems to lead to
the temperature to polarisation leakage considered in this work, one
may ask if other techniques, which do not require differencing, could
be used. If the HWP is continually rotating then certain ``lock-in''
techniques can be used to isolate the polarisation signal from the
systematic errors \citep{2007ApJ...665...55W}. However, maintaining
continuous rotation of the HWP can cause its own wealth of
systematic errors. We therefore focus of the case of a stepped HWP
for which ``lock-in'' techniques are not applicable.
Even with a stepped HWP, the large amount of polarisation angles
provided by the HWP in principle allows one to recover maps of the
Stokes parameters from just one detector. Such a technique is however
more problematic than differencing as the temperature to polarisation
leakage could potentially be much worse. A differencing experiment
allows two detectors, that are located at exactly the same position in
the focal plane (and therefore observe the same point on the sky) to
be used to directly remove the temperature signal (see
equation~\ref{eq:dif_signal}). If a single detector was used to
reconstruct Stokes parameter maps, then the absolute pointing error,
which is typically larger than the differential pointing considered
here, would create different temperature responses between different
observations of a pixel and this would leak temperature fluctuations
to polarisation.
A similar argument holds for ellipticity; by differencing detector
pairs, we are susceptible to the difference in the ellipticity of two
beams which often have very similar beam shapes. By creating
polarisation maps from one detector the total ellipticity would create
different temperature responses when the telescope observes a pixel at
different orientations, leading to a much larger temperature to
polarisation leakage. One problem that detector differencing can
suffer from, and that using one detector avoids, is a constant
differential calibration. However, in this case the benefits of
differencing often outweigh this particular problem. Another benefit
in differencing two detectors, is that correlated noise between the
detectors is removed. Motivated by these considerations we have
adopted a map-making scheme that differences two detectors in a
detector pair.}
\subsection{Map-making algorithm with extensive $\psi_{\rm t}$ coverage} \label{sec:psi_t_ext}
Our experimental model consists of sampling a pixel at a wide range of
orientations of the telescope and HWP. The detected signal, $S^d$, can
be expressed as,
\begin{eqnarray}
S^d(\psi_{\rm r}, \psi_{\rm t}) &=& h(\psi_{\rm r}, \psi_{\rm t})S(\psi_{\rm r}, \psi_{\rm t}),~ \text{where}\label{eq:detected_signal}\\
h(\psi_{\rm r}, \psi_{\rm t}) &\equiv& \frac{1}{N_{\rm hits}}\sum_{i{=}1}^{N_{\rm hits}} \delta(\psi_{\rm r} -\psi_{\rm r}^i)\delta(\psi_{\rm t} -\psi_{\rm t}^i)
\end{eqnarray}
is the window function representing the knowledge that we have of the
pixel. One sample, $i$, will contribute one delta function
$\delta(\psi_{\rm r} -\psi_{\rm r}^i)\delta(\psi_{\rm t} -\psi_{\rm
t}^i)$ to this window. Our aim is to obtain an unbiased estimate of
the polarisation of the pixel given that the systematics are present
and have the functional form outlined in equation
\eqref{eq:rot_sys}. This functional form lends itself to be described
well by a Fourier series. We replace each term in equation
\eqref{eq:detected_signal} with their Fourier series such that,
\begin{eqnarray}
\sum_{n_1 m_{1}} &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\tilde{S}^d_{n_1, m_1} e^{i(n_1\psi_{\rm r} +m_1\psi_{\rm t})}= \nonumber \\
&& \!\!\!\!\!\sum_{\substack{n_2 m_2 \\n_3 m_3}} \tilde{h}_{n_2, m_2} e^{i(n_2\psi_{\rm r} +m_2\psi_{\rm t})} \tilde{S}_{n_3, m_3} e^{i(n_3\psi_{\rm r} +m_3\psi_{\rm t})}.
\end{eqnarray}
Multiplying each side by $\frac{1}{8\pi^2}e^{-i(N\psi_{\rm r}
+M\psi_{\rm t})}$, integrating over the whole $(\psi_{\rm
r},\psi_{\rm t})$ space and evaluating the resulting Kronecker
delta function, we find
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{S}^d_{n_1 m_1} &=& \frac{1}{8\pi^2}\sum_{\substack{n_2 m_2 \\n_3 m_3}} \tilde{h}_{n_2, m_2} \tilde{S}_{n_3, m_3}\nonumber\\
&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\times \int_0^{4\pi}\!\!\!\!\!\!d\psi_{\rm r}\int_0^{2\pi} \!\!\!\!\!\!d\psi_{\rm t} \;e^{i[(n_2+n_3-n_1)\psi_{\rm r} + (m_2 + m_3 - m_1)\psi_{\rm t})]},\\
&=& \sum_{n_3 m_3} \tilde{h}_{n_1{-}n_3, m_1{-}m_3} \tilde{S}_{n_3, m_3}.\label{eq:2d_for}
\end{eqnarray}
In principle, an unbiased estimator for the different components of
the signal can now be formed by inverting equation
\eqref{eq:2d_for}. However, this operation is not yet possible for two
reasons. Firstly, we are attempting to invert a matrix infinite in
size. Secondly for any realistic window function\footnote{By realistic
we specifically mean any window function where $h(\psi_{\rm r},
\psi_{\rm t})=1$.} the {\color{black} matrix} will be singular. By understanding the
dependence on $\psi_{\rm r}$ and $\psi_{\rm t}$ of $S(\psi_{\rm r},
\psi_{\rm t})$, we can ignore terms in equation \eqref{eq:2d_for}
where $\tilde{S}_{n_3, m_3}{=} 0$, thereby making the operation
invertible and obtaining an unbiased estimate of $\tilde{S}_{n_3,
m_3}$ from our detected $\tilde{S}^d_{n_3, m_3}$. If we know the
differenced signal contains temperature to polarisation leakage from
differential gain we would include the term $\tilde{S}_{0,0}$. For
differential pointing and ellipticity, we include $\tilde{S}_{0,\pm1}$
and $\tilde{S}_{0,\pm2}$ respectively. In principle we could remove
systematics of any spin by simply including the correct term. The
polarisation of the pixel will be,
\begin{eqnarray}
Q &=& 2\Re(\tilde{S}_{2,0}),\\
U &=& 2\Im(\tilde{S}_{2,0}).
\end{eqnarray}
Equation \eqref{eq:2d_for} will only be invertible if there are enough
hits on the pixel at a sufficient variety of crossing angles
$\psi_{\rm t}$ and HWP angles $\psi_{\rm h}$. The more terms we
include in equation \eqref{eq:2d_for} the more observed orientations
will be required.
\subsection{Map-making algorithm with limited $\psi_{\rm t}$ coverage} \label{sec:psi_t_lim}
The second class of experiments that we consider has a limited range
of crossing angles $\psi_{\rm t}$ and obtains polarisation angle
coverage using a stepped HWP. This is similar to the observation
strategy envisaged for the LSPE \citep{2012SPIE.8446E..7AA}. In this
case using Fourier terms to describe the systematics is not a good
choice. Here we describe a formalism that is specifically designed for
a small, but non-zero, range of crossing angles.
We start from the same position as for the case of extensive
$\psi_{\rm t}$ coverage in Section \ref{sec:psi_t_ext}. In an
experiment we have a function describing the detected signal given by
equation \eqref{eq:detected_signal}. However the range of angles
$\psi_{\rm t}$ is small. This restricted range of angles means that
describing the full Fourier mode of each systematic would be
problematic. Instead, we choose to describe the summed effect of the
systematics in terms of Legendre polynomials. Let the $\psi_{\rm t}$
angles range from $\psi_{\rm t}^{\rm min}$ to $\psi_{\rm t}^{\rm
max}$. We can now define a coordinate that spans this range:
\begin{eqnarray}
x = \frac{2(\psi_{\rm t} - \psi_{\rm t}^{\rm min})}{\psi_{\rm t}^{\rm max} - \psi_{\rm t}^{\rm min}} - 1,
\end{eqnarray}
where $x$ ranges from $-1$ to $1$. With this definition we can now
rewrite equation \eqref{eq:rot_sys} as
\begin{eqnarray}
S(\psi_{\rm r}, x) &=&\Re\left[P e^{i2\psi_{\rm r}}\right] + f(x), \label{eq:limit_model}
\end{eqnarray}
where $f(x)$ is a function that describes the combined effects of the
systematic leakage from temperature to polarisation. If the $\psi_{\rm
t}$ range is small enough then $f(x)$ will be well described by only
a few Legendre polynomials. In Fig. \ref{fig:leg_demo} we show the
effectiveness of the Legendre polynomials to describe a particular
section of a function of the form $g(\psi)=\cos(2\psi + \pi/8)$, where
the $\psi$ range is $\pm0.25$ rads. This range is chosen to
approximate the range of crossing angles seen in typical balloon
experiments. In particular, the maximum $\psi_{\rm t}$ range in any
pixel in the LSPE scan strategy \citep{2012SPIE.8446E..7AA} is
$\approx$0.5 rads. The left panel shows that the amplitudes reduce almost
exponentially with the order of the polynomial. In the centre and
right panels we demonstrate that using only the first 3 Legendre
polynomials, we can reconstruct the systematic to within fractions of
a percent.
\input{sections/fig/fig_leg_demo}
With this motivation we follow similar steps to those in Section
\ref{sec:psi_t_ext} to create an estimate of the polarisation of a
pixel free of systematics. We use the Legendre polynomials to describe
the $x$ dependence of the signal and a Fourier series to describe the
$\psi_{\rm r}$ dependence. To begin we write the problem as a multiple
of the underlying signal and the window function,
\begin{eqnarray}
S^d(\psi_{\rm r}, x) &=& h(\psi_{\rm r}, x)S(\psi_{\rm r}, x).\label{eq:dectected_signal_x}
\end{eqnarray}
As before we substitute the functions for their decompositions into a
set of basis functions, where here we have chosen the Legendre
polynomials:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\sum_{n_1 m_{1}} \tilde{S}^d_{n_1, m_1} e^{in_1\psi_{\rm r}} P_{m_1}(x) =
\nonumber \\
&&\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\sum_{\substack{n_2 m_2 \\n_3 m_3}} \tilde{h}_{n_2, m_2} e^{in_2\psi_{\rm r}} P_{m_2}(x) \tilde{S}_{n_3, m_3} e^{in_3\psi_{\rm r}}P_{m_3}(x)
\end{eqnarray}
Taking the scalar product\footnote{The scalar product we use is,
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_0^{4\pi} \!\!\!\!\!\!d\psi_{\rm r}\int_{-1}^{1} \!\!\!\!\!\!dx f(\psi_t,x)g(\psi,x).
\end{eqnarray}}
of both sides with a basis function leaves us with the triple integral,
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{S}^d_{n_1, m_1} &=& \frac{2m_1+1}{8\pi}\sum_{\substack{n_2 m_2 \\n_3 m_3}} \tilde{h}_{n_2, m_2}\tilde{S}_{n_3, m_3}\nonumber\\
&& \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\times\int_0^{4\pi} \!\!\!\!\!\!d\psi_{\rm r}\int_{-1}^{1} \!\!\!\!\!\!dx \;e^{i[(n_2+n_3-n_1)\psi_{\rm r}} P_{m_1}(x)P_{m_2}(x)P_{m_3}(x),\\
\tilde{S}^d_{n_1, m_1} &=& (2m_1+1)\sum_{m_2 n_3 m_3} \tilde{h}_{n_1{-}n_3, m_2} \tilde{S}_{n_3, m_3}\nonumber\\
&&\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\times\threej{m_1}{m_2}{m_3}{0}{0}{0}^2,\label{eq:2d_forleg}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have used the Wigner 3j symbol,
\begin{eqnarray}
\threej{m_1}{m_2}{m_3}{\ell_1}{\ell_2}{\ell_3}.
\end{eqnarray}
Once again we can obtain an unbiased estimate of the polarisation by
calculating this coupling matrix and then inverting it. Explicitly
the polarisation will be
\begin{eqnarray}
Q &=& 2\Re(\tilde{S}_{2,0}),\\
U &=& 2\Im(\tilde{S}_{2,0}).
\end{eqnarray}
Just as in Section \ref{sec:psi_t_ext} where we had to ensure that we
included all the Fourier modes of the systematics, here we will have
to include all of the Legendre polynomials that describe $f(x)$. This
will depend on the underlying systematics and the range of $\psi_{\rm
t}$ angles seen at each pixel. Unlike in Section \ref{sec:psi_t_ext}
where the term chosen is a direct result of the spin of the systematic
required to be removed, here there is no physical motivation for the
terms to use. We simply require that enough terms are used such that
we obtain a satisfactory fit for the combined result of the
systematics, $f(x)$.
\section{Test on Simulations}\label{sec:sim_test}
To test the map making algorithms described in Section
\ref{sec:mapmaking_hwp} we simulate two common types of experiment:
one satellite-like experiment, having an extensive range of
orientation angles, and one balloon-like experiment where this range
is limited. To this end, we use the EPIC \citep{2009arXiv0906.1188B}
and the LSPE \citep{2012SPIE.8446E..7AA} scanning strategies
respectively. The hit maps of the two scan strategies are shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:hit_maps}. {\color{black} In this figure, we also plot
the polarisation angle coverage ($p_2$) for each pixel,
\begin{eqnarray}
p_2 = \frac{1}{N_{\rm hits}}\sum_{i=1}^{N_{\rm hits}} [\cos^2(2\psi_t^i) + \sin^2(2\psi_t^i)], \label{eq:pol_cov}
\end{eqnarray}
where $N_{\rm hits}$ is the number of hits that a pixel has received.
This quantity demonstrates the range of $\psi_t$ angles provided by
the scan strategy. The range of $p_2$ goes from 0 to 1 and the lower
the value, the better the polarisation angle coverage.}
\input{sections/fig/scan_strategies}
In all the simulations we use a fiducial power spectrum with a
scalar-to-tensor ratio of 0.1 and lensing $B$-modes are also present.
\subsection{Extensive $\psi_{\rm t}$ coverage algorithm with a satellite-like experiment}\label{sec:epic_sims}
We simulate noisy TODs with systematic errors. The main source of
systematics we will be considering are leakage from temperature
fluctuations to polarisation fluctuations. Therefore it may be
sufficient to only simulate the systematics introduced by
imperfections that couple temperature to polarisation. A TOD element,
$t_j$, is simply the temperature and polarisation response multiplied
by the underlying CMB sky and then integrated,
{\color{black}
\begin{eqnarray}
t_j &=& G\int \mathbf{du} [B^T_j(\mathbf{u})T(\mathbf{u}+\Delta\mathbf{p}) +
B^Q_j(\mathbf{u})Q(\mathbf{u}+\Delta\mathbf{p}) \nonumber\\
&& \qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad+ B^U_j(\mathbf{u})U(\mathbf{u}+\Delta\mathbf{p})], \label{eq:full_tj}
\end{eqnarray} }
where $X(\mathbf{u})$ is the sky emission in the Stokes parameter $X$
from the direction pointed to by the unit vector $\mathbf{u}$.
$B^X_j(\mathbf{u})$ is the beam response in the direction $\mathbf{u}$ for
the Stokes parameter $X$ when orientated in the position $j$.
{\color{black}$G$ is the gain of the detector and $\Delta\mathbf{p}$
is the shift in the temperature beam due to the pointing error.} The
position $j$ describes the orientation of the telescope by the
standard Euler angles and the orientation of the HWP. In order to
simulate this correctly one would need to convolve the sky over this 4
dimensional space. For a high resolution experiment this would be
computationally infeasible, especially when one requires many CMB
realisations. We therefore only simulate beam systematics that couple
temperature to polarisation due to differential ellipticity. The
second and third term of the RHS of equation \eqref{eq:full_tj} can be
calculated simply from a polarisation map of the sky smoothed with the
axisymmetric component of the beam. In our current model of the HWP in
CMB experiments, the orientation of the HWP ($\psi_{\rm h}$) has no effect
on the temperature response. Therefore, we only require the
convolution of the beam over the 3 dimensional space
$(\theta, \phi, \psi_{\rm t})$. This approximation can be formally
written as,
{\color{black}
\begin{eqnarray}
t_j &=& G\int \mathbf{du} [B^T_j(\mathbf{u})T(\mathbf{u} + \Delta\mathbf{p})+ A^Q_j(\mathbf{u})Q(\mathbf{u}+\Delta\mathbf{p})\nonumber\\
&& \qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad + A^U_j(\mathbf{u})U(\mathbf{u}+\Delta\mathbf{p})], \label{eq:simplified_tj}
\end{eqnarray}}where
$A^X_j(\mathbf{u})$ is the axisymmetric component of the beam
response. The first term of equation~\eqref{eq:simplified_tj} is
calculated by a fast pixel space convolution code developed in
\citet{2014MNRAS.442.1963W} based on the algorithm described in
\citet{2011ApJS..193....5M}. The code produces the temperature field
convolved with the asymmetric beam as binned in the 3 dimensional
space. In the $\theta$ and $\phi$ space we use a {\sevensize HEALPix}
pixellation \citep{2005ApJ...622..759G}, and in the $\psi_t$ space we
use a linear binning. The convolution code calculates the central
values of the pixels for this 3 dimensional grid. We use $N_{\rm
side}{=}2048$ for the {\sevensize HEALPix} pixelisation and the
$\psi_{\rm t}$ space is separated into 80 bins. The second and third
terms of equation \eqref{eq:simplified_tj} are calculated using the
{\sevensize SYNFAST} program part of the {\sevensize HEALPix}
package. Each of these codes gives us the central values of the
pixelised space. We therefore, use linear interpolation to calculate
the TOD element for a particular pointing.
We use this set up to simulate the TODs for one detector pair for a
given scan strategy. For the temperature beam, $B^T$, we use an
elliptical Gaussian described by
\begin{eqnarray}
B^T(\theta,\phi) = \frac{1}{2\pi q \sigma^2} e^{-\frac{\theta^2}{2\sigma^2}(\cos^2\phi + q^{-1}\sin^2\phi)}. \label{eq:gaus_beam}
\end{eqnarray}
Equation~(\ref{eq:gaus_beam}) describes the beam for detector 1. The other detector has a similar profile
except it is rotated by $\pi/2$ to create a differential ellipticity
between the two detectors. We use $\sigma = 3$ arcmin corresponding to
a FWHM of 7 arcmin and the ellipticity parameter $q = 1.2$.
We include a differential gain between the detectors by simply
multiplying one detector's response by a constant gain factor. We also
simulate a constant differential pointing by simply including an
offset in one of the detector pointings in our simulation.
We use the EPIC scan strategy \citep{2009arXiv0906.1188B} in the
following simulations with and without a stepped HWP, to simulate one
detector pair that suffers from the systematics we consider in this
paper. See Fig.~\ref{fig:hit_maps} for the hit map of the EPIC scan
strategy. We step the HWP by $\pi/8$ every 1hr. For these satellite
simulations we do not include a Galactic mask. This map-making
algorithm works in a very similar way to a binned map and only
requires the TOD data from one pixel to create an estimate of the
Stokes $Q$ and $U$ of a pixel. It will therefore work equal well
regardless of the sky coverage. Here we use the entire sky to make the
power spectrum analysis simple.
\subsubsection{Simulation 1: No HWP included, no noise}\label{sec:sim1}
We simulate a noise-free TOD from a detector pair that suffers from a
differential gain of the two detectors of 1\% and a differential
pointing of 0.1 arcmin which is 1.5\% of the 7 arcmin (FWHM) beam. We do not
include any differential ellipticity because in this simulation we do
not have a HWP. Without a HWP the spin-2 systematic created by
differential ellipticity cannot be distinguished from the spin-2
polarisation signal. Therefore, the technique we present in this paper
cannot remove the systematic. If an experiment needs to remove this
systematic we suggest the methods presented in
\citet{2014arXiv1403.4302B} and
\citet{2014MNRAS.442.1963W}. Fig.~\ref{fig:epic_b_mode}
shows the recovered $B$-mode power spectrum when
a simple binned map is made from this TOD compared to one where the
algorithm described in Section \ref{sec:psi_t_ext} is used. We
included the terms $\tilde{S}_{0, 0}$ and $\tilde{S}_{0, 1}$ in
equation \eqref{eq:2d_for} to account for the differential gain and
pointing. In Fig.~\ref{fig:epic_b_mode} we can clearly see that the
algorithm has removed the bias on the recovered $B$-mode power
spectrum as a result of the temperature to polarisation leakage.
\input{sections/fig/epic_sim}
\subsubsection{Simulation 2: HWP included, no noise}\label{sec:sim2}
We simulate a noise-free TOD from a detector pair that suffers from a
differential gain of the two detectors of 1\%, a differential pointing
of 0.25 arcmin which is 3.5\% of the 7 arcmin beam. The differential
ellipticity is created using the beam described by equation
\eqref{eq:gaus_beam}. Figure \ref{fig:epic_b_mode} shows the recovered
$B$-mode power spectrum when a simple binned map is made and a map
using the algorithm described in Section \ref{sec:psi_t_ext}. We
included the terms $\tilde{S}_{0, 0}$, $\tilde{S}_{0, 1}$ and
$\tilde{S}_{0, 2}$ in equation~\eqref{eq:2d_for} to account for the
differential gain, pointing and ellipticity. Figure
\ref{fig:epic_b_mode} shows that the bias created from the systematics
has been removed. We also present the result when the same experiment
is used but with no HWP present and when a binned map is made. This
illustrates how a HWP can partially mitigate systematics. It also
demonstrates that even with this mitigation, further systematic
removal would be required.
\subsubsection{Simulation 3: HWP included, noise included}\label{sec:sim3}
We simulate a noisy version of the TOD used in simulation 2 described
in \ref{sec:sim2}. We include noise in the TOD of 1 ${\rm \mu K
\sqrt{s}}$. This is optimistic for a CMB experiment. However it is
chosen so that the recovered $B$-mode power is easily detected with
one detector pair. The algorithm can easily deal with noise as the
noise simply propagates through the matrix operation to the map in the
same way as it does in a binned map-making scheme. The algorithm,
however, does increase the noise on the recovered $Q$ and $U$
measurements and it also increases the covariance of the $Q$ and $U$
estimates. This increase depends on the scan strategy: the more
crossing angles, the lower the increase in noise. The limiting cases of
this are (1) an ideal scan strategy, where the noise increase is zero
and (2) where the matrix in equation \eqref{eq:2d_for} is singular, in
which case the effective increase in the noise is infinite. With noise
simulations we have shown that the noise increase for the EPIC scan and
this HWP set up is 12\%. Fig.~\ref{fig:epic_b_mode} shows the
recovered $B$-mode power spectrum when a simple binned map is made and
a map using the algorithm described in Section \ref{sec:psi_t_ext} and
where we have removed the noise bias in each case. Again we included
the terms $\tilde{S}_{0, 0}$, $\tilde{S}_{0, 1}$ and $\tilde{S}_{0, 2}$ in
equation~\eqref{eq:2d_for} to account for the differential gain, pointing and
ellipticity. Fig.~\ref{fig:epic_b_mode} shows that the bias created
from the systematics has been removed even in the presence of noise.
{\color{black}
\subsubsection{Simulation 4: HWP included, no noise, CMB dipole included}\label{sec:sim4}
The CMB dipole can in principle leak to polarisation through the
systematics considered in this paper and this effect can be very
large. Here, we test if the map-making algorithm can remove such a
level of leakage. For an experiment where the large scale modes are
not filtered out at the time stream level, the leakage from the CMB
dipole could be problematic. Experiments of this type do have the
benefit of being able to calibrate their detectors using
the CMB dipole \citep{2015arXiv150201587P}. With this
benefit in mind one would expect the differential gain for such an
experiment to be lower than for ground-based experiments. To reflect
this effect we lower the level of differential gain in the simulations
for this section. We simulate a noise-free TOD from a detector pair
that suffers from a differential gain of the two detectors of
0.2\%. The other two systematics were kept the same as in simulation 2
in Section \ref{sec:sim2}. Figure \ref{fig:epic_b_mode} shows the
recovered $B$-mode power spectrum when a simple binned map is made and
a map using the algorithm described in Section \ref{sec:psi_t_ext}. We
included the terms $\tilde{S}_{0, 0}$, $\tilde{S}_{0, 1}$ and
$\tilde{S}_{0, 2}$ in equation~\eqref{eq:2d_for} to account for the
differential gain, pointing and ellipticity. Figure
\ref{fig:epic_b_mode} shows that the bias created from the systematics
has been removed. We also present the result when the same experiment
is used but with no HWP present and when a binned map is made. This
illustrates how a HWP can partially mitigate systematics. It also
demonstrates that even with this mitigation, further systematic
removal would be required. }
\subsection{Limited $\psi_{\rm t}$ coverage algorithm with a balloon-like experiment}\label{sec:balloon}
We test the limited $\psi_{\rm t}$ range form of our map making
algorithm on a balloon like experiment. We use the LSPE scan strategy
\citep{2012SPIE.8446E..7AA} --- see Fig.~\ref{fig:hit_maps} for the hit
map of the LSPE scan strategy. This is a typical balloon-like scan
strategy where the gondola rotates rapidly to cover the sky. This
provides good sky coverage (25\% for LSPE). However, the pixels are
always scanned in a similar direction. Although this can make
systematic mitigation problematic, we show here that this problem can
be avoided with a suitable map-making algorithm. Instead of using the
range of crossing angles to accurately characterise the systematic and
therefore remove it, here we assume that the systematics are slow
enough functions of $\psi_{\rm t}$ that in the small range of
$\psi_{\rm t}$ probed by the instrument, the combined effect can be
described by a few Legendre polynomials. The maximum range of
$\psi_{\rm t}$ for all the pixels in the LSPE scan strategy is
$\approx$0.5 rads. Figure \ref{fig:leg_demo} shows that with this small
range the spin-2 systematic (the fastest changing systematic we
consider) can be recovered to a fraction of a percent with just the
first 3 Legendre polynomials.
In the simulation we use the same beam shape as used in
\citet{2014MNRAS.442.1963W} --- see Figure 1 of that paper, which has a
FWHM of 1.5\degree. This beam is a simulation of the beam planned to
be on board LPSE. We simulate TODs from a detector pair --- one dectector
has the same beam as the other but rotated by $\pi/2$ to provide a
differential ellipticity. LSPE will achieve the required angle
coverage by using a stepped HWP. We simulate this by rotating the
polarisation sensitivity of the beam. We step the HWP by $\pi/8$ every
hour in the simulation. We simulate the LSPE scan strategy for 15
days, each day the telescope performs scans of constant elevation. We
then change the elevation daily.
Unlike in the satellite-like experiment, simulating the asymmetric beam
for polarisation is feasible. Even though the asymmetry of the
polarised beam will in principle create a bias that our algorithm does
not remove, the resulting bias is considerably smaller than the
temperature leakage. The simulation performed here is a good
demonstration of this as we simulate the systematic errors such as
differential pointing completely. However, we only remove the
resulting temperature to polarisation leakage and we do not account
for the resulting polarisation to polarisation errors.
As the amount of simulated data is much smaller for this low
resolution balloon-like experiment, we do not have to make the same
approximations as we do in the satellite-like experiment. We perform a
pixel based integration of the beam multiplied by the CMB sky for each
TOD element in the experiment. We simulate differential gain by
multiplying one detector of the pair by 1.01 to create a 1\%
error. Differential pointing is created by changing the pointing
position of the second detector’s beam by 0.05\degree~which is 3\% of
the 1.5\degree~FWHM beam. As described above the differential ellipticity
is created using the simulated beam shown in figure 1 of
\citet{2014MNRAS.442.1963W}. We include noise in the TOD corresponding
to a noise level in the map of 0.1$~\mu$K per 1.5$\degree$~beam. This level of
noise is optimistic for LSPE (which should achieve $\sim7~\mu$K per
1.5$\degree$~beam \citep{2012SPIE.8446E..7CB}). However, as an example
of the algorithms ability to deal with noise, this level of noise is
more than sufficient.
\input{sections/fig/lspe_sim}
Figure \ref{fig:lspe_sim} shows the recovered $E$- and $B$-mode power
spectrum for the balloon-like experiment. As the LSPE scan strategy
only covers 25\% of the sky we use a simple {\color{black}pseudo-$C_\ell$} estimator
\citep{2005MNRAS.360.1262B} to recover the polarised power spectra. We
show the recovered power spectrum averaged over 100 realisations for
maps created in three ways. Unlike in the extensive $\psi_{\rm t}$
range case there is little physical interpretation of the terms
removed in the limited $\psi_{\rm t}$ range case. We are creating
different approximations to the combined effect of the systematic
$f(x)$ from equation \eqref{eq:limit_model}. The first map-making
algorithm we use assumes $f(x){=}0$. This is equivalent to a simply
binned map and the recovered power spectra are shown as the diamonds
in figure \ref{fig:lspe_sim}. The bias from the binned map is obvious.
We can improve this by including the term $\tilde{S}_{0,0}$ in
equation~\eqref{eq:2d_forleg}. This makes the approximation
$f(x){=}{\rm const}$ and reduces the bias by an order of magnitude,
as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:lspe_sim} as the stars. Finally we improve
this further by assuming that $f(x)$ is a linear function. This is
done by including both $\tilde{S}_{0,0}$ and $\tilde{S}_{0,1}$ in
equation~\eqref{eq:limit_model}. The resulting recovered power spectra
and error bars are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:lspe_sim}. The bias in the
recovered $B$-mode has been reduced by 2 orders or magnitude to less
than 5\% of the error bars, which as described above are error bars
for an optimistic LSPE noise level.
Figure \ref{fig:lspe_sim} clearly demonstrates that our technique can
remove the bias as a result of temperature to polarisation
leakage. However, this comes at the cost of a noise penalty in the
map. Including the $\tilde{S}_{0,0}$ only and adopting $f(x){=}{\rm
const}$ incurs a 5\% increase in the noise power with respect to the
binned map. The analysis where $f(x)$ is modelled as a linear function
and both $\tilde{S}_{0,0}$ and $\tilde{S}_{0,1}$ terms are included in
equation \eqref{eq:limit_model} creates an increase in the noise power
of 12\% with respect to a binned map.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
Launched in March of 2009, NASA's \emph{Kepler}\ mission is a space-based photometric telescope designed to address important questions on the frequency and characteristics of planetary systems around Sun-like stars, and to search for transiting Earth-analogs~\citep{Borucki10a}.
Statistical answers to these questions are required in order to constrain planetary formation and evolution scenarios.
\emph{Kepler}\ detects transiting planetary candidates signals through continuous photometric monitoring of about 160\,000 stars at high photometric precision (e.g.,~\citealt{Borucki10a,Borucki10b,Koch10a,Gilliland10a}).
This unprecedented sample of potential exoplanets has become an immense resource for statistical studies of the properties and distributions of planets around main-sequence stars (e.g.,\citealt{Youdin11,Tremaine12, Wu12}). This ensemble of candidates is also necessary for determining the occurrence rate of exoplanets (e.g., \citealt{Howard12,Fressin13}), and more specifically of Earth-size planets in the habitable zone of their parent stars (e.g., \citealt{Catanzarite11,Traub12,Petigura13,Dressing13}).
The mission has led to the detection of 2740 {\it planetary candidates} during the first two years of operation~\citep{Batalha12,Burke14}.
However, only a small subset of these candidates have been confirmed as true planets.
This is because asserting the planetary nature of a transit signal requires significant observational follow-up and computational efforts that are unachievable in a practical sense for every detected candidate.
We do not expect all the signals to be due to planets: many astrophysical phenomena can reproduce a similar lightcurve to that of a transiting
planet~\citep{Brown03}.
Indeed, false-positive contamination is one of the main challenges facing transit surveys such as \emph{Kepler}.
During the last decade, ground-based surveys dedicated to the search of transiting planets have spent considerable effort in confirming the planetary nature of photometrically detected candidates~\citep{Alonso04,Bakos07,Collier07,Moutou09}.
These surveys have established that false positives usually outnumber true planetary systems by a large factor.
It has been shown that from 80 to 90\% of the candidates are false-positives for the most successful ground-based exoplanet surveys (e.g., \citealt{Latham09}).
For these reasons, the true false positive rate of \emph{Kepler}\ remains an active research area because false positives can critically bias estimates of planet occurrence rates (e.g.,~\citealt{Morton11,Morton12,Fressin13}).
This is the subject of the current paper.
The \emph{Kepler}\ survey poses new challenges for dynamically confirming (using radial velocity or transit timing variation) the planetary nature of candidates.
This is because of intrinsic characteristics of the \emph{Kepler}\ target sample such as the large number of candidates, the candidates' small size (presumably of low mass), and the faintness of the host stars.
Consequently, we must develop new methods to determine the origin of \emph{Kepler}\ detectable signals. One method consists of in-depth
statistical validation of candidates by ruling out false positive scenarios one-by-one (e.g., BLENDER,~\citealt{Torres04,Torres11,Fressin11}); it fully exploits the information from the shape of a transit lightcurve~\citep{Seager03}.
The goal of this method is to demonstrate {\it statistically} that a transit signal is more likely to be of planetary origin than to be a false positive. In the case of \emph{Kepler}, this is generally made possible using follow-up observations, such as spectroscopy, imaging, and multi-wavelength transit photometry (including
with \emph{Spitzer}).
This was demonstrated in the case of the first validation of a Super-Earth~\citep{Torres11}.
However, each candidate validated by this method requires intense observational and computational follow-up work.
In particular, the follow-up strategies adopted by the \emph{Kepler}\ team are summarized in~\cite{Batalha10a}, and often require substantial efforts and resources.
Therefore, it is impractical at present to apply the BLENDER method to each individual \emph{Kepler}\ transit signal.
Yet at the same time, we require the fractional values of {\it bona fide} planets, or of astrophysical false
positives, to accurately determine the occurrence of planetary systems from \emph{Kepler}\ ~\citep{Fressin13}.
There are currently several approaches to estimate the {\it False Positive Rate} (FPR) of the \emph{Kepler}\ sample.
\cite{Coughlin14} studied the effect of contamination on the FPR due to the design of \emph{Kepler}\ itself, such as direct PRF (pixel response function), antipodal reflections, CCD cross-talks, or columns anomalies.
The contamination sources are eclipsing binaries, variable stars, and other transiting planets and results in a significant number of the known KOIs to be false positives.
\cite{Coughlin14} performed period-ephemeris matching among all transiting planet, eclipsing binary, and variable star sources. They examined the full KOI list and found that 12\% of KOIs are false-positives due to contamination.
Other approaches use generic arguments about the \emph{Kepler}\ signals to infer the overall \emph{Kepler}\ FPR (e.g.,~\citealt{Morton11,Morton12,Fressin13}).
There are also parallel attempts to estimate the FPR of targeted specific samples of Kepler Objects of Interest (KOIs).
For example, studies have focused on close-in gas giant planet candidates (e.g.,~\citealt{Santerne12,Colon12}), or on the multiple planet system candidates~\citep{Rowe14}.
The latter sample contains less than a percent of false positives~\citep{Latham11,Lissauer12,Lissauer14}.
Other methods use a proxy of the host stars' mean density to estimate the \emph{Kepler}\ FPR (e.g.,~\citealt{Sliski14}).
In this paper, we conduct two campaigns to measure transit depths of KOIs with \emph{Spitzer}, and combine these observations to followup studies, in order to assess the overall FPR of these samples.
We adopt an approach that expands significantly the number of KOIs that are examined using multi-wavelength photometry.
Our project focuses primarily on smaller size candidates, such as mini-Neptune and Super-Earth size objects, compared to previous targeted sample studies.
We select a sample of 51 candidates, measure their transit depth at 4.5 microns with IRAC, and combine these observations with complementary follow-up studies and information from \emph{Kepler}\ in order to derive the false positive probability (FPP) for each object.
Our method is based on the fact that the relative depth of a planetary transit is achromatic (neglecting the modest effect of limb-darkening), but not for a blend.
In contrast, a blend containing a false positive, for instance an eclipsing binary, can yield a depth that can vary significantly with the instrument bandpass and stellar temperatures.
The amplitude of this effect increases correspondingly as the difference in wavelength between the two bandpasses increases.
Since \emph{Kepler}\ observes through a broad bandpass at visible wavelengths, large color-dependent effects for false positives caused by the presence of blended cool stars can be revealed at infrared wavelengths.
We first applied this method by combining \emph{Spitzer}\ data from this program and \emph{Kepler}\ data in~\cite{Fressin11}.
The two Science Exploration \emph{Spitzer}\ programs, which form the core of the data presented in the current paper, have been an active part of the attempts to validate KOIs.
About 20\% of the total amount of \emph{Spitzer}\ telescope time allocated for this project has already been used in publications dedicated to the confirmation or the validation of 22 Kepler planets.
These are Kepler-10c \citep{Fressin11}, Kepler-11b \citep{Lissauer11}, Kepler-14b \citep{Buchhave11}, Kepler-18b,c \citep{Cochran11}, Kepler-19b \cite{Ballard11}, Kepler-20b,c \cite{Gautier12}, Kepler-22b \citep{Borucki12}, Kepler-25b,c \citep{Steffen12}, Kepler-26c \citep{Steffen12}, Kepler-32b \citep{Fabrycky12}, Kepler-37b \citep{Barclay13}, Kepler-49b,c \citep{Steffen13}, Kepler-61b \citep{Ballard13}, Kepler-62e \citep{Borucki13}, Kepler-68b \citep{Gilliland13}, Kepler-410A b \citep{Eylen13}, Kepler-93b \citep{Ballard14} (see Table~\ref{tab:fpp} for the correspondance between \emph{Kepler}\ names and KOI numbers).
Furthermore, some of the KOIs of the current study are already confirmed or validated as planets without using the \emph{Spitzer}\ data.
In particular, \citet{Rowe14} validate 851 planets in multiple-planet system candidates (including 11 KOIs used in our study) by applying statistical arguments \citep{Latham11, Lissauer12, Lissauer14} on the Q1-Q8 \emph{Kepler}\ data.
While the radial velocity technique allowed the confirmation of the planetary nature of Kepler-89d \citep{Weiss13}, Kepler-94b \citep{Marcy14}, Kepler-102d,e \citep{Marcy14}.
Nevertheless, the present work disregard previous validation or confirmation of individual object in order to treat the whole KOI list followed with \emph{Spitzer}\ as a statistical ensemble; this is necessary to estimate the FPR of this sample.
Finally, 150 hours (11\%) of time from these two Exploration Science Programs were used to study the atmospheres of Kepler-detected hot Jupiters detected by monitoring their secondary eclipses~\citep{Desert11b,Fortney11,Desert11c}.
This paper is organized as follows: we first describe the different types of astrophysical false positives that we are concerned with
(Section~\ref{sec:fptype}). We then present the sample of candidates that were selected to conduct this study (Section~\ref{sec:select}).
The \emph{Spitzer}\ observations and results are presented in Sections~\ref{sec:spfollowup} and~\ref{sec:spconstraint}.
The combination of various observational constraints (Section~\ref{sec:observations}) allows us to estimate the FPR of our \emph{Kepler}\ sample (Section~\ref{sec:FPP}).
We finally discuss the implications of our findings in Section~\ref{sec:discussion}, in particular, in the context of other studies.
\section{Astrophysical False Positives In The Kepler Signals}
\label{sec:fptype}
There are a variety of astrophysical phenomena that can mimic the signal of a transiting planet passing in front of a main sequence star targeted by \emph{Kepler}.
These events are produced by additional stars falling within the same aperture as the target star (presumed to be the brighter star), and significantly diluting the total light observed by Kepler.
More specifically, the kinds of false positives that we are concerned with in our study include background or foreground eclipsing binaries (EBs), blended within the Kepler aperture of the target star, as well as those that are physically associated to the target star.
We refer to these latter configurations as hierarchical triples (HTs).
HTs often cannot be resolved in high-angular resolution imaging.
In this paper, we check for the presence of a stellar companion by looking at how transit depths vary between the \emph{Kepler}\ and \emph{Spitzer}\ bandpasses.
The dilution by a stellar companion, blended in the \emph{Kepler}\ aperture of a planet host star of interest, can be responsible for variations in the wavelength-dependent transit depths measured for a planet.
We do not consider the case where the contaminating star is itself transited by a planet as a potential false positive scenario.
Before searching for false-positives in \emph{Kepler}, it is important to recall the major vetting steps that each \emph{Kepler}\ target goes through.
First, a comprehensive study was applied when assembling the Kepler Input Catalog (KIC;~\citealt{Latham05,Batalha10a,Batalha10b,Brown11}), leading to the identification of some EBs and stellar giants, hence avoiding their continuous monitoring with \emph{Kepler}.
About 160\,000 stars were carefully selected from the KIC catalog and were continuously monitored photometrically with \emph{Kepler}\ (\citealt{Jenkins10a}).
\citet{Batalha10b} explains the detection of transit events and the vetting processes that are then applied to reject the most common false positive scenarios.
Transit-like signals are identifiable from TCEs (Threshold-Crossing Events) using the \emph{Kepler}\ photometry alone.
The \emph{Kepler}\ team adopted a detection threshold of $7.1~\sigma$ for the transit so that no more than one spurious signal can occur from purely random fluctuations amongst the 160\,000 stars.
In practice, the process of vetting from TCEs to KOIs involves several qualitative steps that could affect the \emph{Kepler}\ FPR.
\citet{Christiansen13} have validated the integrity of this threshold while \citet{Coughlin14} report that TCERT (Threshold Crossing Event Review Team) is 92.9\% effective in detecting false-positives for KOIs from Q1-Q8.
The \emph{Kepler}\ pipeline identifies grazing EBs by searching for even/odd transit depth differences or by looking for the presence of a clear signature of secondary eclipses.
Giant star-eclipsed-by-a-dwarf star scenarios are detected by recognizing that the primary star is a giant, thereby implying that the size of the transiting body must itself be stellar (e.g.,~\citealt{Gilliland10b,Huber13}).
The detection of the shift in the photocenter at a significance level greater than 3$\sigma$ and the comparison of the difference of in- and out-of transit images show the true source location.
Interestingly, this technique permits the identification of potential contamination by unresolved close-by EBs in an efficient manner~\citep{Jenkins10b,Bryson13}.
However, even for high transit SNR candidates, some blended binary scenarios remain undetectable through the vetting processes.
Therefore, estimating the FPR from \emph{Kepler}\ requires knowledge of the probability of encountering such blend scenarios.
Throughout this paper, we follow the notation introduced by~\cite{Torres11}: the objects that comprise a blended binary system are
referred to as the `secondary' and `tertiary', and the candidate star
host is referred to as the `primary'. The distance along the
line-of-sight between the binary system and the main star is
parametrized in terms of the difference in distance modulus, $\mu$.
The notation applies to every astrophysical false positive scenario.
\section{Selection of the Kepler Object of Interests}
\label{sec:select}
The first \emph{Spitzer}\ follow-up program comprised 36 of the first 400 KOIs identified by the Kepler survey~\citep{Borucki11}.
A second set of 23 candidates was selected from the 2335 KOIs compiled by~\cite{Batalha12} for the second \emph{Spitzer}\ program.
We present the observations and the results for the 36 KOIs from the first program and 15 KOIs from the second program; the current project uses in total 51 KOIs.
The remaining 8 targets from the second program were not observed yet at the time of the present analysis (KOIs-248.03, 1686.01, 2290.01, 2124.01, 2311.01, 2418.01, 2474.01, 2650.01).
KOIs-248.03 and 2650.01 have recently been validated as Kepler-49d, and Kepler-395c, respectively~\citep{Steffen13, Rowe14}. Importantly, we select these two ensembles with very different criteria.
For the first set, our goal was to derive the FPR of a sub-sample by following-up candidates that represent the diversity of KOIs initially found.
To reach this goal, the first sample is chosen to cover representative ranges of orbital periods, transit depths, stellar types and magnitudes that the first 400 KOIs could allow.
The size of this sample includes about 10\% of the known KOIs at the time.
The ranges of the second set are more tightly constrained: we select candidates for which the expected planetary radius $R_{p}$ would be less than 1.6 \ensuremath{R_{\oplus}}\ and the $\ensuremath{T_{\rm eq}}\ < 350~K$ (using a stellar temperature \ensuremath{T_{\rm eff}}\ estimated from the KIC).
Overall, our sample of stellar hosts span a range of KIC estimated temperature from $\ensuremath{T_{\rm eff}}=3700~K$ up to $\ensuremath{T_{\rm eff}}=9000~K$.
For both ensembles, the requirement was imposed to accept targets with predicted transit depths detection of at least $3~\sigma$ (scaled from the \emph{Kepler}\ value), achievable with three or less transits observed with \emph{Spitzer}.
The selected candidate radii as function of their periods are presented in Figure~\ref{fig:rpper}.
\section{Follow-up observations of selected \emph{Kepler}\ candidates with \emph{Spitzer}\ }
\label{sec:spfollowup}
\subsection{\emph{Spitzer}\ observations}
\label{sec:spitzerobs}
We use \emph{Warm-Spitzer}/IRAC~\citep{Werner04,Fazio04} at 4.5~\micron\ to observe transits of the 51 selected KOIs between May 2010 and July 2012.
We obtained these observations as part of two large Science Exploration Programs (program ID 60028 and 80117).
In total, 1400~hours of \emph{Spitzer}\ time is used for the follow-up of \emph{Kepler}\ targets.
Of this time, 800~hours of observations are used to complete the first program (60028) and 600~hours are dedicated to the second program (80117).
150~hours of this time were used to study the atmospheres of hot-Jupiters detected by \emph{Kepler}\ during secondary eclipses~\citep{Desert11b,Fortney11,Desert11c}.
The remaining 1250~hours are dedicated to validating KOIs and estimating the FPR in the \emph{Kepler}\ data, and are the focus of this paper.
A total of 157 \emph{Spitzer}\ AORs (Astronomical Observation Requests) have been submitted for these two programs.
This paper focuses on the study of the 51 KOIs presented in Section~\ref{sec:select} that have been observed with \emph{Spitzer}\ during 95 visits (AORs).
For most of the targeted stars, the data were obtained in a continuous staring full array mode ($256\times256$ pixels) with exposure times of 12 or 30~s, depending on the brightness of the star of interest.
We used the subarray mode of IRAC for the brightest host stars. In this mode, only a $32\times32$-pixel part of the detector is used; this covers a $38\times38\;\mathrm{arcsec}^2$ field of view (pixel size of 1.2\arcsec) and allows for higher cadences (0.2~s exposures).
We choose to put our target at the default pointing position in the center of the field-of-view in order to avoid known hot pixels and bad columns.
This area of the detector is well characterized since it has been extensively used for extrasolar planet studies.
An offset is applied to a few KOIs in order to avoid the presence of a close-by bright target on the same line or column.
The ephemerides of the KOIs were taken from the KFOP database, which are now available on the CFOP website\footnote{https://cfop.ipac.caltech.edu/home/} and we ensured that each visit lasted approximately 2.5 times the transit duration.
We observe 29 KOIs, amongst the 51 presented here, during multiple transit events in order to improve the SNR on the combined lightcurves.
Tables~\ref{tab:spitzer1} and~\ref{tab:spitzer2} list these observations for each program respectively.
\subsection{\emph{Spitzer}\ photometry}
\label{sec:photometry}
We use the BCD files (Basic Calibrated Data) produced by the \emph{Spitzer}/IRAC pipeline.
These files include corrections for dark current, flat fielding, pixel non-linearity, and conversion to flux units.
\cite{Desert09} describes the method used to produce photometric time series in each channel from the BCD files.
The method consists of finding the centroid position of the stellar point-spread-function (PSF) and performing aperture photometry.
We first convert the pixel intensities to electrons based on the detector gain and exposure time provided in the FITS headers.
This facilitates the evaluation of the photometric errors.
We extract the BJD date for each image from the FITS headers and compute it to mid-exposure.
We then correct for transient pixels in each individual image using a 20-point sliding median filter of the pixel intensity versus time.
To do so, we compare each pixel's intensity to the median of the 10 preceding and 10 following exposures at the same pixel position and we replace outliers greater than $4~\sigma$ with their median value.
The fraction of pixels that we replace varies between 0.15 to 0.5\%.
The centroid position of the stellar PSF is then determined using DAOPHOT-type Photometry Procedures, \texttt{GCNTRD}, from the IDL Astronomy Library\footnote{{\tt http://idlastro.gsfc.nasa.gov/homepage.html}}.
We use the \texttt{APER} routine to perform aperture photometry with a circular aperture of variable radius.
For each visit, we search for the best aperture size ranging between 1 and 8 pixels radii in steps of 0.5 pixel.
We propagate the uncertainties as a function of the aperture radius and we adopt the size that provides the smallest errors.
We notice that the SNR does not vary significantly with the aperture radii for all the dataset.
The final aperture sizes are set between $2.5$ and $3.5$~pixels depending on the KOIs.
We determine the background level for each frame from two methods.
The first method uses a fit of a Gaussian to the central region of a histogram of counts from the full array, where the background values are defined by the peak position of this Gaussian.
The second method uses the measure of the median value of the pixels inside an annulus centered around the star, with inner and outer radii of $12$ and $20$ pixels respectively, to estimate the background overall level.
Both estimates produce similar results.
The contribution of the background to the total flux from the stars is low for all observations, from 0.1\% to 1.0\% depending on the images, and fairly constant for each AOR.
We find that the residuals from the final light curve modeling are minimized by adopting the center of the Gaussian fits.
After producing the photometric time-series, we use a sliding median filter to select and trim outliers greater than $5\sigma$, which correspond to less than two \% of the data. We also discard the first half-hour of all observations, which is affected by a significant telescope jitter before stabilization.
Six AORs, corresponding to a total of 30~hours, were gathered at levels above 30,000 DN (in the raw data); this is a level where the detector response tends to be non-linear by several percent.
In order to avoid misinterpreting these data, we do not consider AORs that are above the range of linearization correction.
Therefore, these six AORs are not used in this work and they are not presented in Table~\ref{tab:spitzer1} and~\ref{tab:spitzer2}.
\subsection{Determination of the transit depths from Spitzer lightcurves}
\label{sec:spdepth}
As described in \cite{Desert11a}, we use a transit light curve model multiplied by instrumental decorrelation functions to measure the transit parameters and their uncertainties from the \emph{Spitzer}\ data.
We compute the transit light curves with the IDL transit routine \texttt{OCCULTSMALL} from \cite{Mandel02}.
This model depends on the following parameters: the planet-to-star radius ratio $R_p / R_\star$, the orbital semi-major axis to stellar-radius ratio (system scale) $a / R_\star$, the impact parameter $b$, the time of mid transit $T_c$, and limb darkening coefficients.
The measured parameter of interest here is the transit depth.
We fix $T_c$, $a / R_\star$ and $b$ to their values measured from the \emph{Kepler}\ photometry.
The SNR of our observations is low compared to typical \emph{Spitzer}\ observations of brighter transiting planets.
The limb darkening effect is negligible at this level of precision; the coefficients are set to zero.
We assume an eccentricity of zero for the KOIs orbit since this parameter does not affect the transit depth measurements at the level of precision we are working with.
Only $R_p / R_\star$ is set as a free parameter to represent the astrophysical signal.
The \emph{Spitzer}/IRAC photometry is known to be systematically affected by the so-called pixel-phase effect (see e.g.,~\citealt{Charbonneau05}).
This effect is seen as oscillations in the measured fluxes with a period of approximately 70~minutes (period of the telescope pointing jitter) for data secured prior October 2010, and 40 minutes for data secured after.
By October 2010 the \emph{Spitzer}\ engineering team was able to correlate the pointing wobble with the cycling of a heater used to keep a battery within its operating temperature range. Following this discovery, the \emph{Spitzer}\ team significantly reduced the amplitude and the period of the pointing wobble.
The amplitude of this effect varies between $1$ and $2\%$, peak to peak, depending on the position of the star in the array.
We decorrelated our signal in each channel using a linear function of time for the baseline (two parameters) and three types of functions to correct the data for the intrapixel variations: a linear function of the PSF position (two parameters), a quadratic function (four parameters) and a quadratic with a cross term (five parameters).
\citet{Desert09} describes in detail the last function.
We perform a simultaneous Levenberg--Marquardt least-squares fit~\citep{Markwardt09} to the data to determine the transit depths and the instrumental parameters.
For each visit, we adopt the decorrelation function that significantly improves the $\chi^{2}$ minimization.
We rescale the errors on each photometric point to be set to the root-mean-square (rms) of the residuals from the initial best-fit of the data.
Hence, the reduced $\chi^{2}$ becomes one.
All the data-point measurement errors are therefore assumed to be identical for each lightcurve.
As an example, Figure~\ref{fig:spitzerlightcurves} shows the raw data and the corrected \emph{Spitzer}\ transit lightcurve of KOI-701.03 (Kepler-62e). Figures~\ref{fig:spitzerlightcurvesA},~\ref{fig:spitzerlightcurvesB}, and ~\ref{fig:spitzerlightcurvesC} present the normalized, corrected, binned and combined lightcurves with their associated best fit models for all the observed KOIs that are presented in the current study.
We estimate parameter uncertainties using two different methods: Markov Chain Monte-Carlo (MCMC) and residual permutation methods.
Our MCMC implementation uses the Metropolis-Hasting algorithm with Gibbs sampling \citep{Tegmark04,Ford05}.
We assume uniform prior distributions for all jump parameters.
We adjust the width of the distribution from which we randomly draw the jump sizes in each parameter until 20--25\% of jumps are executed in each of the parameters.
We create five chains, each with 10$^{5}$ points, where each chain starts with a different set of starting parameters (each parameter is assigned a starting position that is +$3\sigma$ or $-3\sigma$ from the best-fit values).
We discard the first 10\% of jumps of each chain to remove the chain's transient dependence on the starting parameters.
In order to obtain an estimate of the correlated and systematic errors in our measurements, we use the residual permutation bootstrap, also called ``Prayer Bead'' method, described in~\citet{Desert11a}.
In this method, the residuals of the initial fit are shifted systematically and sequentially by one frame, and then added to the transit light curve model before fitting again.
For both methods, the posterior distributions are used to estimate the errors: we allow asymmetric error bars spanning $34\%$ of the nearest points above and below the values of the parameters associated with the minimum $\chi^{2}$ to derive the $1~\sigma$ uncertainties for each parameter.
We find that the two approaches provide consistent results.
Tables~\ref{tab:spitzer1} and~\ref{tab:spitzer2} present the transit depths and associated errors derived from the MCMC technique.
Finally, we check that KOIs for which we have multi-epoch measurements have transit depths that agree within the $3~\sigma$ level.
We combine the measured transit depths for these KOIs by computing the weighted means and errors.
\subsection{Determination of the \emph{Spitzer}\ magnitudes}
\label{sec:spmag}
We use standard aperture photometry of each individual BCD image in order to compute the flux for all the KOIs in our sample.
We measure the averaged flux over the background annulus.
The main difference between the procedure used in the section and the one described in Section~\ref{sec:spdepth} is that we use a fixed aperture size with a radius of 3 pixels surrounded by an annulus of 12-to-20 pixels to estimate the flux and the background, respectively.
Furthermore, only the out-of-transit data are considered for determining the source flux densities.
We first convert the BCD images into mJy per pixel units from their original MJy per steradian units.
Then we estimate the centroid position of the main target star's PSF for each image, and compute aperture photometry centered on the source.
We apply an aperture correction of 1.113 at 4.5\micron\ (this value is taken from IRAC data handbook\footnote{{\tt http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/data/SPITZER/docs/irac/\\iracinstrumenthandbook/28/}}).
We correct the full lightcurve for the intrapixel sensitivity using the method described in Section~\ref{sec:spdepth}.
Color and array-location-dependent photometric corrections are also applied to the photometry; the latter accounts for the variation in pixel solid angle (due to distortion) and the variation of the spectral response (due to the tilted filters and wide field-of-view) over the array~\citep{Hora04}.
Most of our data taken in full-array mode is such that the PSF is centered on the central pixel of the array (128;128), so no array correction is applied for this dataset.
The brightest stars of our sample are secured in subarray mode for which we apply an array correction of 0.68\%.
We convert the surface brightness (in mJy) into \emph{Spitzer}\ magnitudes at 4.5\micron\ using a zero-magnitude flux density (zmag) of 179.7 Jy as computed by~\cite{Reach05}.
We finally compute the uncertainties on the flux densities using the photon noise and the standard deviation of the measurements from all the individual frames.
We test the accuracy of our procedure using \emph{Spitzer}\ IRAC photometric calibrator datasets taken from the public \emph{Spitzer}\ archive: BD+60 1753 and HD180609.
We check that our magnitudes match those of~\cite{Reach05} at better than the $1~\sigma$ level.
Tables~\ref{tab:spitzer1} and~\ref{tab:spitzer2} present the flux densities and the corresponding magnitude at 4.5~\micron\ for each KOI.
While the uncertainties in these tables are the formal values, we have conservatively adjusted some of the errors to be no lower than 2\%. This lower limit is based on the findings of ~\citet{Reach05}.
\section{Using \emph{Spitzer}\ observations to rule-out false positive scenarios}
\label{sec:spconstraint}
\subsection{Analytical framework}
This section describes in detail how we use \emph{Spitzer}\ observations to rule-out false positive scenarios.
The applied methodology makes use of the transit depths measured with \emph{Spitzer}\ and with \emph{Kepler}, as well as the measured colors \emph{Kepler} --\emph{Spitzer}.
The true transit depth $\delta_t$ obtained from an eclipsing system comprising a main object (2) and its companion (3) corresponds to:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:tdepth}
\delta_{t} = \displaystyle \frac{\delta F_2} {F_2+F_3},
\end{equation}
\noindent where $F_2$ and $F_3$ are the emitted fluxes in the same bandpass. The parameter $\delta$ represents the surface ratio between the two objects and is expressed as:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:depth}
\delta = \left(\frac{R_3}{R_2}\right)^{2}.
\end{equation}
The blended transit depth corresponds to the apparent transit depth $\delta_b$ of this eclipsing system diluted with a primary star (1). It is computed as follows:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bdepth}
\delta_{b} = \displaystyle \frac{\delta F_2} {F_1+F_2+F_3} = \delta_{t} \cdot d,
\end{equation}
\noindent where $F_1$ is the flux from the primary star, the targeted KOI, and $d$ is the dilution due to the presence this star in the line of sight of the eclipsing binary.
\noindent The ratio of the apparent transit depths measured in the \emph{Kepler}\ (K) and the \emph{Spitzer}\ (S) bandpasses corresponds to:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ratiodepth}
\frac{\delta_{b,{\rm S}}} {\delta_{b,{\rm K}}} = \displaystyle \frac{\delta_{t,{\rm S}}} {\delta_{t,{\rm K}}} \cdot \frac{d_{S}} {d_{K}},
\end{equation}
\noindent The ratio of the true transit depths is calculated from Eq.~\ref{eq:tdepth} and is expressed as:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ratiotruedepth}
\frac{\delta_{t,{\rm S}}} {\delta_{t,{\rm K}}} = \displaystyle \frac {F_{2,{\rm S}}/F_{2,{\rm K}} } { (F_{2,{\rm S}}+F_{3,{\rm S}} )/(F_{2,{\rm K}}+F_{3,{\rm K}})}.
\end{equation}
In order to simplify the problem, we assume that the contribution of the tertiary flux to the ratio of the dilution in the two bandpasses is negligible.
Omitting the contribution of the tertiary has a similar effect as reducing the distance modulus.
Therefore, this approximation does not significantly impact the final results.
Under this assumption, the ratio of the dilution in the \emph{Spitzer}\ bandpass to that in the \emph{Kepler}\ bandpass can then be written as:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ratiodilut}
\frac{d_{S}} {d_{K}} = \displaystyle \frac{10^{-0.4(\mathrm{M}_{1,{\rm K}} - \mathrm{M}_{2,{\rm K}} + \mu )}+1} {10^{-0.4(\mathrm{M}_{1,{\rm S}} - \mathrm{M}_{2,{\rm S}} + \mu)}+1} ,
\end{equation}
\noindent where M$_{1}$ and M$_{2}$ are the absolute magnitudes of the primary and the secondary stars. The distance between the binary and the primary star is parametrized for convenience in terms of the difference in distance modulus, $\mu$ ($\mu=0$ for HT scenarios).
Finally, the three component ``\emph{Kepler}--\emph{Spitzer}'' color $C_{\mathrm{KS}_{123}}$ is expressed as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:color}
C_{\mathrm{KS}_{123}}&=&-2.5\times \nonumber \\
& & \log \frac{10^{-0.4(\mathrm{M}_{1,{\rm K}}+\mu
)}+10^{-0.4(\mathrm{M}_{2,{\rm K}})}+10^{-0.4(\mathrm{M}_{3,{\rm K}})}}{10^{-0.4(\mathrm{M}_{1,{\rm S}}+\mu
)}+10^{-0.4(\mathrm{M}_{2,{\rm S}})}+10^{-0.4(\mathrm{M}_{3,{\rm S}})}}. \nonumber \\
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Using the analytical framework to explore blend effects}
As a first step, we apply the above analytical framework to reveal the effect of blends in various scenarios that we expect to encounter.
In particular, we explore blend types involving EB and HT systems that can mimic the KOI properties in both \emph{Kepler}\ and \emph{Spitzer}\ bandpasses.
We simulate blends using model isochrones from the Padova isochrone series~\citep{Girardi02}.
This allows us to set the properties of the three stars involved, specifically their masses, from which their brightnesses can be predicted in any bandpass.
The relevant bandpasses for this work are those that correspond to \emph{Kepler}\ and \emph{Spitzer}.
These bands are available on the Padova models's CMD website\footnote{http://stev.oapd.inaf.it/cgi-bin/cmd}.
For simplicity, we adopt here a representative isochrone of 3\,Gyr and solar metallicity.
The validity of this approximation, which has only a minor impact on our final results, is discussed in Sect.\ref{sec:complementstudies}.
We now present some of the characteristic features from our simulated blends, and we discuss how they change with the adopted stellar parameters.
Figure~\ref{fig:ratiodepth} displays the ratio of the true eclipse depths in the \emph{Spitzer}\ and \emph{Kepler}\ bands for an undiluted eclipsing binary (eq.~\ref{eq:ratiotruedepth}) as a function of the mass of the tertiary star ($M_3$).
We show this ratio for three different masses of the secondary star ($M_2$).
The net dilution effect caused by the primary star as a function of secondary mass for three values of $M_1$ is presented in Figure~\ref{fig:ratiodilut}.
Figure~\ref{fig:ratiodepthd} shows the same three cases as in Figure~\ref{fig:ratiodepth}, though we include this time the effect of the dilution in the signals produced by a primary star of one solar mass ($M_1 = 1\,M_{\sun}$).
These apparent \emph{Spitzer}/\emph{Kepler}\ eclipse depth ratios (eq.~\ref{eq:ratiodilut}) are shown for two different blend scenarios: a HT configuration (in which the difference in distance modulus between the primary and the EB is zero), and a configuration with the EB in the background (a distance modulus of five).
Finally, figure~\ref{fig:color} illustrates how the stellar properties affect the color difference of a blended system for colors computed between the \emph{Kepler}\ and \emph{Spitzer}\ bandpasses.
This plot shows the difference between the color of the combined light of the primary and secondary ($C_{12}$) and the color of the primary alone ($C_1$), as a function of the secondary's mass. For this illustration, we assume that the tertiary's contribution is negligible, as will usually be the case.
\subsection{Applying the framework to the \emph{Spitzer}\ and \emph{Kepler}\ observations }
The methodology described above allows us to reject many false positive scenarios for the KOIs observed in this study.
The observational constraints consist of the measured transit depths and the apparent magnitudes in the \emph{Spitzer}\ and \emph{Kepler}\ bandpasses (see Tables 1 and 2).
The tests for potential blends use eqs.\ 5 and 6.
The free parameters considered are the secondary and tertiary masses, and the relative distance between the eclipsing pair and the primary star (i.e., the difference in distance modulus).
We explore these quantities over wide ranges of stellar masses and distance moduli, in a grid pattern to fully map the space of parameters for allowed blends.
Primary masses for the KOIs ($M_1$) are taken from the work of \citet{Batalha12} and held fixed.
We allow $M_2$ and $M_3$ to vary between 0.1\,$M_{\sun}$ and 1.4\,$M_{\sun}$, and the distance modulus difference $\mu$ is divided in linear steps between $-5$ mag and 15 mag.
For each star, the intrinsic brightness in the \emph{Spitzer}\ and \emph{Kepler}\ bands is read off directly from the adopted isochrone.
At each trial distance modulus we compute the ratio between the transit depth from \emph{Spitzer}\ ($+ \, \, 3\sigma$) and that from \emph{Kepler}.
This ratio sets an upper limit to the mass of the secondary that could mimic the transit depths measured in both banpasses.
We do not set a lower limit between the transit depths from \emph{Spitzer}\ ($- \, \, 3\sigma$) and that from \emph{Kepler}, because these shallower depths would involve scenarios with massive stars (these are typically more massive than the Sun; See Figure~\ref{fig:ratiodepthd}).
In practice, the number of stars that we eliminate from the shallower limits represent only a small fraction of the number of low mass stars removed from the deeper limits.
In a typical \emph{Kepler}\ aperture, the Besan\c{c}on population synthesis model shows that only 10\% of the stars have mass greater than 80\% of the Sun.
Consequently, we only consider the deeper transit depth from \emph{Spitzer}\ ($+ \, \, 3\sigma$) in our calculation of the FPPs.
Similarly, we use the \emph{Kepler}\ {\it minus} \emph{Spitzer}\ color to further constrain the blend properties.
The color is derived from our measured \emph{Spitzer}\ magnitude (m$_{S}\pm3\sigma$ ; Table~\ref{tab:spitzer1} and~\ref{tab:spitzer2}) and from the \emph{Kepler}\ magnitude as reported by \citet{Batalha12}.
Assuming that the measured fluxes result from the contribution of three stars, the color $C_{123}$ (eq.~\ref{eq:color}) is then compared with the color of the primary star alone, $C_{1}$, computed from the adopted isochrone.
Only a subset of the secondary and tertiary stars can reproduce this color difference, which provides another constraint on the secondaries' masses.
\section{Additional Observational Constraints}
\label{sec:observations}
This section presents additional observational constraints used for several candidates of our sample.
These complementary observations allow us to exclude more false positive scenarios, which remain after applying the constraints from the \emph{Spitzer}\ observations.
\subsection{Stellar Reconnaissance}
\label{sec:recon}
In general, follow-up observations of \emph{Kepler}\ planet candidates involve reconnaissance spectroscopy.
This is necessary to characterize the primary star and to look for evidence of astrophysical false positives~\citep{Batalha10a}.
Such false positives include single- and double-lined binaries, some HTs and EBs, which would show velocity variations at large amplitudes.
We also use their spectra to estimate the effective temperature, surface gravity, metallicity, and rotational and radial velocities of the host star.
For the current study, we assume that the primary star is the brightest star and that it is known and characterized.
In theory, if we are to consider all possible scenarios, a secondary star could be brighter than the primary target (see Figure~\ref{fig:ratiodepthd}).
In practice, our assumption that the primary star is characterized means that the secondary stars considered in this study can only be fainter than the primary stars.
We treat the stars in our sample in a uniform manner as we rely on the stellar radii and masses provided in~\cite{Batalha12}, which are from the KIC~\citep{Brown11}.
This is a critical step to fix the primaries' stellar characteristics in our FPP calculations.
\subsection{Imaging}
\emph{Kepler}'s photometric aperture is typically a few pixels across with a scale of 3\farcs 98 per pixel.
Therefore, high-resolution imaging is often performed in order to identify neighboring stars that may be blended EBs contaminating the primary target photometry.
Only 23 amongst the 51 stars of our study have high spatial-resolution adaptive optics images.
These images were taken in the near-infrared (J and K bands) with ARIES~\citep{McCarthy98} on the MMT and PHARO~\citep{Hayward01} on the Palomar Hale 200-inch.
The observations and their sensitivity curves are presented in~\cite{Adams12}.
The AO images allow us to detect companion stars as close as 0.1\arcsec\ from the target's primary star.
These images also rule-out stellar companions within a 6\arcsec\ separation from the primary, with a magnitude difference up to 9.
There are several KOIs for which we detect additional stars within the \emph{Kepler}\ apertures of the primaries.
We note that since we completed the analysis of the data for this work, several projects have been conducted to search for close-by stellar companions that could be the sources of false positives using high resolution imaging~\citep{Lillobox12,Adams13,Lillobox14}.
Furthermore, a robotic AO survey of nearly 715 KOIs was conducted by~\cite{Law13}, to search for stellar companion in a systematic manner.
So far these searches found 7 KOIs within our samples that have detected fainter close-by stellar companions within 5\arcsec; these are KOI-12, 13, 94, 98, 111, 174, and 555.
We also note that the environment of KOI-854 has been scrutinized using HST/WFC3, but no companions were reported~\citep{Gilliland14}.
\subsection{Centroid analysis from \emph{Kepler}\ }
\label{sec:centroids}
The very high astrometric precision of \emph{Kepler}\ allows us to monitor the motion of the target's photocenter.
This provides an effective way of identifying false positives that are caused by EBs falling within the aperture.
We directly measure the source location {\it via} difference images to search for impostors based on scrutinizing pixels in the KOIs' aperture.
Difference image analysis is conducted based on the difference between average in-transit pixel images and average out-of-transit images.
A fit of the \emph{Kepler}\ pixel response function (PRF;~\citealt{Bryson10}) of both the difference and out-of-transit images directly provides the transit signal's location relative to the host star.
The difference images are measured separately in each quarter.
We estimate that the transit source location is the robust uncertainty-weighted average of the quarterly results.
\cite{Jenkins10a} and \cite{Bryson13} describe this technique.
Subsequent to our study, \cite{Bryson13} presented the centroid analyzes for the complete list of KOIs.
However, at the time of this study, the centroid analyzes have been performed only for a subset of the KOIs targeted in this work (see Table~\ref{tab:fpp}).
This analysis shows no significant offsets during transits in any quarter, the computed offsets are well within the radius of confusion (at the $3\sigma$ level).
This shows that the observed centroid locations are consistent with the transit occurring at the KOI locations.
Stars located at distances beyond the confusion radius from the targeted KOI are ignored since the centroid analysis would be confused by such stars and this would not yield accurate measurements. However, we note that bright stars can have PRF wings than can extend to over 100\arcsec\ and could therefore contaminate the main target~\citep{Coughlin14}.
\subsection{Faint limit condition}
\label{sec:faintlimit}
The faint limit condition corresponds to the faintest blended EB system than can reproduce the transit signal.
The blended system must comprise more than a fraction $\delta_{b}$ (as defined in Equation~\ref{eq:bdepth}) of the total flux within the \emph{Kepler}\ aperture.
This condition may be expressed as the following:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:blender}
m_{2\mathrm{lim},{\rm K}} - m_{1,{\rm K}} = \Delta m_K = -2.5 \log_{10}(\delta_{b}),
\end{equation}
\noindent where $m_{2\mathrm{lim},{\rm K}}$ is the apparent \emph{Kepler}\ magnitude of the blended binary system and $m_{1,{\rm K}}$ is the magnitude of the \emph{Kepler}\ targeted star.
This limit is such that no binary system fainter than $m_{2\mathrm{lim},{\rm K}}$ can possibly mimic a transit signal with a depth of $\delta$ given the primary star of \emph{Kepler}\ magnitude $m_{1,{\rm K}}$.
\section{False-Positive Probability}
\label{sec:FPP}
In this section, we compute the false positive probability for each KOI in our selected sample.
For any candidate, the rate of false positives relative to the rate of any event can be written as:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:fpp}
FPP=\frac{F_{FP}}{F_{FP}+F_{P}},
\end{equation}
where $F_{FP}$ is the estimated frequency of false positive scenarios (which depends on the local stellar density), and $F_P$ is the expected frequency of transiting planets for a given KOI.
Stars that are unable to reproduce the observables are removed using complementary observational constraints (e.g., centroid analysis, AO imaging, etc...).
We then compute the planet and false positive frequencies as described in the following sections and we finally derive the FPP for each object.
We present the FPP for each KOI observed with \emph{Spitzer}\ in Table~\ref{tab:fpp}.
Further details about the steps undertaken are given below.
\textit{\subsection{Planet Frequency}}
To estimate the likelihood of a planet, we rely on the list of candidates from Kepler.
We assume here that all the KOIs are true planets and that the period distribution of our \emph{Spitzer}\ sample follows, in first order, the period distribution of the KOIs.
The latest assumption is verified in Figure~\ref{fig:period_distribution} for the KOI distribution derived from~\cite{Batalha12}.
The KOIs are separated per period range using equal logarithmically spaced intervals.
We count the number of candidates that each period bin contains and divide by the total number of stars followed by \emph{Kepler}\ (156,453) to derive the planet frequency for a given bin.
Figure~\ref{fig:pf} shows the distribution of planet frequencies that we use in the calculation of the FPP for the KOIs we observed with \emph{Spitzer}.
\subsection{False-Positive Frequency}
In order to derive the $F_{FP}$ of a KOI, we must assess the likelihood of the various types of false positives, and also estimate the local stellar density.
We estimate the stellar density using a stellar population synthesis model of the Galaxy, the Besan\c{c}on model~\citep{Robin03}.
We use this model to derive the frequency of stars present in the photometric apertures around each KOI in our sample.
We adopt the stellar densities predicted by this model in the R band, which is a band sufficiently close to the \emph{Kepler}\ bandpass for our purposes.
Instead of estimating the stellar population in a cone around the line of sight of each KOI, we create a grid of 24 cells evenly spaced over \emph{Kepler}'s field of view (about one cell per \emph{Kepler}\ CCD module).
An aperture of 1~square degree centered on each cell of the grid is chosen for the initial estimate of stellar population.
We then perform stellar density calculations in half-magnitude bins of apparent brightness, from a R-magnitude of 5 down to magnitude 24.
We also account for interstellar extinction with a coefficient of 0.5~mag~kpc$^{-1}$ in $V$ band.
The number of stars that fall in the aperture of each grid varies between 30,000 and 1,400,000, depending on the Galactic latitude and longitude of the KOIs.
We derive the stellar population using the closest cell relative to the target.
In this way, we evaluate the expected number density of neighboring stars, and their mass distribution per square degree and per magnitude bin.
We then estimate the number of EBs amongst these neighbor stars that could potentially reproduce the signal detected in \emph{Kepler}.
It corresponds to the occurrence rate of binaries multiply by the probability that they undergo eclipses.
This rate has been measured in the \emph{Kepler}\ field~\citep{Prsa11,Slawson11}.
In particular, 1261 detached binary systems have been found from the first four months of observations with periods less than 125~days~\citep{Slawson11}.
These are the typical false positives of interest for our study.
Therefore, the frequency of EBs that we consider is $f_{\rm EB} = 1261/156,\!453 = 0.80\%$.
This frequency is computed from short period detached binaries and it depends on their period; it decreases below 0.80\% for longer periods.
Consequently, the uniform frequency of EBs that we use in this work is a conservative value.
This allows us to compute upper limits for the FPPs.
We note that this frequency includes eclipsing pairs in triple or higher multiplicity stellar systems.
Finally, the total blend frequency $F_{FP}$ that is inserted in Equation~\ref{eq:fpp} is found by combining the probabilities associated with all background or foreground binaries.
\subsection{Combining observational constraints to remove blended stars within the \emph{Kepler}\ apertures}
For each KOI in our sample, we use the density of stars in each magnitude bin determined using the population synthesis model.
We now calculate the fraction of these stars that would remain false positive candidates after taking into account the available observational constraints.
We describe below the method used in this task.
The first step uses the faint limit condition described in Section~\ref{sec:faintlimit}.
This removes all the stars that are too faint to reproduce the transit depths observed in the \emph{Kepler}\ photometry.
The remaining stars pass through the second step that combines high-resolution images of the target's neighborhood (AO observations) and centroid motion analyzes when available.
This provides the spatial extent considered for blend frequency calculations.
These constraints significantly decrease the size of the apertures that could hide a background or foreground binary: this is sometimes 5'' and often 2''.
Even though stars located at distances beyond 5'' can reproduce \emph{Kepler}\ signals~\citep{Coughlin14}, we assume for simplicity that all the stars that are beyond the limits found by the centroid method cannot mimic transit signals.
These stars are therefore excluded from the blend frequency calculations.
This step always removes the largest number of possible blend scenarios.
It is a very powerful tool for identifying background EBs blended with the target~\citep{Batalha10a}.
In a final third step, we use the constraints from the \emph{Spitzer}\ observations, the measured transit depths and magnitudes, as described in Section~\ref{sec:spconstraint}.
For each secondary star that survives the first two steps, we consider tertiary stars (EBs), ranging from 0.1 to 1.4 solar masses, and test the ratios of transit depths.
We compute the diluted ratio of the true transit depths for each scenario following Equation~\ref{eq:ratiodepth}.
We compare this ratio to its observed value for each mass of the chosen tertiary star.
If the calculated ratio is not consistent with the observed one, the tertiary star scenario is then rejected.
We also apply the constraint from the color ``\emph{Kepler}--\emph{Spitzer}'' $C_{\mathrm{KS}_{123}}$ as given by Equation~\ref{eq:color}.
We reject the tertiary star scenarios for which the calculated colors are not in agreement with the measured ones.
Overall, this third step allows us to remove most of the red dwarfs that could potentially remain as false positives.
We finally find the total blend frequency by combining the probabilities associated with all background or foreground star.
\section{Discussion}
\label{sec:discussion}
\subsection{Comparing the \emph{Kepler}\ and \emph{Spitzer}\ transit depths}
Figure~\ref{fig:depth} (top panel) shows the measured transit depths in the \emph{Spitzer}\ bandpass compared with those measured with \emph{Kepler}.
We find that 50\% of the sample have measured depths that agree within $1\sigma$, and that 85\% agree within $3\sigma$ (Figure~\ref{fig:depth}, bottom).
The distribution is therefore somewhat broader (by $\sim$20\%) than expected for a Gaussian with a standard deviation of unity, indicating that the \emph{Spitzer}\ and \emph{Kepler}\ transit depths for our KOIs are not all statistically consistent within their uncertainties. This may be caused by: (i) the presence of false positives in our sample; (ii) dilution from unresolved companion stars resulting in wavelength-dependent transit depths; or (iii) underestimated uncertainties in our measurement of the Spitzer transit depths. Below we present evidence that some of the KOIs do indeed suffer from dilution effects. Likewise, biases in determining reliable uncertainties for our \emph{Spitzer}\ measurements cannot be entirely ruled out, as they depend on our ability to correct the data for the main source of systematic errors, which is the intra-pixel sensitivity.
There are three candidates for which the transit depths measured from the \emph{Kepler}\ photometry are significantly deeper ($>4~\sigma$) than the depths measured from \emph{Spitzer}: KOI-12.01, KOI-13.01, KOI-94.01.
These objects are three Jupiter-size planet candidates out of the four from this family that we have in our sample.
Since we observed KOI-13.01 and KOI-94.01 with \emph{Spitzer}, these candidates have been confirmed as {\it bona fide} planets by \citet{Barnes11}, and \citet{Weiss13} respectively.
These three KOIs have known close-by companions which are located at closer than 1'', well within the \emph{Kepler}\ apertures and within the \emph{Spitzer}\ PSFs.
The host star KOI-13 is known to be part of a stellar binary system, both components being rapidly rotating A stars \citep{Szabo11, Barnes11}.
The companion is about 300~K cooler than the primary host star and is 0.3 magnitude fainter in the Kepler bandpass.
Similarly, the CFOP shows that KOI-12 is also a massive fast rotator star. Direct images of the close environment of KOI-12 reveal the presence of two fainter stars within 1'' of the primary host.
A low mass-star companion at 0\farcs 6 from KOI-94 has been detected and this explains the significant difference of measured transit depths~\citep{Takahashi13}.
The candidates with the largest discrepancies are KOI-82.01 and KOI-98.01 at the $3.7$ and $3.6 \sigma$ level, respectively. For KOI-98.01, the host star is known to have a stellar companion at 0\farcs 3 \citep{Buchhave11,Law13}. KOI-82 has no close by companion detected by AO~\citep{Marcy14}; we therefore attribute the discrepancy between \emph{Kepler}\ and \emph{Spitzer}\ to statistical fluctuations.
In general, the dilution produced by the presence of stars within the aperture of the KOI result in chromatic differences between the transit depths.
In the present cases, the flux contamination from the companion stars to the primary host targets, KOI-12, 94 and 13, vary with wavelength. The dilution is greater in the infrared compared to the visible as expected for cooler (redder) contaminants.
Because the contaminant stars contribute proportionally to more flux in the infrared compared to the visible, the dilution produced by their presence is larger at longer wavelengths.
This results in shallower measured transit depths in the \emph{Spitzer}\ bandpass compared to the \emph{Kepler}\ bandpass.
KOI-258.01 is the only observed candidate for which the lightcurve is not properly fitted by a transit planet model.
The \emph{Spitzer}\ and the \emph{Kepler}\ transit lightcurves exhibit a clear V-shape.
Such objects do not usually appear in the KOI list as they are flagged as false positives.
KOI-258.01 was ranked as a KOI early on in the mission before being removed.
The \emph{Kepler}\ project has since changed this target to an inactive mode as the primary star has two companions within 1.5" that are 2 to 3 magnitudes fainter in the K band.
However, by the time of this decision the order to execute the \emph{Spitzer}\ observation had already been given. For consistency we therefore choose to remove this object from the list of KOIs with computed FPPs.
\subsection{On the False Positive Rate}
\label{sec:onfpp}
As described in Section~\ref{sec:FPP}, we estimate the FPP for each individual candidate on this list and Table~\ref{tab:fpp} presents our results.
We find that half of the targets in our sample have a FPP which is lower than 1\% (see Fig.~\ref{fig:fpp}).
Using the distribution of FPP for the complete sample, we measure a median value of 1.3\%.
We calculate a robust estimate of the dispersion of the FPP distribution using the median absolute deviation as the initial guess, and then weighting points using Tukey's Biweight~\citep{Hoaglin1983}.
The dispersion of our distribution measured by this method is 2.5\%.
This leads to an upper limit for the FPR of 3.8\% at the $1 \sigma$ level, and of 8.8\% at the $3 \sigma$ level.
At present, the sample of this study represents only 2\% of the total candidates published so far~\citep{Batalha12}.
Therefore, extrapolating a \emph{Kepler}\ FPR from such a small sample should be done with caution.
Furthermore, our sample is not a uniform sample of KOIs as it can be divided into two categories.
The first category comprises the sub-sample of two thirds of the targets for which we have complementary observational constraints from direct imaging (AO) or \emph{Kepler}'s centroid measurements.
For this first sample, we measure a median FPR of 0.7\% with a robust estimate of the dispersion of 0.8\%.
The second category comprises the rest of the targets for which we have no other constraints other than the \emph{Kepler}\ depths and the \emph{Spitzer}\ photometry.
This is because we do not have the centroid analysis completed yet at the time of the work.
For this second sample, we measure a FPR lower than 24\% at $1 \sigma$ level, and we find that these FPPs vary between 5-to-43 \%.
The KOIs of our sample with the highest FPP values (e.g. KOI-137.01, 137.02 and 952.02) are indeed confirmed planets, which implies that their FPP is much lower than the values we can compute from the current study.
All of this leads towards a rather low value for the overall FPR of the \emph{Kepler}\ sample.
Finally, we note that 11 of the observed KOIs have FPPs $<$ 0.3\%.
This implies that these detected signals are at least 99.7\% consistent with planetary objects; these KOIs can be considered as ``validated'' at the $3 \sigma$ level of confidence.
We use two \emph{Spitzer}\ Science Exploration Programs for this study.
We measure a median FPR of 0.8\% with a dispersion of 0.9\% from the KOIs of our first \emph{Spitzer}\ program (60028).
This value becomes 14\%, with a dispersion of 9\%, for the 15 targets from our second program (80117).
This is a higher FPR compared to the value derived from the first \emph{Spitzer}\ program.
This is mainly because we do not have constraints from AO imaging nor from the \emph{Kepler}\ centroid analysis for these KOIs, unlike for most of the targets from the first program.
This higher FPR value is also because the targeted sample is mainly composed of M-dwarf hosts.
Low mass stars are usually faint in the \emph{Kepler}\ bandpass (13.5 $<$mag$_{\mathrm{Kep}}<$ 16), hence the faint magnitude limit (Equation~\ref{eq:blender}) allows for fainter, and hence more numerous, EBs to mimic the transit signal than for the brighter targets in our first program.
This higher FPR value is also because the second sample contains mainly small size planet candidates (super-Earth candidates) which typically have smaller transit depths.
It is expected that the FPP increases with magnitude and with decreasing galactic latitude, and we observe such trends in figure~\ref{fig:fppb}).
Furthermore, the faintness of M-stars also leads to a centroid analyzes with lower precisions, often prevents direct-imaging, and consequently contributes to a higher stellar blend frequency.
The stellar parameters that we use for this study are from \citet{Batalha12}. However, \citet{Huber13} recently updated the stellar properties using data from Quarter 1-16 and different observational techniques, but homogeneously extract the parameters from the Dartmouth stellar isochrones~\citep{Dotter08}.
We find that the changes in stellar masses correspond to 9\% in average compared to~\citet{Batalha12} for the KOIs used for this study.
There are five KOIs of our list with updated masses that decrease between 15\% and 30\% (KOI-104, 244, 252, 663, 899, and 947).
As noted by \citet{Huber13}, these are mainly low mass stars.
Six stars have their updated masses that increase by more than 15\% (KOI-13, 87, 98, 111, 446, and 1362).
Since the mass of the primary is kept fixed in our study, we look at two extreme cases of mass changes (KOI-252 and 87) in order to test the effect of these variations on our determination of the FPPs.
\citet{Huber13} reported a mass for KOI-252 of 0.5~M$_{\odot}$, a decrease of 30\%, and a mass for KOI-87 that is 20\% larger (0.98~M$_{\odot}$).
For these two objects, we compute and compare the apparent transit depth ratios with the old and with the new masses for the primary stars, and we estimate the variations of these ratios for different masses of secondaries and tertiaries (such as presented in Fig~\ref{fig:ratiodepthd}).
We find that with a decrease in the stellar mass of 30\% for a 0.65~M$_{\odot}$ (KOI-252), the apparent transit ratios decrease of no more than 30\% for any secondaries with masses lower than 1.2~M$_{\odot}$, and distance modulii of 5.
Therefore, a primary star with a lower updated mass results in a lower number of low mass stars that can be rejected in order to satisfy the constraint from the {\emph{Spitzer}} transit depth.
We compute the new FPP for KOI-252.01 considering the updated mass. We find that the FPP increases to 0.3\%, compared to 0.21\% with the previous mass.
Inversely, increasing the mass of the primary by 20\% (0.98~M$_{\odot}$, KOI-87) generates an increase in the apparent transit ratios of less than 30\% for any mass of the secondary that is lower than 1.2~M$_{\odot}$. The new FPP for this target goes down to 0.68\%.
We conclude that the new stellar masses computed by~\citet{Huber13} do not change significantly the FPPs of the KOIs that we have observed with {\emph{Spitzer}}.
The FPPs presented in the current study are slightly underestimated for the KOIs for which the updated masses have decreased compared to~\citet{Batalha12}, whereas they are slightly overestimated for the KOIs for which the reevaluated masses are increased.
Finally, the period distribution of the \emph{Spitzer}\ sample is skewed towards long period candidates compared to the distribution obtained from the list of KOIs (see Fig.~\ref{fig:period_distribution}).
This is because the second \emph{Spitzer}\ sample was selected to focus on the super-Earth candidates that orbit in or close to the habitable zone of their host stars.
Longer period KOIs are more difficult to characterize (less \emph{Kepler}\ transit events), therefore the skewed period distribution would tend to overestimate the FPR extrapolated from the \emph{Spitzer}\ measurements.
\subsection{Comparison with complementary studies}
\label{sec:complementstudies}
The majority of the KOIs presented here have already been the focus of more specific studies, and have been validated or confirmed as true planets (see Table~\ref{tab:fpp}).
A subset of planets have constraints on their masses either from radial velocity measurements or from TTVs measured from the \emph{Kepler}\ transit lightcurves \citep{Holman05,Agol05,Holman10}.
Furthermore, nearly half (22) of the KOIs that we selected are in multiple transiting systems.
Eleven of these systems have been validated by \citet{Rowe14} using statistical arguments from \citet{Lissauer12, Lissauer14} and Q1-Q8 \emph{Kepler}\ data.
Most of these systems were initially selected from the multiples in order to understand this relatively unexplored class of objects.
Others have companions that were discovered after their selection.
Since then, we now know that candidates in multiple systems have a very high probability to be planets as demonstrated by~\citet{Lissauer11,Lissauer12,Lissauer14}.
However, for the purposes of this study, we assume that we have no information other than the depths and magnitudes measured in the \emph{Kepler}\ and \emph{Spitzer}\ bandpasses, and the direct imaging observations when available.
In many cases the \emph{Kepler}\ team relies on the BLENDER procedure to assess the planetary nature of candidates in a statistical manner (e.g., Kepler-9d: \citealt{Torres11}, Kepler-11g: \citealt{Lissauer11}, and Kepler-10c: \citealt{Fressin11}).
BLENDER takes into account the detailed morphology of the transit to reject as many false positive scenarios as possible.
This approach is also used by other groups (e.g., \citealt{Nefs12,Diaz14}).
A candidate is considered validated when the likelihood of the signal being due to a true planet is much larger (by orders of magnitude) than the likelihood of a false positive.
Many of the steps followed in the present analysis are inspired by the BLENDER approach, but are simplified and adapted to our purposes.
In particular, we use here only the transit depth rather than its detailed shape to rule out blends.
In contrast to BLENDER, we adopt a single representative isochrone for all stars rather than different isochrones for the background binary and the target based on the measured spectroscopic properties.
This latter approximation has little impact on our results.
We test this for a sub-sample of our candidates for which we obtained spectroscopic reconnaissance of the main targets.
The sub-sample comprises some candidates that were used for BLENDER validation and have already been published (see Table~\ref{tab:fpp}).
For this subset, we determine the mass, radius, and age of the host star from a fit of the isochrones as described by \cite{Torres08}.
We compute a new FPP for each KOI in this subset.
We compare this value to the FPP computed using the standard isochrone for the primary, and have checked that they are very similar.
This is because most of the false positive scenarios are mainly ruled-out from the combination of the \emph{Kepler}\ photometry, the imaging and centroid information.
We also test the robustness of our method using isochrones of different ages for the secondary star instead of a standard isochrone.
The main motivation for this test is that a blended unassociated triple might have a component that is at a very different age from the primary.
We let the secondary isochrones range over all ages between 0.7 to 10 Gyr, while fixing the standard isochrone for the primary.
We find that the differences in the apparent transit depth ratios between \emph{Spitzer}\ and \emph{Kepler}\ (cf. Figure~\ref{fig:ratiodepthd}) vary from 10 to 30\% (in absolute) compared to the use of the standard isochrone for the secondary.
This difference depends on the mass of the secondary and tertiary, and it is partially degenerate with distance, which is a free parameter here.
In practice, this changes the blend frequency, and hence the FPP calculated in Section~\ref{sec:FPP} by only a small fraction.
The impact on the choice of isochrone ages for the secondary has also been tested by~\cite{Torres11} through the detailed study of the shape of transit light-curves using the BLENDER framework.
They find that the age of the secondary does not change significantly their estimate of the FPP.
Therefore, we conclude that using generic isochrones does not affect the overall conclusion of this paper that the FPR of our sample is low.
\citet{Fressin13} perform detailed numerical simulations of the \emph{Kepler}\ targets to predict the occurrence of astrophysical false positives, and its dependence on spectral type, candidate planet size, and orbital period.
They find that the global false positive rate of \emph{Kepler}\ is 9.4\%, peaking for giant planets (6--22\,$R_{\earth}$) at 17.7\%, reaching a low of 6.7\% for small Neptunes (2--4\,$R_{\earth}$), and increasing again for Earth-size planets (0.8--1.25\,$R_{\earth}$) to 12.3\%.
We compare these findings with the sample of candidates observed with \emph{Spitzer}\ that fall in a similar overall size range (1.25--22\,$R_{\earth}$).
From the FPR estimated by \citet{Fressin13}, we can conclude that it would be extremely unlikely that we find no false positives in a random sample of 51 KOIs observed with \emph{Spitzer}.
The difference between our findings and the results from~\citet{Fressin13} is explained by the fact that our \emph{Spitzer}\ sample underwent a much more stringent vetting procedure than typical KOIs.
Indeed, the estimated FPP for our sample is lower than 8.8\% at $3~\sigma$ level.
We now compare our findings to the study of~\cite{Morton11}.
These authors use the depths from the first 1235 KOIs reported from~\cite{Borucki11} together with generic assumptions and with the stellar population synthesis model TRILEGAL~\citep{Girardi05} to derive the FPP of all KOIs.
Their result was updated in \cite{Morton12} using the transit depths reported by~\cite{Batalha12}, and is based on 16 months of \emph{Kepler}\ observations.
The main steps employed in the current paper are similar to their approach.
One of the main differences is that we include color information on the transits depths, thanks to the \emph{Spitzer}\ observations (depths and magnitudes).
We also include constraints from direct imaging and centroids analyses when available.
Another difference is that our work focuses on a small number of KOIs, whereas~\cite{Morton11, Morton12} aim at evaluating the FPR of the complete sample of KOIs.
Despite these differences, we find that our study is in good agreement with the study from~\cite{Morton11}.
They predict that the FPR would be lower than 5\% for half of the KOIs, and lower than 10\% for most of them.
Their results are consistent with the value that we report from our independent observational survey.
Furthermore, we also find trends in agreement with their work for the FPP values as a function of Galactic latitude and \emph{Kepler}\ magnitude (see Figure~\ref{fig:fppkpb}).
There are other observational projects that address the question of the FPR in \emph{Kepler}.
The most comparable observational study to our project in terms of candidate sample size is the work of~\cite{Santerne12}.
They find a relatively high value for the FPR of 34.8\% $\pm$ 6.5\% for their sample of 33 KOIs.
However, there are several important differences between our approach and the one employed by~\cite{Santerne12}.
The first difference remains in the observational method that is used to constrain the FPP of individual targets.
Instead of using transit photometry, \cite{Santerne12} obtain radial velocity observations to establish the nature of the transiting candidates.
The second important difference concerns the selection of the candidates considered for follow-up observations.
They focus on the deepest short-period transit signals with high $SNR$ that \emph{Kepler}\ has detected.
Unlike for our study, \cite{Santerne12} restrict their targets to candidates with large transit depths that are greater than 0.4\%, and with short orbital periods lower than 25 days, and with host stars brighter than \emph{Kepler}\ magnitude 14.7.
This selection is obviously driven by instrumental capabilities.
Instead, we select our candidates from a wider range of candidate sizes, orbital periods, and magnitudes that had been vetted by the {\it CFOP}.
Moreover, some of the KOIs selected by~\cite{Santerne12} were noted as being slightly V-shaped from the \emph{Kepler}\ photometry in~\cite{Batalha12}, and these signals are considered as most likely due to EBs.
We emphasize that the FPR is expected to be greater for larger transit depths.
Therefore, one should expect a higher FPR for the family of giant planets.
The high FPR found in the sample of~\cite{Santerne12} is consistent with the findings of~\cite{Demory11} for which close-in candidates were also targeted.
\cite{Demory11} refine the photometric transit light curve analysis of 115 Kepler giant planet candidates based on photometric data from quarters Q0 to Q2.
These authors find that 14\% of these candidates are likely false positives based on the detections of their secondary eclipses.
Ground-based telescopes are also employed to examine the status of false-positives of a few KOIs using the same technique that we present here, i.e. color photometry.
\cite{Colon12} use the {\it GTC} telescope and observe transits of four short-period (P$<$6 days) planet candidates.
However, we note that the color photometric approach with ground-based instruments is limited to short period candidates for which the transit can be observed during the course of the night.
Furthermore, the amplitude of the color-dependent effects for false positive detection increases as the two bandpasses under consideration are further removed in wavelength.
Therefore, \emph{Spitzer}\ is better adapted compared to ground-based photometric false-positive searches.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
We present the results from two large observational campaigns, which were conducted with the \emph{Spitzer}\ Space Telescope, dedicated to estimating the {\it false positive rate} amongst a sample of \emph{Kepler}\ candidates.
We select a sub-sample of 51 candidates, spanning wide ranges in stellar, orbital and planetary parameter space, and we observe their transits with \emph{Spitzer}\ at 4.5~\micron.
We measure the transit depths of these candidates in the \emph{Spitzer}\ bandpass and compare them to the depths measured with \emph{Kepler}.
This technique allows us to derive the probability that a false-positive (blended eclipsing binaries) could mimic the transit-shape signal.
We estimate that 85\% of the KOIs from this sample have measured \emph{Kepler}\ and \emph{Spitzer}\ depths which agree at better than $3~\sigma$ level.
We use the \emph{Spitzer}\ observations to remove most of the red-dwarfs that could potentially remain as false positives.
By combining \emph{Spitzer}\ and follow-up observations, we estimate that the overall false positive rate of our sample is estimated to be 1.3\%, and lower than 8.8\% at 99.7\% of confidence.
This rate implies that the vetting procedures of the \emph{Kepler}\ data likely rule out a larger fraction of blends.
Extrapolating the empirical knowledge gained from this small sample to the overall \emph{Kepler}\ sample of candidates, we find that the overall false positive rate of the \emph{Kepler}\ sample is small. In this context, at least 90\% of the \emph{Kepler}\ signals could be of planetary origin.
\acknowledgments
We thank the anonymous reviewer for the careful reading of our manuscript and the valuable comments.
This work is based on observations made with \emph{Kepler}, which was competitively selected as the tenth Discovery mission. Funding for this mission is provided by NASA's Science Mission Directorate. The authors would like to thank the many people who generously gave so much their time to make this mission a success.
This work is also based on observations made with the \emph{Spitzer}\ {\it Space Telescope},
which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute
of Technology under a contract with NASA. Support for this work was provided by NASA through an award issued by JPL/Caltech.
DC acknowledges support for this work from grants NNX09AB53G and NNX12AC77G, and GT acknowledges support from grant NNX12AC75G and NNX14AB83G, each from the NASA Kepler Mission Participating Scientist Program.
DC acknowledges the support of a grant from the John Templeton Foundation. The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the John Templeton Foundation.
We would like to thank the Spitzer staff at IPAC and in particular Nancy Silbermann for scheduling the Spitzer observations of this program.
J.-M.D. and S.B. acknowledge the Sagan Exoplanet Fellowship program supported by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and administered by the NASA Exoplanet Science Institute (NExScI).
We thank Samaya Nissanke for careful reading of the manuscript.
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7in]{Figure1.eps}
\caption{Candidate radii as function of their orbital periods (black point) for all the {\it Kepler Object of Interests} (KOIs) presented in \cite{Batalha12}. Overplotted in red are the 51 KOIs that we targeted to estimate the {\it false positive rate} from \emph{Kepler}\ and that are presented in this paper. We observe these 51 objects during transit in the near-Infrared with \emph{Spitzer}. Our selected sample spans a wide range of periods and sizes.}
\label{fig:rpper}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6.5in]{Figure2.eps}
\caption{Example of a \emph{Spitzer}\ transit light-curve observed in the IRAC band-pass at 4.5~\micron: KOI-701.03. Top panel: raw (unbinned) transit light-curve. The red solid line corresponds to the best fit model which includes the time and position instrumental decorrelations as well as the model for the planetary transit (see details in Sect.~\ref{sec:spfollowup}). Bottom panel: corrected, normalized and binned by 30 minutes transit light-curve with the transit best-fit plotted in red and the transit shape (with no limb-darkening) expected from the \emph{Kepler}\ observations overplotted as a green line. The two models agree at 1~$\sigma$ level.}
\label{fig:spitzerlightcurves}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\setlength\fboxsep{17pt}
\setlength\fboxrule{0pt}
\fbox{\includegraphics[width=7.0in]{Figure3.eps}}
\caption{Transit lightcurves from the \emph{Spitzer}\ program 60028 (part-1/2). The lightcurves are obtained at 4.5~\micron\ with the IRAC instrument aboard \emph{Spitzer}. The data are corrected, normalized, binned in time, and combined (when multiple observations are available). The grey points are the measurements with their 1~$\sigma$ error-bars. The red solid lines correspond to the best fit model of the \emph{Spitzer}\ data (unbinned) as described in Sect.~\ref{sec:spfollowup}. The transit shapes expected from the \emph{Kepler}\ observations are overplotted as green lines. The planetary transit models are computed neglecting the effect from stellar limb-darkening. The name of the KOIs appear in each individual plot.}
\label{fig:spitzerlightcurvesA}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\setlength\fboxsep{17pt}
\setlength\fboxrule{0pt}
\fbox{\includegraphics[width=7.0in]{Figure4.eps}}
\caption{Transit lightcurves from the \emph{Spitzer}\ program 60028 (part-2/2). Same as Fig.\ref{fig:spitzerlightcurvesA}}
\label{fig:spitzerlightcurvesB}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\setlength\fboxsep{17pt}
\setlength\fboxrule{0pt}
\fbox{\includegraphics[width=7.0in]{Figure5.eps}}
\caption{Transit lightcurves from the \emph{Spitzer}\ program 80117. Same as Fig.\ref{fig:spitzerlightcurvesA}}
\label{fig:spitzerlightcurvesC}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics{Figure6.eps}
\caption{Ratios of the eclipse depth integrated in the \emph{Spitzer}\ photometric bandpass over the eclipse depth integrated in the \emph{Kepler}\ photometric bandpass as function of the mass of the tertiary star ($M_{3}$). These ratios are computed for an eclipsing binary stellar system composed of a secondary star of mass $M_{2}$ eclipsed by a tertiary stellar component (see Equation~\ref{eq:ratiotruedepth}). }
\label{fig:ratiodepth}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\includegraphics{Figure7.eps}
\caption{Ratios of the dilutions integrated in the \emph{Spitzer}\ photometric bandpass over the dilution integrated in the \emph{Kepler}\ photometric bandpass as a function of the mass secondary star ($M_{2}$) for an eclipsing binary stellar system. This system is composed of a secondary star eclipsed by a tertiary stellar component, that is blended with a primary star of mass $M_{1}$. Two scenarios of distance modulus $\mu$ are presented: $\mu=0$, implying that the binary system is equidistant to the primary star (HT: hierarchical triple), and $\mu=5$ for a background binary (EB: eclipsing binary) scenario. Three cases of $M_{1}$ are presented for reference (see Equation~\ref{eq:ratiodilut}).}
\label{fig:ratiodilut}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics{Figure8.eps}
\caption{Same as Figure~\ref{fig:ratiodepth}, but the eclipsing binary system is now blended with a primary star. These ratios are computed for an eclipsing binary stellar system composed of a secondary star of mass $M_{2}$ eclipsed by a tertiary stellar component that is blended with a primary star of solar mass ($M_{1}$=1). See Equation~\ref{eq:ratiodepth} for more details.}
\label{fig:ratiodepthd}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics{Figure9.eps}
\caption{ Color (\emph{Kepler}- \emph{Spitzer}) difference between the combination of the two stars (primary and secondary) as a function of the mass $M_{2}$ of the secondary. The calculations are presented for three mass scenarios for the primary star. The black curves represent the color differences for a secondary star equidistant to the primary (HT scenario) and the red curves are for a background secondary at a distance modulus from the primary corresponding to 1~magnitude.}
\label{fig:color}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics{Figure10.eps}
\caption{Normalized period distribution of the KOIs (in black) and the \emph{Spitzer}\ sample (in red). The KOI distribution is derived from~\cite{Batalha12}. The vertical dashed lines correspond to the median value of each distribution. The two distributions are broadly consistent, except at the very shortest orbital periods.}
\label{fig:period_distribution}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics{Figure11.eps}
\caption{Transiting planet frequency distribution as function of period bins (in logarithmic scale). The distribution is derived from the list of KOIs published in~\cite{Batalha12}, assuming that all the detected signals are of planetary origin.}
\label{fig:pf}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6in]{Figure12a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=6in]{Figure12b.eps}
\caption{{\bf Top:} Transit depths measured from the \emph{Spitzer}\ 4.5~\micron\ lightcurves (red histogram) compared to their depths measured in the \emph{Kepler}\ bandpass (black histogram) for 50 KOIs targeted in this program. The error bars on the \emph{Spitzer}\ measurements correspond to $1~\sigma$ uncertainties. The targets are ordered by increasing transit depths measured from \emph{Kepler}\ towards the right. {\bf Bottom:} Distribution of the significance of the apparent transit depth differences measured between \emph{Kepler}\ and \emph{Spitzer}. The vertical dotted red line highlights the $3~\sigma$ uncertainties; it encompasses $85\%$ of the candidates. Two KOIs with differences greater than $6~\sigma$ do not appear on this figure (KOI-12.01 and 13.01). The difference in the apparent transit depths is not corrected for dilution caused by the presence of a close-by companion.}
\label{fig:depth}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics{Figure13.eps}
\caption{Ratios of the transit depths measured from the \emph{Spitzer}\ 4.5~\micron\ lightcurves ($+3~\sigma$) to the transit depths measured in the \emph{Kepler}\ bandpass for 50 KOIs targeted in this program. The KOIs are ordered similarly to Figure~\ref{fig:depth}: increasing transit depths from \emph{Kepler}\ towards the right.}
\label{fig:fpp}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics{Figure14.eps}
\caption{Histogram distribution of the False Positive Probability (FPP) of the \emph{Kepler}\ candidates (KOIs) that we observed with \emph{Spitzer}. Half of the overall sample has a FPP$<1\%$. The vertical dashed line shows the 3$\sigma$ upper limit of the FPR (8.8\%) of the KOIs we present in this project (see Section~\ref{sec:onfpp}).}
\label{fig:fpp}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6in]{Figure15a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=6in]{Figure15b.eps}
\caption{{\bf Top:} False Positive Probability (FPP) for each \emph{Kepler}\ candidate (KOI) that we followed-up with \emph{Spitzer}\ as a function of the target star's Galactic latitude. {\bf Bottom:} FPP as a function of the \emph{Kepler}\ magnitude. The overall FPPs increase as the \emph{Kepler}\ magnitude increases and the Galactic latitude decreases.}
\label{fig:fppb}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics{Figure16.eps}
\caption{False Positive Probability (FPP) for each \emph{Kepler}\ candidate (KOI) that we followed-up with \emph{Spitzer}\ as a function of the target star's Galactic latitude and \emph{Kepler}\ magnitude. The radii of the circles increase linearly as a function of the FPP value (largest circles for the largest FPP). The filled circle in red colors correspond to the targets for which the FPP is lower than 0.3\%, which could be considered as validated at $3~\sigma$ level of confidence. These validated planets represent one fourth of the overall sample. The FPP clearly increases towards the bottom-right corner as expected.}
\label{fig:fppkpb}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\newpage
\newpage
\begin{center}
\begin{deluxetable*}{cccccc}
\tablewidth{0pc}
\tablecaption{Measurements from \emph{Spitzer}\ observations of program ID 60028.
\label{tab:spitzer2}}
\tablehead{
\colhead{KOI} &
\colhead{AOR} &
\colhead{Magnitude} &
\colhead{Flux} &
\colhead{Depth$_{Kepler}$} &
\colhead{Depth$_{Spitzer}$} \\
\colhead{} &
\colhead{} &
\colhead{} &
\colhead{(mJy)} &
\colhead{(\%)} &
\colhead{(\%)}
}
\startdata
12.01 & r39525120 & $10.183\pm0.005$ & $15.179\pm0.168$ & $0.9271\pm0.0019$ & $0.688^{+0.012}_{-0.011}$ \\
13.01 & r39525376 & $9.397\pm0.002$ & $31.305\pm0.115$ & $0.4646\pm0.0031$ & $0.228^{+0.011}_{-0.011}$ \\
42.01 & r41010688 & $8.084\pm0.003$ & $104.939\pm0.753$ & $0.0334\pm0.0004$ & $0.018^{+0.005}_{-0.005}$ \\
69.01 & r41009920 & $8.331\pm0.003$ & $83.561\pm0.640$ & $0.0271\pm0.0003$ & $0.007^{+0.008}_{-0.006}$ \\
69.01 & r41010432 & $8.332\pm0.004$ & $83.489\pm0.768$ & $0.0271\pm0.0003$ & $0.009^{+0.008}_{-0.007}$ \\
70.01 & r41165824 & $10.855\pm0.006$ & $8.176\pm0.119$ & $0.1028\pm0.0021$ & $0.057^{+0.022}_{-0.023}$ \\
70.03 & r39437568 & $10.834\pm0.012$ & $8.337\pm0.221$ & $0.0829\pm0.0019$ & $0.055^{+0.016}_{-0.017}$ \\
70.03 & r41164544 & $10.841\pm0.015$ & $8.283\pm0.289$ & $0.0829\pm0.0019$ & $0.062^{+0.016}_{-0.016}$ \\
72.02 & r39369984 & $9.462\pm0.007$ & $29.484\pm0.449$ & $0.0497\pm0.0005$ & $0.032^{+0.008}_{-0.008}$ \\
72.02 & r39369216 & $9.476\pm0.016$ & $29.115\pm1.076$ & $0.0497\pm0.0005$ & $0.033^{+0.010}_{-0.010}$ \\
82.01 & r39420672 & $9.353\pm0.003$ & $32.605\pm0.258$ & $0.0949\pm0.0034$ & $0.056^{+0.010}_{-0.010}$ \\
82.02 & r39419904 & $9.348\pm0.003$ & $32.748\pm0.207$ & $0.0271\pm0.0011$ & $0.038^{+0.011}_{-0.011}$ \\
82.02 & r39437056 & $9.353\pm0.004$ & $32.617\pm0.283$ & $0.0271\pm0.0011$ & $0.018^{+0.012}_{-0.011}$ \\
84.01 & r39369472 & $10.295\pm0.005$ & $13.689\pm0.167$ & $0.0698\pm0.0016$ & $0.110^{+0.020}_{-0.022}$ \\
84.01 & r39370240 & $10.305\pm0.003$ & $13.573\pm0.100$ & $0.0698\pm0.0016$ & $0.016^{+0.017}_{-0.013}$ \\
84.01 & r41165312 & $10.312\pm0.004$ & $13.481\pm0.123$ & $0.0698\pm0.0016$ & $0.070^{+0.019}_{-0.018}$ \\
94.01 & r39421440 & $10.954\pm0.012$ & $7.463\pm0.210$ & $0.5745\pm0.0016$ & $0.478^{+0.017}_{-0.017}$ \\
98.01 & r39421184 & $10.991\pm0.004$ & $7.213\pm0.072$ & $0.2276\pm0.0006$ & $0.170^{+0.016}_{-0.016}$ \\
103.01 & r39366400 & $11.032\pm0.006$ & $6.944\pm0.091$ & $0.0821\pm0.0114$ & $0.069^{+0.028}_{-0.028}$ \\
103.01 & r39366144 & $11.013\pm0.012$ & $7.067\pm0.192$ & $0.0821\pm0.0114$ & $0.075^{+0.025}_{-0.026}$ \\
104.01 & r39420160 & $10.601\pm0.004$ & $10.327\pm0.096$ & $0.1501\pm0.0219$ & $0.081^{+0.039}_{-0.043}$ \\
104.01 & r41163776 & $10.586\pm0.004$ & $10.474\pm0.103$ & $0.1501\pm0.0219$ & $0.154^{+0.039}_{-0.039}$ \\
137.01 & r39365888 & $11.755\pm0.014$ & $3.567\pm0.116$ & $0.2292\pm0.0054$ & $0.168^{+0.037}_{-0.040}$ \\
137.02 & r39369728 & $11.901\pm0.023$ & $3.119\pm0.164$ & $0.3235\pm0.0087$ & $0.371^{+0.046}_{-0.049}$ \\
157.03 & r41197568 & $12.196\pm0.022$ & $2.378\pm0.117$ & $0.1401\pm0.0047$ & $0.046^{+0.040}_{-0.035}$ \\
157.03 & r41197312 & $12.194\pm0.017$ & $2.381\pm0.091$ & $0.1401\pm0.0047$ & $0.138^{+0.040}_{-0.039}$ \\
244.01 & r39437312 & $9.519\pm0.003$ & $27.997\pm0.221$ & $0.1188\pm0.0012$ & $0.125^{+0.012}_{-0.013}$ \\
244.02 & r39438848 & $9.494\pm0.006$ & $28.630\pm0.422$ & $0.0400\pm0.0003$ & $0.041^{+0.011}_{-0.011}$ \\
244.02 & r39439104 & $9.483\pm0.002$ & $28.926\pm0.137$ & $0.0400\pm0.0003$ & $0.011^{+0.011}_{-0.009}$ \\
244.02 & r41165568 & $9.497\pm0.005$ & $28.547\pm0.310$ & $0.0400\pm0.0003$ & $0.043^{+0.011}_{-0.012}$ \\
245.01 & r39420928 & $8.084\pm0.010$ & $104.914\pm2.426$ & $0.0607\pm0.0017$ & $0.051^{+0.009}_{-0.009}$ \\
245.01 & r41009664 & $7.865\pm0.002$ & $128.432\pm0.526$ & $0.0607\pm0.0017$ & $0.049^{+0.005}_{-0.005}$ \\
246.01 & r41009408 & $8.538\pm0.005$ & $69.088\pm0.773$ & $0.0350\pm0.0003$ & $0.056^{+0.007}_{-0.007}$ \\
246.01 & r41010176 & $8.533\pm0.005$ & $69.385\pm0.769$ & $0.0350\pm0.0003$ & $0.035^{+0.007}_{-0.007}$ \\
247.01 & r39368704 & $11.017\pm0.010$ & $7.042\pm0.165$ & $0.0992\pm0.0241$ & $0.056^{+0.038}_{-0.037}$ \\
247.01 & r39368448 & $11.013\pm0.022$ & $7.071\pm0.350$ & $0.0992\pm0.0241$ & $0.105^{+0.034}_{-0.035}$ \\
247.01 & r41164032 & $11.034\pm0.006$ & $6.935\pm0.096$ & $0.0992\pm0.0241$ & $0.089^{+0.048}_{-0.046}$ \\
248.01 & r39370496 & $12.276\pm0.128$ & $2.210\pm0.564$ & $0.1762\pm0.0187$ & $0.078^{+0.052}_{-0.051}$ \\
248.01 & r41165056 & $12.280\pm0.027$ & $2.200\pm0.132$ & $0.1762\pm0.0187$ & $0.135^{+0.049}_{-0.050}$ \\
248.02 & r39366912 & $12.298\pm0.024$ & $2.165\pm0.115$ & $0.1048\pm0.0182$ & $0.086^{+0.057}_{-0.056}$ \\
248.02 & r39367168 & $12.278\pm0.015$ & $2.204\pm0.075$ & $0.1048\pm0.0182$ & $0.087^{+0.061}_{-0.059}$ \\
248.02 & r39366656 & $12.269\pm0.022$ & $2.224\pm0.109$ & $0.1048\pm0.0182$ & $0.218^{+0.071}_{-0.077}$ \\
249.01 & r39419648 & $11.016\pm0.005$ & $7.052\pm0.074$ & $0.1640\pm0.0020$ & $0.174^{+0.032}_{-0.033}$ \\
249.01 & r39421952 & $11.016\pm0.005$ & $7.052\pm0.074$ & $0.1640\pm0.0020$ & $0.106^{+0.030}_{-0.032}$ \\
250.02 & r41197056 & $12.521\pm0.039$ & $1.763\pm0.153$ & $0.1896\pm0.0103$ & $0.108^{+0.066}_{-0.069}$ \\
250.02 & r41196800 & $12.513\pm0.040$ & $1.776\pm0.158$ & $0.1896\pm0.0103$ & $0.280^{+0.063}_{-0.067}$ \\
250.02 & r41196544 & $12.530\pm0.028$ & $1.749\pm0.107$ & $0.1896\pm0.0103$ & $0.105^{+0.068}_{-0.071}$ \\
251.01 & r39437824 & $11.485\pm0.012$ & $4.578\pm0.127$ & $0.2228\pm0.0425$ & $0.280^{+0.041}_{-0.041}$ \\
251.01 & r41164800 & $11.461\pm0.010$ & $4.681\pm0.110$ & $0.2228\pm0.0425$ & $0.315^{+0.075}_{-0.083}$ \\
252.01 & r39421696 & $12.489\pm0.029$ & $1.815\pm0.117$ & $0.2157\pm0.0726$ & $0.152^{+0.051}_{-0.052}$ \\
252.01 & r41166336 & $12.488\pm0.023$ & $1.818\pm0.093$ & $0.2157\pm0.0726$ & $0.187^{+0.047}_{-0.049}$ \\
253.01 & r41440256 & $12.318\pm0.010$ & $2.125\pm0.048$ & $0.1747\pm0.1242$ & $0.094^{+0.066}_{-0.068}$ \\
255.01 & r39420416 & $11.998\pm0.015$ & $2.853\pm0.094$ & $0.2393\pm0.0636$ & $0.143^{+0.039}_{-0.039}$ \\
260.02 & r39438080 & $9.320\pm0.004$ & $33.626\pm0.304$ & $0.0346\pm0.0006$ & $0.039^{+0.007}_{-0.007}$ \\
271.01 & r39439360 & $10.236\pm0.007$ & $14.464\pm0.241$ & $0.0350\pm0.0008$ & $0.013^{+0.015}_{-0.011}$ \\
271.01 & r41166080 & $10.236\pm0.009$ & $14.463\pm0.293$ & $0.0350\pm0.0008$ & $0.005^{+0.011}_{-0.005}$ \\
273.01 & r39368192 & $9.953\pm0.002$ & $18.763\pm0.078$ & $0.0297\pm0.0101$ & $0.029^{+0.024}_{-0.022}$ \\
273.01 & r39367680 & $9.965\pm0.012$ & $18.558\pm0.496$ & $0.0297\pm0.0101$ & $0.041^{+0.020}_{-0.022}$ \\
273.01 & r39367424 & $9.959\pm0.004$ & $18.661\pm0.169$ & $0.0297\pm0.0101$ & $0.029^{+0.019}_{-0.020}$ \\
314.01 & r44144384 & $9.322\pm0.003$ & $33.568\pm0.234$ & $0.0740\pm0.0139$ & $0.101^{+0.020}_{-0.021}$ \\
365.01 & r40252928 & $9.620\pm0.004$ & $25.504\pm0.211$ & $0.0656\pm0.0039$ & $0.086^{+0.010}_{-0.011}$ \\
365.01 & r40252672 & $9.616\pm0.009$ & $25.603\pm0.528$ & $0.0656\pm0.0039$ & $0.078^{+0.010}_{-0.010}$ \\
\enddata
\label{tab:spitzer1}
\end{deluxetable*}
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{deluxetable*}{cccccc}
\tablewidth{0pc}
\tablecaption{Measurements from \emph{Spitzer}\ observations of program ID 80117.
\label{tab:spitzer2}}
\tablehead{
\colhead{KOI} &
\colhead{AOR} &
\colhead{Magnitude} &
\colhead{Flux} &
\colhead{Depth$_{Kepler}$} &
\colhead{Depth$_{Spitzer}$} \\
\colhead{} &
\colhead{} &
\colhead{} &
\colhead{(mJy)} &
\colhead{(\%)} &
\colhead{(\%)}
}
\startdata
87.01 & r44159488 & $10.128\pm0.004$ & $15.965\pm0.163$ & $0.0492\pm0.0075$ & $0.008^{+0.012}_{-0.007}$ \\
111.03 & r44162048 & $11.206\pm0.017$ & $5.916\pm0.229$ & $0.0616\pm0.0012$ & $0.094^{+0.025}_{-0.026}$ \\
174.01 & r44162560 & $11.515\pm0.011$ & $4.453\pm0.115$ & $0.1039\pm0.0026$ & $0.120^{+0.036}_{-0.038}$ \\
174.01 & r44162304 & $11.508\pm0.024$ & $4.483\pm0.238$ & $0.1039\pm0.0026$ & $0.098^{+0.032}_{-0.034}$ \\
446.02 & r44161024 & $12.042\pm0.023$ & $2.739\pm0.142$ & $0.0920\pm0.0365$ & $0.213^{+0.060}_{-0.059}$ \\
446.02 & r44161536 & $12.033\pm0.046$ & $2.764\pm0.278$ & $0.0920\pm0.0365$ & $0.118^{+0.051}_{-0.054}$ \\
446.02 & r44160768 & $12.047\pm0.028$ & $2.727\pm0.170$ & $0.0920\pm0.0365$ & $0.032^{+0.050}_{-0.030}$ \\
555.02 & r44162816 & $12.969\pm0.136$ & $1.166\pm0.313$ & $0.0937\pm0.0030$ & $0.103^{+0.051}_{-0.053}$ \\
663.02 & r44159232 & $10.751\pm0.014$ & $9.002\pm0.286$ & $0.0693\pm0.0083$ & $0.104^{+0.026}_{-0.026}$ \\
663.02 & r44158720 & $10.765\pm0.007$ & $8.882\pm0.142$ & $0.0693\pm0.0083$ & $0.083^{+0.029}_{-0.030}$ \\
701.03 & r44163840 & $11.630\pm0.016$ & $4.003\pm0.145$ & $0.0719\pm0.0108$ & $0.100^{+0.026}_{-0.026}$ \\
711.03 & r44158976 & $12.313\pm0.098$ & $2.135\pm0.430$ & $0.0698\pm0.0029$ & $0.068^{+0.037}_{-0.038}$ \\
817.01 & r44160512 & $12.216\pm0.053$ & $2.334\pm0.268$ & $0.1122\pm0.0576$ & $0.058^{+0.080}_{-0.051}$ \\
817.01 & r44160256 & $12.211\pm0.027$ & $2.344\pm0.140$ & $0.1122\pm0.0576$ & $0.073^{+0.076}_{-0.062}$ \\
854.01 & r44164864 & $12.363\pm0.027$ & $2.039\pm0.125$ & $0.1694\pm0.1658$ & $0.043^{+0.048}_{-0.035}$ \\
854.01 & r44164352 & $12.363\pm0.117$ & $2.039\pm0.483$ & $0.1694\pm0.1658$ & $0.162^{+0.048}_{-0.052}$ \\
899.03 & r44165376 & $11.743\pm0.011$ & $3.609\pm0.092$ & $0.0762\pm0.0214$ & $0.057^{+0.041}_{-0.040}$ \\
899.03 & r44165632 & $11.736\pm0.021$ & $3.633\pm0.171$ & $0.0762\pm0.0214$ & $0.137^{+0.044}_{-0.045}$ \\
899.03 & r44166144 & $11.748\pm0.020$ & $3.594\pm0.160$ & $0.0762\pm0.0214$ & $0.122^{+0.046}_{-0.048}$ \\
947.01 & r44164608 & $11.889\pm0.025$ & $3.154\pm0.175$ & $0.1607\pm0.0177$ & $0.113^{+0.041}_{-0.047}$ \\
947.01 & r44165120 & $11.898\pm0.021$ & $3.128\pm0.146$ & $0.1607\pm0.0177$ & $0.124^{+0.051}_{-0.053}$ \\
952.03 & r44159744 & $12.604\pm0.037$ & $1.633\pm0.134$ & $0.1939\pm0.0543$ & $0.146^{+0.065}_{-0.066}$ \\
952.03 & r44160000 & $12.602\pm0.034$ & $1.635\pm0.123$ & $0.1939\pm0.0543$ & $0.324^{+0.065}_{-0.066}$ \\
1199.01 & r44166400 & $12.681\pm0.134$ & $1.520\pm0.403$ & $0.1039\pm0.0625$ & $0.085^{+0.044}_{-0.047}$ \\
1361.01 & r44161280 & $12.224\pm0.061$ & $2.316\pm0.302$ & $0.1419\pm0.0198$ & $0.104^{+0.044}_{-0.047}$ \\
\enddata
\label{tab:spitzer2}
\end{deluxetable*}
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{deluxetable*}{ccccccccc}
\tablewidth{0pc}
\tablecaption{FPP results.
\label{tab:fpp}}
\tablehead{
\colhead{KOI} &
\colhead{\ensuremath{\sigma_{\rm K-S}}} &
\colhead{Gal. long} &
\colhead{Gal. lat} &
\colhead{Magnitude} &
\colhead{AO} &
\colhead{Centroid} &
\colhead{FPP} &
\colhead{comments} \\
\colhead{} &
\colhead{(*)} &
\colhead{l (deg)} &
\colhead{b (deg)} &
\colhead{(Kepler)} &
\colhead{(**)} &
\colhead{(**)} &
\colhead{(\%)} &
\colhead{}
}
\startdata
12.01 & 19.7 & 75.50 & 7.47 & 11.35 & n & y & 0.40 & \\
13.01 & 20.7 & 77.51 & 16.81 & 9.96 & y & n & 0.02 & Kepler-13b \cite{Barnes11}\\
42.01 & 3.1 & 74.81 & 18.66 & 9.36 & y & n & 0.20 & Kepler-410A b \cite{VanEylen14}\\
69.01 & 3.4 & 71.20 & 10.46 & 9.93 & y & n & 0.67 & Kepler-93b \cite{Ballard14}\\
70.01 & 2.0 & 73.38 & 14.57 & 12.50 & y & n & 0.19 & Kepler-20b \cite{Gautier12}\\
70.03 & 2.0 & 73.38 & 14.57 & 12.50 & y & n & 0.56 & Kepler-20c \cite{Gautier12}\\
72.02 & 2.8 & 80.49 & 18.82 & 10.96 & y & n & 0.06 & Kepler-10c \cite{Fressin11}\\
82.01 & 3.7 & 76.48 & 20.43 & 11.49 & y & n & 0.12 & Kepler-102e \cite{Marcy14}\\
82.02 & 0.2 & 76.48 & 20.43 & 11.49 & y & n & 0.76 & Kepler-102d \cite{Marcy14}\\
84.01 & 0.9 & 70.10 & 10.80 & 11.90 & y & n & 2.62 & Kepler-19b \cite{Ballard11} \\
94.01 & 5.7 & 76.23 & 7.98 & 12.20 & y & n & 0.86 & Kepler-89d \cite{Weiss13} \\
98.01 & 3.6 & 78.15 & 16.52 & 12.13 & y & n & 0.07 & Kepler-14b \cite{Buchhave11} \\
103.01 & 0.4 & 70.46 & 9.86 & 12.59 & y & n & 2.85 & TTVs\\
104.01 & 0.8 & 76.71 & 20.71 & 12.90 & y & n & 0.98 & Kepler-94b \cite{Marcy14} \\
137.01 & 1.5 & 79.01 & 8.92 & 13.55 & n & n & 25.88 & Kepler-18c \cite{Cochran11} \\
137.02 & 0.9 & 79.01 & 8.92 & 13.55 & n & n & 22.86 & Kepler-18d \cite{Cochran11} \\
157.03 & 1.7 & 76.16 & 8.13 & 13.71 & n & y & 6.40 & Kepler-11b \cite{Lissauer11} \\
244.01 & 0.5 & 70.35 & 14.16 & 10.73 & y & n & 0.24 & Kepler-25c \cite{Steffen12} \\
244.02 & 1.3 & 70.35 & 14.16 & 10.73 & y & n & 0.66 & Kepler-25b \cite{Steffen12} \\
245.01 & 2.4 & 74.44 & 17.84 & 9.71 & y & n & 0.11 & Kepler-37b \cite{Barclay13} \\
246.01 & 2.1 & 80.69 & 15.15 & 10.00 & y & n & 0.61 & Kepler-68b \cite{Gilliland13} \\
247.01 & 0.5 & 80.24 & 19.19 & 14.22 & y & n & 0.68 & \\
248.01 & 1.7 & 73.26 & 10.71 & 15.26 & n & y & 1.13 & Kepler-49b \cite{Steffen13} \\
248.02 & 0.3 & 73.26 & 10.71 & 15.26 & n & y & 1.32 & Kepler-49c \cite{Steffen13} \\
249.01 & 1.1 & 76.09 & 17.79 & 14.49 & y & n & 2.51 & \\
250.02 & 0.5 & 76.68 & 17.99 & 15.47 & n & n & 7.98 & Kepler-26c \cite{Steffen12} \\
251.01 & 1.1 & 81.59 & 10.22 & 14.75 & y & n & 3.59 & Kepler-125b \cite{Rowe14} \\
252.01 & 0.6 & 80.31 & 15.44 & 15.61 & n & y & 0.21 & \\
253.01 & 0.6 & 80.19 & 18.78 & 15.25 & n & n & 6.08 & \\
255.01 & 1.3 & 73.62 & 14.55 & 15.11 & n & y & 1.20 & \\
260.02 & 0.6 & 75.64 & 14.23 & 10.50 & y & n & 1.89 & Kepler-126d \cite{Rowe14} \\
271.01 & 3.0 & 76.22 & 17.64 & 11.48 & y & n & 0.12 & Kepler-127d \cite{Rowe14} \\
273.01 & 0.2 & 69.44 & 13.05 & 11.46 & y & n & 0.72 & \\
314.01 & 1.1 & 75.11 & 13.17 & 12.93 & n & n & 9.54 & Kepler-138c \cite{Rowe14} \\
365.01 & 1.9 & 83.14 & 11.64 & 11.19 & y & n & 0.92 & \\
\\
\hline
\\
87.01 & 2.9 & 79.09 & 15.79 & 11.66 & y & n & 0.70 & Kepler-22b \cite{Borucki12} \\
111.03 & 1.2 & 73.19 & 14.57 & 12.60 & n & n & 5.87 & Kepler-104d \cite{Rowe14} \\
174.01 & 0.1 & 81.57 & 11.31 & 13.78 & n & n & 14.09 & \\
446.02 & 0.4 & 69.82 & 16.13 & 14.43 & n & n & 8.74 & Kepler-157b \cite{Rowe14} \\
555.02 & 0.2 & 73.86 & 10.31 & 14.76 & n & n & 34.51 & \\
663.02 & 1.2 & 72.20 & 16.03 & 13.51 & y & n & 6.19 & Kepler-205c \cite{Rowe14} \\
701.03 & 1.0 & 75.04 & 18.69 & 13.73 & n & n & 12.14 & Kepler-62e \cite{Borucki13} \\
711.03 & 0.1 & 79.45 & 11.29 & 13.97 & n & n & 22.19 & \\
817.01 & 0.6 & 69.88 & 16.29 & 15.41 & n & n & 10.44 & Kepler-236c \cite{Rowe14} \\
854.01 & 0.4 & 73.45 & 13.13 & 15.85 & n & n & 21.25 & \\
899.03 & 0.7 & 77.66 & 9.07 & 15.23 & n & n & 16.97 & Kepler-249d \cite{Rowe14} \\
947.01 & 1.1 & 78.48 & 13.56 & 15.19 & n & n & 12.40 & \\
952.03 & 0.6 & 80.54 & 9.96 & 15.80 & n & n & 42.18 & Kepler-32b \cite{Fabrycky12} \\
1199.01 & 0.2 & 72.28 & 8.97 & 14.89 & n & n & 19.32 & \\
1361.01 & 0.7 & 76.01 & 9.58 & 14.99 & y & n & 16.97 & Kepler-61b \cite{Ballard13} \\
\enddata
\label{tab:fpp}
\tablenotetext{*}{Difference between the \emph{Spitzer}\ and \emph{Kepler}\ apparent transit depths in unit of $\sigma$ from combined measurements. The differences are not corrected for dilution caused by the presence of a close-by stellar companions.}
\tablenotetext{**}{These columns indicate whether Information from the Adaptive-Optic imaging (AO) followup and \emph{Kepler}\ centroid analysis are available: "y" means that information is available and used in the study, "no" means that no information on AO and centroid have been used.}
\end{deluxetable*}
\end{center}
\clearpage
\newpage
|
\section{Introduction}
In tokamak physics, plasma equilibrium is a fundamental and essential element to understand not only the basic equilibrium properties but also various plasma phenomena such as MHD instabilities, plasma transport and turbulence, plasma flows and waves, and so on.
Therefore, various numerical or analytical equilibrium studies \cite{Takeda1991JCP} have been conducted for a long time since the axisymmetric plasma equilibrium relation was established in a general form, known as Grad-Shafranov equation \cite{Shafranov1958, Grad1958}.
Depending on the characteristics of applications, the studies can be categorized into two types of problems.
One, so called 'fixed boundary equilibrium', is solving an equilibrium assuming that the plasma boundary or plasma region is known.
So, the external equilibrium field is ignored and the internal equilibrium profiles and flux distributions are mainly concerned.
The other one, so called 'free boundary equilibrium', is solving the equilibrium with unknown plasma boundary.
Hence the plasma position and shape (i.e. plasma region) need to be obtained as a solution, in addition to those equilibrium profiles and flux distributions.
Due to the importance of equilibrium as a basis for various physics studies, the majority of equilibrium studies has been devoted to the fixed boundary equilibrium problems, while less interests given to the free boundary equilibrium solutions.
However, recently new demands for the free boundary equilibrium analysis have been arisen and turned out to be important.
For instance, another type of equilibria with new topological features, so called snow-flake (SF) divertor \cite{Ryutov2007PoP} or X-divertor \cite{Kotschen2007PoP} equilibria, have been proposed and actively studied in various devices \cite{Piras2009PPCF,Souk2011NF} recently.
Specially, since the SF divertor configuration requires a second-order zero of the poloidal magnetic field, it is now an important issue that should be addressed in terms of a free boundary tokamak equilibrium \cite{Lackner2013FST}.
Accordingly, a free boundary Tokamak Equilibrium Solver, called as TES, has been developed with an emphasis on applications to a design work of plasma equilibrium control and to advanced equilibrium study.
The developed TES code is featured by two distinctive functionalities; a generalized method for stabilization of axisymmetric instabilities, and an extension to deal with a second-order zero of the poloidal magnetic field.
In section \ref{sec:solution_method}, the numerical solution methods and procedures used in TES is described for two types of free boundary equilibrium problems, i.e., {\it ideally free} and {\it semi free} boundary problems that will be defined therein.
Most of numerical techniques and issues have been well known, so that only a brief description for each issues is given unless necessary.
For validations of TES code, a direct comparison with a generalized analytic solution is described in section \ref{sec:validation}, in addition to the uniqueness of a solution.
In section \ref{sec:stability}, an intrinsic axisymmetric instability, encountered after all during the numerical procedure, is tested by examining the variations of plasma equilibria, and a generalized stabilization method is introduced and tested.
In section \ref{sec:extension}, an extended feature to deal with a snowflake divertor is explained and discussed, followed by a summary and conclusion in section \ref{sec:conclusion}.
\section{A solution method in TES}
\label{sec:solution_method}
A basic numerical method and procedure of an axisymmetric tokamak plasma equilibrium with a free boundary condition has been well established \cite{Johnson1979JCP, Jardin1986JCP, Hofmann1988CPC}.
The mathematical and numerical treatments used in TES code is also basically in line with those in the references, except some improved and extended features.
Therefore, in this section, we describes the basic numerical treatments and procedures used in TES code briefly unless necessary.
\subsection{Force balance relation for free boundary plasma equilibrium}
In a toroidally axisymmetric system like a tokamak, the force balance relation of a plasma, i.e. plasma equilibrium, can be expressed by a second-order partial differential equation, known as Grad-Shafranov equation \cite{Shafranov1958, Grad1958}, using a cylindrical coordinate system $(R,\phi,Z)$ with an ignorable (due to axisymmetry) toroidal angle coordinate $\phi$.
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:Ampere}
\triangle ^*\psi(R,Z) &=& -\mu_0 R J_{\phi,pl} (R,Z) \\
\label{eq:GS}
J_{\phi,pl}(R,Z) &=& Rp'(\psi) + \dfrac{ F(\psi)F(\psi)' } {\mu_0 R }
\end{eqnarray}
where the poloidal flux function (equal to the actual poloidal magnetic flux divided by $2\pi$) is defined by $\psi(R,Z)\equiv RA_{\phi}(R,Z)$ from $B=\nabla \times A$ (i.e. $\nabla \cdot B=0$), the Shafranov operator defined by $\triangle ^* \equiv R^2 \nabla \cdot \genfrac{}{}{}{0} {\nabla}{R^2}$, and the prime denotes $g' \equiv \genfrac{}{}{}{0} {\partial g}{\partial \psi}$.
And $p(\psi)$ is an isotropic plasma pressure, $F(\psi) \equiv RB_{\phi}$ a toroidal field function, and $J_{\phi,pl}(R,Z)$ a toroidal current density of plasma.
Since the $J_{\phi,pl}(R,Z)$ as a source term in Eq. (\ref{eq:Ampere}) has a strong dependency on $\psi(R,Z)$ by Eq. (\ref{eq:GS}), it gives rise to a strong non-linearity on the equations.
In order to deal with a free boundary condition in equilibrium calculation, the Eq. (\ref{eq:Ampere}) is generalized by including arbitrary toroidal conductor currents as follows.
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:GSe}
\triangle ^*\psi(R,Z) &=& -\mu_0 R J_{\phi} (R,Z) \\
J_{\phi}(R,Z) &=& J_{\phi,pl}(R,Z) + J_{\phi,cond}(R,Z) \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $J_{\phi,cond}(R,Z)$ is the toroidal current density for a conductor.
The toroidal conductor could be any toroidal current source that can affect the equilibrium force balance, such as poloidal field (PF) coil currents or axisymmetric eddy currents on surrounding conductor structures.
Assuming discrete conductors with uniform current distributions inside, the toroidal conductor current density can be expressed by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:jcond}
J_{\phi,cond}(R,Z) &=& \sum^{N_{cond}}_{k=1}{ J_{cond,k}(R,Z) } \\
J_{cond,k}(R,Z) &=&
\begin{cases}
I_{cond,k}/S_{k} & \text{ if } (R,Z) \in \Omega_{cond,k} \nonumber \\
0 & \text{ Otherwise }
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray}
where $J_{cond,k}$, $I_{cond,k}$, $S_k$, and $\Omega_{cond,k}$ are the toroidal current density, the toroidal current, the cross-sectional area, and the domain region of k-th conductor, respectively.
Meanwhile, the toroidal current density of plasma $J_{\phi,pl}$ in Eq. (\ref{eq:GS}) can be set into a canonical form \cite{Albanese1998NF} as shown below
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:jpl}
J_{\phi,pl}(R,Z) =
\begin{cases}
\lambda \left[ \beta_0 \dfrac{R}{R_{geo}} + (1-\beta_0) \dfrac{R_{geo}}{R} \right]
\tilde{j}(\psi, \psi_a,\psi_b) & \text{ if } (R,Z) \in \Omega_{pl} \\
0 & \text{ Otherwise }
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray}
with $\tilde{j}(\psi,\psi_a,\psi_b) \equiv \left(1-\psi^{\alpha_m}_s \right)^{\alpha_n} $, where $R_{geo}$ is the major radius as a reference length scale, $\psi_a$ the flux per radian at the plasma magnetic axis, $\psi_b$ the flux per radian at the plasma boundary, and $\tilde{j}$ a suitable profile function.
The $\lambda$ and $\beta_0$ are adjustable variables to satisfy equilibrium constraints which will be discussed later, while the $\alpha_m$ and $\alpha_n$ are input variables specified by users.
Note that $J_{\phi,pl}(R,Z)$ is automatically set to zero at the plasma boundary in this form by using a normalized poloidal flux, $\psi_s \equiv (\psi-\psi_a)/(\psi_b-\psi_a)$.
In short, a free boundary plasma equilibrium can be obtained by solving Eq. (\ref{eq:GSe}) with a toroidal current density specified by Eqs. (\ref{eq:jcond}) and (\ref{eq:jpl}), and corresponding equilibrium profiles such as $p(\psi)$ and $F(\psi)$ can be obtained from Eqs. (\ref{eq:GS}) and (\ref{eq:jpl}).
\subsection{Numerical approximation by discretizations}
The governing equation described above, i.e. Eq. (\ref{eq:GSe}), can be thought as a 2D Poisson's equation in toroidal geometry, so that easily solved using various numerical methods if the source term is known.
For numerical treatments, the equation is converted to a linear algebraic equation by using the centered finite difference method (FDM) \cite{NR} on a rectangular computational domain in ($R,Z$) space,
where the grids, ($R_l,Z_j$), are built by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:gridrz}
R_l = R_{min}+ \Delta R \times (l-1),~~~
\Delta R \equiv (R_{max}-R_{min})/(N_R-1) \nonumber\\
Z_j = Z_{min}+ \Delta Z \times (j-1),~~~
\Delta Z \equiv (Z_{max}-Z_{min})/(N_Z-1)
\end{eqnarray}
with $l=1,\cdots,N_R$ and $j=1,\cdots,N_Z$. Then the algebraic equation converted by FDM can be expressed as follows.
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:linearGS}
\frac{1}{(\Delta Z)^2} \psi_{j-1,l}
&+& \left( \frac{1}{(\Delta R)^2} + \frac{1}{2R_l(\Delta R)} \right) \psi_{j,l-1}
- \left\{ 2 \left( \frac{1}{(\Delta R)^2} + \frac{1}{(\Delta Z)^2} \right) \right\} \psi_{j,l} \nonumber\\
&+& \left( \frac{1}{(\Delta R)^2} - \frac{1}{2R_l(\Delta R)} \right) \psi_{j,l+1}
+ \frac{1}{(\Delta Z)^2} \psi_{j+1,l} = - \mu_0 R_l J_{\phi j,l}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\psi_{j,l}= \psi(R_l,Z_j)$ and $J_{\phi j,l}= J_{\phi}(R_l,Z_j)$ with $l=2,\cdots,N_R-1$ and $j=2,\cdots,N_Z-1$.
This algebraic equation can be solved by either using a matrix inversion after reforming it in a form of ${\bf Ax=b}$ or using an iterative method such as multi-grid method \cite{NR} or double cyclic reduction \cite{Buneman}, with an appropriate boundary condition.
In TES code, the successive-over-relaxation (SOR) method \cite{NR} is used as a basic numerical scheme for the simplicity.
\subsection{Iterative solution for non-linearity}
To solve the Eq. (\ref{eq:linearGS}) in the given form, the source term on the right hand side should be known.
However, the plasma part of the source term has a strong nonlinear dependency on $\psi_{j,l}$ according to Eq. (\ref{eq:GS}) or (\ref{eq:jpl}).
To deal with this non-linearity, an iteractive method, known as Picard iteration \cite{EngMath}, is adopted.
Then, the Eq. (\ref{eq:linearGS}) is expressed as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:picard}
\frac{1}{(\Delta Z)^2} \psi^{(n)}_{j-1,l}
&+& \left( \frac{1}{(\Delta R)^2} + \frac{1}{2R_l(\Delta R)} \right) \psi^{(n)}_{j,l-1}
- \left\{ 2 \left( \frac{1}{(\Delta R)^2} + \frac{1}{(\Delta Z)^2} \right) \right\} \psi^{(n)}_{j,l} \nonumber\\
&+& \left( \frac{1}{(\Delta R)^2} - \frac{1}{2R_l(\Delta R)} \right) \psi^{(n)}_{j,l+1}
+ \frac{1}{(\Delta Z)^2} \psi^{(n)}_{j+1,l} \\
&=& - \mu_0 R_l J^{(n)}_{\phi j,l} \left( \psi^{(n-1)}_{j,l} \right) \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $(n)$ indicates the n-th Picard iteration.
Note that the source term in the n-th iteration, $J^{(n)}_{\phi j,l}$, is expressed as a function of $\psi^{(n-1)}_{j,l}$, i.e. the poloidal flux in the (n-1)th iteration.
Hence, the $\psi^{(n)}$ is obtained from Eq. (\ref{eq:picard}) using $J^{(n)}_{\phi}$ that was evaluated from $\psi^{(n-1)}$.
Then, the $J^{(n+1)}_{\phi}$ is updated using the refreshed $\psi^{(n)}$ and provided as a new source term into Eq. (\ref{eq:picard}).
This recursive iteration is continued until a convergence criterion, $\left\| \psi^{(n)}-\psi^{(n-1)} \right \| < \epsilon$, is satisfied.
\subsection{Boundary conditions}
In general, the boundary condition in free boundary equilibrium calculation is not constant and varied due to changes of plasma boundary and equilibrium profiles during the numerical iterations, while in a fixed boundary equilibrium it is fixed to zero ($\psi_{bc}=0$) usually.
The Dirichlet boundary condition on the edge of a computational domain can be provided directly by using a Green's function formulation \cite{Miyamoto}.
\begin{eqnarray}
\psi(R,Z)= \iint {G(R,Z;R',Z')J_{\phi}(R',Z')}dR'dZ'
\end{eqnarray}
where $G(R,Z;R',Z')$ is the free space Green's function which gives the poloidal flux at $(R,Z)$ from a unit toroidal current source at $(R',Z')$.
The free space Green's function is defined by
\begin{eqnarray}
G(R,Z;R',Z')&=&\dfrac{\mu_0}{2\pi}\dfrac{\sqrt{RR'}}{k}
\left[ \left( 2-k^2 \right ) K(k) - 2E(k)
\right] \nonumber\\
k^2 &\equiv & \dfrac{4RR'}{ \left( R+R' \right)^2 + \left( Z-Z' \right)^2 }
\end{eqnarray}
where $K(k)$ and $E(k)$ are elliptic integrals of the first and the second kind \cite{NR}, respectively.
Using this, the poloidal flux at the boundary of computational domain can be directly obtained by taking into account both plasma and conductor currents as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
\psi_{bndry}^{(n)}(R_b,Z_b) &=& \int_{\Omega_{pl}'} {G(R_b,Z_b;R',Z')J^{(n)}_{\phi,pl}(R',Z')}d\Omega_{pl}' \nonumber\\
&+&\int_{\Omega_{cond}'} {G(R_b,Z_b;R',Z')J^{(n)}_{\phi,cond}(R',Z')}d\Omega_{cond}'
\end{eqnarray}
where $(R_b,Z_b)$ is the boundary point of the computational domain.
Note that $J^{(n)}_{\phi,pl}(R',Z')$ is varied in every steps of Picard iterations, while $J^{(n)}_{\phi,cond}(R',Z')$ is not changed unless the plasma boundary is specified, which will be discussed later.
\subsection{Determination of plasma boundary}
For a stable convergence of the solution, it is important to accurately determine the plasma region or boundary in terms of $\psi_b$ in every steps of Picard iteration.
Generally a plasma boundary is formed either by limiters (a limited plasma) or by magnetic fields with an X-point (a diverted plasma).
Assuming $I_p>0$, the poloidal flux, $\psi(R,Z)$, has a convex distribution inside plasma, thus $\psi_a>\psi_b$.
Therefore, the $\psi_b$ is defined by the maximum value among all poloidal fluxes from limiters and from X-points.
When $I_p<0$, the $\psi_b$ is defined by the minimum value in a same logic.
More precisely, both magnetic axis and X-point have a null-field ($\lvert \nabla \psi \rvert ^2=0$), while they have different signs of second-derivatives \cite{Johnson1979JCP}, defined by
\begin{equation}
S(R,Z) \equiv
\left( \genfrac{}{}{}{}{\partial^2 \psi}{\partial R^2} \right)
\left( \genfrac{}{}{}{}{\partial^2 \psi}{\partial Z^2} \right)
-\left( \genfrac{}{}{}{}{\partial^2 \psi}{\partial R \partial Z} \right)^2
\end{equation}
If $S>0$, the field-null point is a magnetic axis ($\psi_a$). Otherwise ($S<0$), it is an X-point.
The accurate location of the magnetic axis or the X-point is determined by using the Powell's conjugate direction method \cite{NR} based on a 2D bicubic interpolation.
\subsection{Constraints on plasma equilibrium}
\label{eq_constraint}
In order to have a unique equilibrium solution for Eq. (\ref{eq:GS}), a few constraints on plasma equilibrium quantaties are necessary.
Considering the functional form of Eq. (\ref{eq:jpl}), two constraints, total plasma currents and poloidal plasma beta, are applied.
Note that the equilibrium constraints could be different when a different functional form of $J_{\phi,pl}(R,Z)$ is used instead of Eq.(\ref{eq:jpl}).
For instance, if $q(\psi)$ profile is used in $J_{\phi,pl}(R,Z)$, then $q_a=q(\psi_a)$ could be used as another appropriate constraint \cite{LoDestro1994PoP}.
The constraints can be expressed as
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:ip}
I_p =& \mathop{ \int }_{ \Omega_{pl} } J_{\phi,pl}(\lambda, \beta_0)d\Omega \\
\label{eq:betap}
\beta_p =& \frac{ \langle p(\beta_0) \rangle }{ \langle B_p^2 \rangle _{\psi_a} \slash {2\mu_0} }
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $\mu_0=4\pi \times 10^{-7}[N/A^2]$ is the permeability of vacuum, $a$ the minor radius, and $B_p$ the poloidal magnetic field.
The braket $\langle \cdot \rangle$ means an average over a magnetic surface.
Therefore, by combining these two equations, the $\beta_0$ and $\lambda$ can be determined thus giving a unique solution.
\subsection{External equilibrium fields with specified plasma boundary}
\label{sec:fixedEQ}
In principle, for a free boundary equilibrium problem, the plasma boundary is solved as a part of solutions under given external equilibrium fields.
In practice, however, it is more useful and convenient to solve the equilibrium with a specified plasma boundary.
In this study, we distinguish them by calling the former as an {\it ideally free} boundary problem while the latter by a {\it semi free} boundary problem.
In the case of {\it semi-free} boundary, the external coil currents are adjusted to provide a required equilibrium field.
If a plasma boundary is specified in a series of points, the required external equilibrium field currents can be determined by solving a minimization problem as shown below
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:eq_pf}
\min_{\Delta I_{\text{coil}}}
\left[
\sum^{N_{\text{bndry}}}_{j=1} { \left\lbrace \sum^{N_{\text{coil}}}_{i=1}
\Big( G(R_j,Z_j;R_i,Z_i)\cdot \Delta I_{\text{coil},i} \Big)
-\Delta \psi(R_j,Z_j) \right\rbrace^2 } \right. & \nonumber \\
+\sum^{N_{\text{Xpt}}}_{j=1} { \left\lbrace \sum^{N_{\text{coil}}}_{i=1}
\Big( G_{B_R}(R_j,Z_j;R_i,Z_i)\cdot \Delta I_{\text{coil},i} \Big)
-B_{R}(R_j,Z_j) \right\rbrace^2 } & \nonumber \\
+\sum^{N_{\text{Xpt}}}_{j=1} { \left\lbrace \sum^{N_{\text{coil}}}_{i=1}
\Big( G_{B_Z}(R_j,Z_j;R_i,Z_i)\cdot \Delta I_{\text{coil},i} \Big)
-B_{Z}(R_j,Z_j) \right\rbrace^2 } & \nonumber \\
\left.
+\gamma^2 \sum^{N_{\text{coil}}}_{i=1}{ \Big( \Delta I_{\text{coil},i} \Big)^2 }
\right]
\end{eqnarray}
where ($R_j,Z_j$) is the specified j-th boundary point, $\Delta \psi(R_j,Z_j)=\psi_b - \psi(R_j,Z_j)$ is the poloidal flux error on the point, $B_{R}(R_j,Z_j)$ and $B_{Z}(R_j,Z_j)$ are the radial and vertical magnetic fields there, and $\gamma$ is a Tikhonov parameter for regularization \cite{Tikhonov1977}.
If an X-point is specified as a part of plasma boundary, then the radial and vertical magnetic fields at the point should be zeros.
This constraint is added as the second and third terms in Eq.(\ref{eq:eq_pf}) with $G_{B_R} \equiv -\dfrac{1}{R}\dfrac{\partial G}{\partial Z}$ and $G_{B_Z} \equiv +\dfrac{1}{R}\dfrac{\partial G}{\partial R}$.
From this, the external equilibrium field currents are obtained by $I^{(n)}_{\text{coil},j}=I^{(n-1)}_{\text{coil},j}+ \Delta I_{\text{coil},j}$, where $I^{(n-1)}_{\text{coil},j}$ is the coil currents in ($n-1$)th Picard iteration.
\section{Validations of TES}
\label{sec:validation}
According to the numerical methods and procedures described above, a free boundary tokamak equilibrium solver (TES) has been developed.
For the validations of this code, the uniqueness of a solution is firstly checked by examining the independence on the variations of computation domains, and the mathematical correctness and accuracy of equilibrium profiles are assessed by a direct comparison with an analytic equilibrium solution.
\begin{figure}[!hbtp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{Comp_domain.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.53\textwidth]{Comp_domain_profiles.png}
\caption{(Color online) Two free boundary equilibria, obtained by TES with identical equilibrium constraints, are directly compared.
On the left, the poloidal magnetic flux in a large computational domain (black solid line) is compared with that in a small computational domain (cyon dotted line).
On the right, several equilibrium profiles are directly compared, such as the isotropic pressure, the toroidal field function, the toroidal current density, and the safety factor profile.
}\label{fig:domain}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Uniqueness of a solution under numerical variations}
Since we are solving the problem in a numerical approach, one fundamental test, which is seldom seen in the related literatures, is to examine if it provides an identical result, independent on the number of grids or the change of computational domain.
Particularly it is essential and critical when a free boundary condition is imposed.
A comparison of two free boundary equilibrium solutions, one in a large and the other in a small computational domains, is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:domain} where $I_p=-2.0$ MA, $B_T=-2.7$ T, $a=0.48$ m, and $\beta_p=0.5$ with a large elongation $\kappa=2.0$.
The poloidal magnetic fluxes are compared on the left and several equilibrium profiles on the right.
The solution for a large computational domain (black solid line) was obtained in $0.7 \le R \le 2.8$ m, $-1.9 \le Z \le +1.9$ m with $N_R \times N_Z=65\times 85$, while the one for a small computational domain (cyon dotted line) in $1.1 \le R \le 2.4$ m, $-1.3 \le Z \le +1.3$ m with $N_R \times N_Z=45\times 65$.
As expected, the poloidal magnetic fluxes and the equilibrium profiles are shown to be almost identical for both.
Therefore it confirms that the equilibrium obtained by TES provides a unique solution, independently on any change of computational domain and the grid size.
\begin{figure}[!hbtp]
\includegraphics[width=5.0cm]{Comp_solovev_vs_TES.png}
\caption{(Color online) The poloidal magnetic flux obtained from TES (black solid line) is compared directly with the analytic one from the Solovev's equilibirum (yellow dotted line). The filled contour plot with a rectangular boundary shows the full distribution of poloidal magnetic flux including vacuum region, which is obtained from TES.
}\label{fig:solovev}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Benchmark with an analytic solution}
For a direct validation of TES, an analytic fixed boundary equilibrium solution, known as a generalized Solov'ev equilibrium \cite{Zheng1996PoP}, is considered and compared with a TES result.
Note that it is to check the mathematical correctness and accuracy of the solution from TES.
The pressure and toroidal field function in the analytic solution are assumed to be constant
\begin{equation}
-\mu_0 \frac{ \partial p }{ \partial \psi }=A_1,~~~
F \frac{\partial F}{\partial \psi}=A_2
\label{eq:simple_jphi}
\end{equation}
Then, the equilibrium solution can be expressed explicitly as follows
\begin{equation}
\psi(R,Z)=c_1 + c_2 R^2 + c_3 (R^4-4 R^2 Z^2) + c_4 \left[ R^2 \ln(R)-Z^2 \right] + \frac{R^4}{8} A_1 - \frac{Z^2}{2} A_2
\label{eq:solution}
\end{equation}
where four constants, $c_i,~i=1,\cdots,4$ are determined to satisfy the boundary conditions from specified plasma boundary, and other two parameters, $A_1$ and $A_2$, are adjusted to meet the equilibrium constraints.
Four boundary conditions, with a modification for the comparison, are given by $\psi(R_{in},Z_{in})=\psi(R_{out},Z_{out})=\psi(R_{top},Z_{top})=\psi_b$ and $\genfrac{.}{|}{}{} {\partial \psi}{\partial R} _{\left(R_{top},Z_{top}\right)}=0$, where $in$, $out$, and $top$ are the inner-, the outer-, and the top-most boundary points respectively.
The equilibrium constraints are the total plasma currents $I_p$ and the poloidal beta $\beta_p$ as follows
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
I_p =& \mathop{ \int }_{ \Omega_{pl} } J_{\phi}dRdZ
= - \left( \mathop{ \int }_{ \Omega_{pl} } \left( \frac{R}{\mu_0} \right) dRdZ \right) A_1
+ \left( \mathop{ \int }_{ \Omega_{pl} } \left( \frac{1}{\mu_0 R} \right) dRdZ \right) A_2 \\
\beta_p =& \frac{8 \pi}{\mu_0} \frac{ \int p~dRdZ }{I_p^2}
= \left( \frac{8 \pi}{ (\mu_0 I_p)^2 } \int (\psi_b - \psi)dRdZ \right) A_1
\label{eq:constraints2}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
thus determining appropriate values of $A_1$ and $A_2$.
The poloidal magnetic fluxes obtained from TES and the analytic solution are directly compared in Fig. \ref{fig:solovev}, where $I_p=0.5$ MA, $B_T=2.7$ T, $\beta_p=0.5$ with elongation $\kappa=1.45$ and minor radius $a=0.5$ m in a limited configuration (i.e. without null point).
The full distribution (including vacuum region) of poloidal magnetic flux from TES is shown as a filled contour plot with a rectangular boundary, to show it is indeed a free boundary solution.
The poloidal magnetic fluxes in plasma region are directly compared by overlapping them; one is from TES (black solid line) and the other from the analytic solution (yellow dotted line).
As shown, two results are not distinguishable and thus the difference is negligible.
It confirms that the equilibrium informations inside plasma region, obtained by TES, are accurately consistent with those from analytic calculations.
Summarizing two validation results above, it is confirmed that TES provides a unique equilibrium solution with high accuracy, consistent with theoretical analysis.
\section{Axisymmetric instability and its stabilization}
\label{sec:stability}
\subsection{Axisymmetric instability of shaped plasma equilibrium}
A tokamak plasma equilibrium has 2D axisymmetric, instrinsic instabilities associated with plasma shaping.
The most important 2D axisymmetric, i.e. the toroidal mode number n=0, instability is known as a vertical instability which becomes unstable once a plasma elongation is increased above a threshold.
It has been well understood that this instability is originated from a $J_{\phi,pl} \times B_{ext,pol}$ force on plasma by an external equilibrium field due to a bad curvature associated with the plasma shape.
The field curvature can be evaluated by a field decay index, $n_{\text{decay}}$, defined as
\begin{equation}
n_{\text{decay}}(R,Z) \equiv -\dfrac{R}{B_Z}
\genfrac{}{}{}{}{\partial B_Z}{\partial R}
= -\dfrac{R}{B_Z}
\genfrac{}{}{}{}{\partial B_R}{\partial Z}
\label{eq:ndecay}
\end{equation}
Theoretically, it is well known that a vertically elongated plasma can be unstable when $n_{\text{decay}} < 0$ and a radially elongated plasma unstable when $n_{\text{decay}} > 3/2$ \cite{Fukuyama1975JJAP}.
\begin{figure}[!hbtp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{kappa0p7.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.50\textwidth]{ndecay_vs_kappa.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{kappa1p996.png}
\caption{(Color online) Decay index of external equilibrium fields ($n_{\text{decay}}$) vs plasma elongation ($\kappa$) for two different plasma betas ($\beta_p$).
Theoretically stable and unstable regimes in terms of $n_{\text{decay}}$ are marked with filled colors.
Additionally a radially elongated plasma with $\kappa=0.7$ (left) and a vertically elongated plasma with $\kappa=2.0$ (right) are shown for $\beta_p=0.8$.
}\label{fig:ndecay}
\end{figure}
The relation between plasma shape and field decay index can be seen in FIG. \ref{fig:ndecay} for a plasma of $I_p=0.5$ MA and $B_T=2.5$ T, where theoretically stable and unstable regimes are marked with filled colors.
Comparison of two plasmas with different beta ($\beta_p$) shows that the plasma with higher $\beta_p$ is less unstable and has wider range of stable $\kappa$, consistently with theory.
Note that the series of equilibria in this figure is obtained by specifying the plasma boundary (i.e. as a {\it semi free} boundary problem), in order to avoid the axisymmetric instability due to the bad curvature.
\subsection{A generalized stabilization for axisymmetric instabilities}
Due to the axisymmetric instability, the direct solution of plasma equilibrium under given external equilibrium field (i.e. as an {\it ideally free} boundary problem) has a convergence issue.
That is, a small deviation of plasma from an equilibrium position is inevitable during a numerical iteration, so that the plasma could be drifted and eventually diverged either radially (when $n_{decay}>1.5$) or vertically (when $n_{decay}<0.0$).
In the literature, a conventional method to resolve the vertical instability of elongated plasma is simply inserting a feedback loop \cite{Johnson1979JCP} by adding artificial feedback coils which are typically a pair of up-down symmetric coils to produce a horizontal magnetic field.
In this method, the feedback coil currents are adjusted to control the vertical position of magnetic axis to a pre-selected target position according to the relation below
\begin{equation}
I_{\text{feedback}}=-\text{sign}(Z_{\text{coil}}) \left\lbrace C_1 (Z^{(n)}_{\text{mag}} - Z_{\text{target}}) + C_2(Z^{(n)}_{\text{mag}}-Z^{(n-1)}_{\text{mag}}) \right\rbrace I_p
\label{eq:fbzp}
\end{equation}
where $Z_{\text{target}}$ is the desired vertical position of the magnetic axis and $Z_{\text{coil}}$ is the vertical position of the control coil.
A critical drawback of this method is that the desired vertical position of the magnetic axis should be known, prior to obtaining it as a solution from the equilibrium calculation.
Also the constants $C_1$ and $C_2$ are chosen by trial and error.
In TES code, the Eq. (\ref{eq:fbzp}) is modified for a general treatment.
Instead of controlling the vertical position in a feedback manner, we are eliminating the source of vertical instability by compensating $B_R$ field at the center of plasma currents in each steps as following.
\begin{equation}
I_{\text{feedback}}=-g_z \genfrac{.}{|}{}{} {B_{R,\text{vacuum}}} {B^*_{R,\text{feedback}}}
_{ R_{\text{cur}},Z_{\text{cur}} }
\label{eq:general_zp}
\end{equation}
where the minus sign indicates a compensation, $g_z$ is an adjustable constant, and $B_{R,\text{vacuum}}$ and $B^*_{R,\text{feedback}}$ are the radial magnetic fields by external equilibrium conductor currents (i.e. vacuum field) and by unit currents of vertical stabilizing coils, respectively.
Also note that there is no $I_P$ dependency in this method.
If $g_z=1.0$, the exactly same $B_R$ field is compensated by the feedback currents.
In TES, practically $2.0 \le g_z \le 2.5$ is used to ensure a general stabilization by using a up-down symmetric pair of coils, which is set to be located radially in the middle of and vertically just outside computational domain.
For the evaluation of $B_R$, we use the effective current center ($R_{\text{curr}}, Z_{\text{curr}}$) instead of the magnetic axis for a better description of axisymmetric plasma motion as following
\begin{eqnarray}
R^2_{\text{cur}} &=& \dfrac{1}{I_p} \mathop{ \int } R^2 J_{\phi,pl}(R,Z)d\Omega_{pl} \\
Z_{\text{cur}} &=& \dfrac{1}{I_p} \mathop{ \int } Z J_{\phi,pl}(R,Z)d\Omega_{pl} \nonumber
\label{eq:curr_center}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that a generalized method for the radial stabilization is not described here (due to lack of practical interest) but also possible in a similar way.
\subsection{Validation of vertical stability and its stabilization}
\begin{figure}[!hbtp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{stability_vertical.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{stability_radial.png}
\caption{(Color online) Comparisons of plasma displacement responses to the initial perturbations of $\Delta Z=-0.01$ m and $\Delta R=-0.01$ m for the stability test.
Two equilibria with $\kappa=1.0$ and $\kappa=1.2$ are tested for the vertical stability (left) and another two equilibria with $\kappa=1.0$ and $\kappa=0.8$ are tested for the radial stability (right).
}\label{fig:stability_check}
\end{figure}
For a validation of the generalized stabilization method described above, we first test the validity of force-balance relation solved in TES, by considering the natural axisymmetric instability.
From FIG. \ref{fig:ndecay}, it is obvious that the equilibrium with $\kappa=1.2$ is expected to be vertically unstable ($n_{\text{decay}}<0$), while the equilibrium with $\kappa=1.0$ to be stable ($n_{\text{decay}}>0$), if the force-balance relation in TES is correct.
Similarly, the equilibrium with $\kappa=0.8$ is expected to be radially unstable ($n_{\text{decay}}>1.5$), while the equilibrium with $\kappa=1.0$ to be stable ($n_{\text{decay}}<1.5$).
Remind that these equilibria were obtained by specifying the plasma boundary and thus produced the required external equilibrium fields as a result (i.e. as a {\it semi free} boundary problem).
To test the natural vertical stability without any additional stabilization, the equilibrium analysis is re-performed as an {\it ideally free} boundary problem, i.e. by specifying the external equilibrium coil currents which were obtained from the FIG. \ref{fig:ndecay}.
As a seed for vertical or radial instability, a small perturbation is added into the initial position of plasma boundary, which is used in 0-th Picard iteration.
The comparisons of vertical and radial displacement responses to small deviations of $\Delta Z=-0.01$ m and $\Delta R=-0.01$ m are shown in FIG. \ref{fig:stability_check}.
On the left, the vertical stability is tested by an initial perturbation, $\Delta Z=-0.01$ m, for two equilibria; one with $\kappa=1.0$ (black dotted line) and the other with $\kappa=1.2$ (blue dotted line).
Consistently with the theoretical expectations, the initial perturbation of the former was naturally stabilized, while the one of the latter was exponentially diverged.
On the right, the radial stability is tested by an initial perturbation, $\Delta R=-0.01$ m, for two equilibria; one with $\kappa=1.0$ (black dotted line) and the other with $\kappa=0.8$ (blue dotted line).
Similarly, the initial perturbation of the former was naturally stabilized or stable, while the one of the latter was exponentially diverged.
Therefore, it confirms that the force-balance relation used in TES is correctly solved and the associated instability is precisely consistent with the theory.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{SN.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{vertical_stabilization.png}
\caption{(Color online) Vertical displacement responses to an initial perturbation of $\Delta Z=-0.03$ m are compared for the equilibrium shown on the left.
The first one (black) is during TES iteration as a {\it semi free} boundary problem, the second one (blue) as an {\it ideally free} boundary problem, and the third one (red) with the generalized vertical stabilization.
}\label{fig:general_zp}
\end{figure}
For the validation of the generalized stabilization method, a further strongly shaped and up-down asymmetric plasma is considered as a worst case.
The reference equilibrium is obtained in a single null (SN) configuration with $I_P=-0.5$ MA, $B_T=2.5$ T, $\beta_P=0.1$, and $\kappa=1.7$ ($n_{\text{decay}}=-1.8$) as shown in FIG. \ref{fig:general_zp}.
The comparison of vertical displacement responses with and without the generalized stabilization is shown on the right of the FIG. \ref{fig:general_zp}.
The evolution of a {\it semi free} boundary solution (black line) shows that it converged to $Z_{\text{mag}}=-0.03$ m (thus it is a reference equilibrium position).
In case of {\it ideally free} boundary solution (blue line) without any stabilization, it was slowly drifted upward and finally diverged, as expected.
Then, by applying the generalized vertical stabilization (red line), the evolution was really stabilized so that it was smoothly evolved and converged to the reference position closely.
Here, the final difference of vertical position compared with the reference is about 0.5 cm.
Therefore, it demonstrates that the generalized method can effectively stabilize the natural vertical instability of elongated plasmas and automatically guide the plasma to an equilibrium position, that is consistent with that from a {\it semi free} boundary solution.
\section{Extension to Advanced Equilibrium Analysis}
\label{sec:extension}
Recently new types of tokamak equilibria have been proposed and studied in various devices, in order to resolve the issue of an excessive heat and particle fluxes onto the plasma facing components in ITER and beyond.
These are featured by a new divertor configuration such as snowflake \cite{Ryutov2007PoP} and (super) X divertors \cite{Kotschen2007PoP}.
Particularly the snowflake equilibrium requires to have a second-order zero of poloidal flux at the null-field point so that it is not straight-forward to deal with it by a conventional free boundary equilibrium solver \cite{Lackner2013FST}.
To solve this new equilibrium with specified plasma boundary, the minimization constraint, Eq. (\ref{eq:eq_pf}), for required external equilibrium field currents is modified in TES as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:eq_pf_sf}
\min_{\Delta I_{\text{coil}}}
\left[
\sum^{N_{\text{bndry}}}_{j=1} { \left\lbrace \sum^{N_{\text{coil}}}_{i=1}
\Big( G(R_j,Z_j;R_i,Z_i)\cdot \Delta I_{\text{coil},i} \Big)
-\Delta \psi(R_j,Z_j) \right\rbrace^2 } \right. & \nonumber \\
+\sum^{N^{\text{SF}}_{\text{Xpt}}}_{j=1} { \left\lbrace
\sum^{N_{\text{coil}}}_{i=1}
\Big( \genfrac{}{}{}{} {\partial {G_{B_R}(R_j,Z_j;R_i,Z_i)}}{\partial Z} \cdot \Delta I_{\text{coil},i} \Big)
-\genfrac{.}{|}{}{} {\partial B_{R}}{\partial Z} _{(R_j,Z_j)}
\right\rbrace^2 } & \nonumber \\
+\sum^{N^{\text{SF}}_{\text{Xpt}}}_{j=1} { \left\lbrace
\sum^{N_{\text{coil}}}_{i=1}
\Big( \genfrac{}{}{}{} {\partial {G_{B_Z}(R_j,Z_j;R_i,Z_i)}}{\partial R} \cdot \Delta I_{\text{coil},i} \Big)
-\genfrac{.}{|}{}{} {\partial B_{Z}}{\partial R} _{(R_j,Z_j)}
\right\rbrace^2 } & \nonumber \\
\left.
+\gamma^2 \sum^{N_{\text{coil}}}_{i=1}{ \Big( \Delta I_{\text{coil},i} \Big)^2 }
\right]
\end{eqnarray}
where $\genfrac{}{}{}{0} {\partial B_{R}}{\partial Z} = \genfrac{}{}{}{0} {\partial}{\partial Z} \left( -\genfrac{}{}{}{0} {1}{R}\genfrac{}{}{}{0} {\partial \psi}{\partial Z} \right)=-\genfrac{}{}{}{0} {1}{R} \genfrac{}{}{}{0} {\partial^2 \psi}{\partial Z^2}$ and similarly $\genfrac{}{}{}{0} {\partial B_Z}{\partial R}=+\genfrac{}{}{}{0} {1}{R} \genfrac{}{}{}{0} {\partial ^2 \psi}{\partial R^2}$.
By using this, the snowflake equilibrium that requires a second-order zero of $\psi(R,Z)$ can be directly obtained without any special treatment in TES.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{DN_SF.png}
\caption{(Color online) A comparison of two distinctive plasma equilibria. One is with a typical double null divertor (left) and the other with a snowflake divertor (right). The plasma boundary points specified in calculation are marked with a red circle.
}
\label{fig:DN_SF}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:DN_SF} shows a comparison of two equilibria obtained by TES with identical plasma equilibrium parameters, which are $I_P=$1.0 MA, $B_T=$2.5 T, $\kappa=$2.0, and $\beta_P=$0.2.
One (on the left) is a typical double null (DN) divertor and the other (on the right) is a snowflake (SF) divertor configurations.
The difference of two equilibria is easily seen from the magnetic distributions around the field null points.
In the SF configuration, it is clearly seen that three concave and another three convex distributions are formed alternately, centred at the up-down symmetric field null points, i.e. a second order zero of poloidal magnetic flux is formed.
\begin{table}
\caption{Required external coil currents (kA) to form the equilibria shown in FIG. \ref{fig:DN_SF}}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
& Double-Null (DN) & Snow-Flake (SF) \\
\colrule
PF1 & -6.02 & -1.04 \\
PF2 & 9.64 & -19.05 \\
PF3 & 6.10 & 135.27 \\
PF4 & 7.07 & -67.32 \\
PF5 & 8.33 & 18.60 \\
PF6 & -1.03 & -5.30 \\
PF7 & -7.26 & -4.03 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\label{tab:Ieq_SF}
\end{table}
Table \ref{tab:Ieq_SF} shows the external equilibrium coil currents required to form the target equilibria shown in FIG. \ref{fig:DN_SF}.
It is important to note that in the case of SF equilibrium some of coil currents are required extremely large values, while in the case of DN equilibrium all coil currents are well balanced.
It indicates that it is not practically possible to form the SF equilibria onto the KSTAR by using current coil system.
Therefore, a new coil system, specially designed for SF divertor, is essentially needed.
In fact, it is consistent with the recent highlighted issue \cite{Lackner2013FST} in the study on advanced divertor configurations.
In addition, it is worthwhile to note that the SF equilibrium here is solved self-consistently by considering full force-balance relations in a toroidal system, while in the reference {\cite{Lackner2013FST}, it is solved by using a simplified wire plasma model.
\section{CONCLUSIONS}
\label{sec:conclusion}
A free-boundary tokamak equilibrium solver, developed for advanced study of tokamak equilibra, was described with various validation results.
The developed solver, named as TES, is characterized by two distinctive features.
At first, a generalized stabilization method for intrinsic axisymmetric instabilities was applied, which is encountered after all in equilibrium calculation under a free boundary condition.
In this method, the source of axisymmetric instabilities is directly removed or minimized, instead of feedback controlling the plasma position to a target location.
Thus, it ensures in general that the TES code produces a solution stably even under highly (axisymmetrically) unstable conditions.
The other important feature is an extension to deal with a new divertor geometry such as snowflake or X divertors.
To deal with the innovative divertor concept, particularly the snowflake divertor, the equilibrium solver needs to be able to control the location of second order zero of poloidal magnetic field.
By implementing this functionality into the TES code, it was demonstrated that the snowflake type of advanced tokamak equilibria can be analysed in consideration of full toroidal force balance relations, instead of using a simplified wire plasma model.
For the validation of TES code, the uniqueness of a solution was confirmed by the independence on variations of computational domain, the mathematical correctness and accuracy of equilibrium profiles were checked by a direct comparison with the generalized Solov'ev equilibrium, and the governing force balance relation was tested by examining the intrinsice axisymmetric instabilities.
As a valuable application, a snowflake equilibrium was analysed by taking into account the KSTAR equilibrium coil system.
Since the KSTAR has a limited set of equilibrium control coils, it is important to check whether the innovative divertor equilibria can be realized in the current system.
The analysis results suggest that practically it is not possible to form a snowflake equilibrium in current KSTAR device so that additional control coils need to be considered for the study of advanced divertors in future.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This work was supported by the Korean Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning under the KSTAR project contract.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
Today all object recognition approaches use machine-learning methods. Larger the dataset better is the performance. Labeled datasets like NORB\cite{1} Caltech-101/256\cite{2}\cite{3} and CIFAR-10/100\cite{4} with tens of thousands of images are in today’s scenario considered small and LabelMe\cite{5} and Image Net \cite{6} with millions of images are preferred. A simple recognition task also requires datasets of size of the order of tens of thousands of images [14]. It is always assumed that objects in realistic settings show a lot of variability and therefore to learn to recognize them it is essential to have much larger training sets. The many shortcomings of small size data sets have been widely recognized by Pinto\cite{7}. To learn from thousands of objects from millions of images, a model with a large learning capacity with powerful processing is required.
We present an innovative, adaptive, self-learning, and self-evolving hybrid recognition engine, which works well with small sized training data. The model uses the intelligent information processing mechanism of Artificial Immune System (AIS) and helps Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) generate a robust feature set taking the small set of input training images as seeds. Our model performs visual pattern learning using a heterogeneous combination of supervised CNN and Clonal Selection (CS) principles of AIS. It can be extended to perform classification tasks with limited training data particularly in the context of personal photo collections; where for each training sample different points of view are gathered in parallel using clonal selection.This is very different from populating datasets with artificially generated training examples\cite{25} by randomly distorting the original training images with randomly picked distortion parameters.
Specific contribution of this paper is as follows: Designed a hybrid Convolutional Neural Network- Artificial Immune System (CNN-AIS) Recognition Engine Architecture designed to work with modest sized training data. This is detailed in Section 3. The model was tested on well-known MNIST digit database and showed remarkable success. The current best rate of 0.3\% on the MINST digit recognition task approaches human performance \cite{8}. But we have got good results with considerably smaller number of training samples. We have also applied this model to a small AIS based classifier and successfully accomplished classification for two categories from a small personal photo collection dataset.
\section{Related Work}
The idea of building a hierarchical structure of features for object detection has deep roots in the computer vision literature\cite{9},\cite{12}. The general structure of the deep convolutional neural network (CNN) was introduced in 1989 by LeCun\cite{13}. His deep convolutional neural network architecture called LeNet is what is still being used today with a lot of consistent improvement to the individual components within the architecture. An important idea of the CNN is that the feature extraction and classifier were unified in a single structure. The parameters of both the classifier and feature detector were trained globally and supervised by back propagation. After the last stage of feature detection a few fully connected layers were added to perform classification. The model was proposed for handwritten digit recognition and achieved a very high success rate on MINST dataset\cite{14}. But it demands substantial amount of labeled data for training (60,000 for MINST). Also the size of input is very small(28x28) with no background clutter, illumination change etc which is an integral part of normal pictures/images. Infact for most realistic vision applications this is not the case. For instance Ranzato et al \cite{15} trained a large CNN for object detection (Caltech 101 dataset) but obtained poor results though it achieved perfect classification on the training set. The weak generalization power of CNN when the number of training data is small and the number of free parameter is large is a case of over fitting or overparametrization. Other biologically inspired models like HMAX \cite{16} use hardwired filter and use hard Max functions to compute the responses in the pooling layer. The problem was that it was unable to adapt to different problem settings.
Successful algorithms have been built on top of handcrafted gradient response features such as SIFT and histograms of oriented gradients (HOG). These are fixed features and are unable to adjust to model the intricacies of a problem. The success of object recognition algorithm to a large extent depends on features detected. The features should have the most distinct characteristics among different classes while retaining invariant characteristics within a class. Traditional hand designed feature extraction is laborious and moreover cannot process raw images while the automatic extraction mechanism can fetch features directly. The multiple processing layers of machine learning systems extract more abstract, invariant features of data and have higher classification accuracy than the traditional shallower classifiers. These deep architectures have shown promising performances in image \cite{14} language \cite{18} and speech\cite{19}.
In \cite{20}, \cite{21} supervised classifiers such as CNNs, MLPs, SVMs and K-nearest Neighbors are combined in a ‘Mixture of Experts” approach where the output of parallel classifiers is used to produce the final result. CNNs though efficient at learning invariant features from images, do not always produce optimal classification and SVMs with their fixed kernel function are unable to learn complicated invariances. Our approach is different as we propose a single architecture for training and testing using CNN and AIS principles.
\section{Convolutional Neural Network- Artificial Immune System (CNN-AIS) Model}
Our proposed architecture integrates Clonal Selection (CS) principles from Artificial Immune System(AIS) with Convolutional Neural Networks(CNN). We will briefly introduce the Artificial Immune System (AIS) theory and the basic CNN structure that we have used in the subsequent sections. Then the hybrid CNN-AIS trainable recognition engine is presented followed by results and analysis of its merits.
\subsubsection{Artificial Immune Systems (AIS):}
AIS use Clonal Selection and Negative Selection imitating the biological immune system. The main task of the immune system is to defend the organism against pathogens. In the human body the B-cells with different receptor shapes try to bind to antigens. The best fit cells proliferate and produce clones which mutate at very high rates. The process is repeated and it is likely that a better B-cell (better solution) might emerge. This is called Clonal Selection. These clones have mutated from the original cell at a rate inversely proportional to the match strength. Two main concepts are particularly relevant for our framework.
Generation of Diversity: The B cells produce antibodies for specific antigens. Each B cell makes a specific antibody, which is expressed from the genes in its gene library. The gene library does not contain genes that define antibodies for every possible antigen. Gene fragments in the gene library randomly combine and recombine and produce a huge diverse range of antibodies
This helps the immune system to make the precise antibody for an antigen it may never have encountered previously.
Avidity: Refers to the accrued strength of various diverse affinities of individual binding interaction. Avidity (functional affinity) is the collective strength of multiple affinities of an antigen with various antibodies.
Based on this biological process, quite a few Artificial Immune System (AIS) have been developed in the past, [22] and [23]. Castro developed the Clonal Selection Algorithm (CLONALG) [24] on the basis of Clonal Selection theory of the immune system. It was proved that it can perform pattern recognition. The CLONALG algorithm can be described as follows:
1. Randomly initialize a population of individual (M);
2. For each pattern of P, present it to the population M and determine its affinity with each element of the population M;
3. Select n of the best highest affinity elements of M and generate copies/clones of these individuals proportionally to their affinity with the antigen which is the pattern P. The higher the affinity, the higher the number of clones, and vice-versa;
4. Mutate all these copies with a rate proportional to their affinity with the input pattern: the higher the affinity, the smaller the mutation rate;
5. Add these mutated individuals to the population M and reselect m of these maturated individuals to be kept as memories of the systems;
6. Repeat steps 2 to 5 until a certain criterion is met.
\subsubsection{Convolutional Neural Network(CNN)}
A Convolutional Neural Network \cite{25}\cite{26} is a multilayer feed forward artificial neural network with a deep supervised learning architecture. The ordered architectures of MLPs progressively learn the higher level features with the last layer giving classification. Two operations of convolutional filtering and down sampling alternate to learn the features from the raw images and constitute the feature map layers.
The weights are trained by a back propagation algorithm using gradient descent approaches for minimizing the training error. We have used Stochastic Gradient Approach as it avoids being stuck in poor local minima which is highly likely due to the non linear nature of the error surface. A simplified CNN was presented in \cite{27} which we have used for our work instead of using the rather complicated LeNet-5\cite{28}. The model has five layers.
\subsubsection{CNN-AIS Model}
Modern architecture trains learning features across hidden layers starting from low level details up to high level details. The architecture of our hybrid CNN-AIS model was designed by adding an additional layer of Artificial Immune System (AIS) based Clonal Selection (CS) in the traditional Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) structure, Fig.1. The model is explained layer wise.
\begin{figure}
\hspace{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[height=8.2cm]{1.png}
\caption{CNN-AIS Hybrid Model}
\label{fig:example}
\end{figure}
Convolutional Layer: A 2D filtering between input images n, and a matrix of kernels/weights K produces the output I where $I_{k}$ = $\Sigma_{ i, j, k}$ є M ($n_i$ * $K_{j}$) where M is a table of input output relationships. The kernel responses from the inputs connected to the same output are linearly combined. As with MLPs a scaled hyperbolic tangent function is applied to every I.
Sub sampling Layer: Small invariances to translation and distortion is accomplished with the Max-Pooling operation. This is for faster convergence and improves generalization as well.
Fully Connected Layer - I: The input to this layer is a set of feature maps from the lower layer which are combined into a 1-dimensional feature vector and subsequently passed through an activation function
\textbf{Clonal selection Layer}: This is the new additional layer that we propose in our architecture
and it is the second last layer. This layer receives its input from the fully connected layer-I in the form of 1-D feature vector for all the images (n) in the current running batch. Each feature vector in the Feature set undergoes Cloning, Mutation and Crossover according to the rules of Clonal Selection to generate additional features that satisfy the minimum threshold criteria and resemble the particular class.
The number of clones is calculated by
\\CNum= $\eta$η x affinity (Feature Vector1, Feature Vector2) ... (i), where $\eta$η is the cloning constant.
Higher the affinity of match the greater the clone stimulus gets, the more the cloning number is. On the contrary, the number is less, which is consistent with biological immune response mechanism.
Mutation frequency is defined as Rate, which is calculated by
Rate = $\alpha$ {1/ affinity (Feature Vector1, Feature Vector2)} … (ii)
Where $\alpha$α is mutation constant. In accordance with (ii), the higher the affinity of match, the smaller the clone stimulus gets, the lower the mutation frequency is. On the contrary, the mutation frequency is higher.
Hence from n initial feature sets we now have (n x CNum) feature sets. These newly generated feature vectors are grouped into batches and individually fed to the output layer and the subsequent error is backpropagated to train the kernels of the CNN. Hence from the seeds of a few representative images of each class a bigger set is evolved using Clonal Selection principles of Artificial Immune System. End of training phase yields a set of representative features, which we call antibodies, from each class of size much larger than the original dataset and a trained CNN. Though we start with random values of feature sets(antibodies) for each class but eventually they converge to their optimal values.
Output Layer(Fully Connected Layer-II): This layer has one output neuron per class label and acts as linear classifier operating on the 1-dimensional feature vector set computed from the CS layer
\section{Result}
We performed tests on MNIST dataset. Fig.2 is a plot of comparison of error versus training data size for both CNN and CNN +AIS hybrid. When available data is less then CNN+AIS model performs better giving lesser error.It is evident that CNN-AIS error rates are much lower for small data size. Hence AIS helps in training CNN better when training data is scarce. Fig.3 shows a plot of error versus the number of epochs for our hybrid model for standard data size. As the number of epochs increases the error rate decreases and becomes constant after 15 epochs.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\centering
\includegraphics[height=7cm]{4.png}
\caption{Error versus training data size }
\label{fig:example}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=7cm]{5.png}
\caption{Plot of error rate w.r.t no. of epochs }
\label{fig:example}
\end{figure}
\section{Application: Personal Photo Album}
The CNN-AIS generates a robust and diverse pool of feature vectors and a trained CNN for any class. We tested this model for a personal collection of photos for two classes Picnic (A) and Conference (N). For every testing image (the antigen), the trained CNN-AIS model computes the feature vector and compares this with the feature set pool of that class. If the number of matches of the test image with the various feature sets of that class and the combined affinities exceed the threshold then the testing image is placed in that class. These emulate the antibodies in a human body recognizing an antigen. The model is shown in Fig 4.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=8.2cm]{2.png}
\caption{Application: CNN-AIS Model Used for Personal Photo Classification}
\label{fig:example}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.6cm]{3.png}
\caption{Application Analysis on Personal Photo Album}
\label{fig:example}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=4cm]{mamm.png}
\caption{Sample images from Application dataset}
\label{fig:example}
\end{figure}
The trained CNN learns the features of the test image, the antigen. A two phase testing mechanism is used for classification. The first phase matches the test image feature with the 3N feature sets (antibodies) of each of the classes. The total number of antibodies lying above the threshold for matching is counted (C) for each class. All classes providing a minimum number of C are qualified for phase 2 testing. The second phase calculates Avidity for each class which is the mean strength of multiple affinities of all qualified antibodies in C with the testing image antigen. It is calculated by taking the mean of individual scores (calculated using inner product measure) of matching of test image with each antibody above the threshold for each qualified class. This score is labeled avidity. The class is eventually decided on the basis of the combined scores S=(Count+Avidity). The test images are different from training images and may belong to different individuals. The model can be extended to generate a new class. If during testing no suitable match happens then the test image can initialize a new class/ antibody set with its features set. Mutation generates the new relevant population. The experimental results are summarized in Fig.5. The sample dataset used for our experiments is shown in Fig.6. Despite the diversity in the dataset and the small size of training data set, our model gives good results.
\section{Conclusion}
The AIS layer shows a marked improvement in recognition when training data is limited. The proposed model can be extended to be used as a classifier for personal photo albums as explained by the example application. The results are very encouraging. A new class can be added to the existing set of classes dynamically replicating the behavioral aspects of self-learning and self evolving of human immune system. The results show the efficacy of our model. The proposed model is able to capture diversity that is inherent in personal photo collections unlike CNN by itself.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:1}
Idealized and reduced models have been useful in analyzing and studying, in a simplified arena, some aspects of (3+1) general relativity. To be more precise, one can consider the sector of Einstein theory that is invariant under certain symmetries, that sometimes becomes tractable, in order to gain some insight into the full theory. An outstanding example of such simplified model is the (2+1)-dimensional case which, apart from being much simpler than the (3+1) case, it has been `solved' in many different contexts and by different approaches \cite{deser,Witten1988}. It is then natural to explore and compare the resulting formalism with the hope of learning something new about the full (3+1) case.
The issue that we shall here consider is the definition of gravitational energy.
This endeavor is certainly not new and a sizeable amount of literature has been
devoted to this topic in both 4D \cite{energy} and 3D gravity \cite{jackiw}. In the case of
3D gravity, the present situation is not devoid of some tension. More precisely,
the first systematic study of asymptotically flat ($\Lambda=0$) boundary
conditions was first put forward by Ashtekar and Varadarajan in
\cite{Ashtekar-Varadarajan1994}. They made precise the notion of asymptotically flat boundary
conditions for the canonical theory and concluded, within the Regge-Teitelboim
formalism \cite{regge-teitel} that the canonical energy is not only bounded from
below, as one could have expected, but it is also bounded from above. This
unexpected feature has some interesting consequences when considering the
quantum theory \cite{aa:quantum}. The Regge-Teitelboim formalism suffers,
nevertheless, from an ambiguity in the definition of the value of the energy it
assigns to, say, its lowest energy configuration. The ambiguity comes from the
fact that one could add an arbitrary constant to the Hamiltonian and the
formalism is still fully consistent. In the case of 3+1 gravity,
this special configuration is precisely Minkowski spacetime and it is customary
to assign to it a {\it zero} value of energy. This choice is fully justified and
is not subject to any controversy. The same is not true for the 3D case. In
\cite{Ashtekar-Varadarajan1994} the authors chose the same convention and assigned
zero energy to 2+1 Minkowski spacetime.
In \cite{Marolf-Patino2006} Marolf and Pati\~no followed a different approach.
They started from a well defined second order action for the gravitational field
consisting of the standard Einstein-Hilbert action plus a boundary term given
by the Gibbons-Hawking term. After a 2+1 decomposition they obtained the boundary
contribution to the Hamiltonian and found that there is an extra term that
``shifts'' the value of the energy in such a way that Minkowski spacetime is
assigned a negative value equal to $-1/4G$, and the upper bound on energy is zero.
Even when this result might appear to be counter-intuitive from the perspective of 3+1 gravity, there are several argument to support this behaviour. First, one should note that the gravitational constant $G$ in three spacetime dimensions has dimensions of inverse mass, so in this case one {\it does} have a mass scale even for vacuum gravity. Second, the asymptotic conditions at infinity are such that
there is a preferred notion of time translation. The symmetry group is much more restricted, and it is not strange to assign a non-zero ADM momentum to this preferred frame \cite{deser2,symmetry}.\footnote{In 3+1 gravity a non-zero value for the ADM four-momentum would select a preferred frame thus violating asymptotic Lorentz invariance.} Finally, the asymptotic spatial geometry corresponding to configurations where the energy approaches its limiting (upper) value correspond to two dimensional conical defects that ``close up". It is not then unnatural to assign a zero energy to such spatially closed spacetimes
\cite{Marolf-Patino2006}.
The use of first order variables for gravity in 3+1 dimensions has proven to be rather convenient. Apart from the necessity to consider them when coupling Fermions, they allow for a simple well defined action \cite{aes} in the case of
asymptotically flat configurations. A natural question is whether a corresponding
action principle can be defined for $2+1$ gravity. Here the main variables
would be a co-triad $e_a^I$, together with a connection ${w_{aI}}^J$ taking
values in the Lie algebra of $SO$(2,1).
The purpose of this manuscript is to
address several of these issues. First we extend the results of \cite{aes}
to three dimensions and derive the asymptotically flat conditions for the
first order variables. Then, we prove that the 3-dimensional Palatini action with boundary term, which
give us the same equations of motion that the 3-dimensional Einstein-Hilbert action, has a well posed
action principle. That is, it is finite and differentiable under the asymptotically flat boundary
conditions. Moreover, we define a new action principle by introducing an additional boundary term to the
action. This new action is explicitly Lorentz invariant and, as we prove in detail, it is equivalent to the Einstein-Hilbert action with a Gibbons-Hawking term
of \cite{Marolf-Patino2006}. The next step is to consider the covariant
Hamiltonian formulation (CHF) defined by these two action principles and explore
some of its relevant quantities.
In particular, we prove that the energy is bounded from
below and above, for asymptotically 3-dimensional flat space-times, in agreement
with previous results in the metric
variables via Regge-Teitelboim methods \cite{Ashtekar-Varadarajan1994}. Although
the CHF provides an elegant and short
derivation for the energy (and other relevant symmetry generators as
discussed in \cite{crv1,crv2}), the energy is only determined up to a constant,
that shifts the region in which the energy is defined.
Next, we consider the 2+1 decomposition of the two first order actions.
We follow two different strategies. The first one, that we shall call the ``Witten" approach (See
\cite{Witten1988} and \cite{romano} for details), exploits the fact that the bulk action has the
structure of a $BF$ theory, where no underlying spacetime metric is assumed. The second approach,
as put forward by Barbero and Varadarajan \cite{Barbero-Varadarajan1994}, uses the fact that there is an
underlying metric structure, and resembles the 3+1 first order case (as described in \cite{romano}). In
both cases, we show that the resulting canonical theories are well defined and obtain the Hamiltonian from
the corresponding boundary terms. We find that the energy
associated to the spacetime depends on the choice of action principle, differing by a constant. For the
simplest Palatini action, the interval in which the energy is defined is positive,
and assigns a zero value of energy to Minkowski spacetime. For the fully gauge invariant action,
we shall show that the energy is always negative and coincides with the values assigned by Marolf
and Pati\~no. Thus, from the perspective of the first order formalism, Minkowski spacetime can
consistently have {\it either}, zero,
{\it or} a negative energy equal to $-1/4G$, depending on the choice of consistent action employed as a
starting point.
The structure of the manuscript is as follows. In Sec.~\ref{sec:2} we introduce the notion a asymptotic
flatness for the first order variables. In Sec.~\ref{sec:3} we define the two actions that we shall
consider in the manuscript. We study their finiteness and differentiability. In Sec.~\ref{sec:4} we employ
the covariant Hamiltonian formalism to find the symplectic structure and the corresponding conserved
quantities. In particular, we find an expression for the energy (up to a constant). In Sec.~\ref{sec:5} we
perform the 2+1 decomposition of the action, following two different methods and obtain the energy as the
contribution to the Hamiltonian coming from the boundary. We end with a discussion in Sec.~\ref{sec:6}. We
have included two appendices.
Throughout the manuscript we set $c=1$, but leave the gravitational constant $G$ explicit. Note that we are {\emph{not}} setting $8\pi G=1$ as is normally done in the 2+1 literature.
\section{Preliminaries: Asymptotics in 3 dimensions}
\label{sec:2}
In this section we shall recall some subtleties that appear in the definition of asymptotically flat 3D
spacetimes. We shall contrast the case at hand with that of ordinary 4D spacetimes.
Intuitively speaking, in $(3+1)$ dimensions we can think of an asymptotically flat spacetime as an
spacetime with certain matter content in a bounded region outside of which the metric approaches the
Minkowski metric. In the standard definition we say that a smooth space-time metric $g$ on
$\mathcal{R}$ is \emph{weakly asymptotically flat at spatial infinity} if there
exist a Minkowski metric $\eta$ such that, outside a spatially compact world tube, $(g - \eta)$ admits an
asymptotic expansion to order 1 and $\lim_{r^{m} \rightarrow \infty } (g - \eta) = 0$.\footnote{The
explicit form of the expansion depends on the coordinates. For instance, in 3-dimensions and cylindrical
coordinates, as we shall use through the present work, an asymptotic expansion to order $m$ of a function
$f$ has the form,
\begin{equation}
f(r, \theta) = \sum_{n=0} ^{m} \frac{\,^{n}f(\theta)}{r^{n}} + o(r^{-m}),
\end{equation}
where $r$ and $\theta$ are the coordinates on cylinders with $r = const$ and the remainder $o(r ^{-m})$
has the property that
\begin{equation}
\lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} r \,\,\, o(r ^{-m}) = 0.
\end{equation}}
In a (2+1) spacetime the situation is slightly different. For illustrative purposes, let us consider a mass distribution, say a point particle at the origin, $r=0$. Outside this region, $r>0$, the metric does not approach a flat metric, \emph{it is flat.} So, how can we define an asymptotically flat space-time?
In order to define an (2+1) asymptotically flat spacetime, we can first study this particular spacetime corresponding to a point particle of mass $M$ at the origin,
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{d} s^2=-\mathrm{d} t^2+r^{-8GM}(\mathrm{d} r^2+r^2\mathrm{d}\theta^2) \ \ \ {\mathrm{for}} \ r > 0 \label{pp}
\end{equation}
where $t,r,\theta$ are the cylindrical coordinates, $t\in(-\infty, +\infty)$, $r\in [0,\infty)$, and $\theta\in [0,2\pi)$. This metric is flat everywhere except at the origin. To see that, we can define $\rho:= \frac{r^\alpha}{\alpha}$, $\bar\theta:=\alpha\theta$ with $\alpha := 1-4GM$.
So the metric takes the form,
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{d} s^2=-\mathrm{d} t^2+\mathrm{d}\rho^2+\rho^2\mathrm{d}\bar\theta^2, \label{ppfl}
\end{equation}
from which the flatness of the metric is explicit. This is due to the fact that in a three-dimensional manifold satisfying Einstein's equations, whenever $T_{ab}=0$ the Riemann tensor is zero, i.e. the spacetime is flat on those points\footnote{We know that the Riemann tensor can be split into its trace and trace-free part, the Ricci tensor and scalar, and the Weyl tensor respectively. In 3-dimensions the Weyl tensor is identically zero, and by Einstein's equations if $T_{ab}=0$ implies that the Ricci tensor and scalar are also zero. Therefore the Riemann tensor is zero, so locally the space-time is flat. Note also that here we are dealing with asymptotically flat space-time, in contrast to the conformally flat picture where the vanishing of the Cotton tensor is equivalent to the metric being conformally flat.}.
In order to further understand the global structure of this spacetime, one can note that $\bar\theta \in
[0, 2 \pi\alpha)$ with ($0 < \alpha \leq 1$). Therefore, there is a deficit angle which, despite
the local flatness for $r>0$, makes this spacetime not globally equivalent to Minkowski space
(due to the conic singularity).
We are now in position of specifying the notion of asymptotic flatness for 3D gravity. Instead of
requiring that all metrics approach a `single' Minkowski metric at infinity, one has now a one parameter
family of possible, inequivalent, asymptotic configurations labelled, intuitively, by the ``mass $M$" of
the asymptotic spacetime. That is,
we are looking for a metric that at spatial infinity approaches that of a point particle at
the origin (\ref{pp}).
Thus, we can define a 2+1 space-time to be asymptotically flat if, the line element admits an expansion of the form\footnote{A word on notation, ${\cal O} (r^{-m} )$ means that those terms \emph{include} a term proportional to $r^{-m}$ and terms that decay faster, in contrast with $o(r^{-m})$ that only includes terms that decay faster than $r^{-m}$, for instance, terms of the form $\frac{f}{r^{-m+\varepsilon}}$.} \cite{Marolf-Patino2006},
\begin{eqnarray}\label{2mas1falloffmetric}
\nonumber \mathrm{d} s^2&=&-\left(1 +{\cal O}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)\right)\mathrm{d} t^2 +r^{-\beta} \left[\left(1 +{\cal O}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)\right)\mathrm{d} r^2+r^2\left(1 +{\cal O}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)\right) \mathrm{d}\theta^2\right] \\
&&+{\cal O}(r^{-1-\beta/2})\mathrm{d} t\mathrm{d}\theta ,
\end{eqnarray}
Note that in the asymptotic region (when $r \rightarrow \infty$) the previous line element approaches to the background metric (in Cartesian coordinates),
\begin{equation}\label{eta}
\bar{\eta}_{ab} = \begin{pmatrix}
-1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & r^{-\beta} & 0 \\
0 & 0 & r^{-\beta}\\
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation}
Note that we are approaching spatial infinity by some one-parameter family of boundaries of regions $\mathcal{M}_{\rho} \subset \mathcal{M}$ (cylinders throughout the present work, since they are more suited for Hamiltonian methods, as we plan to use in the following sections. Furthermore, the use of hyperboloids in the $3D$ context is less natural than in the $4D$ case \cite{aes, cwe, crv1,crv2}, due to the lack of asympototic Lorentz invariance, since, unless $M=0$, the asymptotically flat spacetime previously defined is not globally isometric to the three dimensional Minkowski space). $\{\mathcal{M}_{\rho} | \rho > 0\}$ are an increasing family, i.e. $\mathcal{M}_{\rho} \subset \mathcal{M}_{\rho '}$ whenever $\rho < \rho '$ and such that they cover $\mathcal{M}$ ($\bigcup_{\rho} \mathcal{M}_{\rho} = \mathcal{M}$). This procedure of taking a finite region $\mathcal{M}_{\rho}$ represents a cut-off for space-time and then we remove it by the limiting process $\rho \rightarrow \infty$. We take $\rho = r + {\cal O}(r^{0})$. This is called a `cylindrical cut-off' in \cite{mm}.
To summarize, an asymptotically flat spacetime approaches that of a point particle (as opposed to a fixed Minkowski metric in the $4D$ case). In terms of the matter fields that might be present in the spacetime, the particular falloff conditions in the geometric degrees of freedom imply certain decay rates for matter. Since they do not have much of an impact in the quantities we are considering here (just as in the 3+1 case) we shall not consider any matter content in particular. For a related treatment of asymptotically flatness from the conformal perspective (where the particular decay rates on matter are discussed), see \cite{symmetry}.
\section{The action and the boundary conditions of the first order variables}
\label{sec:3}
We can consider the Palatini action in three dimensions, whose equations of motion are equivalent to those given by the three dimensional Einstein-Hilbert action. Now the dynamical variables instead of the metric are a triad $e$ and a Lorentz connection $\omega$, both valued on the Lie algebra of $SO(2,1)$\footnote{The co-tetrad $e_a^I$ has an internal index $I$ `living' in an internal 3 dimensional vector space. Since the Lie algebra of $SO(2,1)$ is three dimensional, we can identify them.}.
Furthermore, we add to the Palatini action a boundary term in order to have a well posed action principle, that is, we want the action to be finite when evaluated on histories compatible with the boundary conditions, and also differentiable.\footnote{For further discussion on what it means for an action to be differentiable see \cite{crv1,crv2}.}
As we have emphasized, we want to begin with a well posed action principle, so it is natural to start with the three dimensional analogue of the four dimensional well posed Palatini action \cite{aes}. That is, let us define the \emph{the Standard Palatini action with boundary term} (SPB) as,
\begin{equation}\label{SPB
S_{\textrm{SPB}}[e,\omega] = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} e^{I} \wedge F_{I} \; \; - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M}} e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I}\, ,
\end{equation}
where $\kappa=8\pi G$.
Now, the natural question arises: is the boundary term gauge invariant? (under local Lorentz transformations). We can answer this in two ways. The first is by noting that we can perform a Lorentz transformation on the internal indices in (\ref{AFfalloff-cotriad}), (\ref{AFfalloff-triad}) and we still have an asymptotically flat configuration. So, in a sense, the internal directions are `arbitrary', therefore without loss of generality we can fix on the boundary one of the internal directions $\partial_{a} n^{I} = 0$ as in the 4-dimensional case \cite{aes,bn}, and the boundary term will be invariant under the residual gauge transformations. One should also expect that, just as in the 3+1 case one has to fix the asymptotic tetrad in order to have a consistent formalism \cite{CR}, in our case this is also needed.
On the other hand we can add the following term to the action,
\begin{equation}\label{AdditionalHarmlessBoundaryTerm}
\frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{I} \wedge n_{K} \mathrm{d} n_{L}
\end{equation}
with this addition, when $\alpha = 1$, the boundary term in (\ref{SPB}) becomes\footnote{
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{I} \wedge n_{K} \mathcal{D} n_{L} &=& \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IK}\, _{L} e_{I} \wedge n_{K} \left(\mathrm{d}n^{K} + \varepsilon^{L}\, _{MN} \omega^{M} n^{N} \right)\\
&=& \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{I} \wedge n_{K} \mathrm{d}n_{L} + \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{I} \wedge n_{K} \varepsilon_{LMN} \omega^{M} n^{N}
\end{eqnarray}
},
\begin{equation}\label{AppLI-Result}
-\frac{1}{\kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M}} e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} -\frac{1}{\kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{I} \wedge n_{K} \mathrm{d} n_{L} = -\frac{1}{\kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{I} \wedge n_{K} \mathcal{D} n_{L} .
\end{equation}
So instead of the action (\ref{SPB}) we can begin with the \emph{manifestly Lorentz invariant well posed action} (LIP)\footnote{Note the global minus sign, this is introduced since the Einstein Hilbert action with Gibbons Hawking term is equivalent to this action with minus sign (see appendix \ref{Appendix-Equiv-Einstein-vs-Palatini} for more details), so we can compare our results here with those obtained in the second order formulation \cite{Ashtekar-Varadarajan1994, Marolf-Patino2006}.
},
\begin{equation}\label{LIP
S_{\textrm{LIP}}[e,\omega] = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} e^{I} \wedge F_{I} \; \; - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{I} \wedge n_{K} \mathcal{D} n_{L}.
\end{equation}
Note that the \emph{general Palatini action} contains both the SPB and LIP cases, when $\alpha = 0$ and $\alpha = 1$ respectively, we shall use it to compare both actions,
\begin{equation}
S_{\textrm{GP}}[e,\omega] = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} e^{I} \wedge F_{I} \; \; - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M}} e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} - \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{I} \wedge n_{K} \mathrm{d} n_{L}
\end{equation}
Moreover, we can show that (\ref{AdditionalHarmlessBoundaryTerm}) is a constant when evaluated on
asymptotically flat boundary conditions (see Appendix \ref{NewBoundaryTerm-constant} for the details on
the derivation), so it does not spoil finiteness nor differentiability of the action. Therefore
(\ref{LIP}) is still a well posed action. Further, the term (\ref{AppLI-Result}) is related the Gibbons-
Hawking term needed for the Einstein-Hilbert action to be well posed and the action (\ref{LIP}) is
\emph{the same} as the Einstein-Hilbert action with Gibbons-Hawking term \cite{Marolf-Patino2006}.
As in the four dimensional case this is a first order action, we only have first derivatives on our
configuration variables, that is why we also refer to these variables as first order variables.
Some comments are in order. We are writing the action in a way that is independent of the Lie group $G$ on which is defined \cite{romano}, which does not need the existence of a metric to be defined. In the case of an arbitrary $G$, $e_{aI}$ can no longer be thought of as the cotriad. The action (\ref{SPB}) is then a functional of a $\pounds_{G}-$valued connection one-form $\omega_{a} ^{I}$ and a $\pounds_{G} ^{*}-$valued covector field $e_{aI}$. Where $\pounds_{G}-$ stands out for the Lie algebra of $G$ and $\pounds ^{\star} _{G}-$ its dual. When we chose $G=SO(2,1)$ we recover three-dimensional general relativity and we can think of $e_{aI}$ as a cotriad. This coincidence is exclusive of the three-dimensional case.\\
\subsection{Fall-off conditions}\label{SecFallOff}
To check that, in fact, the previous action is well posed we need to specify the boundary conditions on the first order variables $e$ and $\omega$, in this case asymptotically flat boundary conditions.
From the line element (\ref{2mas1falloffmetric}),
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber \mathrm{d} s^2&=&-\left(1 +{\cal O}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)\right)\mathrm{d} t^2 +r^{-\beta} \left[\left(1 +{\cal O}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)\right)\mathrm{d} r^2+r^2\left(1 +{\cal O}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)\right) \mathrm{d}\theta^2\right] \\
&&+{\cal O}(r^{-1-\beta/2})\mathrm{d} t\mathrm{d}\theta ,
\end{eqnarray}
we can find the fall-off conditions of $g_{ab}$ as in \cite{Ashtekar-Varadarajan1994, Marolf-Patino2006}, with $a,b,c = 0,1,2$ spacetime indices, and therefore remembering that $g_{ab} = \eta_{IJ} e_{a} ^{I} e_{b} ^{J}$ where $\eta_{IJ} = \mathrm{diag}(-1,1,1)$ is the Minkowski metric, the fall-off conditions of the first order variables.
We can assume that the co-triads and the triads admit an asymptotic expansion of the form\footnote{A tensor field $T^{a...b}\,_{c...d}$ will be said to admit an asymptotic expansion to order $m$ if all its component in the \emph{Cartesian} chart $x^{a}$ do so. Note that apart from the $r^{-\beta}$ factor in the spatial part of (\ref{2mas1falloffmetric}) the components in cartesian coordinates admit an expansion of order 1 in analogy with the standard definition of an asymptotically flat spacetime for 4 dimensional spacetimes \cite{aes, cwe, crv1,crv2}, and also we assume that the first order variables, apart from a factor of $r^{-\beta /2}$, do so.}
\begin{equation}\label{AFfalloff-cotriad}
e^{I} _{a} = \delta^{0} _{a} \left(\,^{o}\bar{e}^{I} _{0} + \frac{\,^{1}\bar{e}^{I} _{0}(\theta )}{r} + o(r^{-1})\right) + r^{-\beta / 2} \left(\,^{o}\bar{e}^{I} _{\bar{a}} + \frac{\,^{1}\bar{e}^{I} _{\bar{a}}(\theta )}{r} + o(r^{-1})\right) \delta^{\bar{a}} _{a},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{AFfalloff-triad}
e_{I} ^{a} = \delta_{0} ^{a} \left(\,^{o}\bar{e}_{I} ^{0} + \frac{\,^{1}\bar{e}_{I} ^{0}(\theta )}{r} + o(r^{-1})\right) + r^{\beta / 2} \left(\,^{o}\bar{e}_{I} ^{\bar{a}} + \frac{\,^{1}\bar{e}_{I} ^{\bar{a}}(\theta )}{r} + o(r^{-1})\right) \delta_{\bar{a}} ^{a}.
\end{equation}
We define,
\begin{equation}\label{Def-0e}
\, ^{0} e_{a} ^{I} := \, ^{0} \bar{e}_{0} ^{I} \delta^{0} _{a} + r ^{- \beta / 2} \,^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{a}} ^{I} \delta^{\bar{a}} _{a} \,\,\,\,\, \mathrm{and} \,\,\,\,\, \, ^{1} e_{a} ^{I} := \frac{ \, ^{1} \bar{e}_{0} ^{I} }{r} \delta^{0} _{a} + r ^{- \beta / 2} \frac{\,^{1} \bar{e}_{\bar{a}} ^{I}}{r} \delta^{\bar{a}} _{a}
\end{equation}
such that $\bar{\eta} _{ab} = \eta_{IJ} \,^{0} e_{a} ^{I} \,^{0} e_{b} ^{J}$ given by (\ref{eta}), where $\eta_{IJ} = \mathrm{diag}(-1,1,1)$ is the Minkowski metric.
As for the triads, we assume that the connection $\omega_{a} ^{I}$ admits an expansion of the form,
\begin{equation}\label{AFfalloff-connection}
\omega^{I} _{a} = \,^{o}\bar{\omega}^{I} _{a} + \frac{\,^{1}\bar{\omega}^{I} _{a}(\theta )}{r} + \frac{\,^{2}\bar{\omega}^{I} _{a}(\theta )}{r^{2}} + o(r^{-2}),
\end{equation}
Even though this expansion seems different from that of the triad, we can check that this expansion is derived from that of the triad and co-triad by means of the condition, De = 0, to first order.
Now we have to recall that any connection $D$ can be written as $D = \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} + \omega$ , where $\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}$ is any other connection. When there is a `preferred' connection available, we can write all the other connections as that one plus a vector potential $\omega$. Since there is no canonical choice of this \emph{standard flat connection}, $\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}$, within this particular problem it will be convenient to choose that $\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{[a} \, ^{0} \bar{e}_{b]} ^{I} = 0$. Using local coordinates and a local trivialization of $E = U_\mathcal{M} \times SO(2,1)$, where $U_\mathcal{M}$ is an open set on $\mathcal{M}$, the components of the connection for the condition of the compatibility of the triad with the connection, $De = 0$ will look like,
\begin{equation}\label{Deigual0}
D_{[a} e_{b]} ^{I} = \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{[a} e_{b]} ^{I} + \varepsilon^{IJK} \omega_{[a|J} e_{b]K} = 0.
\end{equation}
From (\ref{Deigual0}) it is a straightforward calculation to see that the spin connection can be written in terms of the triad as,
\begin{equation}
\omega_{c} ^{M} = - \frac{1}{2} \left( \varepsilon_{L} \, ^{KM} e^{a} _{K} e^{bL} e_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{[a} e_{b]} ^{I} - \varepsilon_{L} \, ^{KM} e^{a} _{K} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{[c} e_{a]} ^{L} - \varepsilon_{L} \, ^{KM} e^{bL} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{[b} e_{c] K} \right).
\end{equation}
The leading term of the spin connection can be found from the previous equation considering the leading terms of the triad and cotriad,
\begin{equation}\label{zeroOmegaExpressionLeadingterm}
\, ^{Leading} \omega_{c} ^{M} = - \frac{1}{2} \left( \varepsilon_{L} \, ^{KM} \,^{0} e^{a} _{K} \,^{0} e^{bL}\,^{0} e_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{[a} \,^{0} e_{b]} ^{I} - \varepsilon_{L} \, ^{KM} \,^{0} e^{a} _{K} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{[c} \,^{0} e_{a]} ^{L} - \varepsilon_{L} \, ^{KM} \,^{0} e^{bL} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{[b} \,^{0} e_{c] K} \right).
\end{equation}
where $\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{b} \, ^{0} \bar{e}_{a} ^{I} = 0$. Note that from (\ref{AFfalloff-cotriad}),
\begin{equation}
\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{b} \, ^{0} e_{a} ^{I} = \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{b} ( \, ^{0} \bar{e}_{0} ^{I} \delta_{a} ^{0} ) + \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{b} (r^{-\beta /2} \,^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{a}} ^{I} \delta_{a} ^{\bar{a}} ) = \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{b} (r^{-\beta /2}) \,^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{a}} ^{I} \delta_{a} ^{\bar{a}} = (\partial_{b} r^{- \beta / 2}) \,^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{a}} ^{I} \delta_{a} ^{\bar{a}}
\end{equation}
but $\partial_{b} r^{- \beta / 2} = - \frac{1}{2} \beta r^{-1 - \beta / 2} \partial_{b} r$. Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{0barDe}
\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{b} \, ^{0} e_{a} ^{I} = (- \frac{1}{2} \beta r^{-1 - \beta / 2} \partial_{b} r) \,^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{a}} ^{I} \delta_{a} ^{\bar{a}}= (- \frac{1}{2} \beta r^{-1 } \partial_{b} r) \,^{0} e_{\bar{a}} ^{I} \delta_{a} ^{\bar{a}}
\end{equation}
Taking into account the previous equation and the fall-off conditions (\ref{AFfalloff-cotriad}) and (\ref{AFfalloff-triad}), equation (\ref{zeroOmegaExpressionLeadingterm}) becomes (using that $\partial_{0} r = 0$),
\begin{equation}
\, ^{Leading} \omega_{c} ^{M} = \frac{\beta}{2r} \varepsilon_{L} \, ^{KM} \,^{0} \bar{e}_{K} ^{\bar{a}} \,^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{c}} ^{L} \delta_{c} ^{\bar{c}},
\end{equation}
then considering the expansion (\ref{AFfalloff-connection}) we can see that,
\begin{equation}\label{FalloffOmegaZero}
\,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{c} ^{M} = \frac{\beta}{2} \partial_{\bar{a}} r \varepsilon_{L}\, ^{KM} \,^{0} \bar{e}_{K} ^{\bar{a}} \,^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{c}} ^{L} \delta_{c} ^{\bar{c}}.
\end{equation}
Which implies that $\frac{\,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{c} ^{M}}{r}$ is the leading term of $\omega_{c} ^{M}$ and that $\,^{0} \omega_{c} ^{M} = 0$ as well as $\,^{1} \omega_{0} ^{M} = 0$.
\subsection{Well posedness of the action}
As we already mentioned, beginning with a well posed action principle under asymptotically flat boundary conditions, we want to find an expression for the energy under various approaches. We want to analyse whether this results coincide with those in the second order formalism \cite{Ashtekar-Varadarajan1994, Marolf-Patino2006} and also the relation and differences among the different paths we take: the covariant Hamiltonian formalism (CHF), and the canonical one, where we take two different $2+1-$decompositions.
But first we have to check that the action principle we are working with is well posed, i.e. finite and differentiable under asymptotically flat boundary conditions and variations. With the fall-off conditions of the first order variables found in section \ref{SecFallOff} we are ready to undertake this task.
\subsubsection{Finiteness}\label{Finiteness}
Since the term (\ref{AdditionalHarmlessBoundaryTerm}) is a finite constant when evaluated on the boundary\footnote{See appendix \ref{NewBoundaryTerm-constant} for details.}, it does not spoil finiteness. Then, it is only necessary to cheek that the action (\ref{SPB}) is finite, so the manifestly gauge invariant action (\ref{LIP}) is also finite. The action (\ref{SPB}) can be rewritten as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber S[e, \omega] &=& - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} e^{I} \wedge F_{I} \; \; - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M}} e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I}\\
&=& - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \left(e^{I} \wedge \mathrm{d} \omega_{I} + \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon_{I} \, ^{JK} e^{I} \wedge \omega_{J} \wedge \omega_{K} \right) \; \; - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M}} e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I}
\end{eqnarray}
since $F_{I} = \mathrm{d} \omega_{I} + \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon_{I} \, ^{JK} \omega_{J} \wedge \omega_{K} $ and,
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{d} (e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} ) = \mathrm{d} e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} - e^{I} \wedge \mathrm{d} \omega_{I} \,\, \Rightarrow \,\, e^{I} \wedge \mathrm{d} \omega_{I} = \mathrm{d} e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} - \mathrm{d} (e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} ).
\end{equation}
Then,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ExpressionFiniteness}
\nonumber S[e, \omega] &=& -\frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \left(\mathrm{d} e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} + \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon_{I} \, ^{JK} e^{I} \wedge \omega_{J} \wedge \omega_{K} - \mathrm{d} (e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} )\right) \; \; - \frac{1}{ \kappa}\int_{\partial \mathcal{M}} e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I}\\
&=& - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \left(\mathrm{d} e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} + \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon_{I} \, ^{JK} e^{I} \wedge \omega_{J} \wedge \omega_{K} \right).
\end{eqnarray}
The leading term of the previous equation is,
\begin{equation}\label{ActionFinitenessFirstorder}
\,^{0} S[e, \omega] = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \left(\mathrm{d} \,^{0} e^{I} \wedge \,^{1} \omega_{I} + \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon_{I} \, ^{JK} \,^{0} e^{I} \wedge \,^{1} \omega_{J} \wedge \,^{1} \omega_{K} \right),
\end{equation}
but we already used the compatibility condition with the triad to first order to obtain the fall-off conditions on $\omega$, (\ref{Deigual0}), which can also be written as,
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{d} \,^{0} e^{I} - \varepsilon^{I}\, _{JK} \,^{1} \omega^{K} \wedge \,^{0} e^{J} = 0
\end{equation}
therefore, we can rewrite (\ref{ActionFinitenessFirstorder}) as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber \,^{0} S[e, \omega] &=& - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \left(\mathrm{d} \,^{0} e^{I} \wedge \,^{1} \omega_{I} - \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon_{I} \, ^{JK} \,^{0} e^{I} \wedge \,^{1} \omega_{J} \wedge \,^{1} \omega_{K} \right) \\
&=& - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \left( \mathrm{d} \,^{0} e^{I} \wedge \,^{1} \omega_{I} - \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{d} \,^{0} e^{I} \wedge \,^{1} \omega_{I} \right) = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{d} \,^{0} e^{I} \wedge \,^{1} \omega_{I}.
\end{eqnarray}
Now, using (\ref{0barDe}) and (\ref{FalloffOmegaZero}) the leading term is\footnote{Where $\mathrm{d} x^{a} \wedge \mathrm{d} x^{b} \wedge \mathrm{d} x^{c} = \tilde{\varepsilon}^{abc}\mathrm{d}^{3}x$, with $\tilde{\varepsilon}^{abc}$ the Levi-Civita tensor density of weight +1, that is related with the Levi-Civita tensor, $\varepsilon^{abc}$, by $\tilde{\varepsilon}^{abc} = (s) \sqrt{|g|} \varepsilon^{abc}$ with $g$ the determinant of the spacetime metric and $s$ the signature of the metric. },
\begin{equation}\label{Finiteness-LeadingZero}
\frac{1}{4\kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{a} \, ^{0} e_{b} ^{I} \,^{1} \omega_{c} ^{K} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{abc} \mathrm{d}^{3} x = 0,
\end{equation}
since\footnote{$\,^{1} \omega_{0} ^{K} = 0$ is zero from the fall off conditions on $\omega$, $\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{a} \, ^{0} e_{0} ^{I} = 0$ because $\, ^{0} e_{0} ^{I} = \, ^{0} \bar{e}_{0} ^{I}$ and $D_{0} \, ^{0} e_{\bar{a}} ^{I} = 0$ because we ask the condition of the compatibility of the triad with the connection to be satisfied to first order to find the fall-off conditions on $\omega$,
\[ D_{0} \,^{0} e_{b} ^{I} = \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{0} \,^{0} e_{b} ^{I} + \varepsilon^{IJK} \,^{1} \omega_{0J} \,^{0} e_{bK} = 0.
\]
since $\,^{1} \omega_{0} ^{K} = 0$ then $\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{0} \,^{0} e_{b} ^{I} =0$. } $\,^{1} \omega_{0} ^{K} = 0$, $\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{0} \, ^{0} e_{\bar{a}} ^{I} = 0$ and $\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{a} \, ^{0} e_{0} ^{I} = 0$. On the other hand note that we could have chosen to write (\ref{ExpressionFiniteness}), using $De =0$ to first order as well, as,
\begin{equation}
\,^{0} S[e, \omega] = - \frac{1}{4 \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \varepsilon^{I}\, _{JK} \,^{0} e^{I} \wedge \,^{1} \omega^{J} \wedge \,^{1} \omega^{K} = - \frac{1}{4 \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \varepsilon^{I}\, _{JK} \,^{0} e_{a} ^{I} \,^{1} \omega_{b} ^{J} \,^{1} \omega_{c} ^{K} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{abc} \mathrm{d}^{3} x.
\end{equation}
In the previous equation, using (\ref{Def-0e}) and (\ref{FalloffOmegaZero}), the only nonvanishing term is
\begin{equation}
\,^{0} S[e, \omega] = - \frac{1}{4 \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \varepsilon^{I}\, _{JK} \,^{0} \bar{e}_{0} ^{I} \frac{ \,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{\bar{b}} ^{J}}{r} \frac{\,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{\bar{c}} ^{K}}{r} \varepsilon^{0\bar{b}\bar{c}}\, r \mathrm{d} r \mathrm{d} \theta \mathrm{d} t = \int_{\mathcal{M}}{ \cal{O}}( r^{-1}) \mathrm{d} r\, .
\end{equation}
Our region of integration $\mathcal{M}$ is bounded by $\partial \mathcal{M} = M_{1} \cup M_{2} \cup \mathcal{I}$ with its corresponding orientation. In order to check finiteness it is enough to check that the integral over a spatial hypersurface is finite. This is true since we are integrating over a finite time interval where the Cauchy surfaces $M_{1}$ and $M_{2}$ are asymptotically time-translated with respect to each other. Such spacetimes $\mathcal{M}$ are referred to as \emph{cylindrical slabs} \cite{aes} or as \emph{cylindrical temporal cut-off} \cite{mm}.
Note that on a Cauchy slice the only dependency on $r$ of the previous equation is due to $\,^{1}
\omega_{c}^{K} ={ \cal{O}}( r^{-1})$, so the integral over $r$ goes as $\int { \cal{O}}( r^{-1}) \mathrm{d} r$ that
\emph{may} logarithmically diverge in the limit $r \rightarrow \infty$, but we already proved in
(\ref{Finiteness-LeadingZero}) that this term is zero. Then, the next to leading terms decay faster in $r$
so, in the limit $r \rightarrow \infty$, they go to zero.
Therefore, the integral is finite \emph{even off shell}.
\subsubsection{Differentiability}
In order for an action to be differentiable the variation of the action needs to take the form,
\begin{equation}
\delta S [e,\omega] = \int_{\mathcal{M}} \left[\mathbf{E}_{e} \wedge \delta e + \mathbf{E}_{\omega} \wedge \delta \omega \right] + \int_{\partial M} \tilde{\theta} (e^{I}, \omega^{I}, \delta e^{I}, \delta \omega^{I}),
\end{equation}
and in order for $\mathbf{E}_{e}$ and $\mathbf{E}_{\omega}$ to be the Euler-Lagrange equations of motion, the boundary term needs to be zero when evaluated on histories compatible with the boundary conditions. Since the term (\ref{AdditionalHarmlessBoundaryTerm}) is constant when evaluated on those histories, its variation is zero so it does not spoil differentiability. Therefore we only need to check whether the action (\ref{SPB}) is differentiable.
The variation of the 3-dimensional Palatini action with boundary term (\ref{SPB}) is,
\begin{equation}
\delta S [e,\omega] = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \left[\delta e^{I} \wedge F_{I} + e^{I} \wedge \delta F_{I}\right] - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M}} \left[\delta e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} + e^{I} \wedge \delta \omega_{I}\right],
\end{equation}
but
\begin{equation}
\delta F_{I} = \mathrm{d} \delta \omega_{I} + \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon_{I}\, ^{JK} \delta \omega_{J} \wedge \omega_{K} + \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon_{I} \, ^{JK} \omega_{J} \wedge \delta \omega_{K} = \mathrm{d} \delta \omega_{I} + \varepsilon_{I}\, ^{JK} \delta \omega_{J} \wedge \omega_{K}
\end{equation}
then, the variation becomes,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{variation}
\delta S [e,\omega] = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \delta e^{I} \wedge F_{I} - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \left( \mathrm{d} e^{J} + \varepsilon^{JIK} e_{I} \wedge \omega_{K} \right) \wedge \delta \omega_{J} - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M}} \delta e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} .
\end{eqnarray}
If the boundary term is zero under the boundary conditions, the action is said to be differentiable and the equations of motion are,
\begin{equation}\label{PalatiniEoM}
F_{I} = 0 \,\,\,\,\, \mathrm{and} \,\,\,\,\, De^{J} = \mathrm{d} e^{J} + \varepsilon^{JIK} e_{I} \wedge \omega_{K} = 0.
\end{equation}
That are equivalent to those given by the three-dimensional Einstein-Hilbert action. The boundary term is,
\begin{equation}
- \frac{1}{ \kappa}\int_{\partial \mathcal{M}} \delta e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \left( -\int_{M_{1}} + \int_{M_{2}} + \int_{\mathcal{I}} \right) \delta e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I}
\end{equation}
where we are considering that our integration region $\mathcal{M}$ is bounded by $\partial \mathcal{M} = M_{1} \cup M_{2} \cup \mathcal{I}$ with its corresponding orientation. We are taking, as usual, $\delta e^{I} = \delta \omega_{I} = 0$ on the space-like surfaces $M_{1}$ and $M_{2}$. We are left only with the integral on the time-like boundary $\mathcal{I}$. Recall that we are approaching spatial infinity by a family of cylinders, $C_{r}$ with $r=const$, in the limit when $r \rightarrow \infty$.
To check differentiability we have to prove that
\begin{equation}\label{BoundaryTerm-differentiability}
\lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{r}} \delta e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} = 0,
\end{equation}
when evaluated on histories compatible with the asymptotically flat boundary conditions. Note that we are allowing all the possible variations compatible with the boundary conditions and not only those of compact support. It is enough to check the behaviour of the leading term (the next to leading terms decay `faster' as $r$ goes to infinity).
Considering the asymptotic conditions on $e_{a} ^{I}$ and $\omega_{a} ^{I}$, (\ref{AFfalloff-cotriad}) and (\ref{AFfalloff-connection}), and the fact that $\frac{ \,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{a} ^{I}}{r}$ is the leading term of $\omega_{a} ^{I}$ (thus $\,^{0}\omega_{a} ^{I} = 0$) with $\,^{1}\omega_{0} ^{I} = 0$; and using (\ref{Def-0e}), equation (\ref{BoundaryTerm-differentiability}) can be written as\footnote{Where $\varepsilon^{ab}$ is the two-dimensional Levi-Civita tensor related to the tensor density of weight +1 by $\varepsilon^{ab} = \frac{(s)}{\sqrt{|\gamma|}} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab}$, where $\gamma_{ab}$ is the induced metric on the timelike boundary, $\gamma$ its determinant and $s$ the signature of $\gamma_{ab}$.},
\begin{eqnarray}\label{BoundaryTerm-differentiability-Full}
\nonumber \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{r}} \delta e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{r}} \delta \left( \,^{0} e_{a} ^{I} + \,^{1} e_{a} ^{I} + o(r^{-2}) \right) \left( \frac{ \,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{\bar{b}} ^{J}}{r} \delta_{b} ^{\bar{b}} + \frac{ \,^{2} \bar{\omega}_{b} ^{J}}{r^{2}} + o(r^{-2}) \right) \eta_{JI} \varepsilon^{ab} r \mathrm{d} \theta \mathrm{d} t\\
\nonumber &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{r}} \left[ \delta ^{0} e_{a} ^{I} \,\, \frac{ \,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{\bar{b}} ^{J}}{r} \delta_{b} ^{\bar{b}} + \delta ^{0} e_{a} ^{I} \,\, \frac{ \,^{2} \bar{\omega}_{b} ^{J}}{r^{2}} + \delta ^{1} e_{a} ^{I} \,\, \frac{ \,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{\bar{b}} ^{J}}{r} \delta_{b} ^{\bar{b}} + o(r^{-2}) \right] \eta_{JI} \varepsilon^{ab} r \mathrm{d} \theta \mathrm{d} t\\
&=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{r}} \left[ \delta ^{0} e_{a} ^{I} \,\, \frac{ \,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{\bar{b}} ^{J}}{r} \delta_{b} ^{\bar{b}} + { \cal{O}}( r^{-2})\right] \eta_{JI} \varepsilon^{ab} r \mathrm{d} \theta \mathrm{d} t.
\end{eqnarray}
but\footnote{
From (\ref{Def-0e}) and since $\,^{0}\bar{e} _{a} ^{I}$ is a fixed flat frame at the asymptotic region, $\delta \,^{0}\bar{e} _{a} ^{I} = 0$, then,
\begin{equation}
\delta \,^{0} e_{a} ^{I} = \delta \left( \,^{0} \bar{e}_{0} ^{I} \delta_{a} ^{0} + r^{- \beta /2} \,^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{a}} ^{I} \delta_{a} ^{\bar{a}} \right) = \delta (r^{-\beta / 2}) \,^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{a}} ^{I} \delta_{a} ^{\bar{a}}.
\end{equation}
In the timelike boundary $\delta r = 0$ so
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber \delta \left( r^{-\beta/2} \right) &=& - \frac{\beta }{2} r^{-\beta / 2 - 1} \delta r - \frac{r^{- \beta / 2}}{2} \log (r) \delta \beta\\
&=& - \frac{r^{- \beta / 2}}{2} \log (r) \delta \beta
\end{eqnarray}}
\begin{equation}\label{delta-Ceroe}
\delta \,^{0} e_{a} ^{I} = \left( - \frac{r^{- \beta / 2}}{2} \log (r) \delta \beta \right) \,^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{a}} ^{I} \delta_{a} ^{\bar{a}}.
\end{equation}
Using (\ref{delta-Ceroe}), equation (\ref{BoundaryTerm-differentiability-Full}) becomes,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{BoundaryTerm-differentiability-FullFull}
\nonumber \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{r}} \delta e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{r}} \left[ \left( - \frac{r^{- \beta / 2}}{2} \log (r) \delta \beta \right) \,^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{a}} ^{I} \delta_{a} ^{\bar{a}} \,\, \frac{ \,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{\bar{b}} ^{J}}{r} \delta_{b} ^{\bar{b}} + { \cal{O}}( r^{-2})\right] \eta_{JI} \varepsilon^{ab} r \mathrm{d} \theta \mathrm{d} t\\
&=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{r}} \left[ - \frac{r^{- \beta / 2}}{2} \log (r) \delta \beta \,\,^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{a}} ^{I} \,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{\bar{b}} ^{J} \delta_{a} ^{\bar{a}} \delta_{b} ^{\bar{b}} + { \cal{O}}( r^{-1})\right] \eta_{JI} \varepsilon^{ab} \mathrm{d} \theta \mathrm{d} t.
\end{eqnarray}
We can see in two ways that this term vanish. The first is to note that $\varepsilon^{ab}$ is the induced Levi-Civita tensor on the timelike boundary (hypercylinders) so the indices, $a,b=0,1$, have one temporal and one spatial component, but in the previous equation due to $\delta_{a} ^{\bar{a}} \delta_{b} ^{\bar{b}}\varepsilon^{ab} = 0$, the leading term vanishes identically. Also in the previous equation, we can note that the only dependence on $r$ is through $ r^{- \beta / 2} \log (r)$, and since we are not integrating over $r$ and demanding that $\beta >0$,
\begin{equation}
\lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} r^{- \beta / 2} \log (r) = 0.
\end{equation}
So in the limit equation (\ref{BoundaryTerm-differentiability-FullFull}) vanishes,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{DifferentiabilityProff}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{r}} \delta e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I} &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{r}} \left[ - \frac{r^{- \beta / 2}}{2} \log (r) \delta \beta \,\,^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{a}} ^{I} \,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{\bar{b}J} \delta_{a} ^{\bar{a}} \delta_{b} ^{\bar{b}} + { \cal{O}}( r^{-1})\right] \varepsilon^{ab} \mathrm{d} \theta \mathrm{d} t = 0.
\end{eqnarray}
Therefore the action is also differentiable under asymptotically flat boundary conditions, for arbitrary compatible variations.
\section{Covariant analysis}
\label{sec:4}
In this section we shall follow the approach of the covariant Hamiltonian formalism (CHF), as summarized in\cite{crv1,crv2}. In particular, we shall identify several components of the CHF, such as the symplectic potential, (pre-)symplectic structure and Hamiltonian generators, starting from the actions defined in Sec.~\ref{sec:3}. This section has two parts. In the first one we identify these quantities and prove their finiteness. In the second one we focus our attention on Hamiltonian flows and their generators.
\subsection{Symplectic geometry}
From the variation of the action (\ref{variation}), we can identify the symplectic potential,
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\Theta} (e^{I}, \omega^{I}, \delta e^{I}, \delta \omega^{I}) := \int_{\partial M} \tilde{\theta} (e^{I}, \omega^{I}, \delta e^{I}, \delta \omega^{I}) = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial M} \delta e^{I} \wedge \omega_{I},
\end{equation}
and its associated symplectic current,
\begin{equation}
J(\delta_{1}, \delta_{2}) := 2 \delta_{[1} \tilde{\theta} ( \delta_{2]}) = -\frac{1}{ \kappa} \left( \delta_{2} e^{I} \wedge \delta_{1} \omega_{I} - \delta_{1} e^{I} \wedge \delta_{2} \omega_{I}\right).
\end{equation}
Since $J$ is closed over any region $\mathcal{M}$,
\begin{equation}
0 = \int_{\mathcal{M}} \mathrm{d} J (\delta_{1}, \delta_{2}) = \oint_{\partial \mathcal{M}} J ( \delta_{1}, \delta_{2}) = \left[ - \int_{M_{1}} + \int_{M_{2}} + \int_{\mathcal{I}} \right] J (\delta_{1}, \delta_{2})
\end{equation}
here we are considering the region $\mathcal{M}$ is bounded by $\partial_{\mathcal{M}} = M_{1} \cup M_{2} \cup \mathcal{I}$, $M_{1}$ and $M_{2}$ are space-like slices and $\mathcal{I}$ an outer boundary, in particular we shall consider configurations that are asymptotically flat. We are assuming no internal boundary.
In order to have a \emph{conserved symplectic current} and therefore a \emph{conserved pre-symplectic form}, independent of the Cauchy surface, we have to check that $\int_{\mathcal{I}} J = 0 $, that is, that there is no current `leakage' at infinity.
Taking into account the asymptotically flat boundary conditions previously derived, we can see that the leading terms of $\int_{\mathcal{I}} J$ are,
\begin{equation}\label{JatInfinity}
\int_{\mathcal{I}} \,^{0} J (\delta_{1}, \delta_{2}) = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{r}} \left( \delta_{2} \,^{0} e^{I} \wedge \delta_{1} \,^{1} \omega_{I} - \delta_{1} \,^{0} e^{I} \wedge \delta_{2} \,^{1} \omega_{I} \right).
\end{equation}
Following the same arguments as in (\ref{DifferentiabilityProff}), that is using $\,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{0} ^{I} =0$ and $\delta \,^{0}e^{I} _{0} = 0$, and noticing that the previous equation becomes,
\begin{equation}
\int_{\mathcal{I}} \,^{0} J (\delta_{1}, \delta_{2}) = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{r}} \left( \delta_{2} \,^{0} e_{0} ^{I} \delta_{1} \,^{1} \omega_{\bar{a}I} - \delta_{2} \,^{0} e_{\bar{a}} ^{I} \delta_{1} \,^{1} \omega_{0I} - \delta_{1} \,^{0} e_{0}^{I} \delta_{2} \,^{1} \omega_{\bar{a}I} + \delta_{1} \,^{0} e_{\bar{a}} ^{I} \delta_{2} \,^{1} \omega_{0I} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{0 \bar{a}} \mathrm{d}^{2}x,
\end{equation}
we can see that
\begin{equation}
\int_{\mathcal{I}} \,^{0} J (\delta_{1}, \delta_{2}) = 0.
\end{equation}
But, on the other hand note that
\begin{equation}
\int_{\mathcal{I}} \,^{0} J (\delta_{1}, \delta_{2}) = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{r}} \left( \delta_{2} \,^{0} e_{a} ^{I} \delta_{1} \frac{\,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{bI}}{r} - \delta_{1} \,^{0} e_{a} ^{I} \wedge \delta_{2} \frac{\,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{bI}}{r} \right) \varepsilon^{ab} r \mathrm{d} \theta \mathrm{d} t
\end{equation}
is independent of $r$. Therefore the next to leading terms goes as,
\begin{equation}
\int_{\mathcal{I}} J (\delta_{1}, \delta_{2}) = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{r}} {\cal O} (r^{-1} ) \varepsilon^{ab} \mathrm{d} \theta \mathrm{d} t = 0.
\end{equation}
Therefore, the symplectic current is conserved.
Now we can define a \emph{conserved pre-symplectic form} over an arbitrary space-like surface $M$,
\begin{equation}\label{PreSymplecticForm}
\tilde{\Omega} (\delta_{1} , \delta_{2} ) := \int_{M} J (\delta_{1}, \delta_{2}) = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{M} \delta_{2} e^{I} \wedge \delta_{1} \omega_{I} - \delta_{1} e^{I} \wedge \delta_{2} \omega_{I}
\end{equation}
Once we have $\tilde{\Omega} (\delta_{1} , \delta_{2} )$, we can analyse the symmetries of the theory and their associated conserved charges. In particular we are interested in the conserved charge associated with the asymptotic time translations, i.e. the ADM energy.
Since one of our goals is to compare the resulting expression for the energy through the covariant and canonical formalism, we need to be sure that the conventions in both schemes are in agreement. We discuss this point in the next part.
\subsubsection{Link between covariant and canonical approaches}
The symplectic structure is essential in order to have a Hamiltonian description. In a coordinate basis associated with the configuration variables, the fields $\phi^{A}$, the symplectic form can also be defined by
\begin{equation}
\bar{\Omega} := \mathrm{d} \Pi_{A} \wedge \mathrm{d} \phi^{A},
\end{equation}
where $\Pi_{A}$ is the momenta canonically conjugated to $\phi^{A}$. This $\bar{\Omega}$ is consistent with all our derivations in the covariant phase space. But, up to now, we have not specified `what our variables are', namely $\phi^{A}$ and $\Pi_{A}$.
It is well known that in the first order formulation of general relativity one of our configuration variables is the canonically conjugated variable to the other. For instance, in the connection-dynamics approach, $\omega$ is chosen to be the configuration variable and, as it turns out, $e$ happens to be its canonical momenta. The role of the variables is inverted if we choose the geometrodynamics picture.
To compare with the results obtained by the canonical formalism, first we have to decide if we want to work in the connection or geometrodynamics approach. In this contribution we choose the former one, that is $\phi^{A} = \omega^{I}$ and $\Pi_{A} = e_{I}$. From (\ref{PreSymplecticForm}) we have then,
\begin{equation}\label{PreSymplecticForm-AgreesCanonical}
\tilde{\Omega} (\delta_{1} , \delta_{2} ) = - \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{M} \delta_{2} \underbrace{e^{I}}_{\Pi^{A}} \wedge \delta_{1} \underbrace{\omega_{I}}_{\phi^{A}} - \delta_{1} e^{I} \wedge \delta_{2} \omega_{I} = - \bar{\Omega}
\end{equation}
We conclude then that in order to compare our expressions for the energy, we
have to set $\bar{\Omega} = - \tilde{\Omega}$. From now on, this is the choice we shall make.
\subsection{The Hamiltonian and the energy}
Consider infinitesimal diffeomorphisms generated by a vector field $\xi$, these diffeomorphisms induce an infinitesimal change in the fields given by $\delta_{\xi} := ( \pounds_{\xi} e , \pounds_{\xi} \omega)$.
We say that $\xi$ is a Hamiltonian vector field iff $\bar{\Omega} (\delta , \delta_{\xi})$ is closed, $\mathrm{d} \!\!\!\! \mathrm{d}\, \Omega = 0$, and the Hamiltonian $H_{\xi}$ is defined by,
\begin{equation}\label{CovariantHamiltonianDef}
\bar{\Omega} (\delta , \delta_{\xi}) = \delta H_{\xi} = \mathrm{d} \!\!\!\! \mathrm{d}\, H.
\end{equation}
Where $\mathrm{d} \!\!\!\! \mathrm{d}\,$ is the exterior derivative on the covariant phase space\footnote{see \cite{crv1,crv2} for further details and definitions.}, which is different from the exterior derivative on spacetime $\mathrm{d}$.
So $H_{\xi}$ is a conserved quantity along the flow generated by $\xi$. We consider the case when $\xi$ generates asymptotic time translations of the space-time, which induces time evolution on the covariant phase space generated by the vector field $\delta_{\xi} := ( \pounds_{\xi} e , \pounds_{\xi} \omega)$. In this case, $H_{\xi}$ is the energy.
\subsubsection{The energy}
From eq. (\ref{PreSymplecticForm}) and (\ref{CovariantHamiltonianDef}),
\begin{eqnarray}
\bar{\Omega} (\delta , \delta_{\xi} ) &=& - \tilde{\Omega} (\delta , \delta_{\xi} ) = \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{M} \delta_{\xi} e^{I} \wedge \delta \omega_{I} - \delta e^{I} \wedge \delta_{\xi} \omega_{I}\\
&=& \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{M} \pounds_{\xi} e^{I} \wedge \delta \omega_{I} - \delta e^{I} \wedge \pounds_{\xi} \omega_{I}
\end{eqnarray}
by using $\pounds_{\xi} \phi^{A} = \xi \cdot \mathrm{d} \phi^{A} + \mathrm{d} (\xi \cdot \phi^{A}) $
\begin{equation}
\bar{\Omega} (\delta , \delta_{\xi}) = \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{M} \left[ (\xi \cdot \mathrm{d} e^{I}) \wedge \delta \omega_{I} + \mathrm{d}(\xi \cdot e^{I}) \wedge \delta \omega_{I} - \delta e^{I} \wedge (\xi \cdot \mathrm{d} \omega_{I}) - \delta e^{I} \wedge \mathrm{d} ( \xi \cdot \omega_{I}) \right].
\end{equation}
Now we have to use that at infinity $\xi$ should approach a time-translation Killing vector field of the asymptotic flat spacetime. In particular this means that in the asymptotic region $\xi ^{a} $ is orthogonal to the spacelike surface. Therefore $\xi \cdot e^{I} = e_{0} ^{I}$, $\xi \cdot \omega_{I} = \omega_{0I}$ but for the leading term we have seen $\,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{0I} = 0$, also $\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{a} \, ^{0} e_{b} ^{I}$ only has spatial components so $\xi \cdot \mathrm{d} \,^{0} e^{I} = 0$. With this at hand we can see that\footnote{This is the only non-vanishing term to first order.},
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Presymplectic1}
\bar{\Omega} (\delta , \delta_{\xi}) &=& \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{M} \mathrm{d}(\xi \cdot e^{I}) \wedge \delta \omega_{I}\\
&=& \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{M} \mathrm{d} \left[ (\xi \cdot e^{I}) \delta \omega_{I} \right] - (\xi \cdot e^{I}) \mathrm{d} \delta \omega_{I}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that the second term of the previous equation in components becomes,
\begin{equation}
- \int_{M} \, ^{0} \bar{e}_{0} ^{I} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{[\bar{b}|} \delta \omega_{|\bar{c}]I} \varepsilon^{\bar{b}\bar{c}} r \mathrm{d} r \mathrm{d} \theta
\end{equation}
but
\begin{equation}
\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{[\bar{b}|} \delta \omega_{|\bar{c}]} ^{M} = \delta \beta \left[ r^{-2} \partial_{[\bar{b}| } r \partial_{\bar{a} } r + r^{-1} \partial_{[\bar{b}|} \partial_{\bar{a}} r \right] \varepsilon_{LK}\,^{M} \,^{0} \bar{e}^{K} _{\bar{d}} \,^{0} \bar{e}^{L} _{|\bar{c}]} \eta^{\bar{a} \bar{d}} ,
\end{equation}
so
\begin{equation}
\, ^{0} \bar{e}_{0} ^{I} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}}_{[\bar{b}|} \delta \omega_{|\bar{c}]I} \varepsilon^{\bar{b}\bar{c}} = \delta \beta \left[ r^{-2} \partial_{[\bar{b}| } r \partial_{\bar{a} } r + r^{-1} \partial_{[\bar{b}|} \partial_{\bar{a}} r \right] \underbrace{\varepsilon_{LKI} \,^{0} \bar{e}^{K} _{\bar{d}} \,^{0} \bar{e}^{L} _{|\bar{c}]} \, ^{0} \bar{e}_{0} ^{I}}_{\bar{e} \tilde{\varepsilon}_{|\bar{c}] \bar{d} 0 } } \eta^{\bar{a} \bar{d}} \underbrace{\varepsilon^{\bar{b}\bar{c}}}_{\frac{\tilde{\varepsilon}^{0 \bar{b}\bar{c}}}{r}} ,
\end{equation}
here $\bar{e} = \sqrt{- \eta} = 1$ where $\eta_{ab}$ is the Minkowski metric associated with the fixed frame $\bar{e}_{I} ^{a}$ at the asymptotic region, also $\tilde{\varepsilon}_{|\bar{c}] \bar{d} 0 }\tilde{\varepsilon}^{0 \bar{b}\bar{c}} = -2 \delta_{|\bar{d}] } ^{\bar{b} } $. Thus by antisymmetry in the space-time indices this term vanishes.
From (\ref{Presymplectic1}) and the previous argument the presymplectic form is,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Omega-energy}
\nonumber \bar{\Omega} (\delta , \delta_{\xi}) &=& \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{M} \mathrm{d} \left[ (\xi \cdot e^{I}) \delta \omega_{I} \right] = \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial M} (\xi \cdot e^{I}) \delta \omega_{I} \\
&=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \left[ \frac{1}{\kappa} \int_{\partial M} \,^{0} e_{0} ^{I} \delta \frac{ \,^{1} \omega_{\bar{c}I}}{r} \varepsilon^{0\bar{c}} r \mathrm{d} \theta + \int_{\partial M} {\cal{O}} (r^{-1}) \mathrm{d} \theta \right],
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{equation}
\delta \left( \frac{\,^{1} \omega_{\bar{c}} ^{M}}{r} \right) = \frac{1}{2r} \delta \beta \partial_{\bar{a}} r \varepsilon_{LK} \, ^{M} \,^{0} \bar{e} ^{K} _{\bar{d}} \,^{0} \bar{e} ^{L} _{\bar{c}} \eta^{\bar{a} \bar{d}} .
\end{equation}
Then, by (\ref{CovariantHamiltonianDef}), the variation of the Hamiltonian, and therefore of its corresponding associated conserved quantity, the energy, is
\begin{eqnarray}\label{BigExpression-EnergyCovariant}
\nonumber \delta H_{\xi} = \bar{\Omega} (\delta , \delta_{\xi}) &=& \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{\partial M} \,^{0} \bar{e}_{0} ^{I} \left( \delta \beta r^{-1} \partial_{\bar{a}} r \varepsilon_{LKI} \,^{0} \bar{e} ^{K} _{\bar{d}} \,^{0} \bar{e} ^{L} _{\bar{c}} \eta^{\bar{a} \bar{d}} \right) \varepsilon^{0\bar{c}} r \mathrm{d} \theta\\
&=& \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{\partial M} \frac{1}{r} \delta \beta \underbrace{\left( \varepsilon_{LKI} \,^{0} \bar{e}_{0} ^{I} \,^{0} \bar{e} ^{K} _{\bar{d}} \,^{0} \bar{e} ^{L} _{\bar{c}} \right)}_{\bar{e} \tilde{\varepsilon}_{\bar{c} \bar{d} 0 } } \eta^{\bar{a} \bar{d}} \partial_{\bar{a}} r \varepsilon^{0\bar{c}} r \mathrm{d} \theta
\end{eqnarray}
here we are using the identity $\varepsilon_{LKI} \,^{0} \bar{e}_{0} ^{I} \,^{0} \bar{e} ^{K} _{\bar{d}} \,^{0} \bar{e} ^{L} _{\bar{c}} = \bar{e} \tilde{\varepsilon}_{0 \bar{c} \bar{d}}$ where
$\,^{0} \bar{e} = \sqrt{- \eta} = 1$ with $\eta$ the determinant of $\eta_{ab}$, the Minkowski metric associated with the fixed frame $\bar{e}_{I} ^{a}$ at the asymptotic region. Taking into account the fall-off conditions on $e_{a} ^{I}$, its determinant, $e$, will decay as $e = \,^{0} \bar{e} + O(r^{-1})$, then $\bar{e} \tilde{\varepsilon}_{\bar{c} \bar{d} 0 } = \left[ e \varepsilon_{\bar{c} \bar{d} 0 } - \varepsilon_{\bar{c} \bar{d} 0 } O(r^{-1}) \right]$. Also $\partial^{\bar{a}} r =: r^{\bar{a}}$ can be seen as the normal to the cylinders $r = const$ and $\tilde{\varepsilon}_{abc} r^{c} = \tilde{\varepsilon}_{ab}$.
With all this we can see that the previous equation (\ref{BigExpression-EnergyCovariant}) is,
\begin{equation}
\delta H_{\xi} = \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{\partial M} \left[ \frac{1}{r} \delta \beta \varepsilon_{\bar{c} \bar{d} 0 } r^{\bar{d} } \varepsilon^{0\bar{c}} r \mathrm{d}\theta + O(r^{-1}) \right] = \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\partial M} \delta \beta \underbrace{\varepsilon_{0 \bar{c} } \varepsilon^{ 0 \bar{c}}}_{1} \mathrm{d} \theta = \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \delta \beta \int_{\partial M} \mathrm{d} \theta
\end{equation}
Also note that $\partial M = C_{t}$, $M$ a space like slice at ``time'' $t$, and $C_{t}$ a circle with radius $r$ at time $t$. We can write the expression for the energy,
\begin{equation}
\delta H_{\xi} = \frac{ \delta \beta}{2 \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \mathrm{d} \theta
\end{equation}
taking $\kappa = 8 \pi G$,
\begin{equation}
\delta H_{\xi} = \frac{ \delta \beta}{2 (8 \pi G)} 2 \pi = \frac{\delta \beta}{8 G}.
\end{equation}
Since the previous expression only gives the variation, the energy will always be determined up to a constant,
\begin{equation}\label{Energy-covariant-const}
E = \frac{ \beta}{16G} + \mathrm{const}', .
\end{equation}
Let us summarize the situation. By employing the covariant Hamiltonian formalism, we have reached an expression for the gradient of the Hamiltonian function on the covariant phase space, responsible for the Hamiltonian flow that generates asymptotic unit time translations. As is usually the case with the Hamiltonian formalism, this function is determined up to a constant. Here we are faced with several
choices. We could, for instance, follow \cite{Ashtekar-Varadarajan1994} and declare that Minkowski spacetime should have a vanishing energy. Since $\beta \in [0,2)$, we should then choose this constant to be zero for the energy of Minkowski space-time to vanish,
\begin{equation}
E \in \left[ 0, \frac{1}{4G} \right].
\end{equation}
Although the CHF is elegant, it only provide us with the variation of the energy, so we have an
indeterminacy in the election of the constant that may shift the region in which the energy is bounded.
Of course, we are in principle allowed to make any other choice for the up to now arbitrary constant,
unless we take some input that helps us select it.
That is why we shall analyse this action through the canonical 2+1 formalism, where the Hamiltonian
{\emph is} completely determined by the Legendre transform. This is the subject of the following section.
\section{Canonical analysis}
\label{sec:5}
In the case of theories that can be formulated without the need of a metric, we have two choices for a $2+1$ decomposition. The first one, that we shall refer to as the \emph{Witten approach}\footnote{Following the nomenclature of \cite{Barbero-Varadarajan1994} referring to Witten's paper \cite{Witten1988}. For more details on the analysis in the case where there is no boundary see \cite{romano}.}, it does not need the existence of a metric. We only ask the spacetime $\mathcal{M}$ to be topologically $\Sigma \times R$ and that there exists a function $t$ (with nowhere vanishing gradient $(\mathrm{d} t)_{a}$) such that each $t$= const surface $M_{t}$ is diffeomorphic to $\Sigma$. Also, one assumes the existence a flow defined by a vector field $t^{a}$ satisfying $t^{a} (\mathrm{d} t)_{a} = 1$, which allow us to define ``evolution'', although $t$ does not necessarily have the interpretation of time\footnote{Since the $2+1$ Palatini action based on an arbitrary Lie group $G$ (\ref{SPB}) is a theory independent of a spacetime metric, we can still define evolution from one $t=const$ surface to the next using the Lie derivative along $t^{a}$.}.
The second approach, that we shall refer to as the \emph{Ashtekar-Barbero-Varadarajan} approach\footnote{In \cite{Barbero-Varadarajan1994} the authors discuss the differences in the canonical analysis, particularly in the constraints, following Witten's vs Ashtekar's approaches. That is why we call it Ashtekar-Barbero-Varadarajan approach.} follows closely the $3+1$ decomposition of the first order variables. In it, besides the elements of the Witten approach, we are also assuming the existence of a metric $g_{ab}$ and therefore a unit normal $n^a$ to the Cauchy surfaces.
This introduces additional information to that in Witten's decomposition. In particular, we can decompose any tensor into its normal and tangential part, and in particular $t^{a}$ can be decomposed as $t^{a} = Nn^{a} + N^{a}$, where $N$ and $N^{a}$ are the lapse and shift functions. Now we have additional information, namely the freedom of choosing any foliation and any vector field $t^{a}$, that is coded in the lapse and shift functions.
A comment on notation is in order. In what follows we use $\tilde{\varepsilon}^{abc}$ as the Levi-Civita tensor density of weight $+1$ instead of $\tilde{\eta}^{abc}$, more commonly used in the $3-$ dimensional case, this to avoid confusion with the flat metric $\bar{\eta}_{ab}$ (\ref{eta}), or with the Minkowki metric (either with internal or spacetime indices).
When we write $\tilde{\varepsilon}^{abc}$ in the action we assume it is accompanied with its respective $d^{3}x$, but we do not write it in order to simplify notation. Only when dealing with the Levi-Civita tensor, $\varepsilon^{abc}$, related with the tensor density by $\tilde{\varepsilon}^{abc} = (s) \sqrt{|g|} \varepsilon^{abc}$ (with $g$ the determinant of the spacetime metric and $s$ the signature of the metric), we write the volume element explicitly. The same convention will be used for the $\tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab}$ and $\tilde{\varepsilon}^{a}$. Finally,
we shall refer to a Cauchy slice as $M$ following the notation in \cite{crv1,crv2}.
\subsection{Witten's approach}
\label{Witten-approach}
In order to make the canonical analysis (a la Witten) of the 3-dimensional Palatini action, we write the action (\ref{LIP}) it in components,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Palatini-arbitraryG}
S_{PB} [e, \omega ] &=& - \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{abc} e_{aI} F_{bc} ^{I} - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } e_{aI} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} - \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{aI} n_{K} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab}\\
&=& - \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{abc} e_{aI} F_{bc} ^{I} - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } e_{aI} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} + \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{\sqrt{ n \cdot n}} \varepsilon^{IL} e_{aI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab}
\end{eqnarray}
For this decomposition we shall follow the analysis in \cite{romano}, taking enough care of the boundary term, the one coming from the Palatini action and the boundary terms in (\ref{Palatini-arbitraryG}). Using that $\tilde{\varepsilon}^{abc} = 3 t^{[a} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{bc]} \mathrm{d} t$ and $\tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} = 2 t^{[a} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b]} \mathrm{d} t$
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber S_{PB} [e, \omega ] &=& - \frac{1}{2 \kappa}\int \mathrm{d} t \int_{M} ( t^{a} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{bc} + t^{b} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} + t^{c} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab}) e_{aI} F_{bc}^{I} - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{C_{t}} (t^{a} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - t^{b} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a}) e_{aI} \omega_{b} ^{I} \\
&&+ \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{C_{t}} (t^{a} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - t^{b} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a}) \frac{1}{\sqrt{ n \cdot n}} \varepsilon^{IL} e_{aI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \\
\nonumber &=& - \frac{1}{ \kappa}\int \mathrm{d} t \int_{M} \left[ \frac{1}{2} \underbrace{(t^{a} e_{aI})}_{(t \cdot e)^{I}} F_{bc}^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{bc} + t^{b}\tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI} F_{bc} ^{I} \right] \\
&&- \frac{1}{\kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{C_{t}} \left[ \underbrace{ (t^{a} e_{aI})}_{(t \cdot e)^{I}} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - \underbrace{(t^{b} \omega_{b} ^{I})}_{(t\cdot \omega)^{I}} e_{aI} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right]\\
&&+ \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{C_{t}} \frac{1}{\sqrt{ n \cdot n}} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[( t^{a} e_{aI} )\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - (t^{b} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L}) e_{aI} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right]
\end{eqnarray}
Taking into account the following standard relations,
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{bc} ^{I} &=& 2 \partial_{[b} \omega_{c]} ^{I} + [\omega_{b} , \omega_{c}]^{I} = \partial_{b} \omega_{c} - \partial_{c} \omega_{b} + [\omega_{b} , \omega_{c}]^{I}\\
\mathcal{D}_{b} \omega_{c} ^{I} &=& \partial_{b} \omega_{c} ^{I} + [\omega_{b} , \omega_{c}]^{I}\\
t^{b} F_{bc} ^{I} &=& \pounds_{\vec{t}} \omega_{c} ^{I} - \mathcal{D}_{c} (t\cdot \omega)^{I}
\label{tF-igual-LieD-menos-CovD}
\end{eqnarray}
the second term of the bulk part can be written as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI} t^{b} F_{bc} ^{I} &=& (\pounds_{\vec{t}} \omega_{c} ^{I}) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI} - \mathcal{D}_{c} (\omega \cdot t)^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI}\\
&=& (\pounds_{\vec{t}} \omega_{c} ^{I}) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI} - \mathcal{D}_{c} [(\omega \cdot t)^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI}^{I}] + (\omega \cdot t)^{I} \mathcal{D}_{c} (\tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI}).
\end{eqnarray}
Then the action takes the form,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber S_{PB} [e, \omega ] &=& - \frac{1}{ \kappa}\int \mathrm{d} t \int_{M} \left[ \frac{1}{2} \underbrace{(t^{a} e_{aI})}_{(t \cdot e)_{I}} F_{bc}^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{bc} + (\pounds_{\vec{t}} \omega_{c} ^{I}) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI} - \mathcal{D}_{c} [(\omega \cdot t)^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI}] + (\omega \cdot t)^{I} \mathcal{D}_{c} (\tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI}) \right] \\
&&- \frac{1}{\kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{C_{t}} \left[ \underbrace{ (t^{a} e_{aI})}_{(t \cdot e)_{I}} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - \underbrace{(t^{b} \omega_{b} ^{I})}_{(t\cdot \omega)^{I}} e_{aI} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right]\\
&&+ \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{C_{t}} \frac{1}{\sqrt{ n \cdot n}} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[( t^{a} e_{aI} )\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - (t^{b} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L}) e_{aI} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right]\\
\nonumber &=& - \frac{1}{ \kappa}\int \mathrm{d} t \int_{M} \left[ \frac{1}{2} \underbrace{(t^{a} e_{aI})}_{(t \cdot e)_{I}} F_{bc}^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{bc} + (\pounds_{\vec{t}} \omega_{c} ^{I}) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI} + (\omega \cdot t)^{I} \mathcal{D}_{c} (\tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI}) \right] \\
&& + \frac{1}{ \kappa}\int \mathrm{d} t \int_{M} \mathcal{D}_{c} [(\omega \cdot t)^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI}] - \frac{1}{\kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{C_{t}} \left[ \underbrace{ (t^{a} e_{aI})}_{(t \cdot e)_{I}} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - \underbrace{(t^{b} \omega_{b} ^{I})}_{(t\cdot \omega)^{I}} e_{aI} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right]\\
&&+ \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{C_{t}} \frac{1}{\sqrt{ n \cdot n}} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[( t^{a} e_{aI} )\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - (t^{b} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L}) e_{aI} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right].
\end{eqnarray}
Strictly speaking we begin with an action valid for \emph{any} Lie group ($e$ is not related to the metric unless we identify the group with $SO(2,1)$ so this action can be defined without the need of a metric), since in Witten's decomposition we are not assuming the existence of a metric.
In order to proceed with the Legendre transformation we need to calculate the momenta,
\begin{equation}
\Pi_{I} ^{c} = \frac{\delta \mathcal{L} }{\delta (\pounds_{\vec{t}} \omega_{c} ^{I} ) } = \frac{1}{\kappa} \tilde{\varepsilon} ^{ca} e_{aI},
\end{equation}
then the canonical Hamiltonian is\footnote{Note that the bulk part of this Hamiltonian coincides with that given in \cite{romano}.},
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Hamiltonian-Witten}
\nonumber H[e, \omega] &=& \int_{M} \left[ (\pounds_{\vec{t}} \omega_{c} ^{I} )\Pi_{I} ^{c} - \mathcal{L} \right]\\
\nonumber &=& + \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{M} \left[ \frac{1}{2} \underbrace{(t^{a} e_{aI})}_{(t \cdot e)_{I}} F_{bc}^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{bc} + (\omega \cdot t)^{I} \mathcal{D}_{c} (\tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI}) \right] \\
\nonumber && - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{M} \mathcal{D}_{c} [(\omega \cdot t)^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI}] + \frac{1}{\kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \left[ \underbrace{ (t^{a} e_{aI})}_{(t \cdot e)_{I}} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - \underbrace{(t^{b} \omega_{b} ^{I})}_{(t\cdot \omega)^{I}} e_{aI} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right]\\
&&- \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \frac{1}{\sqrt{ n \cdot n}} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[( t^{a} e_{aI} )\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - (t^{b} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L}) e_{aI} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right].\end{eqnarray}
We can see that the following constraints
\begin{equation}\label{Witten-constraints}
F_{bc}^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{bc} \approx 0 \,\,\,\,\, \mathrm{and} \,\,\,\,\, \mathcal{D}_{c} (\tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI}) \approx 0,
\end{equation}
are first class, and also they are the pull-back to $M$ with $\tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab}$ of the equations of motion (\ref{PalatiniEoM}).
On the constraint surface,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber H [e, \omega] &=& - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{M} \mathcal{D}_{c} [(\omega \cdot t)^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ca} e_{aI}] + \frac{1}{\kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \left[ \underbrace{ (t^{a} e_{aI})}_{(t \cdot e)_{I}} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - \underbrace{(t^{b} \omega_{b} ^{I})}_{(t\cdot \omega)^{I}} e_{aI} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right]\\
&&- \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[( t^{a} e_{aI} )\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} \frac{ n_{L}}{\sqrt{ n \cdot n}} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - \left(t^{b} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} \frac{ n_{L}}{\sqrt{ n \cdot n}}\right) e_{aI} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right].
\end{eqnarray}
that is, the boundary terms are the only non-vanishing terms.
Now if we take into account the asymptotically flat boundary conditions, the leading term of $(\omega \cdot t)^{I} $ is zero and also $t^{b} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} (r^{c} \, ^{0} e_{cL} ) = 0$. In the timelike boundary as well as in the boundary of $M$ (circles for each time $t$, $C_{t}$) the normal to the surface is $r^{a}$, then $n_{L} / \sqrt{n \cdot n } = r^{c} e_{cL}$. So the only non-vanishing leading term comes from,
\begin{equation}\label{H-nonvanishingleadingtermscomefrom}
H [e, \omega] = \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} (t \cdot e)_{I} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \varepsilon^{IL} ( t^{a} e_{aI} ) \underbrace{\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} (r^{c} e_{cL} )}_{ r^{c} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} e_{cL} + e_{cL} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} r^{c} } \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} .
\end{equation}
As in the covariant case, if we want this Hamiltonian to generate asymptotic time translations and therefore its conserved quantity to be the \emph{energy}, $t^{a}$ has to approach a unit time-translation Killing vector field of the asymptotic flat spacetime, which also translates into $t$ being orthogonal to $M$. Using this and the fall-off conditions (\ref{AFfalloff-cotriad}) and (\ref{FalloffOmegaZero}), the Hamiltonian is given by\footnote{The term (that comes from eq. (\ref{H-nonvanishingleadingtermscomefrom})),
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber \, ^{Leading} \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} - \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \varepsilon^{IL} ( t^{a} e_{aI} ) r^{c} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} e_{cL} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \left[ - \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \varepsilon^{IL} \, ^{0} e_{0I} r^{c} ( - \frac{\beta}{2r} r^{ - \beta /2 } \partial_{b} r \, ^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{c}L} \delta^{\bar{c}} _{c} )\tilde{\varepsilon}^{0b} + {\cal O}(r^{- 1})\right] \\
\nonumber &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty}\left[ \frac{\alpha \beta}{ 2\kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \underbrace{\varepsilon^{IL} \, ^{0} e_{0I} \, ^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{c}L}}_{\bar{e} \tilde{\varepsilon}_{0\bar{c} }} \frac{1}{r} r^{ - \beta /2 } r^{\bar{c}} \partial_{b} r \tilde{\varepsilon}^{0b} + {\cal O}(r^{- 1})\right] \\
\nonumber &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \left[ \frac{\alpha \beta}{ 2\kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \frac{1}{r} r^{ - \beta /2 } r^{\bar{c}} \partial_{b} r \underbrace{ \tilde{\varepsilon}_{0\bar{c} } \tilde{\varepsilon}^{0b} }_{\delta_{\bar{c}} ^{b}} r \mathrm{d}\theta + {\cal O}(r^{- 1})\right] \\
\nonumber &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \left[ \frac{\alpha \beta}{ 2\kappa} \int_{C_{t}} r^{ - \beta /2 } (+1) \mathrm{d}\theta + {\cal O}(r^{- 1})\right] \\
\nonumber &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \left[ \frac{\alpha \beta}{ 2\kappa} r^{ - \beta /2 } 2\pi + {\cal O}(r^{- 1})\right] \\
\nonumber &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \left[ {\cal O}(r^{- \beta / 2}) + {\cal O}(r^{- 1})\right] = 0 \,\,\,\,\, iff\,\,\,\,\, \beta > 0\\
\end{eqnarray}
},
\begin{equation}\label{H-Wittendecomposition}
H [e, \omega] = \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \left[ \underbrace{ \int_{C_{t}} \frac{1}{ \kappa} \,^{0} e_{0I} \frac{\,^{1} \omega_{\bar{b}} ^{I}}{r} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{\bar{b}} }_{H_{1}} \underbrace{- \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \varepsilon^{IL} \, ^{0} e_{0I} \left( \, ^{0} e_{cL} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} r^{c} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} }_{H_{2}} + {\cal O}(r^{- \beta / 2}) \right]
\end{equation}
For the first term of the right hand side of previous equation, since the volume element associated to $C_{t}$ goes as $r \mathrm{d}\theta$, the leading term of the previous equation does not depend on $r$, and the next to leading terms go as ${\cal O}(r^{-1})$ so in the limit they vanish leaving us with just the leading term,
\begin{equation}\label{H1-Wittens}
H_{1} = \frac{1}{ \kappa} \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{t}} \,^{0} e_{0I} \frac{\,^{1} \bar{\omega}_{\bar{b}} ^{I}}{r} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{\bar{b}} = \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{t}} \,^{0} e_{0I} \frac{1}{r} \beta \partial_{\bar{a}} r \varepsilon_{L}\, ^{KI} \,^{0} \bar{e}_{K} ^{\bar{a}} \,^{0} \bar{e}_{\bar{b}} ^{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{0\bar{b}}
\end{equation}
Note that, apart from $\delta \beta \leftrightarrow \beta$, this expression \emph{is the same} as (\ref{BigExpression-EnergyCovariant}). Using the same steps we can see that (taking $\kappa = 8 \pi G$),
\begin{equation}
H_{1} = \frac{ \beta}{2 \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \mathrm{d} \theta = \frac{ \beta}{2 (8 \pi G)} 2 \pi = \frac{ \beta}{8 G}.
\end{equation}
For the second term of the right hand side,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{H2-Wittens}
\nonumber H_{2} &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \left[ - \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \varepsilon^{IL} \, ^{0} e_{0I} \left( \, ^{0} e_{cL} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} r^{c} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{0b} \right]\\
\nonumber &=& - \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{t}} \underbrace{ \varepsilon^{IL} \, ^{0} e_{0I} \, ^{0} e_{cL} }_{\bar{e} \tilde{\varepsilon}_{0c} } \underbrace{\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} r^{c}}_{\partial_{b} r^{c}} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{0b} \\
\nonumber &=& - \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{t}} \underbrace{ \tilde{\varepsilon}^{0b} \tilde{\varepsilon}_{0c}}_{\delta^{b} _{c}} (\partial_{b} r^{c} ) r \mathrm{d} \theta\\
&=& - \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \int_{C_{t}} \underbrace{ (\partial_{c} r^{c} )}_{1/r} r \mathrm{d} \theta = - \frac{\alpha}{2 \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} 2 \mathrm{d} \theta
\end{eqnarray}
Using (\ref{H1-Wittens}) and (\ref{H2-Wittens}), we can see that the Hamiltonian (\ref{H-Wittendecomposition}) is given by,
\begin{equation}\label{Witten-lastHamiltonian}
H = H_{1} + H_{2} = \frac{ \beta}{2 \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \mathrm{d}\theta - \frac{\alpha}{2 \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} 2 \mathrm{d}\theta = - \frac{ 1}{2 \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} (2 \alpha - \beta) \mathrm{d}\theta.
\end{equation}
Let us summarize the situation. We have performed the 2+1 decomposition, {\emph a la} Witten, of the two
actions we considered in Sec.~\ref{sec:3}. After performing the Legendre transform, the Hamiltonian is
given by the boundary term of Eq.~(\ref{Witten-lastHamiltonian}). Recall that we have introduced a
`switch' $\alpha$, that selects between the totally Lorentz invariant action ($\alpha=1$) and the
generalized Palatini action ($\alpha=0$).
The first obvious observation is that the Hamiltonian (and energy), depends
on $\alpha$ and therefore, on the action we started with. Let us now analyse both cases.
Let us first consider the case when $\alpha = 1$, and note that we recover the results
of \cite{Marolf-Patino2006},
\begin{equation}
H = - \frac{ 1}{2 \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} (2 - \beta) \mathrm{d}\theta.
\end{equation}
Following \cite{Ashtekar-Varadarajan1994, Marolf-Patino2006}, the parameter $\beta$ lies in the interval $\beta \in [0,2)$. From here we can conclude that the energy
\begin{equation}
E=\frac{1}{8G}(\beta - 2)\, ,
\label{energy-canonical}
\end{equation}
is bounded from below and above, and lies within the interval,
$E \in \left[ -\frac{1}{4G}, 0 \right]$.
That is, all gravitational configurations have a negative energy, and in particular, Minkowski spacetime has an energy equal to $E_{\textrm{Mink}}= - 1/(4G)$.
The other case, namely when $\alpha = 0$, yields an energy $E_{\alpha=0}=\beta/(8G)$, that is always
positive, with a zero value for the lower bound corresponding to Minkowski spacetime.
In this sense one can observe that the energy found in the
canonical description realizes the choice made by the authors of \cite{Ashtekar-Varadarajan1994}.
This is the main result of this article. Let us now end this section with a few remarks.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Note that in both our analysis and in the one given in \cite{Marolf-Patino2006}, the starting point is a well posed action; the Palatini action with boundary term and the Einstein-Hilbert action with Gibbons-Hawking term respectively. Also, note that the addition of the
boundary term (\ref{AdditionalHarmlessBoundaryTerm}) is essential, within the first order action,
to be equivalent to the Einstein-Hilbert action with Gibbons-Hawking term. It is then not surprising that the LIP action leads to the same expression for the energy as in \cite{Marolf-Patino2006}.
\item Even though both actions, SPB and LIP, lead to the same classical equations of motion, the Einstein equations of motion, they do not completely agree at the Hamiltonian level, since they differ by a constant.
\item It is important emphasize the difference between our result, where the Hamiltonian and therefore the energy is \emph{completely} determined by the Legendre transform, in contrast with the covariant formalism where one only gets the variation of the Hamiltonian function, so the energy is only determined up to an additive constant (\ref{Energy-covariant-const}).
\end{enumerate}
In the next part we shall perform a different 2+1 splitting, that follows the standard decomposition and resembles the 3+1 case.
\subsection{Barbero-Varadarajan's approach}
As was the case in Witten's decomposition, we shall begin with the well posed manifestly Lorentz invariant Palatini action,
\begin{equation}
S_{\textrm{LIP}} [e, \omega ] = - \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{abc} e_{aI} F_{bc} ^{I} - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } e_{aI} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} - \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{aI} n_{K} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab}
\end{equation}
Using $\tilde{\varepsilon}^{abc} \varepsilon_{IJK} e_{c} ^{K} = 2e e_{I} ^{[a} e_{J} ^{b]}$, which implies $e \, \varepsilon^{LKM} e^{a} _{L} e^{b} _{K} = \tilde{\varepsilon}^{abc} e_{c} ^{M}$. The well posed Palatini action can be written,
\begin{equation}
S_{\textrm{LIP}} [e, \omega ] = - \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} e \varepsilon^{LKI} e_{L} ^{b} e_{K} ^{c} F_{bcI} - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } e_{aI} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} - \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{aI} n_{K} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab}
\end{equation}
As we already mentioned, to make a standard $2+1$ \emph{decomposition}, we assume the existence of a metric and thus we can introduce a projector $q_{a} ^{b} = \delta_{a} ^{b} + n_{a} n^{b}$ which projects down all the fields in their spacelike and normal components respectively. In particular we can decompose $t^{a} = n^{a} N + N^{a}$.
To begin with, we have to use $q_{a} ^{b}$ to project all the dynamical variables appearing in the action. First we shall decompose the integrand of the bulk term of the previous equation,
\begin{equation}
e \varepsilon^{LKI} e_{L} ^{b} e_{K} ^{c} F_{bcI} = e \varepsilon^{LKI} e_{L} ^{a} e_{K} ^{d} \delta_{a} ^{b} \delta_{d} ^{c} F_{bcI} = e \varepsilon^{LKI} e_{L} ^{a} e_{K} ^{d} (q_{a} ^{b} - n_{a} n^{b})( q_{d} ^{c} - n_{d}n^{c} )F_{bcI}
\end{equation}
with $q_{ab}$ the induced metric and $n^{a}$ the normal to the $2-$dimensional Cauchy slices. Now using $n^{a} = (t^{a} - N^{a})/N$, also $\mathcal{E}_{a} ^{I} = q_{a} ^{b} e_{b} ^{I}$ and $\mathcal{F}_{ab} ^{I} = q_{a} ^{c} q_{b} ^{d} F_{cd} ^{I}$ are the projections of $e$ and $F$ to the Cauchy slice, and $n_{K} := n^{a} e_{aK}$, then the integrand of the bulk term becomes,
\begin{equation}
e \varepsilon^{LKI} e_{L} ^{b} e_{K} ^{c} F_{bcI} = e \varepsilon^{LKI} \left[ \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} \mathcal{E}_{K} ^{c} \mathcal{F}_{bcI} - \frac{2}{N} \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} t^{c} F_{bcI} + \frac{2}{N} \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} N^{c} \mathcal{F}_{bcI} \right].
\end{equation}
which implies that the decomposed bulk term is,
\begin{equation}\label{ABV-Bulktermdecomposed}
- \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} e \varepsilon^{LKI} e_{L} ^{b} e_{K} ^{c} F_{bcI} = - \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\mathcal{M}} e \varepsilon^{LKI} \left[ \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} \mathcal{E}_{K} ^{c} \mathcal{F}_{bcI} - \frac{2}{N} \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} t^{c} F_{bcI} + \frac{2}{N} \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} N^{c} \mathcal{F}_{bcI} \right].
\end{equation}
Now we shall decompose the boundary term,
\begin{equation}
- \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } e_{aI} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} - \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{aI} n_{K} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab}.
\end{equation}
We begin with the integrand of the standard boundary term, $e_{aI} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab}$,
\begin{equation}
e_{aI} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} = \delta_{a} ^{c} \delta_{b} ^{d} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} e_{cI} \omega_{d} ^{I} = (q_{a} ^{c} - n_{a} n^{c})( q_{b} ^{d} - n_{b} n^{d}) e_{cI} \omega_{d} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab}
\end{equation}
but $\tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} = 2N n^{[a} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b]} \mathrm{d} t$, then
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber e_{aI} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} &=& N \left[q_{a} ^{c} q_{b} ^{d} e_{cI} \omega_{d} ^{I} (n^{a} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - n^{b} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a}) - q_{a} ^{c} n_{b} n^{d} e_{cI} \omega_{d} ^{I} (n^{a} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - n^{b} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a}) \right. \\
&& \left. - q_{b} ^{d} n_{a} n^{c} e_{cI} \omega_{d} ^{I} (n^{a} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - n^{b} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a}) + n_{a} n^{c} n_{b} n^{d} e_{cI} \omega_{d} ^{I} (n^{a} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} - n^{b} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a}) \right]\mathrm{d} t.
\end{eqnarray}
Note that most of the terms vanishes due to $q_{a} ^{c} n^{a} = 0$ or by antisymmetry of the indices, the non vanishing terms are,
\begin{equation}
e_{aI} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} = - N \left[ q_{a} ^{c} n_{b} n^{d} n^{b} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} - q^{d} _{b} n_{a} n^{c} n^{a} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} \right] e_{cI} \omega_{d} ^{I}\mathrm{d} t.
\end{equation}
Since $n^{a}$ is the normal to the spacelike surfaces $M$ (and the splitting in the boundary is compatible with the spacetime one), $n_{a} n^{a} = -1$. Also we use $n^{a} = (t^{a} - N^{a})/N$, $\mathcal{E}_{a} ^{I} = q_{a} ^{b} e_{b} ^{I}$ and $\mathcal{W}_{a} ^{I} = q_{a} ^{b} \omega_{b} ^{I}$, the integrand of the boundary term becomes,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber e_{aI} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} &=& - N \left[ \mathcal{E}_{aI} \frac{1}{N} (t^{d} - N^{d}) (n_{b} n^{b}) \omega_{d} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} - \frac{1}{N} (t^{c} - N^{c} ) \omega_{d} ^{I} e_{cI} (n_{a} n^{a}) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b}\right]\mathrm{d} t \\
&=& - (n_{b} n^{b} ) \left[ t^{d} \omega_{d} ^{I} \mathcal{E}_{aI} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} - N^{d} \omega_{d} ^{I} \mathcal{E}_{aI} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} + t^{c} e_{cI} \mathcal{W}_{d} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{d} - N^{c} e_{cI} \mathcal{W}_{d} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{d} \right]\mathrm{d} t
\end{eqnarray}
which implies that the decomposed standard boundary term is,
\begin{equation}\label{ABV-boundarytermdecomposed}
- \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } e_{aI} \omega_{b} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} = - \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \left[ t^{d} \omega_{d} ^{I} \mathcal{E}_{aI} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} - N^{d} \omega_{d} ^{I} \mathcal{E}_{aI} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} + t^{c} e_{cI} \mathcal{W}_{d} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{d} - N^{c} e_{cI} \mathcal{W}_{d} ^{I} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{d} \right]\mathrm{d} t
\end{equation}
Now we decompose the integrand of the additional boundary term (\ref{AdditionalHarmlessBoundaryTerm}), $\frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{aI} n_{K} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab}$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{aI} n_{K} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} &=& \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{cI} \delta_{a} ^{c} n_{K} \delta_{b} ^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab}\\
\nonumber &=& \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{cI} n_{K} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} (q_{a} ^{c} - n_{a} n^{c} ) ( q_{b} ^{d} - n_{b} n^{d} ) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab}\\
\nonumber &=& - \frac{1}{\sqrt{ n \cdot n}} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[ \left( \mathcal{E}_{aI} t^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} - \mathcal{E}_{aI} N^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right. \\
&& \left. + \left( t^{c} e_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} - N^{c} \mathcal{E}_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} \right] \mathrm{d} t
\end{eqnarray}
for the previous equation we used $n^{c} = \frac{1}{N}(t^{c} - N^{c})$, $n^{a}$ is normal to a spacelike surface so $n_{a} n^{a} = -1$, $\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d}$ is spatial so $q_{b} ^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} = \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} $, and $\mathcal{E}_{a} ^{I} = q_{a} ^{b} e_{b} ^{I}$. Thus the decomposed boundary term ((\ref{AdditionalHarmlessBoundaryTerm})) is,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ABV-decomposition-additionalBT}
\nonumber - \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IKL} e_{aI} n_{K} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{ab} &=& \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M} } \frac{1}{ \sqrt{n \cdot n}} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[ \left( \mathcal{E}_{aI} t^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} - \mathcal{E}_{aI} N^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right. \\
&& + \left. \left( t^{c} e_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} - N^{c} \mathcal{E}_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} \right] \mathrm{d} t
\end{eqnarray}
Using (\ref{ABV-Bulktermdecomposed}), (\ref{ABV-boundarytermdecomposed}), (\ref{ABV-decomposition-additionalBT}) and $e = \sqrt{-g} = N \sqrt{|q|} = N \mathcal{E}$ with $q$ the determinant of the induced metric $q_{ab}$ on $M$ and $\mathcal{E}$ the determinant of $\mathcal{E} ^{a} _{I}$, we can rewrite the action (\ref{Palatini-arbitraryG}) as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber S_{PB} [e, \omega ] &=& - \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{M} N \mathcal{E} \varepsilon^{LKI} \left[ \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} \mathcal{E}_{K} ^{c} \mathcal{F}_{bcI} - \frac{2}{N} \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} t^{c} F_{bcI} + \frac{2}{N} \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} N^{c} \mathcal{F}_{bcI} \right]\\
\nonumber &&- \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{\partial M } \left[ t^{d} \omega_{d} ^{I} \mathcal{E}_{aI} \varepsilon^{a} - N^{d} \omega_{d} ^{I} \mathcal{E}_{aI} \varepsilon^{a} + t^{c} e_{cI} \mathcal{W}_{d} ^{I} \varepsilon^{d} - N^{c} e_{cI} \mathcal{W}_{d} ^{I} \varepsilon^{d} \right] \\
\nonumber && + \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{\partial M} \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[ \left( \mathcal{E}_{aI} t^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} - \mathcal{E}_{aI} N^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right. \\
&& \left. + \left( t^{c} e_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} - N^{c} \mathcal{E}_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} \right]
\end{eqnarray}
As in the Witten decomposition, we use (\ref{tF-igual-LieD-menos-CovD}) to rewrite the second term of the bulk part of the action,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber N \mathcal{E} \varepsilon^{LKI} (\frac{2}{N} \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} t^{c} F_{cb} ^{I}) \nonumber &=& \mathcal{E} \varepsilon^{LKI} 2 \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} \pounds_{\vec{t}} \omega_{b} ^{I} - \mathcal{E} \varepsilon^{LKI} 2 \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K}\mathcal{D}_{b} (t\cdot \omega)^{I} \\
\nonumber &=& 2 \mathcal{E} \varepsilon^{LKI} \left[ \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} \pounds_{\vec{t}} \omega_{b} ^{I} + \mathcal{D}_{b} \left( \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} \right) (t\cdot \omega)^{I} \right]\\
&& - \mathcal{D}_{b} \left[ \mathcal{E} \varepsilon^{LKI} 2 \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} (t\cdot \omega)^{I} \right]
\end{eqnarray}
Then the action can be written,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber S_{PB} [e, \omega ] &=& - \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{M} \left[ N \mathcal{E} \varepsilon^{LKI} \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} \mathcal{E}_{K} ^{c} \mathcal{F}_{bcI} + 2 \mathcal{E} \varepsilon^{LKI} \left( \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} \pounds_{\vec{t}} \omega_{b} ^{I} + \mathcal{D}_{b} \left( \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} \right) (t\cdot \omega)^{I}\right. \right. \\
\nonumber && \left. \left. + \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} N^{c} \mathcal{F}_{bcI} \right) \right] + \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{M} \mathcal{D}_{b} \left[ \mathcal{E} \varepsilon^{LKI} 2 \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} (t\cdot \omega)^{I} \right] \\
\nonumber &&- \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{\partial M } \left[ t^{d} \omega_{d} ^{I} \mathcal{E}_{aI} \varepsilon^{a} - N^{d} \omega_{d} ^{I} \mathcal{E}_{aI} \varepsilon^{a} + t^{c} e_{cI} \mathcal{W}_{d} ^{I} \varepsilon^{d} - N^{c} e_{cI} \mathcal{W}_{d} ^{I} \varepsilon^{d} \right] \\
\nonumber && + \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int \mathrm{d} t \int_{\partial M} \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[ \left( \mathcal{E}_{aI} t^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} - \mathcal{E}_{aI} N^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right. \\
&& \left. + \left( t^{c} e_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} - N^{c} \mathcal{E}_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} \right]
\end{eqnarray}
To find the Hamiltonian we need to calculate the momenta to perform the Legendre transformation,
\begin{equation}
\Pi_{I} ^{b} = \frac{\delta \mathcal{L} }{\delta (\pounds_{\vec{t}} \omega_{b} ^{I} ) } = \frac{1}{\kappa} \mathcal{E} \varepsilon^{LKI} \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K}
\end{equation}
Then,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Hamiltonian-ABV}
\nonumber H[e, \omega] &=& \int_{M} \left[ (\pounds_{\vec{t}} \omega_{c} ^{I} )\Pi_{I} ^{c} - \mathcal{L} \right]\\
\nonumber &=& + \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{M} \left[ N \mathcal{E} \varepsilon^{LKI} \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} \mathcal{E}_{K} ^{c} \mathcal{F}_{bcI} + 2 \mathcal{E} \varepsilon^{LKI} \left[\mathcal{D}_{b} \left( \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} \right) (t\cdot \omega)^{I} + \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} N^{c} \mathcal{F}_{bcI} \right] \right]\\
\nonumber && - \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{M} \mathcal{D}_{b} \left[ \mathcal{E} \varepsilon^{LKI} 2 \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} (t\cdot \omega)^{I} \right] \\
\nonumber &&+ \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial M } \left[ t^{d} \omega_{d} ^{I} \mathcal{E}_{aI} \varepsilon^{a} - N^{d} \omega_{d} ^{I} \mathcal{E}_{aI} \varepsilon^{a} + t^{c} e_{cI} \mathcal{W}_{d} ^{I} \varepsilon^{d} - N^{c} e_{cI} \mathcal{W}_{d} ^{I} \varepsilon^{d} \right]\\
\nonumber && - \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial M} \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[ \left( \mathcal{E}_{aI} t^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} - \mathcal{E}_{aI} N^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right. \\
&& \left. + \left( t^{c} e_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} - N^{c} \mathcal{E}_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} \right]
\end{eqnarray}
Note that within this decomposition we have `more structure', now we have three constraints
\begin{equation}
\varepsilon^{LKI} \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} \mathcal{E}_{K} ^{c} \mathcal{F}_{bcI} \approx 0 ,\,\,\,\,\, \varepsilon^{LKI} \mathcal{D}_{b} \left( \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} \right) \approx 0 \,\,\,\,\, \mathrm{and} \,\,\,\,\, \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} \mathcal{F}_{bcI} \approx 0,
\end{equation}
instead of the two found by the Witten approach (\ref{Witten-constraints}).
On the constraint surface we are left only with the boundary term,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber H &=& - \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{M} \mathcal{D}_{b} \left[ \mathcal{E} \varepsilon^{LKI} 2 \mathcal{E}_{L} ^{b} n_{K} (t\cdot \omega)^{I} \right]\\
\nonumber && + \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial M } \left[ t^{d} \omega_{d} ^{I} \mathcal{E}_{aI} \varepsilon^{a} - N^{d} \omega_{d} ^{I} \mathcal{E}_{aI} \varepsilon^{a} + t^{c} e_{cI} \mathcal{W}_{d} ^{I} \varepsilon^{d} - N^{c} e_{cI} \mathcal{W}_{d} ^{I} \varepsilon^{d} \right]\\
\nonumber &&- \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial M} \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[ \left( \mathcal{E}_{aI} t^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} - \mathcal{E}_{aI} N^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right. \\
&& \left. + \left( t^{c} e_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} - N^{c} \mathcal{E}_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} \right]
\end{eqnarray}
Let us now consider the asymptotically flat boundary conditions. The leading term of $(t \cdot \omega)^{I} = 0$ and also since $\mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d}$ is spatial $t^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} = 0$ . So we are left with
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ABV-hamiltonian-boundary-threeterms}
\nonumber H &=& \lim_{r \to \infty} \left\{- \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial M } \left[ N^{\bar{d}} \,^{1} \mathcal{W}_{\bar{d} } ^{I} \,^{0}\mathcal{E}_{ \bar{a}I} \varepsilon^{\bar{a} } - t^{c} \,^{0}e_{cI} \,^{1} \mathcal{W}_{\bar{d} } ^{I} \varepsilon^{\bar{d} } + N^{\bar{c} } \,^{0}\mathcal{E}_{ \bar{c}I} \,^{1}\mathcal{W}_{\bar{d} } ^{I} \varepsilon^{\bar{d} } \right] \right.\\
\nonumber &&- \left. \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial M} \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[ - \,^{0}\mathcal{E}_{aI} N^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} + \left( t^{c} \,^{0}e_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} - N^{c} \,^{0}\mathcal{E}_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} \right] \right. \\
&& \left. + {\cal O}(r^{-1}) \right\}
\end{eqnarray}
In addition to the fall-off conditions on $e$ and $\omega$, now we have to take into account the behaviour of the lapse $N$ and shift $N^{a}$ functions on the asymptotic region for time-translations (following \cite{Ashtekar-Varadarajan1994, Marolf-Patino2006}),
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{Falloff-Laps} N &=& 1 + {\cal O}(r^{-1})\\
\label{Falloff-Shift} N^{a} &=& {\cal O}(r^{-1-\beta}),
\end{eqnarray}
Note that in the asymptotic region the projections $\mathcal{E}_{a} ^{I} = q_{a} ^{b} e_{b} ^{I}$ and $\mathcal{W}_{a} ^{I} = q_{a} ^{b} \omega_{b} ^{I}$ coincide with $e_{\bar{a}} ^{I}$ and $\omega_{\bar{a}} ^{I}$. With conditions (\ref{Falloff-Laps}),(\ref{Falloff-Shift}) and considering the order of leading terms of $e$ and $\omega$: $\,^{1} \omega_{\bar{d} } ^{I} = {\cal O}(r^{-1}) = \,^{1} \mathcal{W}_{\bar{d} } ^{I}$, $\,^{0} e_{ \bar{c}I} = {\cal O}(r^{-\beta/2}) = \,^{0} \mathcal{E}_{ \bar{a}I}$, and that $\varepsilon^{\bar{d} } = {\cal O}(r)$. Note that to first order the first and third terms in (\ref{ABV-hamiltonian-boundary-threeterms}) decay as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\lim_{r \rightarrow \infty } \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\partial M } N^{\bar{d}} \,^{1}\omega_{\bar{d} } ^{I} \,^{0} \mathcal{E}_{ \bar{a}I} \varepsilon^{\bar{a} } &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty } \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\partial M } {\cal O}(r^{-1-\beta}) {\cal O}(r^{-1}) {\cal O}(r^{-\beta/2}) {\cal O}(r)\\
&=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty } \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\partial M } {\cal O}(r^{-1-3 \beta / 2}) = 0
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\lim_{r \rightarrow \infty } \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\partial M } N^{\bar{c} } \,^{0}\mathcal{E}_{ \bar{c}I} \,^{1}\mathcal{W}_{\bar{d} } ^{I} \varepsilon^{\bar{d} } &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty } \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\partial M } {\cal O}(r^{-1-\beta}) {\cal O}(r^{-\beta/2}){\cal O}(r^{-1}) {\cal O}(r)\\
&=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty } \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\partial M } {\cal O}(r^{-1-3 \beta / 2}) = 0,
\end{eqnarray}
respectively. And the fourth and sixth terms decay as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty } \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial M} \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[ \,^{0}\mathcal{E}_{aI} N^{d} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{d} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{a} \right] &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty } \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\partial M } {\cal O}(r^{-\beta/2}) {\cal O}(r^{-1-\beta}) {\cal O}(r^{-1-\beta /2}) {\cal O}(r)\\
&=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty } \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\partial M } {\cal O}(r^{-1-2 \beta }) = 0
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty } \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial M} \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[ N^{c} \,^{0}\mathcal{E}_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} \right] &=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty } \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\partial M } {\cal O}(r^{-1-\beta}) {\cal O}(r^{-\beta/2}) {\cal O}(r^{-1-\beta /2}) {\cal O}(r)\\
&=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty } \frac{1}{2 \kappa} \int_{\partial M } {\cal O}(r^{-1-2 \beta }) = 0.
\end{eqnarray}
Therefore, $H$ can be written as,
\begin{equation}
\nonumber H = \lim_{r \to \infty} \left\{- \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial M } \left[ - t^{c} \,^{0}e_{cI} \,^{1} \mathcal{W}_{\bar{d} } ^{I} \varepsilon^{\bar{d} } \right] - \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial M} \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[ t^{c} \,^{0}e_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} \right] + {\cal O}(r^{-1}) \right\}
\end{equation}
As in the previous sections, if we want this Hamiltonian to generate asymptotic time translations and therefore its conserved quantity to be the \emph{energy}, $t^{a}$ has to approach a time-translation Killing vector field of the asymptotic flat spacetime, which also translates in $t$ being orthogonal to $M$ (corresponding to $N\to 1, N^a\to 0$). In that case
the previous expression coincides with (\ref{H-nonvanishingleadingtermscomefrom}) from
Therefore, $H$ can be written as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber H &=& \lim_{r \to \infty} \left\{- \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial M } \left[ - t^{c} \,^{0}e_{cI} \,^{1} \mathcal{W}_{\bar{d} } ^{I} \varepsilon^{\bar{d} } \right] - \frac{\alpha}{\kappa} \int_{\partial M} \frac{1}{ n \cdot n} \varepsilon^{IL} \left[ t^{c} \,^{0}e_{cI} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} n_{L} \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} \right] + {\cal O}(r^{-1}) \right\} \\
&=& \lim_{r \rightarrow \infty} \left\{ \frac{1}{ \kappa} \int_{\partial M } \,^{0} e_{0I} \frac{\,^{1}\bar{\omega}_{\bar{d} } ^{I} }{r} \varepsilon^{\bar{d} } - \frac{\alpha}{ \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} \frac{1}{\sqrt{ n \cdot n}} \varepsilon^{IL} \, ^{0} e_{0I} \left( \, ^{0} e_{cL} \mathring{\bar{\mathcal{D}}} _{b} r^{c} \right) \tilde{\varepsilon}^{b} \right\}.
\end{eqnarray}
Which is exactly the same term as (\ref{H-Wittendecomposition}), the one found by the Witten's decomposition. Therefore the Hamiltonian is the same as (\ref{Witten-lastHamiltonian}) of the previous part,
\begin{equation}
H = - \frac{ 1}{2 \kappa} \int_{C_{t}} (2 \alpha - \beta) \mathrm{d} \theta=\frac{1}{8G}\,(\beta - 2)\, ,
\end{equation}
which is the same result we obtained for the Witten decomposition.
Note that at the end of the day, the result for the energy is the same in both decompositions as expected,
this is due to the fact that at the asymptotic region the direction of $t^{a}$ coincides with $n^{a}$, and
also the lapse y shift functions decay in such a way. This may not be true for other conserved quantities
such as the angular momentum, but we shall leave the discussion to forthcoming works.
\section{Discussion}
\label{sec:6}
In this work we have addressed the issue of defining well posed variational principles for first order asymptotically flat 2+1 gravity, {\emph{and}} their corresponding Hamiltonian descriptions, in both the covariant and canonical formalisms. Of particular relevance was the issue of recovering the Hamiltonian and therefore the energy as
a boundary term after performing the Legendre transform, {\emph{without}} the need to postulate extra
boundary terms to render the formalism consistent (as is the case in the Regge-Teitelboim formalism \cite{regge-teitel,Ashtekar-Varadarajan1994}).
As we have shown, this question can be answered in the affirmative
not for one, but for {\emph{two}} different actions, each of which yields a different value for the energy of the spacetime. In turn, this clarifies a tension that existed in the literature regarding, say, the energy of Minkowski spacetime. One should also note that this program has only been recently completed in first order
3+1 gravity as well \cite{CR}.
Let us now summarize our results. First, we proposed a three dimensional manifestly Lorentz invariant Palatini action $S_{\textrm{LIP}}$ that is well posed under asymptotically flat boundary conditions. As we have noted, the analogue of the well posed Palatini action in $4D$ \cite{aes}, that we called $S_{\textrm{SPB}}$, is not manifestly Lorentz invariant, although it has a well posed action principle under the asymptotically flat boundary conditions. This is so given that one has to make a partial gauge fixing in the boundary to make it invariant under the residual gauge transformations. As we showed in detail, by introducing an additional appropriate boundary term \ref{AdditionalHarmlessBoundaryTerm}, we can indeed define an action that is manifestly Lorentz invariant and moreover, this action coincide with the three dimensional Einstein-Hilbert action with a Gibbons-Hawking term. We derived the asymptotically flat boundary conditions for the first order variables, and with these conditions we showed that the proposed action $S_{\textrm{LIP}}$ has a well posed variational principle, i.e., it is finite and differentiable. Then, using the covariant and canonical approaches we obtained an expression for the energy. In the first case, the covariant formalism can at best yield an expression for the {\it{variation}} of the energy. Thus, our results are analogous to those in \cite{Ashtekar-Varadarajan1994} where the Regge-Teitelboim method was used for the second order metric variables. In the second case, using a canonical formalism, we could directly compare our results with those in \cite{Marolf-Patino2006}, where the starting point is the Einstein-Hilbert action with Gibbons-Hawking term, that is well posed under asymptotically flat boundary conditions.
To summarize, we have two results: When we start with the action $S_{\textrm{SPB}}$, the
corresponding boundary contribution yields a {\it positive} energy in the interval
$[0,1/4G]$. Thus, Minkowski spacetime is assigned zero energy. When we consider
the manifestly gauge invariant action $S_{\textrm{LIP}}$ obtained by the
addition of the term \ref{AdditionalHarmlessBoundaryTerm}, we recover the results
of \cite{Marolf-Patino2006}. Namely, in this case the gravitational energy is always negative and contained within the interval $[-1/4G,0]$. Thus, Minkowski spacetime has a negative energy equal to $-1/4G$.
Let us now end with some remarks regarding these results.
\begin{enumerate}
\item As is also standard practice in asymptotically flat 3+1 gravity, we have focused our attention on the gravitational action, without considering any particular matter content. This does not mean that our considerations are restricted to the vacuum case. The assumption that we have made, as is done in the 3+1 case, is that the decay rates of matter fields are stronger in such a way that there is no contribution to the boundary terms of the action coming from the matter fields. Thus, the Hamiltonian does not depend explicitly on the matter fields.\footnote{Recall that the situation is similar in 3+1 gravity. Even when the expression for energy depends explicitly only on geometrical fields, these depend through Einstein's equations on the matter content.
Even more, the vacuum 2+1 case would be trivial.} Thus, the expressions for energy we have found are valid for generic matter content (satisfying reasonable energy conditions).
\item Let us compare our results here regarding the different actions with the situation in 3+1 gravity. In 3+1, the standard second order action for asymptotically flat spacetimes is given by the Einstein-Hilbert bulk term of the form $\int_M R$ plus a boundary term of the form $\int_{\partial M}(K-K_0)$, where one subtracts a non-dynamical (infinite) term to make the action finite (See, however \cite{mm} for a discussion of the viability of this action). In the first order formalism, the
Palatini action plus a simple boundary term \cite{aes}, the analogue to our $S_{\textrm{SPB}}$ action, is already finite and has been shown to be related, under certain conditions to the finite second order action \cite{aes}.
In 2+1 gravity, the action of the form
$\int_M R + \int_{\partial M}K$ is already finite and does not need to be `renormalized', as shown in \cite{Marolf-Patino2006}. Here we have shown that the
totally gauge invariant action $S_{\textrm{LIP}}$ is equal to the Marolf-Pati\~no action $\int_M R + \int_{\partial M}K$. Moreover, just as in the 3+1 case, the action
$S_{\textrm{SPB}}$ that we considered here is a `shifted' version of the Marolf-Patiño action. The difference with the 3+1 case is that, in 2+1 dimensions, this non-dynamical `shift' is finite rendering both actions well defined, while in the 3+1 case only one of them is viable.
\item In 3+1 gravity, several arguments strongly suggest that the ADM four momentum of Minkowski spacetime should vanish. On the one hand, there is no combination of the fundamental constants of the theory (for simple matter content) that has dimensions of mass, so it would be unnatural to have a non-zero value for energy of the vacuum configuration. Even more, symmetry considerations suggest that a Poincare invariant configuration (in terms of asymptotic symmetries) should have zero ADM four-momentum. Otherwise, a non-zero ADM four-vector would select a preferred (asymptotic) frame, violating Poincare invariance. In three dimensions, none of this features exist. To begin with, the gravitational constant $G$ has dimensions of inverse mass. Second, since the asymptotic metric is not that of Minkowski spacetime but that of a cone (flat with a deficit angle), translations are {\it not} a symmetry of the asymptotic spacetime \cite{deser2,symmetry}. Thus, a preferred frame is not in principle excluded. Given all this, it is not surprising nor completely unexpected that Minkowski spacetime might have a non-zero value for energy.
\item As we have mentioned, the asymptotic symmetry group of AF 2+1 gravity is qualitatively different
from the 3+1 case. Two distinct lines of research have been pursued to study the structure of this group.
In \cite{symmetry}, conformal techniques were employed to describe such symmetries. In \cite{barnich} a
different strategy, motivated by work on AdS was put forward. It would be interesting to take our
Hamiltonian description as a staring point, and systematically study the structure of the asymptotic
symmetries. This will be left for a future publication.
\item As was early noted \cite{Witten1988}, at the level of actions for a compact spatial slice, the
Einstein-Palatini action is equivalent to a Chern-Simons theory for the group $ISO(2,1)$. They differ,
precisely, by a boundary term. The natural question is whether one can define a consistent action by
adding appropriate boundary terms to the bulk Chern-Simons form. Furthermore, one would like to study the
same issues we have considered here, and obtain the energy as defined by that action.
This shall be reported elsewhere \cite{CR-CS}.
\end{enumerate}
|
\section{\label{introduction} Introduction}
Recently, a revised version \cite{ALEPH13} of the ALEPH data \cite{ALEPH98}
for the non-strange vector ($V$) and axial vector ($A$) spectral distributions
obtained from measurements of hadronic $\tau$ decays
became available. These results corrected a problem, uncovered
in Ref.~\cite{TAU10}, in the publicly posted 2005 and 2008 versions
of the correlations between different energy bins.\footnote{The
corrected data may be found
at http://aleph.web.lal.in2p3.fr/tau/specfun13.html.}
In Ref.~\cite{alphas14} we analyzed these data in order to extract the strong
coupling at the $\tau$ mass, $\alpha_s(m_\tau^2)$, as well as OPE condensates,
following the strategy previously developed in Refs.~\cite{US1,US2}.
This analysis leads to a complete description of the $V$ and $A$
spectral functions as a function of the energy-squared $s$, including
the region $s>m_\tau^2$.
Complete knowledge of the spectral functions allows one to construct
a representation of the (subtracted) vacuum polarizations in both
channels, and the unsubtracted vacuum polarization in the $V-A$ channel,
as a function of $s$. Combining
these representations
with the analytic expressions derived from chiral perturbation theory
(ChPT), which are known to next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) \cite{ABT}
allows us to extract the low-energy constant (LEC) $C_{87}$,
and a linear combination of $L_{10}$, $C_{12}-C_{61}+C_{80}$ and
$C_{13}-C_{62}+C_{81}$ from conventional chiral sum rules for the
non-strange $V-A$ channel \cite{DGHS,GPP}, and $C_{12}+C_{61}+C_{80}$ and
a linear combination of $L_{10}$ and $C_{12}-C_{61}+C_{80}$ from
flavor-breaking ($ud-us$) chiral sum rules \cite{DK} in the $V\pm A$
channels. These determinations employ as input existing values of $L_5$
and $L_9$, estimates existing from both
phenomenology \cite{bj11,bt02} and the lattice \cite{FLAG,MILC9A}.
In order to disentangle further $L_{10}$, $C_{12}-C_{61}+C_{80}$ and
$C_{13}-C_{62}+C_{81}$, we exploit the dependence of the coefficients
of these LEC combinations appearing in the $V-A$
polarization on the pion and kaon masses using data for this polarization
from the lattice \cite{bgjmp13,Boyleetal14}.\footnote{We
hope to revisit the determination of $L_5$ and $L_9$ from the
$ud$ and $us$ $V$ polarizations
in the future, but it remains to be seen whether the errors from such
an analysis are competitive with those of Refs.~\cite{bj11,bt02,FLAG,MILC9A}.
Here we will use values from the literature.}
The goal of this article is to update the analysis of
Refs.~\cite{bgjmp13,Boyleetal14,GMPNNLO}, replacing the
experimental data for the non-strange spectral functions, which previously
came from OPAL \cite{OPAL}, with the revised data from Ref.~\cite{ALEPH13}, and,
at the same time, updating the lattice input of Ref.~\cite{Boyleetal14}.
The expectation is that the errors
on $L_{10}$ and the accessible NNLO combinations will decrease, because the
ALEPH data are more precise, especially in the low-energy region.
Improvements in the lattice data should also help in
the process of disentangling $L_{10}$ from the combinations
$C_{12}-C_{61}+C_{80}$ and $C_{13}-C_{62}+C_{81}$, described previously in
Ref.~\cite{bgjmp13}. In the current analysis, we employ a slightly
different input for $L_5$, choosing now to use the $2+1$-flavor estimate
of Ref.~\cite{MILC9A}, $L_5^r(\mu=770~\mbox{MeV})=0.84(38)\times 10^{-3}$.
This value is the $2+1$-flavor estimate adopted in Ref.~\cite{FLAG}, and straddles
several nominally more precise, but not mutually consistent, estimates,
including the result $L_5^r(\mu=770~\mbox{MeV})=0.58(13)\times 10^{-3}$
of Ref.~\cite{bj11} used in our previous analysis.
While the main emphasis here is on the LECs of ChPT,
we will also update our estimates for the operator product expansion (OPE)
condensates $C_{6,V-A}$ and $C_{8,V-A}$, which are order parameters
(in contrast to the analogous condensates in the $V+A$ channel).
By their nature, these condensates are sensitive to the high-energy part
of the spectral function, which is less well known. Therefore, it is
interesting to compare the values for the condensates
obtained from the OPAL and ALEPH data.
\section{\label{theory} Theory compendium}
In this section, we briefly collect the definitions and relations between
quantities needed in order to present our results. More detailed overviews
can be found in Refs.~\cite{bgjmp13,GMPNNLO} and references therein. We first
consider the required sum-rule results, and then collect relevant results
from ChPT.
\subsection{\label{sum rules} Sum rules}
The vacuum polarizations, $\Pi^{(J)}_T(Q^2)$, with $T=V,\, V\pm A$
and $J=0,1$, are the spin $J$ scalar parts of the corresponding
current-current two-point functions, $\Pi^T_{\mu \nu}(q)$, and are related
to the corresponding spectral functions, $\rho^{(J)}_T(s)$, by finite-energy
sum rules (FESRs). The flavor $ud$ and $us$ versions of these spectral
functions can be obtained from experimental differential hadronic $\tau$ decay
distribution data for energies up to the $\tau$ mass.
Above the $\tau$ mass one needs a theoretical representation, and we
will use the one obtained in Ref.~\cite{alphas14}.
First, let us consider the non-strange $V-A$ channel, for which the
vacuum polarization obeys the unsubtracted dispersion relation
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{defPiLR}
\Pi_{V-A}(Q^2)&\equiv&\Pi^{(0+1)}_{V-A}(Q^2)=
\int_0^\infty ds\;\frac{\r_V(s)-\r_A(s)}{s+Q^2}\ ,\\
\Pi^{(0+1)}_{V-A}(Q^2)&\equiv&
-\frac{1}{3q^2}\left(g^{\mu\nu}-\frac{4q^\mu q^\nu}{q^2}\right)
\Pi^{V-A}_{\mu\nu}(q)\ ,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where the Euclidean momentum-squared $Q^2=-q^2$.
Here $\r_V$ ($\r_A$) is the
non-strange, $I=1$ vector (axial) spectral function summing the
angular momentum $J=1$ and $J=0$ contributions. Generalizing the
definition of $\Pi_{V-A}(Q^2)$, we also define functions
$\Pi_{V-A}^{(w)}$, to be used in the restricted
sense employed below, involving
additional polynomial weight factors $w(y)$:
\begin{equation}
\label{defPiLRw}
\Pi_{V-A}^{(w)}(Q^2)=\int_0^\infty ds\;w(s/s_0)\;\frac{\r_V(s)-\r_A(s)}{s+Q^2}
\end{equation}
with $0<s_0\le m_\tau^2$. In what follows, we will use the
weights
\begin{equation}
\label{weights}
w_k(y)=(1-y)^k\ ,\quad k=1,2\ .
\end{equation}
In evaluating the integral in Eq.~(\ref{defPiLRw}), we will use the ALEPH
experimental data for the spectral functions for $s\le s_0$, and the
duality-violating (DV) part
\begin{equation}
\label{approx}
\r_V(s)-\r_A(s)\approx\r^{\rm DV}_V(s)-\r^{\rm DV}_A(s)\ ,\qquad s\ge s_0\ ,
\end{equation}
above $s_0$, with $\r^{\rm DV}_V(s)-\r^{\rm DV}_A(s)$ equal to $1/\p$ times the imaginary part of $\Pi_{V-A}^{\rm DV}(Q^2)$, defined, in turn, from
\begin{equation}
\label{split}
\Pi_{V-A}(Q^2)=\Pi_{V-A}^{\rm OPE}(Q^2)+\Pi_{V-A}^{\rm DV}(Q^2)\ ,
\end{equation}
for $\vert Q^2\vert \ge s_0$, where the OPE part has the form
\begin{equation}
\label{highQ2}
\Pi_{V-A}^{\rm OPE}(Q^2)=\sum_{k=1}^\infty\;\frac{C_{2k,V/A}}{(Q^2)^k}\ ,
\end{equation}
with $C_{2k,V/A}$ the OPE coefficients. We will always assume that we
can choose $s_0$ smaller than $m_\tau^2$, but large enough that the
separation~(\ref{split}) into OPE and DV parts makes sense.
We use a model for the DV parts of
the spectral functions:
\begin{equation}
\label{ansatz}
\r_{V/A}(s)=e^{-\delta-\gamma s}\sin{(\alpha+\beta s)} ,
\end{equation}
with $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$, and $\delta$ parameters which differ
in the $V$ and $A$ channels. The form of this {\it ansatz} was motivated
in Ref.~\cite{CGPDV}, and it was shown in Refs.~\cite{alphas14,US1} that this
model can be used to successfully parametrize the resonance structure
in the data for $s\,\gtap\, 1.4$~GeV$^2$. Here we will fix the values
of the $V$ and $A$ DV parameters using the results of the
FOPT fit of Table~IV of Ref.~\cite{alphas14} with
$s_{\rm min}=1.55$~GeV$^2$.\footnote{Essentially identical
results are obtained if one employs instead the results of the
corresponding CIPT fit.}
In what follows we will denote by ${\overline{\P}}_A$, ${\overline{\P}}_A^{(w)}$
and ${\overline{\r}}_A$ the versions of $\Pi_A$, $\Pi_A^{(w)}$ and $\r_A$
from which the pion pole contribution has been subtracted. Analogous
pion-pole-subtracted versions of the $V\pm A$ polarizations and spectral
functions are denoted ${\overline{\P}}_{V\pm A}=\Pi_V\pm{\overline{\P}}_A$,
${\overline{\P}}_{V\pm A}^{(w)}=\Pi_V^{(w)}\pm{\overline{\P}}_A^{(w)}$ and ${\overline{\r}}_{V\pm A}=\r_V
\pm{\overline{\r}}_A$.
For $Q^2<4 m_\pi^2$, ${\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(Q^2)$ admits a Taylor expansion,
and we can thus define the intercept and slope at $Q^2=0$,
\begin{equation}
\label{lowQ2}
{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(Q^2)=-8L_{10}^{\rm eff}-16C_{87}^{\rm eff}Q^2+O(Q^4)\ .
\end{equation}
Employing FESRs for the weights~(\ref{weights}) and analytic results for
the OPE coefficients $C_{2,V-A}$ and $C_{4,V-A}$ \cite{FNR,NLOC4},
it follows that \cite{US1}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{alt}
&&\hspace{-0.4cm}-8L_{10}^{\rm eff}={\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(0)=
{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}^{(w_1)}(0)+\frac{2f_\p^2}{s_0}\\
&&\hspace{0.2cm}={\overline{\P}}_{V-A}^{(w_2)}(0)+
\frac{4f_\p^2}{s_0}\left[1-\frac{17}{16\p^2}\left(\frac{\alpha_s(s_0)}{\p}\right)^2\frac{m_u(s_0)m_d(s_0)}{f_\p^2}
-\frac{m_\p^2}{2s_0}\left(1+\frac{4}{3}\frac{\alpha_s(s_0)}{\p}\right)
\right]\ .
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Since the terms proportional to $\alpha_s(s_0)$ lead to effects smaller than the
experimental errors, we will omit these terms from the actual analysis leading
to our results for $L_{10}^{\rm eff}$ and $C_{87}^{\rm eff}$.
In addition to the information obtained from the flavor
$ud$ V-A channel, further constraints can be obtained
from inverse-moment FESRs (IMFESRs) for the flavor-breaking differences
\begin{equation}
\label{Pidiff}
\Delta\Pi_T(Q^2)\equiv\Pi^{(0+1)}_{ud;T}(Q^2)-\Pi^{(0+1)}_{us;T}(Q^2)\ ,
\end{equation}
defined in Ref.~\cite{GMPNNLO}. Note that the $\Delta \Pi_T(Q^2)$
are finite and satisfy unsubtracted dispersion relations.
The IMFESRs of Ref. [17] have the forms
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{vpmaimsralt}
\Delta\Pi_V(0) &=&
\int_{s_{\rm th}}^{s_0}ds\, {\frac{w(s/s_0)}{s}}\,\Delta{\rho}_V(s)
+{\frac{1}{2\pi i}}\,\oint_{\vert z\vert = s_0} dz\,
{\frac{w(z/s_0)}{z}}\, \left[\Delta\Pi_V (-z)\right]^{\rm OPE}\ ,\label{dkvsr}
\nonumber
\\
\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V\pm A}(0) &=&
\int_{s_{\rm th}}^{s_0}ds\, {\frac{w(s/s_0)}{s}}\,\Delta\overline{\rho}_{V\pm A}(s)
\pm \left[{\frac{f_K^2}{s_0}}\, f^w_{\rm res}(y_K)\,
-\, {\frac{f_\pi^2}{s_0}}\, f^w_{\rm res}(y_\pi )\right]
\nonumber\\
&&\ \ \ \ \ +\,{\frac{1}{2\pi i}}\,\oint_{\vert z\vert = s_0} dz\,
{\frac{w(z/s_0)}{z}}\, \left[\Delta\Pi_{V\pm A} (-z)\right]^{\rm OPE}\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
in which $s_{\rm th}$ is the continuum threshold $4m_\p^2$,
$y_\p=m_\p^2/s_0$, $y_K=m_K^2/s_0$, and
\begin{equation}
\label{fdef}
f(y)=\frac{2}{y}\left(w(0)-w(y)\right)\ .
\end{equation}
As long as we retain the exact $\Delta\Pi(-z)$ in the contour
integrals of Eq.~(\ref{vpmaimsralt}), the full
right-hand sides are necessarily independent of the weight choice $w$,
provided we restrict our attention to $w(y)$ all having $w(0)=1$.
In Eq.~(\ref{vpmaimsralt}) we dropped the DV term from the split~(\ref{split}),
and kept only the OPE contribution. It is reasonable to do so, because the
only weights we will use will be triply pinched, \mbox{\it i.e.}, contain a factor
$(z-s_0)^3$, which suppresses DVs strongly.
In our analysis, we will use the weights
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{IMweights}
{\hat{w}}(y)&=&(1-y)^3\ ,\\
w_{\rm DK}(y)&=&(1-y)^3\left(1+y+{1\over 2} y^2\right)
=1-2y+{1\over 2}\left(y^2+y^3+y^4-y^5\right)\ .\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The IMFESR with $w_{\rm DK}$ was first considered in Ref.~\cite{DK}.
The quantities ${\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(0)$, ${\overline{\P}}'_{V-A}(0)$, $\Delta\Pi_V(0)$ and
$\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V\pm A}(0)$ can be obtained from hadronic $\tau$-decay data,
which yield the spectral functions $\r_{V/A}(s)$, either directly,
for $s<m_\tau^2$, or, where it is needed for $s>m_\tau^2$ in the $V-A$
channel analysis, indirectly through Eq.~(\ref{approx}),
using the values of the DV parameters obtained from the fits to
these same data,
described in Ref.~\cite{alphas14}. In addition, one needs the experimental values
of $m_\p$, $f_\p$,\footnote{Our normalization is such that
$f_\p=92.21(14)$~MeV.}
$m_K$ and $f_K$. For a detailed discussion of the OPE contributions to
Eq.~(\ref{vpmaimsralt}), we refer to Ref.~\cite{GMPNNLO}.\footnote{See, in particular,
Sec.~III.B of that reference.} A key point is that the numerical contributions
from the OPE terms to $\Delta\Pi_V(0)$ and $\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V\pm A}(0)$ are very small.
That implies that even if these OPE contributions are not very well known,
and one has therefore to include very conservative estimates
of their errors in the total error budget, the impact
on our final errors is minor.
As already noted above, we have dropped DV contributions in
Eq.~(\ref{vpmaimsralt}). The reason is that these are very suppressed for the
weights~(\ref{IMweights}), which are triply pinched, and moreover
suppress the large-$s$ region by an additional factor $1/s$.
Since the $s_0$ dependence from both the OPE and DVs is non-trivial,
our treatment of the OPE and the omission of DVs can be tested by
checking the $s_0$ independence of $\Delta\Pi_V(0)$, $\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V+A}(0)$ and
$\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(0)$ produced using the right-hand side of the
corresponding IMFESR.
\subsection{\label{chpt} Chiral perturbation theory}
The motivation for considering the quantities $L_{10}^{\rm eff}$,
$C_{87}^{\rm eff}$, $\Delta\Pi_V(0)$, and $\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V\pm A}(0)$ is that they
all depend on NLO and NNLO LECs of the chiral effective theory, and
thus yield information on the QCD values for these LECs if sufficiently
accurate data (from experiment or lattice QCD) are
available. Here we will collect the relevant NNLO ChPT expressions needed
in order to connect the quantities defined in the previous subsection to the
LECs of ChPT.
The representation of ${\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(Q^2)$ to NNLO in ChPT has the form
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{Pifit}
{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(Q^2)&=&-8\Bigl(1-4(2\mu_\p+\mu_K)\Bigr)L_{10}^r
+32m_\p^2\left(C_{12}^r-C_{61}^r+C_{80}^r\right)\\
&&+32(2m_K^2+m_\p^2)\left(C_{13}^r-C_{62}^r+C_{81}^r\right)
-16C_{87}^rQ^2+R_{\p K}(\mu,Q^2;L_9^r)\ ,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where the explicit expression for $R_{\p K}(\mu,Q^2;L_9^r)$ can be
reconstituted from the results of Ref.~\cite{ABT}.\footnote{Since the value
of $L_9^r$ is well known \cite{bt02}, we treat the loop contribution
proportional to this LEC as known, and we thus include
this contribution in $R_{\p K}(\mu,Q^2;L_9^r)$.}
The subscript $\p K$ indicates that $R$ depends
also on $m_\p$, $m_K$ and $f_\p$, in addition to the explicitly shown
arguments.%
\footnote{In Ref.~\cite{bgjmp13} we denoted this term simply as $R(Q^2;L_9^r)$.}
$L_{10}^{\rm eff}$ and
$C_{87}^{\rm eff}$ are then given by:
\begin{subequations}
\label{chptconn}
\begin{eqnarray}
{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(0)&=&-8L_{10}^{\rm eff}\nonumber\\
&=&-8L_{10}^r\Bigl(1-4(2\mu_\p+\mu_K)\Bigr)
+16(2\mu_\p+\mu_K)L_9^r
\label{chptconna}\\
&&+32m_\p^2\left(C_{12}^r-C_{61}^r+C_{80}^r\right)+32(2m_K^2+m_\p^2)
\left(C_{13}^r-C_{62}^r+C_{81}^r\right)\nonumber\\
&&+{\hat R}_{\p K}(\mu,0)
\ ,\nonumber
\\
{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}'(0)&=&-16C_{87}^{\rm eff}\label{chptconnb}\\
&=&-16C_{87}^r+\frac{1}{4\p^2 f_\p^2}\left(1-\log\frac{\mu^2}{m_\p^2}+
\frac{1}{3}\log\frac{m_K^2}{m_\p^2}\right)L_9^r
\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\partial {\hat R}_{\p K}(\mu,Q^2)}{\partial Q^2}\Biggr|_{Q^2=0}
\ ,\nonumber\\
\mu_P&=&\frac{m_P^2}{32\p^2f_\p^2}\log\frac{m_P^2}{\mu^2}\ ,\label{chptconnc}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
where $\hat R_{\p K}(\mu,Q^2)$ is the part of $R_{\p K}(\mu,Q^2;L_9^r)$
independent of $L_9^r$.
Here the superscript $r$ denotes the values of LECs renormalized in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme at scale
$\mu$, which we will take to be $\mu=770$~MeV in what follows.
We will also need the NNLO ChPT expressions for $\Delta\Pi_T(0)$, $T=V$,
$V\pm A$, but only at physical values of $m_\p$, $m_K$ and $f_\p$.
We therefore give the expressions in terms of the LECs with the numerical
values of the coefficients for the NLO LECs $L_{5,9,10}^r$ evaluated at
$m_\p=139.57$~MeV, $M_K=495.65$~MeV,\footnote{This is the average of the
charged and neutral kaon masses. Taking just the charged or neutral value
has no impact on our final results.}
$f_\p=92.21$~MeV, and $\mu=770$~MeV:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta\Pi_V(0)&=&0.00775-0.7218\, L_5^r\,
+\, 1.423\, L_9^r\, +\, 1.062\, L_{10}^r
\, +\, 32(m_K^2-m_\pi^2)C_{61}^r\ ,\nonumber\\
\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V+A}(0)&=&
0.00880 -0.7218\, L_5^r\, +\, 1.423\, L_9^r
\, +\, 32(m_K^2-m_\pi^2)\left[ C_{12}^r+C_{61}^r
+C_{80}^r\right]\ ,\nonumber\\
\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(0)&=&
0.00670-0.7218\, L_5^r\, +\, 1.423\, L_9^r\, +\, 2.125\,
L_{10}^r\nonumber\\
&&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad -\, 32(m_K^2-m_\pi^2)\left[ C_{12}^r-C_{61}^r
+C_{80}^r\right]\ .
\label{nlonnlocontributions}
\end{eqnarray}
Equations~(\ref{Pifit}),~(\ref{chptconn}) and~(\ref{nlonnlocontributions})
give access to combinations involving
the LECs $L_{10}^r$, $C_{87}^r$, and the linear combinations
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal C}_0^r&\equiv&
32 m_\pi^2 \left( C^r_{12}-C^r_{61}+C^r_{80}\right)\ ,\nonumber\\
{\cal C}_1^r&\equiv& 32 \left( m_\pi^2+2m_K^2\right)
\left( C^r_{13}-C^r_{62}+C^r_{81}\right)\ .
\label{c0c1defns}
\end{eqnarray}
In addition, the LECs $L_5^r$, $C_{61}^r$ and the linear combination
$C^r_{12}+C^r_{61}+C^r_{80}$
appear in Eq.~(\ref{nlonnlocontributions}).
Our goal is to use the ALEPH hadronic $\tau$-decay data to extract $L_{10}^r$,
$C_{61}^r$, $C_{87}^r$ and $C_{12}^r\pm C_{61}^r+C_{80}^r$, using the known values of
$L_5^r$ and $L_9^r$. However, $L_{10}^r$ appears in a linear combination
with ${\cal C}_0^r$ and ${\cal C}_1^r$ that does not depend on $Q^2$, and
we thus need other information in order to disentangle $L_{10}^r$,
${\cal C}_0^r$ and ${\cal C}_1^r$ from each other. This can be done by
using lattice data for different values of the meson masses, and such
data are available for $T=V-A$ \cite{Boyleetal14}.\footnote{No such lattice
analysis has been performed yet for the $us$ channel, which is why we
will use known values for $L_5^r$ and $L_9^r$ here.}
We thus will consider, following Ref.~\cite{bgjmp13},
\begin{equation}
\label{LPiVA}
\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}^{\rm L,E}(Q^2)\equiv
{\overline{\P}}^{\rm L,E}_{V-A}(Q^2)-{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(Q^2)\ ,
\end{equation}
the difference between the non-strange pion-pole-subtracted
$V-A$ correlator ${\overline{\P}}^{\rm L,E}_{V-A}(Q^2)$ evaluated on
a lattice ensemble $E$ with $\pi$ and $K$ masses and decay constants
different from the physical ones, and the same correlator,
${\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(Q^2)$, evaluated at the same $Q^2$, for the physical
quark mass case. The latter is obtained from the dispersive
representation using spectral functions obtained from the
hadronic $\tau$ decay data.
It then follows that in terms of LECs this difference can be expressed
as
\begin{equation}
\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}^{\rm L,E}(Q^2) = \Delta R^{\rm L,E}_{\pi K}(\mu ,Q^2; L_9^r)
\, +\, \delta^{\rm L,E}_{10}\, L_{10}^r\, +\,
\delta^{\rm L,E}_0 {\cal C}_0^r\, +\, \delta^{\rm L,E}_1 {\cal C}_1^r\ ,
\label{deltadeltapibar}
\end{equation}
where $\Delta R^{\rm L,E}(\mu ,Q^2; L_9^r)$ and the $Q^2$-independent coefficients
$\delta^{\rm L,E}_{10,0,1}$ are known in terms of the lattice and physical
meson masses and decay constants, and the chiral renormalization scale $\mu$.
Evaluating Eq.~(\ref{LPiVA}) using lattice and dispersive
results, Eq.~(\ref{deltadeltapibar}) yields a constraint on $L_{10}^r$,
${\cal C}^r_0$ and ${\cal C}^r_1$ for each ensemble, $E$, and each $Q^2$.
As explained in more detail below, different choices of $Q^2$ for fixed
$E$ provide self-consistency checks on the use of the lattice data.
\section{\label{input} Input data}
We will evaluate $\Pi_{V-A}(Q^2)$
and $\Pi^{(w_k)}_{V-A}(Q^2)$ using ALEPH experimental data \cite{ALEPH13}
for the spectral functions $\r_V(s)$ and ${\overline{\r}}_A(s)$ for
$s\le s_0=s_{\rm switch}$,\footnote{For details on the handling of the
ALEPH data, see Ref.~\cite{alphas14}.} and
approximating the difference $\r_V(s)-{\overline{\r}}_A(s)$ by Eq.~(\ref{approx}) for
$s\ge s_0=s_{\rm switch}$, with values for the DV parameters from the combined
$V$ and $A$ channel fits of Ref.~\cite{alphas14}. We will choose
$s_{\rm switch}$ to be the upper end of an ALEPH bin, obtaining, in the notation
adopted in Ref.~\cite{alphas14},
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{PiALEPH}
{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}^{(w)}(Q^2)&=&\sum_{{\tt sbin}<s_{\rm switch}}
\int_{{\tt sbin}-{\tt dsbin}/2}^{{\tt sbin}+{\tt dsbin}/2}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!ds\;w\left(\frac{s}{s_{\rm switch}}\right)\;
\frac{\r_V({\tt sbin})-{\overline{\r}}_A({\tt sbin})}{{\tt sbin}+Q^2}\nonumber\\
&&+\int_{s_{\rm switch}}^\infty ds\;w\left(\frac{s}{s_{\rm switch}}\right)\;\frac{\r^{\rm DV}_V(s)-\r^{\rm DV}_A(s)}{s+Q^2}\ .
\end{eqnarray}
Here we will choose $s_{\rm switch}=1.55$~GeV$^2$,
the value of $s_{\rm min}$ which produced
the best fit to the weighted spectral integrals in our extraction of
$\alpha_s$ in Ref.~\cite{alphas14}.
Since we are only interested in the
behavior of ${\overline{\P}}_{V-A}^{(w)}(Q^2)$ at values of $Q^2\ll 1.55$~GeV$^2$,
the right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{PiALEPH}) is very insensitive to the precise choice
of $s_{\rm switch}$, and varying it within the range of $s_{\rm min}$ values for
which we obtained good fits in Ref.~\cite{alphas14} has no effect on either the
values or errors we will obtain for the LECs below.
We have fully propagated all errors and correlations in the results
we will report on below.
In particular, the DV parameter values used in Eq.~(\ref{PiALEPH}) are
correlated with the data, and we have computed these correlations using the
linear error propagation method summarized in the appendix of Ref.~\cite{US2}
(see, in particular, Eq.~(A.4) of that reference, which can be used to express
the parameter-data covariances in terms of the data covariance matrix).
For the $us$ data needed in order to evaluate the
strange spectral integrals in Eq.~(\ref{vpmaimsralt})
we will use exactly the same treatment and input as used
in Ref.~\cite{bgjmp13}, and we refer to Sec.~III.C of that article for details.
We collect the values of all other external input parameters:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{inputpar}
m_\p&=&139.57~\mbox{MeV}\ ,\\
m_K&=& 495.65~\mbox{MeV}\ ,\nonumber\\
m_\eta&=& 547.85~\mbox{MeV}\ ,\nonumber\\
f_\p&=& 92.21(14)~\mbox{MeV}\ ,\nonumber\\
f_K&=& 110.5(5)~\mbox{MeV}\ ,\nonumber\\
L_5^r(\mu=770~\mbox{MeV})&=&0.84(38)\times 10^{-3}
\ ,\qquad \mbox{\cite{MILC9A}}\ ,\nonumber\\
L_9^r(\mu=770~\mbox{MeV})&=&5.93(43)\times 10^{-3}\ ,\qquad \mbox{\cite{bt02}}
\ .\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
For the value of $L_5^r$ we choose the value reported of Ref.~\cite{MILC9A},
which has a larger error than the value of Ref.~\cite{bj11} we used in
Ref.~\cite{bgjmp13}. The comparison with other values in Ref.~\cite{FLAG}
shows that the error quoted in Eq.~(\ref{inputpar}) above covers these
other values, and we thus consider its use to represent a conservative choice.
\section{\label{results} Results }
In this section, we present the results of our analysis, dividing the
presentation into several parts. We first present our values for
$L_{10}^{\rm eff}$ and $C_{87}^{\rm eff}$, which are based purely
on non-strange $\tau$-decay data, then derive additional constraints
employing also the lattice data, and finally use the $us$ spectral
data to obtain further constraints via the flavor-breaking IMFESRs.
The output is a determination of
$L_{10}^r$, $C_{61}^r$, $C_{87}^r$, $C_{12}^r-C_{61}^r+C_{80}^r$ and
$C_{13}-C_{62}+C_{81}$, in terms
of the known values for $L_5^r$ and $L_9^r$. In the final subsection, we
switch gears, and consider what we can learn from the ALEPH data about the
OPE coefficients $C_{6,V-A}$ and $C_{8,V-A}$.
\subsection{\label{effective} Effective LECs}
We first give the values of $L_{10}^{\rm eff}$ and $C_{87}^{\rm eff}$,
which follow directly from Eq.~(\ref{alt}) and the evaluation of Eq.~(\ref{PiALEPH}). For the three
different weights we find
\begin{subequations}
\label{L10eff}
\begin{eqnarray}
L_{10}^{\rm eff}&=&-6.482(64)\times 10^{-3}\ ,\qquad
(\mbox{from}\ {\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(0))\ ,
\label{L10effa}\\
&=&-6.486(64)\times 10^{-3}\ ,\qquad (\mbox{from}\ {\overline{\P}}^{(w_1)}_{V-A}(0))\ ,
\label{L10effb}\\
&=&-6.446(50)\times 10^{-3}\ ,\qquad (\mbox{from}\ {\overline{\P}}^{(w_2)}_{V-A}(0))\ .
\label{L10effc}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
These values are consistent with those found
employing OPAL data in Ref.~\cite{bgjmp13}, but more precise, with errors about a
factor two smaller. The contribution from the DV part of the spectral function
in Eq.~(\ref{PiALEPH}) ranges from 3\% for the first estimate in Eq.~(\ref{L10eff}) to
about 1\% for the third estimate. Their size is thus comparable with the
quoted errors, suggesting that the uncertainty in the DV part due to the
use of a model for DVs, Eq.~(\ref{ansatz}), is negligible.
From the slope of ${\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(Q^2)$ at zero we find
\begin{equation}
\label{C87eff}
C_{87}^{\rm eff}=8.38(18)\times 10^{-3}\ \mbox{GeV}^2\ .
\end{equation}
In this case, the contribution from the DV part is about 1\%.
These results are in good agreement with those in Refs.~\cite{GPP3,Dominguezetal}.
However, our errors are somewhat smaller, and our analysis
employs versions of the DV contributions fitted individually
in the $V$ and $A$ channels, as required by the data,
avoiding the simplifications employed in
Ref.~\cite{GPP3,Dominguezetal} (see also the discussion in
Ref.~\cite{bgjmp13}).
{}From our best value for $L_{10}^{\rm eff}$, Eq.~(\ref{L10effc}), and using
Eq.~(\ref{chptconna}), we find the constraint
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{VmAconstraint}
L_{10}^r&=&0.6576L_{10}^{\rm eff}+0.001161-0.1712L_9^r+0.08220({\cal C}_0^r
+{\cal C}_1^r)\\
&=&-0.004094(33)_{\rm ALEPH}(74)_{L_9^r}+0.08220({\cal C}_0^r
+{\cal C}_1^r)
\ .\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Together with information from the lattice on the combinations ${\cal C}_0^r$
and ${\cal C}_1^r$, this constraint will yield an estimate for $L_{10}^r$.
Likewise, Eq.~(\ref{chptconnb}) leads to the constraint \cite{bgjmp13}
\begin{equation}
\label{C87effC87}
C_{87}^{\rm eff}=C_{87}^r+0.292L_9^r+0.00155\ \mbox{GeV}^{-2}\ ,
\end{equation}
and, with Eqs.~(\ref{C87eff}) and~(\ref{inputpar}), this leads to the estimate
\begin{equation}
\label{C87res}
C_{87}^r=5.10(22)\times 10^{-3}\ \mbox{GeV}^{-2}\ .
\end{equation}
\begin{boldmath}
\subsection{\label{lattice} Constraints using the lattice}
\end{boldmath}
As shown in Ref.~\cite{Boyleetal14}, and noted already above,
useful independent constraints on $L_{10}^r$, ${\cal C}_0^r$ and
${\cal C}_1^r$ can be obtained by considering the difference of
the lattice-ensemble, $E$, and physical-mass, continuum results
for $\overline{\Pi}_{V-A}(Q^2)$, evaluated at the same $Q^2$.
In what follows, we will use the superscript $phys$ to specify
quantities evaluated with physical values of the masses and decay
constants.
Recasting the NNLO representation, Eq.~(\ref{deltadeltapibar}),
in the form
\begin{equation}
\delta_{10}^{\rm L,E}\, L_{10}^r\, +\, \delta^{L,E}_0 {\cal C}_0^r\,
+\, \delta^{\rm L,E}_1 {\cal C}_1^r\, =\, \Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}^{\rm L,E}(Q^2)
-\, \Delta R_{\pi K}^{\rm L,E}(\mu ,Q^2; L_9^r)\, \equiv\,
T^{\rm L,E}(Q^2)\ ,
\label{deltadeltapibarnnloalt}\end{equation}
one notes that the left-hand side is explicitly $Q^2$-independent, while the
right-hand side is the difference of two $Q^2$-dependent terms. For
values of $Q^2$ for which the NNLO representation
is reliable, the $T^{\rm L,E}(Q^2)$ for fixed ensemble $E$ but different
$Q^2$ should be compatible within errors, thus providing non-trivial
self-consistency checks. We will denote
the average of the $T^{\rm L,E}(Q^2)$ for an ensemble satisfying these
self-consistency tests by $T^{\rm L,E}$.
The explicit expression for
$\Delta R_{\pi K}^{\rm L,E}(\mu ,Q^2; L_9^r)\equiv
R_{\pi K}^{\rm L,E}(\mu ,Q^2;L_9^r) \, -\, R_{\pi K}^{phys}(\mu ,Q^2;L_9^r)$
follows from the results
of Ref.~\cite{ABT}, but is very lengthy and hence not given here. The
explicit expressions for the mass-dependent constants appearing on
the LHS of Eq.~(\ref{deltadeltapibarnnloalt}) are
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta_{10}^{\rm L,E}&=&
32\, \left[ \left( 2\mu_\pi +\mu_K\right)^{\rm L,E} \, -\,
\left( 2\mu_\pi +\mu_K\right)^{phys}\right]\ , \label{lattconstnnloleccoefs}\\
\delta^{\rm L,E}_0&\equiv& {\frac{[m_\pi^2]^{\rm L,E}}{[m_\pi^2]^{phys}}}
\, -\, 1\ , \nonumber\\
\delta^{\rm L,E}_1&\equiv& {\frac{\left[ m_\pi^2+2m_K^2\right]^{\rm L,E}}
{\left[ m_\pi^2+2m_K^2\right]^{phys}}}\, -\, 1\ .
\nonumber\end{eqnarray}
The lattice data we employ in forming the lattice-minus-continuum
constraints are obtained using the $n_f=2+1$ domain wall fermion
ensembles of the RBC/UKQCD collaboration. Details of the underlying
simulations may be found in Refs.~\cite{rbcukqcdfine11,rbcukqcdcoarse12},
with updated values of the lattice spacings $a$, obtained after
incorporating results from the new physical point ensembles, given
in Ref.~\cite{rbcukqcdphyspt14}.
We have used the following criteria
in deciding on the choice of ensembles and $Q^2$ values to be employed.
First, we restrict our attention to ensembles with $m_\pi < 350$ MeV.
Second, we require the ensemble to have sufficiently many $Q^2$
points in the expected range of validity of the representation,
Eq.~(\ref{deltadeltapibar}), that meaningful self-consistency tests
can be performed. With the errors at the lowest $Q^2$ point turning
out to be very large for all ensembles considered, this means that
a minimum of two additional such $Q^2$, or three in total, are required.
Finally, we identify the range of validity of the representation
Eq.~(\ref{deltadeltapibar}) as follows. We first note that the
supplemented NNLO representation of $\overline{\Pi}_{V-A}(Q^2)$,
discussed in more detail in Refs.~\cite{bgjmp13,gmp14}, and the
corresponding NNLO representation given above, both yield the same
representation of the lattice-continuum difference
$\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}^{\rm L,E}(Q^2)$. The supplemented form of
$\overline{\Pi}_{V-A}(Q^2)$ incorporates resonance-induced NNNLO
contributions analogous to those already encoded in the NNLO contribution
proportional to $C_{87}^r$ through the inclusion of an additional analytic
term $CQ^4$. The inclusion of such a term was shown to extend the
reliability of the supplemented version of the representations to
significantly larger $Q^2$ in both the $V-A$ and $V$ correlator
cases~\cite{bgjmp13,gmp14}. Here we investigate the supplemented
NNLO fit by fixing $L_{10}^{\rm eff}$ and $C_{87}^{\rm eff}$ to the values
given in Eqs.~(\ref{L10eff}) and~(\ref{C87eff}), and fitting the additional effective mass-independent NNNLO
LEC, $C$, to the dispersive results for $\overline{\Pi}_{V-A}(Q^2)$
in the window $0<Q^2<Q^2_{\rm max}$. The range of validity of the supplemented
form is then identified as the largest $Q^2_{\rm max}$ for which such a fit is
successful within errors. The results of this exploration show that the
supplemented form can be employed up to $\sim 0.25\ {\rm GeV}^2$, but not
beyond. We thus restrict our attention further to ensembles having at least
three $Q^2$ in the region below $0.25\ {\rm GeV}^2$.
Three RBC/UKQCD ensembles satisfy the above criteria,
two coarse ensembles with $1/a=1.379(7)$ GeV and $m_\pi = 172$ and
$250$ MeV, and one intermediate ensemble with $1/a=1.785(5)$ GeV
and $m_\p =340$ MeV \cite{rbcukqcdphyspt14}.
These are labelled $E=1$, $2$ and $3$ in
what follows. The coarse ensembles have eight points each below
$0.25\ {\rm GeV}^2$, the intermediate ensemble has four. The results for
the $V-A$ correlators for all three of these ensembles pass the
self-consistency tests discussed above.
The lattice-continuum constraints for the first two cases were obtained
previously in Ref.~\cite{Boyleetal14}. While the results of
Ref.~\cite{rbcukqcdphyspt14} lead to a small shift in the value
of $1/a$ for these ensembles, this change affects the constraints
only through the values of the $Q^2$ at which the dispersive
representation of the physical-mass correlator is evaluated,
the values of $a^2Q^2$ being fixed by the lattice size. The small
resulting $Q^2$ changes turn out to have no impact
on the resulting $T^{\rm L,E}$ averages for these ensembles to
the number of significant figures previously quoted. The
resulting average $T^{\rm L,E}$ are thus those given in Ref.\cite{Boyleetal14},
\begin{eqnarray}
T^{\rm L,1}&&\, =\, 0.0007(17)\ ,\nonumber\\
T^{\rm L,2}&&\, =\, 0.0039(21)\ .
\label{Taveensemble1and2}\end{eqnarray}
The third ensemble has a relative error on $af_\pi$
a factor of $2$ smaller than that for the two coarse ensembles, and
hence a smaller uncertainty in the pion-pole subtraction involved
in forming $\overline{\Pi}^{\rm L,E}_{V-A}(Q^2)$ from the directly measured
unsubtracted version. In order to improve further the associated constraint,
the statistics for this ensemble were increased using
multiple time sources. This increase in statistics
was greatly aided by the use of the HDCG algorithm of Ref.~\cite{Boyle:2014rwa},
employed in performing the propagator inversions.
The covariances of the corresponding lattice-minus-continuum
differences for different $Q^2$ (equal to the sum of the covariances of
the corresponding lattice and dispersive results) are strongly dominated by
the lattice contributions. With the covariance matrix available,
the average constraint value, $T^{\rm L,3}$, can be obtained by a standard,
fully correlated $\chi^2$ fit to the four $T^{\rm L,3}(Q^2)$ with
$Q^2<0.25\ {\rm GeV}^2$ available for this ensemble. The result is
\begin{equation}
T^{\rm L,3}\, =\, 0.00625(48)\ .
\label{Taveensemble3}\end{equation}
The error here reflects only the errors on (and correlations among)
the lattice results at different $Q^2$ and dispersive results at
different $Q^2$. Additional errors due to the
uncertainties on the input quantities $L_5^r(\mu )$ and $L_9^r(\mu )$,
which are $100\%$ correlated with the analogous uncertainties entering the
$\overline{\Pi}_{V-A}(0)$ and flavor-breaking IMFESR constraints, are handled
separately below.
\vskip0.7cm
\begin{boldmath}
\subsection{\label{IMFESR} Constraints using IMFESRs}
\end{boldmath}
In this subsection, we evaluate $\Delta{\overline{\P}}_T(0)$ with $T=V$, and $V\pm A$
from Eq.~(\ref{vpmaimsralt}), for values of $s_0$ between $2.15~\mbox{GeV}^2$
and $m_\tau^2$. Of course, $\Delta{\overline{\P}}_T(0)$ is independent of $s_0$, implying that
evaluating the right-hand side of the expressions in Eq.~(\ref{vpmaimsralt}) and
checking for $s_0$ independence provides a self-consistency check on the
use of the OPE, and the assumption that DVs can be neglected. The values
we find are, using $w(y)=w_{\rm DK}(y)$ in Eq.~(\ref{vpmaimsralt}),
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{DeltaPivalues}
\Delta\Pi_{V}(0)&=&0.0224(9)
\ ,\\
\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{A}(0)&=&0.0113(8)
\ ,\nonumber\\
\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V+A}(0)&=&0.0338(10)
\ ,\nonumber\\
\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(0)&=&0.0111(11)
\ .\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The result for $\Delta{\overline{\P}}_A(0)$ obtained from the analogous $A$ channel IMFESR
is also included for completeness. While the axial case is not independent
of the others, performing the axial analysis directly is the most
straightforward way to take into account the correlations amongst
the other channels and arrive at the correct error for the $A$ case.
The quoted errors take into account the experimental errors in the ALEPH data,
the uncertainties in the estimates of the OPE contribution, and the
small residual $s_0$-dependence observed as $s_0$ is varied over the
analysis window noted above. As a further check of the self-consistency
of the values in Eq.~(\ref{DeltaPivalues}),
we have rerun the analysis using $w(y)=\hat{w}(y)$ in place of $w_{\rm DK}(y)$,
and find results compatible with those obtained using $w_{\rm DK}(y)$ to well
within the errors quoted in Eq.~(\ref{DeltaPivalues}).
The analysis method leading to the values~(\ref{DeltaPivalues}) is
identical to that of Ref.~\cite{bgjmp13}, to which we refer for a detailed
discussion.
From the value for $\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V+A}(0)$ and Eq.~(\ref{nlonnlocontributions}) we
find, using the values of $L_5^r$ and $L_9^r$ in Eq.~(\ref{inputpar}),
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{VpA}
C_{12}^r+C_{61}^r+C_{80}^r&=&0.00237(13)_{\Delta{\overline{\P}}}(4)_{L_5^r}(8)_{L_9^r}\
\mbox{GeV}^{-2}\\
&=&0.00237(16)\ \mbox{GeV}^{-2}
\ ,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where the subscript $\Delta{\overline{\P}}$ refers to the error coming from the value for
$\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V+A}(0)$ in Eq.~(\ref{DeltaPivalues}), and on the second line we have
combined errors in quadrature. The sum rules for $\Delta{\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(0)$ and
$\Delta\Pi_V(0)$ provide two independent constraints
involving combinations of $L_{10}^r$ and other NNLO LECs:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{VmA}
2.125L_{10}^r-32(m_K^2-m_\p^2)(C_{12}^r-C_{61}^r+C_{80}^r)&=&
-0.0034(11)_{\Delta{\overline{\P}}}(3)_{L_5^r}(6)_{L_9^r}\ \mbox{GeV}^{-2}\nonumber\\
&=&
-0.0034(13)\ \mbox{GeV}^{-2}\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{V}
1.062L_{10}^r+32(m_K^2-m_\p^2)C_{61}^r&=&
0.0071(9)_{\Delta{\overline{\P}}}(3)_{L_5^r}(6)_{L_9^r}\ \mbox{GeV}^{-2}\\
&=&
0.0068(11)\ \mbox{GeV}^{-2}\ .\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Employing the constraints Eqs.~(\ref{VmAconstraint}),
~(\ref{VmA}) and the $E=1,2,3$ versions of Eq.~(\ref{deltadeltapibarnnloalt}),
with Eqs.~(\ref{Taveensemble1and2}) and ~(\ref{Taveensemble3})
as input on the right-hand side and Eq.~(\ref{lattconstnnloleccoefs}) as input on
the left-hand side, we find
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{LEClattice}
L_{10}^r&=&-0.00350(11)(13)_{L_5,L_9}=-0.00350(17) \ ,\\
{\cal C}_0^r&=&-0.00035(9)(4)_{L_5,L_9}=-0.00035(10) \ ,\nonumber\\
{\cal C}_1^r&=&0.0075(13)(8)_{L_5,L_9}=0.0075(15) \ .\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Here the first error quoted comes primarily from the errors
on the lattice data,\footnote{Lattice errors in the
differences~(\ref{DeltaPivalues}) dominate over the errors coming
from the $\tau$ spectral data.} while the second error comes
from the errors in $L_5^r$ and $L_9^r$.
The value of ${\cal C}_0^r$ translates directly into
\begin{equation}
\label{C12mC61pC80}
C_{12}^r-C_{61}^r+C_{80}^r=-0.00056(15)\ \mbox{GeV}^{-2}\ ,
\end{equation}
the value of ${\cal C}_1^r$ into
\begin{equation}
\label{C13mC62pC81}
C_{13}^r-C_{62}^r+C_{81}^r=0.00046(9)\ \mbox{GeV}^{-2}\ ,
\end{equation}
while the value of $L_{10}^r$ in Eq.~(\ref{LEClattice}) together with Eq.~(\ref{V})
leads to the estimate
\begin{equation}
\label{C61}
C_{61}^r=0.00146(15)\ \mbox{GeV}^{-2}\ .
\end{equation}
For completeness, the result for the NNLO LEC
combination entering the flavor-breaking $A$ IMFESR is
\begin{equation}
\label{C12pC80}
C_{12}^r+C_{80}^r=0.00090(9)\ \mbox{GeV}^{-2}\ .
\end{equation}
\vskip0.7cm
\begin{boldmath}
\subsection{\label{condensates} $V-A$ condensates}
\end{boldmath}
In addition to the LECs extracted in the previous subsections, ${\overline{\P}}_{V-A}(Q^2)$
also provides information on the OPE coefficients $C_{6,V-A}$ and $C_{8,V-A}$.
Adapting Eq.~(4.20) of Ref.~\cite{bgjmp13} to the case of the ALEPH data, following
the notation of Ref.~\cite{alphas14}, used also in Eq.~(\ref{PiALEPH}) above, these two
coefficients are given by
\begin{subequations}
\label{C68}
\begin{eqnarray}
C_{6,V-A}&=&\sum_{{\tt sbin}<s_{\rm switch}}\int_{{\tt sbin}-{\tt dsbin}/2}^{{\tt sbin}+{\tt dsbin}/2}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!ds\;(s-s_{\rm switch})^2\left(\r_V({\tt sbin})-{\overline{\r}}_A({\tt sbin})\right)
\label{C68a}\\
&&-2f_\p^2\left(m_\p^2-s_{\rm switch}\right)^2+\int_{s_{\rm switch}}^\infty ds\;(s-s_{\rm switch})^2\left(\r_V^{\rm DV}(s)- \r_A^{\rm DV}(s)\right)\ ,\nonumber\\
C_{8,V-A}&=&-\sum_{{\tt sbin}<s_{\rm switch}}\int_{{\tt sbin}-{\tt dsbin}/2}^{{\tt sbin}+{\tt dsbin}/2}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!ds\;(s-s_{\rm switch})^2(s+2s_{\rm switch})\left(\r_V({\tt sbin})-{\overline{\r}}_A({\tt sbin})\right)\nonumber
\\
&&+2f_\p^2 \left(m_\p^2-s_{\rm switch}\right)^2(m_\p^2+2s_{\rm switch})
\nonumber\\
&&-\int_{s_{\rm switch}}^\infty ds\;(s-s_{\rm switch})^2(s+2s_{\rm switch})\left(\r_V^{\rm DV}(s)-\r_A^{\rm DV}(s)\right)\ .\label{C68b}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
The first of these two expressions
involves contributions proportional to $C_{2k,V-A}$ for $k=1,\ 2,\ 3$,
but the leading-order expressions~\cite{FNR,NLOC4}
\begin{subequations}
\label{C2C4}
\begin{eqnarray}
\hspace{-0.2cm}C_{2,V-A}
&\!\!\!=&\!\!\!-\frac{\alpha_s(\mu^2)}{\p^3}\,m_u(\mu^2)m_d(\mu^2)
\left(1\!-\!\frac{\alpha_s(\mu^2)}{\p}\left(\frac{17}{4}
\log{\frac{Q^2}{\mu^2}}+c\right)\!\right)+\dots,\label{C2C4a}\\
\hspace{-0.2cm}C_{4,V-A}&\!\!\!=&\!\!\!-\frac{8}{3}\frac{\alpha_s}{\p}
f_\p^2 m_\p^2+\dots\ ,\label{C2C4b}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
with $c$ a numerical constant whose value is not required in what follows,
suggest that the $D=2$ and $D=4$ terms
are numerically negligible. A similar observation holds for the second
of these expressions.
The use of Eq.~(\ref{C68}) to estimate $C_{6,V-A}$ and $C_{8,V-A}$
thus rests on the assumption that these estimates for the $D=2$ and $D=4$
contributions are sufficiently reliable, which is equivalent to assuming
that the two Weinberg sum rules hold exactly.
In this case, Eq.~(\ref{C68}) leads to the estimates
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{C6C8num}
\mbox{ALEPH}:\qquad C_{6,V-A}&=&(-3.16\pm 0.91)\times 10^{-3}\ \mbox{GeV}^6\ ,
\\
C_{8,V-A}&=&(-13.0\pm 5.5)\times 10^{-3}\ \mbox{GeV}^8\ .
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
These results correspond to the choice
$s_{\rm switch}=2.2\ \mbox{GeV}^2$, which yields the smallest
estimate for the errors on $C_{6,V-A}$ and $C_{8,V-A}$. We have checked
that the central values remain stable as a function of $s_{\rm switch}$
as $s_{\rm switch}$ is varied between $s_{\rm min}=1.55\ {\rm GeV}^2$ and
$m_\tau^2$. The results of Eq.~(\ref{C6C8num}) are in agreement
within errors with those of Refs.~\cite{GPP3,Dominguezetal}.
Let us compare these values with those we found from the OPAL data in
Ref.~\cite{bgjmp13}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{C6C8t3}
\mbox{OPAL}:\qquad C_{6,V-A}&=&(-6.6\pm 1.1)\times 10^{-3}\ \mbox{GeV}^6
\ ,\\
C_{8,V-A}&=&(5\pm 5)\times 10^{-3}\ \mbox{GeV}^8
\ .\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
These values differ by $2.4\ \s$ from the ALEPH values
in Eq.~(\ref{C6C8num}).
Instead of the weights employed
in Eq.~(\ref{C68}), one can use the weight $s^2$ to estimate $C_{6,V-A}$, and
the weight $s^3$ to estimate $C_{8,V-A}$. If we do so, we find the values
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{C6C8direct}
C_{6,V-A}&=&(-4.4\pm 5.2)\times 10^{-3}\ \mbox{GeV}^6\ ,\\
C_{8,V-A}&=&(-8\pm 18)\times 10^{-3}\ \mbox{GeV}^8\ .
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
This suggests that central values of $C_{2,V-A}$ and $C_{4,V-A}$
produced by the ALEPH data are larger than those following from Eq.~(\ref{C2C4}).
Direct determination of these coefficients from the data, using the
weights $1$ and $s$ on the right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{C68}),
yield values $C_{2,V-A}=(0.14\pm 0.24)\times 10^{-3}\ \mbox{GeV}^2$ and
$C_{4,V-A}=(0.1\pm 1.2)\times 10^{-3}\ \mbox{GeV}^4$. These central values
are indeed larger and explain
the difference between the estimates~(\ref{C68}) and~(\ref{C6C8direct}),
though the results are consistent with Eq.~(\ref{C2C4}) within
errors.
The smaller errors reported in Eq.~(\ref{C6C8t3}) are thus a consequence of the
{\it assumption} that $C_{2,V-A}$ and $C_{4,V-A}$ can be neglected, or,
equivalently, the assumption that the first and second Weinberg sum rules
are exactly satisfied.
In view of the discussion above, we conclude that current data
lead to somewhat conflicting estimates for
$C_{6,V-A}$ and $C_{8,V-A}$.
This is not surprising, because these coefficients are sensitive to the
large-$s$ region of the data. In addition, we observe
the contribution from the DV terms to the expressions on the right-hand
side of Eq.~(\ref{C68}), \mbox{\it i.e.}, the size of the DV contributions which must be
subtracted to arrive at the values reported in Eq.~(\ref{C6C8num}), are
non-negligible: about $-0.28\times 10^{-3}\ \mbox{GeV}^6$ and
$3\times 10^{-3}\ \mbox{GeV}^8$
for $C_{6,V-A}$ and $C_{8,V-A}$, respectively.
\vskip0.7cm
\section{\label{conclusion} Conclusion}
Using the recently updated and corrected ALEPH results for the
non-strange $V$ and $A$ hadronic $\tau$ decay distributions,
existing results for the corresponding strange decay distributions,
and updated lattice results for the non-strange $V-A$ polarization
at heavier than physical meson masses, we have
produced improved determinations of the NLO chiral LEC $L_{10}^r$
and a number of NNLO LEC combinations. Those results are given
in Eqs.~(\ref{VpA}) and (\ref{LEClattice}) to~(\ref{C12pC80}). We have also used the
non-strange ALEPH data to extract the dimension six and eight
condensates appearing in the OPE representation of the $V-A$
polarization. These results are given in Eq.~(\ref{C6C8num}).
The improvements produced by using the new lattice results and
the new ALEPH data in place of the old OPAL data
reduce the fit component of the errors on $L_{10}^r$ and the
$1/N_c$-suppressed NNLO LEC combination $C_{13}^r-C_{62}^r+C_{81}^r$
by a factor of roughly $2.5$ compared to our earlier analysis. The
fit errors on the remaining NNLO LECs are about $2/3$ of those of
the previous analysis. Taking, as in Ref.~\cite{bgjmp13}, $25\%$ as an
estimate of the expected reduction in size of contributions in going from
one order to the next in the chiral expansion, we would expect
the uncertainties from the neglect of NNNLO and higher contributions
to be roughly $6\%$ for $L_{10}^r$ and $25\%$ for the NNLO LECs.
With the current fit errors, the total errors on all the LECs
determined have reached these levels, suggesting that the optimal
practical precision one can expect for an NNLO analysis
has now been attained.
We find, in contrast, that using the higher precision ALEPH
data produces essentially no improvement in the accuracy
of the determination of the dimension six and eight $V-A$ OPE
condensates. Our results for these quantities are in agreement
with those of other ALEPH-based analyses, and show about $2.4\sigma$
discrepancies with the corresponding results obtained using
the OPAL data. These discrepancies presumably reflect additional
systematic uncertainties encountered in attempting to extract
these small higher dimension contributions from existing data,
and should be kept in mind if results based on one or the other
of the two data sets are employed in other contexts.
\vspace{3ex}
\noindent {\bf Acknowledgments}
\vspace{3ex}
DB thanks the Department of Physics of the
Universitat Aut\`onoma de Barcelona, and
KM and SP thank the Department of Physics and Astronomy at San
Francisco State University for hospitality. DB is supported by the
S\~ao Paulo Research Foundation (Fapesp) grant 14/50683-0;
MG is supported in part by the US Department of Energy, AF, RH, RL and KM are
supported by grants from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research
Council of Canada, and SP is supported by CICYTFEDER-FPA2011-25948,
2014~SGR~1450, the Spanish Consolider-Ingenio 2010 Program
CPAN (CSD2007-00042). Propagator inversions for the improved
lattice data were performed on the STFC funded ``DiRAC'' BG/Q
system in the Advanced Computing Facility at the University of
Edinburgh.
|
\section{Introduction}
Twitter has attracted significant attention both in academic fields and in industry as a tool that may be useful for sharing and spreading important information during circumstances such as natural disasters.
Many people used Twitter actively in Japan following the March $11$, $2011$ earthquake, which is one example that has led people to tout social media as a useful device.
Although it may be a powerful tool, maintaining such activity is critical.
Suppose that we try to collect or spread information after a natural disaster using Twitter. If the activity of users decays very quickly, we cannot expect substantial response or influence.
The persistence of activity provides another indication. Although the use of hashtags was encouraged after the earthquake so that the users could refer to related information, few users actually used hashtags in their tweets.
It has been argued that this was partly because they were not accustomed to using Twitter.
If such persistence is low, we will face the same problem in a future emergency.
In this note, we investigate the degree of activity of Twitter users after the earthquake.
We show that many people created accounts and reacted to the information on the earthquake, but a significant fraction of these quickly went inactive afterward.
\section{Dataset and its analysis}
In $2012$, a Japanese project titled \textit{shinsaidata} \cite{shinsaidataWeb} was conducted, and a complete dataset of Twitter activity up to 1 week after the earthquake was distributed.
The project was conducted for research purposes, and the data were accessible for only a limited period.
The dataset contains all tweets posted in Japanese and related information, such as user IDs and time stamps.
Researchers accessing the data agreed to delete the original data when the project ended, and therefore, we no longer possess the data and were only able to retrieve the related statistics.
Based on the user IDs in the dataset, we crawled information using the Twitter API ran based on those IDs.
The analysis presented here was conducted in the fall of $2012$, and we used version $1$ of the API \cite{APIcommand}.
Within the distributed dataset, the total number of unique users who tweeted at least once in Japanese within a week after the earthquake was $N_{\mathrm{total}} = 3,691,599$.
Among them, we confirmed the existence of $N_{\mathrm{data}} = 3,444,326$ ($93.3\%$) accounts using the API, and the remaining users probably deleted their accounts.
Of these users, the number of public users was $N_{\mathrm{public}} = 3,323,342$ ($96.5\%$), whereas we could not search information for private users.
These indicate that most users kept their accounts and that our data analysis is a fairly good estimate of all users in Japan.
First, we measured the number of people who created accounts after the earthquake.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{AccountCreation}, a significant number of people reacted sensitively to the event and created accounts right after the earthquake.
Specifically, the number of users who joined Twitter within a week after the earthquake was $N_{\mathrm{new}} = 232,818$, which is $6.76\%$ of $N_{\mathrm{data}}$ users, or $222,446$ public users (6.46\% of $N_{\mathrm{data}}$ users).
\begin{figure}[!t]
\vspace{\baselineskip}
\vspace{\baselineskip}
\hspace{-30pt}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{AccountCreation_per10days.pdf}
\caption{Time series of the number of accounts created, where each bin represents a period of $10$ days.
The inset shows the zoomed time series around the day of the earthquake, where each bin represents a period of $1$ day.}
\label{AccountCreation}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{Cumulative_allusers.pdf}
\caption{Cumulative distribution function of the latest tweet date among $N_{\mathrm{data}}$ users from the day of the earthquake to our measure date.}
\label{CumulativeAll}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{Cumulative_new.pdf}
\caption{Cumulative distribution function of the latest tweet date among $N_{\mathrm{new}}$ users from the day of the earthquake to the measure date.}
\label{CumulativeLow}
\end{figure}
We then plotted the cumulative distribution function of the latest tweet date among $N_{\mathrm{data}}$ users (see Fig.~\ref{CumulativeAll}).
Presented as a reversed J-shaped curve, rapid decay was observed after the earthquake for only $5\%$ of users, who stopped tweeting soon after the earthquake.
On the contrary, if we naively define active users as those who tweeted at least once during a $1,000$-hour period, the fraction of active users was $67\%$ at our measure date.
Finally, we plotted the cumulative distribution function of the latest tweet date among $N_{\mathrm{new}}$ users (see Fig.~\ref{CumulativeLow}).
Roughly $35\%$ stopped tweeting shortly after the earthquake, compared to the small fraction of $N_{\mathrm{data}}$ users who did so.
That is, although a fairly large fraction of all users kept using Twitter, a significant fraction of users who joined shortly after the earthquake practically quit by our measure date ($1.5$ years after the earthquake). Moreover, many of them quit soon after creating their own accounts.
\vspace{\baselineskip}
\vspace{\baselineskip}
\section{Discussion}
Although we defined active users as those who actively tweet, accounts with no tweets do not necessarily mean that they are inactive, as they might be reading Twitter feeds often.
However, there is no way to identify such characteristics on Twitter, and as expected, not all users are active. Our analysis quantitatively shows the degrees of reaction and persistence before and after the March $11$, $2011$ earthquake.
The goal of the workshop \textit{shinsaidata} was to determine whether and how the distributed dataset can be useful for emergencies.
While detailed social network analyses may be possible using the Twitter dataset, we focused on a more fundamental question, because we believe it is relevant to the goal of the project (although not challenging as academic research).
We hope that our simple data analysis contributes as a guideline to estimating the expected reaction and persistence of Twitter users.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The author thanks Twitter, Inc. for sharing the dataset and the people who organized the workshop \textit{shinsaidata} in $2012$ for providing this opportunity.
The author also thanks Naoaki Okazaki and Yukie Sano for sharing the clean data extracted from the raw dataset and Taro Takaguchi for the useful comments.
\bibliographystyle{apsrev}
|
\subsection{Convergence Analysis of FR-ADM}
Since the optimization problem (\ref{eq:decomp}) is highly non-convex, a global convergence theorem as in eALM \cite{ALM} cannot be given. However, a weak covergence result similar to iALM or that of LMAFIT~\cite{LMAFIT} (where there is no nuclear norm minimization) can be given. For that purpose, let us state the first-order optimality conditions for the
constrained minimization problem (\ref{eq:decomp}):
\vspace{-3mm}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{KKT}
U^TY &=& 0 \nonumber\\
YV &=& 0 \nonumber\\
S &=& P_{ST_{1/\mu}}(S+Y/\mu)\\
M &=& L + S \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where $L=UBV^T$, $\mu>0$ and $Y$ is a Lagrange multiplier. Then we can prove that:
\vspace{3mm}
\begin{thm}
If the sequence of iterates
generated by Algorithm~\ref{ADM} converges to a point $(U^*,B^*,V^*,S^*,Y^*)$, this point satisfies the conditions
(\ref{KKT}) and therefore is a local minimum of (\ref{eq:decomp}).
\end{thm}
\noindent \textit{Proof}: Using Algorithm~\ref{ADM}, and given a projector $P_Q \equiv Q Q^T$, we have:
\begin{equation}
\scalemath{1}{
\begin{split}
& Y_{k+1}-Y_k \rightarrow 0\quad \Rightarrow\quad L^*+S^*= M \nonumber \\
& S_{k+1}-S_k\rightarrow 0 \quad \Rightarrow\quad S^*=P_{ST_{1/\mu}}(S^*+{Y^*}/{\mu})\\
&(P_{U_{k+1}}-P_{U_k})(M-S_k+Y_k/\mu)V_k\rightarrow 0 \Rightarrow P^\perp_{U^*}Y^*V^* = 0\\
&(P_{V_{k+1}}-P_{V_k})(M^T-S^T_k+Y^T_k /\mu)U_k\rightarrow 0 \Rightarrow P^\perp_{V^*}{Y^*}^TU^* = 0\\
&B_{k+1}-B_k\rightarrow 0\quad \Rightarrow\quad {U^*}^TY^*V^*=0
\end{split}}
\end{equation}
\noindent and from this the conditions (\ref{KKT}) are easily derived. $\blacksquare$.
As for the convergence rate, a similar argument to the one used in \cite{ALM} shows that the convergence rate is $\mathcal{O}(1/\mu_k)$.
\section{Sparse Fixed-Rank Decomposition}
\label{sec:approach}
We propose the resolution of the non-convex program in (\ref{eq:decomp}) as a direct way to perform the sparse and fixed-rank decomposition---note that (\ref{eq:decomp}) is equivalent to the program (\ref{eq:fr}) defined in Sec.\ref{intro}.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:decomp}
\text{min}_{L, S} \norm{S}_{\ell_1}, s.t.\ M = L + S,\ L \in \mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n},
\end{equation}
The optimization of (\ref{eq:decomp}) is carried out over an Augmented Lagrangian function, leading to (\ref{eq:lagrange}). $Y$ stands for the Lagrange multiplier and $\mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n}$ represents the fixed-rank manifold of rank $r$.
\vspace{-3mm}
\begin{equation}
\scalemath{1}{
\mathcal{L}(L, S, Y, \mu) = \frac{\mu}{2}\norm{M-L-S}_F^2 + \norm{S}_{\ell_1} + \langle Y, M-L-S \rangle \nonumber
}\end{equation}
\vspace{-4mm}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:lagrange}
s.t.\ L \in \mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n}
\end{equation}
To efficiently solve (\ref{eq:lagrange}) we utilize an ADM scheme~\cite{ALM} endowed with a continuation step, as presented in Algorithm~\ref{ADM}. The update of the fixed-rank matrix $L$ is obtained via the \textit{FixedRankOptStep} algorithm that implements the proposed polar factorization. For the sparse matrix $S$, the standard soft-thresholding is used. Notice that $\mu_k$ is updated following a geometric series (Alg.\hyperref[ADM]{\ref{ADM}.\#9}) in order to achieve a Q-linear converge rate $\mathcal{O}(1/\mu_k)$~\cite{ALM}. Despite having the same asymptotic convergence order as LMAFIT, AS and ROSL, our method FR-ADM takes less iterations to converge, due to the accuracy of the novel \textit{FixedRankOptStep}. This is especially important for the cases where the magnitude of the entries of $S$ are similar to those of $L$, a challenging situation that other state-of-the-art methods fail to address correctly. We provide empirical validation for this claim in Sec.~\ref{sec:results}.
\vspace{2mm}
\setlength{\intextsep}{4pt}
\setlength{\textfloatsep}{10pt}
\begin{algorithm}
\algsetup{linenosize=\small}
\small
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE Data matrix $M\in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$, $r$ (rank)
\STATE $k \leftarrow 1, S_k \leftarrow 0_{m \times n}, L_k \leftarrow 0_{m \times n}, Y_k \leftarrow 0_{m \times n}$
\STATE $\mu_k \leftarrow 1, \rho > 1, \bar{\mu} \leftarrow 10^9, U_0 \leftarrow I_{m \times r}, B_0 \leftarrow I_{r}, V_0 \leftarrow I_{r \times n}$
\WHILE{not converged}
\STATE $L_{k+1} \leftarrow \textrm{arg min}_{L\in \mathcal{F}_r} \mathcal{L}(L, S_k, Y_k, \mu_k)$
\STATE \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ $= \textit{FixedRankOptStep}(M - S_k + \frac{1}{\mu_k} Y_k, U_k, B_k, V_k)$
\STATE $S_{k+1} \leftarrow \textrm{arg min}_{S\in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}} \mathcal{L}(L_{k+1}, S, Y_k, \mu_k)$
\STATE \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ $= P_{\text{ST}_{1/\mu_k}}(M - L_{k+1} + \frac{1}{\mu_k} Y_k)$
\STATE $Y_{k+1} \leftarrow Y_k + \mu_k (M - L_{k+1} - S_{k+1})$
\STATE $\mu_{k+1} \leftarrow \text{min}(\bar{\mu}, \rho \mu_k)$
\STATE $k \leftarrow k + 1$
\ENDWHILE
\RETURN{$L_k$, $S_k$.}
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{\textit{FR-ADM}}
\label{ADM}
\end{algorithm}
An adapted version of FR-ADM, referred as FR-Nys, is also provided. FR-Nys exploits Nystrom's subsampling method (\!\!\cite{Nystrom1}\cite{ROSL}), to further speed up computations. This method is presented in Algorithm~\ref{ADM-Nys} and follows the recipe given in~\cite{ROSL}.
\setlength{\floatsep}{0pt}
\setlength{\textfloatsep}{5mm}
\setlength{\intextsep}{6pt}
\begin{algorithm}
\algsetup{linenosize=\small}
\small
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE Data matrix $M\in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$, $r$ (rank)
\STATE $\tilde{M} \leftarrow \textit{random-row-shuffle}(M)$
\STATE $(L_L, S_L) \leftarrow \text{FR-ADM}(\tilde{M}_{[1:m, 1:l]},\ r)$,\ \ for $l = k r$
\STATE $(L_T, S_T) \leftarrow \text{FR-ADM}(\tilde{M}_{[1:l, 1:n]},\ r)$,\ \ \ for $l = k r$
\STATE $L \leftarrow L_L \ {L_L}^+_{[1:l, 1:l]}\ L_T$,\ \ $S \leftarrow \tilde{M} - L$
\RETURN{$L$, $S$.}
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{\textit{FR-Nys}}
\label{ADM-Nys}
\end{algorithm}
Nystrom's scheme proceeds by randomly shuffling the rows of $M$ producing $\tilde{M}$. Then, the top and the left blocks of $\tilde{M}$ are processed separately by using FR-ADM (Alg.\ref{ADM}). Notice that these blocks are chosen of size $m \times l$ and $l \times n$, where $l$ has to be a number larger than the expected matrix rank. In our case $k = 10$. Finally the independently recovered matrices $L_L$ and $L_T$ are combined to produce $L$ and $S$.
\section{Sparse Fixed-Rank Decomposition}
\label{sec:approach}
We propose the resolution of the non-convex program in (\ref{eq:decomp}) as a direct way to perform the sparse and fixed-rank decomposition\footnote{Notice that (\ref{eq:decomp}) is analogous to the program (\ref{eq:fr}) defined in Sec.\ref{sec:intro}}. The optimization of (\ref{eq:decomp}) is carried out over an Augmented Lagrange function, leading to the expression shown in (\ref{eq:lagrange}). $Y$ stands for the Lagrange multiplier and $\mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n}$ represents the fixed-rank manifold of rank $r$.
\vspace{-6mm}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:decomp}
\text{min}_{L, S} \norm{S}_{\ell_1}, s.t.\ M = L + S,\ L \in \mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n},
\end{equation}
\vspace{-7mm}
\begin{equation}
\scalemath{0.81}{
\mathcal{L}(L, S, Y, \mu) = \frac{1}{\mu}\norm{M-L-S}_F^2 + \lambda \norm{S}_{\ell_1} + \langle Y, M-L-S \rangle. \nonumber
}\end{equation}
\vspace{-7mm}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:lagrange}
s.t. L \in \mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n}
\end{equation}
To efficiently solve (\ref{eq:lagrange}) we utilize an ADM scheme~\cite{ALM} endowed with a continuation step, as presented in Algorithm~\ref{ADM}. The update of the fixed-rank matrix $L$ is obtained via the FixedRankOpt algorithm that implements the proposed polar factorization. For the sparse matrix $S$, the standard soft-thresholding is used. Notice that $\mu_k$ is updated following a geometric series in order to achieve a Q-linear converge rate $O(1/\mu_k)$~\cite{ALM}. Despite presenting the same asymptotic convergence order than AS, our method converges faster. Given sequence $\{\rho \mu_k\}_{k=1}^{k_{\text{max}}}$ for the continuation, then the convergence of FR-ADM follows $\sim C_{\text{FR}} g(\rho \mu_k)$ and AS follows $\sim C_{\text{AS}} g(\rho \mu_k)$, for a common function $g(\rho\mu_k) = \frac{1}{\rho \mu_k}$. Comparing the constants of both methods we have that $\frac{ C_{\text{FR}} }{ C_{\text{AS}} } << 1$. We provide empirical validation for this claim in Sec.~\ref{sec:results}, by counting the number of iterations up to convergence.
\setlength{\textfloatsep}{10pt}
\begin{algorithm}
\algsetup{linenosize=\small}
\small
\begin{algorithmic}
\REQUIRE Data matrix $M\in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$
\STATE $k \leftarrow 1, S_k \leftarrow 0_{m \times n}, L_k \leftarrow 0_{m \times n}, Y_k \leftarrow 0_{m \times n}$
\STATE $\mu_k \leftarrow 1, \rho > 1, \bar{\mu} \leftarrow 10^9, U_0 \leftarrow I_{m \times r}, B_0 \leftarrow I_{r}, V_0 \leftarrow I_{r \times n}$
\vspace{-2mm}
\WHILE{not converged}
\STATE $L_{k+1} \leftarrow \textrm{arg min}_{L\in \mathcal{F}_r} \mathcal{L}(L, S_k, Y_k, \mu_k)$
\STATE \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ $= \textit{FixedRankOpt}(M - S_k + \frac{1}{\mu_k} Y_k, U_0, B_0, V_0)$
\STATE $S_{k+1} \leftarrow \textrm{arg min}_{S\in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}} \mathcal{L}(L_{k+1}, S, Y_k, \mu_k)$
\STATE \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ $= \text{Soft}(M - L_{k+1} + \frac{1}{\mu_k} Y_k)$
\STATE $Y_{k+1} \leftarrow Y_k + \mu_k (M - L_{k+1} - S_{k+1})$
\STATE $\mu_{k+1} \leftarrow \text{min}(\bar{\mu}, \rho \mu_k)$
\STATE $k \leftarrow k + 1$
\ENDWHILE
\RETURN{$L_k$, $S_k$.}
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{FixedRank-ADM}
\label{ADM}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Polar Factorization in the Fixed-Rank Manifold}
\label{sec:polar}
When dealing with rank constraints, we need an efficient way of computing the projection of an arbitrary matrix $M \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ with arbitrary rank onto the fixed-rank manifold $\mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n}$. For this task, a simple solution is provided by the Eckart–Young theorem~\cite{SVD}, which shows that the optimization problem (\ref{eq:Eck}):
\begin{equation}
\textrm{min}_{\textrm{rank}(L)= r}\norm{M-L}_F^2,
\label{eq:Eck}
\end{equation}
\noindent is solved by the truncated SVD (TSVD) of $M$, $L=U\Sigma V^T$, where $U\in \textrm{St}_{m,r},U^TU=I_r$,
$V\in \textrm{St}_{n,r},V^TV=I_r$ and $\Sigma$ is a diagonal matrix with positive entries given by the first $r$ singular values of $M$.
Despite the great success of the TSVD as a tool to produce low-rank approximations, some problems require the computation of many TSVDs (typically one per iteration) of very large matrices, and therefore an efficient alternative to the usual TSVD algorithm is required. In this section we propose the method \textit{FixedRankOpt} (Algorithm~\ref{Alg-FROpt}), which computes the projection of a matrix onto the fixed-rank manifold, leading to the optimal solution of the TSVD. Our method shows a convergence rate of $O(\log(1/\epsilon))$, converging in a small fraction of the time taken by a TSVD. Additionally, we also propose the method \textit{FixedRankStep} (Algorithm~\ref{Alg-FRStep}) as a part of the more general \textit{FixedRankOpt}. \textit{FixedRankOpt} can be seen as a series of iterations of the \textit{FixedRankStep} algorithm, which provides a proximal solution to the TSVD, with solutions living on $\mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n}$, but much cheaper than the standard TSVD. The \textit{FixedRankStep} algorithm is suitable for large-scale problems, where many TSVD of large matrices are required. Notice that exact projections do not need to be computed in each iteration. In a sense, \textit{FixedRankOpt} performs an exact line-search in the normal direction towards the fixed-rank manifold, while \textit{FixedRankStep} performs an inexact line-search in the same direction. In many cases an inexact line-search is fast and enough to ensure convergence, as we will show later.
Following~\cite{Meyer}, we shall consider a polar factorization on $\mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n}$ given by the TSVD, which will turn very convenient. Given a matrix $L \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ of rank $r$, its TSVD factorization is $L=U\Sigma V^T$, where $U\in \textrm{St}_{m,r},U^TU=I_r$, $V\in \textrm{St}_{n,r},V^TV=I_r$ and $\Sigma$ is a diagonal $r\times r$ matrix with positive entries. A transformation $(U,\Sigma, V)\rightarrow (U O,O^T\Sigma O, V O)$, where $O\in O_r$ is an orthogonal matrix, does not change $L$, and allows to write it as $L=UB V^T$, where now $B\in \textrm{SPD}_r$. Therefore, the fixed-rank manifold can be seen as the quotient manifold $(\textrm{St}_{m,r}\times \textrm{SPD}_r\times \textrm{St}_{n,r})/O_r$. From this, we reformulate the problem of minimizing $M$ in the fixed-rank manifold as the solution of (\ref{eq:MinimizationFixedRank}).
\vspace{-3mm}
\begin{equation}
\textrm{min}_{U\in \textrm{St}_{m,r},B\in \textrm{SPD}_r,V\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}}\norm{M-UB V^T}_F^2.
\label{eq:MinimizationFixedRank}
\end{equation}
\vspace{-5mm}
The program (\ref{eq:MinimizationFixedRank}), although highly non-convex, converges geometrically to the global minimum when optimized via the proposed \textit{FixedRankOpt} method (Algorithm~\ref{Alg-FROpt}). The input matrices $U_0$, $B_0$ and $V_0$ are initialized as previously mentioned in Algorithm~\ref{ADM}.
\vspace{-1mm}
\begin{algorithm}
\algsetup{linenosize=\small}
\small
\begin{algorithmic}
\REQUIRE Data matrix $M\in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$, inital matrices $U_0\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $B_0\in \textrm{SPD}_r$, $V_0\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}$
\STATE $i\leftarrow 0$
\WHILE{not converged}
\STATE $(U_{i+1},B_{i+1},V_{i+1})\leftarrow FixedRankStep(M,U_i,B_i,V_i)$
\STATE $i\leftarrow i+1$
\ENDWHILE
\RETURN{$U^*\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $B^*\in \textrm{SPD}_r$, $V^*\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}$ such that $L=U^*B^*{V^*}^T$ is the
TSVD of $M$ }
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{FixedRankOpt Algorithm}
\label{Alg-FROpt}
\end{algorithm}
\vspace{-2mm}
Here, the \textit{FixedRankStep} algorithm performs an alternating directions minimzation (ADM)
on each of the submanifolds $\textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $\textrm{St}_{n,r}$ and $\textrm{SPD}_r$, as shown in Algorithm~\ref{Alg-FRStep}
\vspace{-1mm}
\setlength{\textfloatsep}{3pt}
\begin{algorithm}
\algsetup{linenosize=\small}
\small
\begin{algorithmic}
\REQUIRE Data matrix $M\in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$, previous values $U_0\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $B_0\in \textrm{SPD}_r$, $V_0\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}$
\STATE $U \leftarrow \textrm{arg min}_{U\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}}\norm{M-UB_0 V_0^T}_F^2$
\STATE $V \leftarrow \textrm{arg min}_{V\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}}\norm{M-UB_0 V^T}_F^2$
\STATE $B \leftarrow \textrm{arg min}_{B\in \textrm{SPD}_r}\norm{M-UB V^T}_F^2$
\RETURN{$U\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $B\in \textrm{SPD}_r$, $V\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}$. }
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{FixedRankStep Algorithm}
\label{Alg-FRStep}
\end{algorithm}
\vspace{-2mm}
In our formulation, we are dealing with minimization subproblems on the Stiefel manifold that are not those of the standard Stiefel Procrustes Problem~\cite{Stiefel-Procrustes}. In our case the Stiefel matrix is left-multiplying instead of right-multiplying, as usually assumed. Fortunately, this change turns out to allow us to produce a fast closed-form solution by using the well-known Orthogonal Procrustes Problem (OPP)~\cite{Orth-Procrustes}, as shown in (\ref{eq:OrthogonalProcrustes}):
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{equation}
\textrm{min}_{U\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}}\norm{M-UBV^T}_F^2 \Rightarrow\quad U=P_{\textrm{O}}[MVB] ,
\label{eq:OrthogonalProcrustes}
\end{equation}
where $P_{\textrm{O}}[A]$ is the projector onto the Stiefel Manifold (i.e. the column space of $A$), and can be efficiently computed through an SVD as $A= Q\Sigma S^T \,,Q\in\textrm{St}_{m,r}\,,S\in O_r \Rightarrow U=QS^T$.
A similar result holds for the minimization of $V$ by simply transposing (\ref{eq:OrthogonalProcrustes}). Note that there exists an explicit solution for the double Orthogonal Procrustes Problem ~\cite{MatrixProcrustesProblems}, but it requires the computation of the TSVD of $M$, something that would be computationally expensive, and it is not applicable in the Stiefel case.
The minimization subproblem on the SPD manifold is more challenging. The reason is that, although convex, the SPD manifold is an open manifold and therefore the existence of a global minimum in not guaranteed. Its closure is the SPSD manifold, and there the existence of a solution is neither guaranteed. However, we shall see that in our case there exists a minimun in $\text{SPD}_r$. Let us analyse this by first introducing a novel projector onto the SPD manifold. To this end we consider the SPD Procrustes Problem~\cite{SPDProcrustes} (\ref{SPDProcrustes}):
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{equation}
\scalemath{0.98}{
\textrm{min}_{B\in \textrm{SPD}_r}\norm{M-UBV^T}_F^2 \Rightarrow B=P_{\textrm{SPD}}[U^TMV],}
\label{SPDProcrustes}
\end{equation}
\vspace{-4mm}
\noindent where the projector $P_{\textrm{SPD}}[A]$ is simply given by $P_{\textrm{SPD}}[A]=\textrm{Sym}(A)$. In general, the solution of the SPD Procrustes Problem requires to solve a Lyapunov equation~\cite{SPDProcrustes}, but in our case is simpler since $U$ and $V$ are orthogonal. Although in general, there is not guarantee that $B=\textrm{Sym}(U^TMV)$ is positive definite, we can assure it for our formulation. Given that $\text{rank}(M) > r = \text{rank}(L)$, and considering $U$ and $V$ as the solutions of an OPP, then a unique solution in the SPD manifolds must exist. This solution is given in the following discussion, but we need some previous results.
\begin{lem}
(see \cite{Stiefel-Procrustes}) Let $U$ (or $V$) be the solution of the OPP (\ref{eq:OrthogonalProcrustes}), then $U^TMVB$ (or $BU^TMV$) is in $\textrm{SPD}_r$.
\label{lemmaOPP}
\end{lem}
\vspace{-3mm}
\noindent \textit{Proof}: As shown before, if $MVB=Q\Sigma S^T$, then $U=QS^T$ and $U^TMVB=SQ^TQ\Sigma S^T=S\Sigma S^T$, which is SPD since $\textrm{rank}(M)\geq r$ and $B$ is supposed to be in $\textrm{SPD}_r$. A similar argument shows that $BU^TMV \in \textrm{SPD}_r$ after minimizing $V$.
From Lemma~\ref{lemmaOPP}, we have that $U_{i+1}^TMV_iB_i$ and $B_iU_{i+1}^TMV_{i+1}$ are in $SPD_r$, but in order to proof $B_{i+1}=\textrm{Sym}(U_{i+1}^TMV_{i+1})\in \textrm{SPD}_r$ we need to pass to the limit. When passing to the limit the sequences defined by $\{U_i\}$, $\{B_i\}$ and $\{V_i\}$, it can be seen that both conditions are simultaneously met, as presented in Lemma~\ref{lemmaSPDLimit}:
\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{lem}
Suppose that the \textit{FixedRankOpt} Algorithm converges to a fixed point $(U^*,B^*,V^*)$, then
$U^*\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $B^*\in \textrm{SPD}_r$, and $V^*\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}$.
\label{lemmaSPDLimit}
\end{lem}
\vspace{-1mm}
\noindent \textit{Proof}: Since $\scalemath{0.92}{(U^*,B^*,V^*)=\textit{FixedRankStep}(M,U^*,B^*,V^*)}$, $U^*$ and $V^*$ are solutions to their respective OPPs and have to be in their respective Stiefel manifolds. Then, by applying Lemma~\ref{lemmaOPP}, both $U^*{}^TMV^*B^*$ and $B^*U^*{}^TMV^*$ are in SPD$_r$. Since $B^*=\textrm{Sym}(U^*{}^TMV^*)$, it can be derived that:\newline
\setlength{\abovedisplayskip}{-4mm}
\begin{eqnarray}
2B^*{}^2 &=& B^*\textrm{Sym}(U^*{}^TMV^*)+\textrm{Sym}(U^*{}^TMV^*)B^* \nonumber\\
&=& U^*{}^TMV^*B^*+B^*U^*{}^TMV^*\,,
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent which is on SPD$_r$ since it is a convex manifold. Then, by taking the square root of $B^*{}^2$ we have that
$B^*\in \textrm{SPD}_r$. Also, since $\textrm{SPD}_r$ is open in the subset of symmetric matrices, there exists $\epsilon>0$ such that the open ball of radius $\epsilon$ is contained in $\textrm{SPD}_r$. Thus, if \textit{FixedRankOpt} converges, then there exists $n_0\in \mathbb{N}$ such that $B_i\in \textrm{SPD}_r\,\forall i\geq n_0$. In fact in our numerical experiments we always have that $B_i\in \textrm{SPD}_r\,\forall i\geq 1$. The actual value of $B_0$ does not really matter, and we always take $B_0=I_r$. From this, Theorem~\ref{TheoremGlobalMinimum} assures the convergence of the \textit{FixedRankOpt} algorithm for arbitrary initial matrices $U_0\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $B_0\in \textrm{SPD}_r$, $V_0\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}$:
\begin{thm}
The \textit{FixedRankOpt} Algorithm converges to the unique global minimun of (\ref{eq:MinimizationFixedRank}) given by $(U^*,B^*,V^*)$ such that $L=U^*B^*V^*{}^T$ is the rank-r projection of $M$.
\label{TheoremGlobalMinimum}
\end{thm}
\vspace{-3mm}
Due to space limitations the proof of this theorem is supplied as additional material. We shall only mention that our proof of convergence is based on the three points property and the fact that the Stiefel manifold is compact, and therefore the sequences $\{U_i\}$ and $\{V_i\}$ admit sub-sequences $\{U_{s_i}\}$ and $\{V_{s_i}\}$ converging to some $\hat{U}$ and $\hat{V}$. Then, the subsequence $B_{s_i}=\textrm{Sym}(U_{s_i}^TMV_{s_i})$ also converges to some $\hat{B}$. From this we prove that $(\hat{U}, \hat{B},\hat{V})$ is the unique fixed-point of the iterative algorithm, minimizing the problem (\ref{eq:MinimizationFixedRank}), and thus providing the solution $(U^*,B^*,V^*)=(\hat{U}, \hat{B},\hat{V})$.
The \textit{FixedRankStep} algorithm produces by itself a good approximation of $M$ to a rank-r matrix $L$, provided that the initial estimates $U_0,B_0,V_0$ are well chosen. Since this is a modification of the orthogonal iteration from the computations of eigenvalues~\cite{MatrixComputations}, in each iteration the error $\norm{L^*-UBV^T}_F$ is decreased by a factor $(\frac{\sigma_{r+1}}{\sigma_r})$, where $\sigma_i$ are the singular values of $M$~\cite{MatrixComputations}. Given that $M$ is of the form $M=L+S$, with $L \in \mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n}$ and $S$ is a perturbation matrix, then $\sigma_{r+1}$ will be much smaller than $\sigma_{r}$ and the error will be largely decreased in each iteration.
In the \textit{FixedRankOpt} algorithm, the initial matrices $U_0$ and $V_0$ must satisfy that their respective column spaces intersect with the ones of the optimal solution $L=U^*B^*{V^*}^T$ but, due to the form of the solution of the OPP, it is possible to choose, without loss of generality, $U_0 = I_{m\times r}$, $V_0 = I_{n \times r}$ and $B_0=I_r$. From this selection, the error of \textit{FixedRankOpt} after $k$ iterations is bounded by by $(\frac{\sigma_{r+1}}{\sigma_r})^{k}$, which leads to a Q-linear rate of convergence with order $O(log(1/\epsilon))$ to achieve a given error $\epsilon$.
It is worth mentioning that the \textit{FixedRankOpt} algorithm, for the case $r=1$ can be seen as a two-step
version of the Power Method. In this context, the \textit{FixedRankStep} algorithm first obtains an approximation of the left and right dominant eigenvectors, $u_{i+1}=\frac{Mv_i}{\norm{Mv_i}_2}$, $v_{i+1}=\frac{M^Tu_{i+1}}{\norm{M^Tu_{i+1}}_2}$, and finally an approximation of the dominant singular value $b_{i+1}=u_{i+1}^TMv_{i+1}$ of $M$, which is strictly positive due to Lemma \ref{lemmaOPP}.
\section{Experimental Evaluation}
\label{sec:results}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\vspace{-1mm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.64]{sections/figures/errorSVD5.eps}
\vspace{-2mm}
\caption{Convergence speed of different Fixed-rank projectors with respect to an exact TSVD.}
\label{fig:svd}
\vspace{5mm}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\vspace{-1mm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{sections/figures/phase4x.eps}
\vspace{-2mm}
\caption{Phase transition diagrams for APG, eALM, iALM, , AS, LMAFIT, ROSL and FR-ADM, showing the percentage of error according to the percentage of outliers (y-axis) and the fraction of the matrix rank $r/min(m,n)$ for $m=n=800$ (x-axis). Probabilities are calculated as $\frac{1}{K} \sum_{z=1}^K \sum_{i,j}^{m,n} \frac{\psi_{\epsilon}(S^z_{i,j}-S^{*,z}_{i,j})}{m n}$, where $K$ is the number of repetitions and $\psi_{\epsilon}(s) = \{|s|, \text{ if } |s| > \epsilon;\ \ 0, \text{otherwise} \}$.}
\label{fig:phase}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{figure*}
FR-ADM, and its Nystrom accelerated variant FR-Nys, are compared here against the selected methods of the state of the art, i.e.: Accelerated Proximal Gradients (APG)~\cite{APG}, inexact Augmented Lagrangian Multiplier (iALM), exact Augmented Lagrangian Multiplier (eALM)~\cite{ALM}, Active Subspace method (AS)~\cite{AS}, Low-Rank Matrix Fitting (LMAFIT)~\cite{LMAFIT} and Robust Orthonormal Subspace Learning (ROSL)~\cite{ROSL}. These methods are good representatives of the evolution of \textit{S-LR} and \textit{S-FR} solutions, ranging from the fundamental proximal gradients of APG to sophisticated factorizations included in AS and ROSL, via ADMM optimization~\cite{ALM}. We also included a version of iALM that makes use of the Randomized TSVD (R-TSVD)~\cite{Halko} in order to show the benefits of our approach against simple randomization. It is critical for the correct understanding of our experiment to clarify that we have split the previous methods up into two categories, i.e., \textit{S-LR} and \textit{S-FR} techniques. APG, iALM and eALM represent \textit{S-LR} methods, i.e., the rank is not known a priori; while R-TSVD, AS, LMAFIT, ROSL and FR-ADM represent \textit{S-FR} solutions, i.e., a correct initialization of the rank is provided, since the specific application allows it. This assumption holds for the entire section. Experiments are conducted over synthetic and real data to show the capabilities of our technique in computer vision problems. All the algorithms have been configured according to the suggestions of their respective authors. The experiments were run on a desktop PC at 3.2GHz and 64GB of RAM.
\subsection{Synthetic Data}
We test the recovery accuracy and time performance of the methods with matrices of different dimensions and ranks. To this end, we generate full-rank matrices $A \in \mathbb{R}_*^{m \times r}$ and $B \in \mathbb{R}_*^{n \times r}$ from a Gaussian distribution $N(0, 1)$, such that $L = A B^T$ and $\text{rank}(L)=r$. A sparse matrix $S \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ representing outliers is created with a given percentage of its entries being non-zero and magnitudes in the range $[-1, 1]$. Then, the final corrupted matrix is $M = L + S$. We deliberately forced the sparse entries to have a magnitude similar to the one of the expected low-rank matrix. The reason for this is that usually the experiments presented in the literature impose a good differentiation between the magnitude of the entries of $L$ and $S$, making the recovery problem almost trivial. Here, we remove that simplification, allowing for similar magnitudes of the corrupted entries, which makes the problem more interesting. We will show that, with this challenging setup, the performance of many state-of-the-art methods dramatically decreases, while our approach maintains a good recovery accuracy.
Our first test measures the recovery capabilities of the different methods under study when subjected to similar magnitudes of the entries of $L$ and $S$. To this end we create corrupted matrices of increasing rank and an increasing fraction of outliers. The result of this experiment is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:phase} in form of phase transition diagrams, with rank fractions represented in the x-axis and outlier fraction in the y-axis. Colors represent the recovery (inverse) probability of each case, i.e., the lower error (cold colors, i.e. blue-ish) the better. From this plot, it can be seen that these conditions are very challenging for all the algorithms.
APG, eALM and iALM, making use of an SVD, end up with a very narrow recovery region (in blue). R-TSVD gets a narrow recovery region due to accuracy problems (see also Fig.~\ref{fig:svd} for further information). Notice that AS is not even able to converge beyond a $60\%$ of rank due to the strong non-convexity induced by its bi-linear factorization. LMAFIT shows a rather acceptable recovery region, while ROSL clearly suffers in obtaining a correct recovery for this sort of data. In our analysis, ROSL performs well when the magnitude of $S$ (the noisy entries) are several magnitudes bigger than those of $L$. However, in other cases the recoverability of ROSL dramatically decay. Our proposal, FR-ADM, presents the best recovery for a wider region even in this challenging setup. This characteristic is critical for real applications where outliers might be either very large or very subtle.
We also evaluated one of the most critical aspects of these methods, i.e., the accuracy of a given method at providing a good low-rank approximations of a matrix $L$. State-of-the-art approaches have gained in efficiency by replacing the SVD for a more convenient fixed-rank projection, as in the case of R-TSVD, AS, LMAFIT, ROSL and our proposal FR-ADM. However, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:svd}, different projection strategies lead to different convergence rates and speeds. In this way, when compared against an exact TSVD, the polar decomposition used by FR-ADM turns out to be superior to all its competitors, as derived from the reduced number of iterations required to achieve a relative error of $10^{-12}$. We would like to highlight that our approach even presents a better convergence behaviour than the well-known R-TSVD, which is considered one of the fastest methods for low-rank projection. Later, we will show that FR-ADM not only has a better convergence, but is also faster and more accurate.
Our second experiment uses matrices of increasing sizes ($m=n$), ranging from $m=500$ to $m=8000$, while keeping the rank fixed, $r = 10$ and the entries magnitudes as defined above. 10 repetitions are considered per each size. In this case the methods under evaluation are the APG, iALM, eALM, R-TSVD, AS, LMAFIT, ROSL, ROSL+ and our proposal FR-ADM, along with its equivalent accelerated version, FR-Nys. We have accelerated FR-ADM to present a counterpart to ROSL+\cite{ROSL}. In this way we can offer a fair comparison with our proposal and show that our method remains superior after the Nystrom's speed-up. Results of this test are shown in Table~\ref{tab:rank10}, considering the recovery error for both matrices $L$ and $S$ given by $\text{Err. L} = \norm{L-L*}_F / \norm{L*}_F$ and $\text{Err. S} = \norm{S-S*}_F / \norm{S*}_F$, where $L*$ and $S*$ are the optimal matrices. We also consider computational time in seconds and the number of iterations used by each method. FR-ADM is the method with the best trade-off of high recovery accuracy and low computational time (the fastest of the non-accelerated methods). The efficiency of methods such as LMAFIT and ROSL considerably decreased due to their difficulties to face small sparse entries. APG, iALM and eALM also find troubles searching for the appropriate rank in this challenging conditions. For the case of the R-TSVD, its accuracy is lower than desired, and due to its lack of accuracy requires too many iterations to converge.
For the accelerated methods, FR-Nys has proven to be the fastest and the most accurate in all synthetic tests, despite the accuracy degradation provoked by the matrix sampling. The benefits of applying Nystrom's acceleration are clear, specially for big matrices, as in the $8000 \times 8000$ case, where the total time is reduced in two orders of magnitude. However, as we show in the next experiment, this acceleration is not convenient for problems with large matrix ranks.
In this third experiment methods performance is tested against matrices of increasing dimensions and rank. Matrices are created as described above, but their rank is established to be $rank(L) = 0.1 m$, where $m=n$ is the matrix size. Results are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:bigRank}. The first thing to notice is that the time of Nystrom-accelerated methods is bigger than their unaccelerated counterparts. This is due to the high rank of the problem and that the matrices resulting from the Nystrom's sampling technique are of sizes $m \times k r$ and $k r \times n$, with $k$ big enough (usually $3 < k < 10$). This leads to two matrices that are almost of the size of the original one, making the use of Nystrom counterproductive. Regarding the unaccelerated methods, FR-ADM performs almost twice faster than the second best approach, AS. In terms of recovery accuracy, all the methods present similar results, except for small matrices, where ROSL fails due to its sensibility to initialization parameters.
\singlespacing
\begin{table}
\centering
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\scriptsize
\tabcolsep=0.06cm
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\cline{3-12}\noalign{\vskip 1pt}
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{ } & \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{\textit{S-LR}} & \multicolumn{5}{|c|}{\textit{S-FR} No Accel.} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{\textit{S-FR} Accel. }\\
\cline{3-12}\noalign{\vskip 1pt}
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{ } & \textbf{APG} & \textbf{iALM} & \textbf{eALM} & \textbf{R-TSVD} & \textbf{AS} & \textbf{LMAFIT} & \textbf{ROSL} & \textbf{FR-ADM} & \textbf{ROSL+} & \textbf{FR-Nys}\\
\hline
& Err. L & 6.2e-7 & 6.3e-10 & 3.3e-9 & 1.0e-7 & 7.6e-9 & 1.3e-4 & 5.0e-10 & 2.21e-10 & 1.7e-2 & 6.8e-10\\
& Err. S & 8.4e-5 & 1.1e-7 & 5.8e-7 & 8.7e-6 & 3.8e-7 & 9.1e-3 & 7.5e-8 & 3.6e-8 & 1.2e+0 & 4.8e-8\\
500 & iters & 140 & 33 & 9 & 96 & 120 & 40 & 93 & 28 & 200 & 68\\
& time & 11.74 & 1.25 & 2.29 & 0.90 & 0.59 &\colB{0.11} & 0.89 &\colB{0.11} & 0.67 & \colR{0.17}\\
\hline
& Err. L & 4.7e-7 & 1.1e-9 & 2.5e-10 & 1.8e-7 & 1.4e-9 & 1.8e-7 & 1.3e-9 & 5.0e-10 & 1.2e-4 & 6.2e-10\\
& Err. S & 8.7e-5 & 5.1e-7 & 6.4e-8 & 1.6e-5 & 4.3e-7 & 1.2e-5 & 6.3e-7 & 2.0e-7 & 8.4e-3 & 8.7e-7\\
1K & iters & 142 & 34 & 10 & 95 & 133 & 65 & 98 & 28 & 200 & 65\\
& time & 61.75 & 5.87 & 11.04 & 1.57 & 2.39 & 0.75 & 4.27 & \colB{0.46} & 1.29 & \colR{0.22}\\
\hline
& Err. L & 3.7e-7 & 8.1e-10 & 2.3e-10 & 4.4e-7 & 1.3e-9 & 2.1e-8 & 1.1e-9 & 3.0e-10 & 5.2e-8 & 3.1e-10\\
& Err. S & 9.4e-5 & 4.5e-7 & 7.8e-8 & 3.4e-5 & 6.3e-7 & 4.6e-7 & 6.9e-7 & 1.8e-7 & 3.6e-6 & 7.6e-8\\
2K & iters & 144 & 35 & 10 & 92 & 131 & 300 & 98 & 29 & 200 & 66\\
& time & 396.4 & 20.34 & 50.02 & 5.14 & 9.64 & 12.45 & 17.79 & \colB{1.57} & 1.98 & \colR{0.31}\\
\hline
& Err. L & 2.6e-7 & 4.8e-10 & 2.5e-10 & 7.3e-7 & 9.4e-10 & 1.3e-8 & 6.8e-10 & 2.7e-10 & 4.7e-9 & 3.3e-10\\
& Err. S & 9.3e-5 & 4.2e-7 & 1.0e-7 & 5.9e-5 & 6.3e-7 & 2.9e-7 & 6.0e-7 & 2.2e-7 & 3.2e-7 & 2.2e-8\\
4K & iters & 147 & 36 & 10 & 91 & 135 & 300 & 99 & 29 & 140 & 62\\
& time & 3002 & 112 & 328 & 18 & 50.05 & 56.93 & 67.63 & \colB{7.52} & 3.33 & \colR{0.65}\\
\hline
& Err. L & 1.9e-7 & 5.4e-10 & 2.7e-10 & 1.4e-6 & 6.7e-10 & 9.4e-9 & 4.9e-10 & 4.5e-10 & 5.4e-9 & 5.0e-10\\
& Err. S & 9.3e-5 & 6.5e-7 & 1.6e-7 & 1.3e-4 & 6.8e-7 & 2.0e-7 & 6.2e-7 & 7.6e-7 & 3.7e-7 & 2.8e-8\\
8K & iters & 150 & 36 & 10 & 88 & 138 & 300 & 100 & 28 & 139 & 61\\
& time & 22415 & 517 & 2214 & 63.6 & 243 & 202 & 261 & \colB{27.42} & 6.90 & \colR{1.24}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}%
}
\vspace{0.7mm}
\caption{Average evaluation of recovery accuracy and computational performance for matrices of different dimensions, with 10\% outliers and $\text{rank}(L) = 10$ across ten repetitions. Best time of an accelerated method is shown in \colR{red} and the best time of an unaccelerated method is shown in \colB{blue}.}
\label{tab:rank10}
\vspace{1mm}
\end{table}
\singlespacing
\begin{table}
\centering
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\scriptsize
\tabcolsep=0.06cm
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\cline{3-12}\noalign{\vskip 1pt}
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{ } & \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{\textit{S-LR}} & \multicolumn{5}{|c|}{\textit{S-FR} No Accel.} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{\textit{S-FR} Accel. }\\
\cline{3-12}\noalign{\vskip 1pt}\multicolumn{2}{c|}{ } & \textbf{APG} & \textbf{iALM} & \textbf{eALM} & \textbf{R-TSVD} & \textbf{AS} & \textbf{LMAFIT} & \textbf{ROSL} & \textbf{FR-ADM} & \textbf{ROSL+} & \textbf{FR-Nys}\\
\hline
& Err. L & 1.3e-5 & 1.7e-4 & 1.1e-6 & 2.3e-7 & 1.5e-8 & 1.8e-4 & 1.2e-2 & 9.0e-9 & 1.7e-4 & 2.7e-10\\
500 & Err. S & 1.3e-4 & 1.7e-3 & 1.1e-5 & 4.1e-5 & 1.1e-7 & 2.8e-2 & 1.2e-1 & 1.1e-7 & 2.5e-2 & 4.1e-8\\
r=50 & iters & 175 & 37 & 11 & 88 & 85 & 48 & 138 & 37 & 200 & 66\\
& time & 13.77 & 3.61 & 15.44 & 1.70 & 0.75 & 0.42 & 6.43 &\colB{0.34} & 8.99 & \colR{0.97}\\
\hline
& Err. L & 2.4e-6 & 6.9e-9 & 4.4e-7 & 6.7e-7 & 1.6e-8 & 2.8e-8 & 1.2e-8 & 9.9e-9 & 4.3e-8 & 8.1e-10\\
1K & Err. S & 3.4e-5 & 1.3e-7 & 6.2e-6 & 1.6e-4 & 1.7e-7 & 2.2e-6 & 8.8e-8 & 1.8e-7 & 9.4e-6 & 1.8e-7\\
r=100 & iters & 174 & 37 & 11 & 82 & 79 & 300 & 69 & 36 & 200 & 62\\
& time & 68.88 & 14.36 & 61.74 & 7.63 & 3.18 & 7.43 & 33.13 &\colB{1.54} & 69.75 & \colR{3.61}\\
\hline
& Err. L & 6.8e-7 & 6.3e-9 & 2.0e-7 & 1.7e-6 & 1.1e-8 & 1.9e-8 & 1.1e-8 & 1.1e-8 & 4.5e-8 & 1.6e-9\\
2K & Err. S & 1.3e-5 & 1.7e-7 & 4.0e-6 & 5.9e-4 & 1.6e-7 & 2.0e-6 & 1.2e-7 & 3.0e-7 & 1.4e-5 & 4.8e-7\\
r=200 & iters & 175 & 37 & 11 & 77 & 85 & 300 & 67 & 35 & 200 & 60\\
& time & 461 & 80.49 & 332 & 32.74 & 17.32 & 30.77 & 325 &\colB{7.53} & 653.13 & \colR{16.93}\\
\hline
& Err. L & 3.5e-7 & 7.5e-9 & 1.5e-7 & 5.0e-6 & 1.2e-8 & 1.3e-8 & 1.0e-8 & 6.8e-9 & 4.7e-8 & 5.3e-9\\
4K & Err. S & 1.0e-5 & 2.8e-7 & 4.4e-6 & 2.4e-3 & 2.7e-7 & 1.9e-6 & 1.8e-7 & 2.6e-7 & 2.0e-5 & 2.3e-6\\
r=400 & iters & 175 & 37 & 10 & 71 & 89 & 300 & 66 & 36 & 200 & 57\\
& time & 3453 & 529 & 2106 & 183.5 & 107 & 162 & 3586 &\colB{43} & 7008 & \colR{96.57}\\
\hline
& Err. L & 5.9e-7 & 5.0e-9 & 4.3e-9 & 1.5e-5 & 6.3e-9 & 8.6e-9 & 7.1e-8 & 9.5e-9 & 4.8e-8 & 1.4e-8\\
8K & Err. S & 3.7e-4 & 5.5e-6 & 3.4e-6 & 1.0e-2 & 6.6e-6 & 1.8e-6 & 1.2e-5 & 1e-5 & 3.0e-5 & 8.6e-6\\
r=800 & iters & 143 & 35 & 10 & 65 & 130 & 300 & 7107 & 21 & 200 & 54\\
& time & 23130 & 2651 & 6394 & 1382 & 1075 & 1035 & 97397 & \colB{166} & 91242 & \colR{564}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}%
}
\vspace{0.7mm}
\caption{Average evaluation of recovery accuracy and computational performance for matrices of different dimensions, with 10\% outliers and $\text{rank}(L) = 0.1 m$ across ten repetitions. Best time of an accelerated method is shown in \colR{red} and the best time of an unaccelerated method is shown in \colB{blue}.}
\label{tab:bigRank}
\vspace{3mm}
\end{table}
\vspace{-8mm}
\subsection{Robust Photometric Stereo}
\vspace{-1mm}
We have chosen photometric stereo~\cite{PhotoStereo} (PS) as our first example of fixed-rank problem. PS consists in estimating the normal map and depth of a still scene from several 2D images grabbed from the same position but under different light directions. The Lambertian reflectance model~\cite{PhotoStereo} is assumed, such that the light directions $L \in \mathbb{R}^{3 \times n}$, the matrix of normals (unknowns) $N \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times 3}$, and the matrix of pixel intensities $I \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ are related via $I = \rho N L$, where $\rho$ represents the albedo. The objective of recovering the normal map $N$ can be achieved by a Least-Squares (LS) method, but the quality of such a solution would suffer in the presence of outliers. Instead, robust decompositions can be used to get ride of outliers, as proposed in~\cite{RobustPS}. Since $I$ is a product of two rank-3 matrices, in ideal conditions its rank is at most 3. We make use of this rank property to recover an uncorrupted version of $I$ that leads to a better estimation of the map $N$ and consequently of the depth map.
In our tests we use a dataset of objects viewed under 20 different illuminations, provided in ~\cite{PS}. From such images, we recover an uncorrupted version of the intensities $I$. Then we run the Photometric Stereo Toolbox~\cite{PS} to recover normal maps, depth maps, 3D models and some statistics. Table~\ref{tab:ps1} shows the error in the normal maps after the recovery process with different methods. Here, we consider the reconstruction error, i.e., the normal map is re-rendered into a shading image and then compared with the captured images. From the resulting error map several statistics are computed (RMS, mean and maximum error). The classical LS approach is taken as a reference of non-robust approaches. As robust methods, APG, eALM and iALM, AS, LMAFIT, ROSL and FR-ADM are considered. R-TSVD has not been considered due to its observed reduced accuracy. Nystrom accelerated versions are excluded due to the small size of the observation matrices, a constraint that prevents speed-ups.
The comparison shows that AS, ROSL and FR-ADM are the most accurate methods, producing estimations of the normal map with reconstruction errors below $10^{-10}$. The remaining methods are far from the accuracy offered by these fixed-rank techniques, producing high residuals. Although AS consistently presents a lower error in the majority of the cases, the error differences below $10^{-10}$ are of no impact for the application. This is shown in the error maps of Fig.~\ref{fig:psComb}\textbf{(a)}. However, computational time is a critical factor for this problem, where, FR-ADM is one order of magnitude faster than ROSL and two orders faster than AS.
This figure displays the error maps of the considered approaches. As expected, LS leads to high errors due to outliers. APG, iALM and eALM improve LS results, but since they do not use the rank-$3$ constraint recovered matrices have an erroneous low-rank. Fixed-rank techniques, such as AS, ROSL and FR-ADM achieve very low residuals, making the error maps black. The recovered normal maps after the application of the FR-ADM technique are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:psComb}\textbf{(b)} along with the 3D reconstruction of the objects. It can be concluded that \textit{S-FR} techniques, can drastically benefit problems like photometric stereo and FR-ADM stands as the fastest alternative while offering a very high accuracy.
\singlespacing
\begin{table}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\scriptsize
\tabcolsep=0.07cm
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\cline{3-10}\noalign{\vskip 1pt}
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{ } & LS & APG & iALM & eALM & AS & ROSL & LMAFIT & FR-ADM\\
\hline
&\tx{RMS} & 1.4e-2 & 3.7e-3 & 3.9e-3 & 3.9e-3 & 1.2e-12 & 1.6e-11 & 2.3e-2 & 1.5e-11 \\
\ty Frog &\tx{Mean Err.} & 1.1e-2 & 2.7e-3 & 2.7e-3 & 2.7e-3 & 1.2e-12 & 1.4e-11 & 7.9e-3 & 1.3e-11 \\
&\tx{Max Err.} & 1.6e-1 & 2.2e-2 & 2.1e-2 & 2.1e-2 & 1.8e-12 & 4.8e-11 & 2.1e-1 & 4.7e-11 \\
& \tx{Time(s)} & x & 2.3e+2 & 1.4e+2 & 5.6e+2 & 3.1e+1 & 4.0e+1 & 1.4e+2 & \colB{7.1e+0} \\
\hline
&\tx{RMS} & 1.4e-2 & 2.7e-3 & 2.5e-3 & 2.5e-3 & 4.3e-14 & 2.7e-11 & 9.6e-3 & 2.5e-11 \\
\ty Cat &\tx{Mean Err.} & 9.3e-3 & 1.9e-3 & 1.8e-3 & 1.8e-3 & 4.1e-14 & 2.3e-11 & 3.9e-3 & 2.2e-11 \\
&\tx{Max Err.} & 2.2e-1 & 1.8e-2 & 1.4e-2 & 1.4e-2 & 6.4e-14 & 6.6e-11 & 1.4e-1 & 6.7e-11 \\
&\tx{Time(s)} & x & 1.8e+2 & 1.1e+2 & 4.3e+2 & 2.4e+1 & 3.0e+1 & 1.1e+2 & \colB{5.9e+0} \\
\hline
&\tx{RMS} & 1.5e-2 & 2.9e-3 & 2.8e-3 & 2.8e-3 & 6.0e-13 & 2.6e-11 & 1.4e-2 & 2.6e-11 \\
\ty Hippo &\tx{Mean Err.} & 9.8e-3 & 1.6e-3 & 1.5e-3 & 1.5e-3 & 5.7e-13 & 2.4e-11 & 6.4e-3 & 2.3e-11 \\
&\tx{Max Err.} & 1.9e-1 & 2.3e-2 & 1.9e-2 & 1.9e-2 & 9.8e-13 & 8.1e-11 & 1.8e-1 & 8.4e-11 \\
&\tx{Time(s)} & x & 1.9e+2 & 1.2e+2 & 4.7e+2 & 2.6e+1 & 3.2e+1 & 1.2e+2 & \colB{6.0e+0} \\
\hline
&\tx{RMS} & 1.4e-2 & 4.0e-3 & 3.9e-3 & 3.6e-3 & 3.8e-12 & 1.8e-11 & 1.8e-2 & 1.5e-11 \\
\ty Lizard &\tx{Mean Err.} & 1.2e-2 & 3.1e-3 & 3.0e-3 & 2.8e-3 & 3.5e-12 & 1.6e-11 & 6.2e-3 & 1.3e-11 \\
&\tx{Max Err.} & 1.7e-1 & 3.6e-2 & 2.7e-2 & 2.7e-2 & 1.2e-11 & 5.5e-11 & 2.2e-1 & 4.4e-11 \\
&\tx{Time(s) } & x & 2.8e+2 & 1.6e+2 & 7.8e+2 & 3.7e+1 & 4.3e+1 & 1.6e+2 & \colB{8.9e+0} \\
\hline
&\tx{RMS} & 1.0e-2 & 2.7e-3 & 2.5e-3 & 2.5e-3 & 1.4e-11 & 1.9e-14 & 1.5e-2 & 6.8e-11 \\
\ty Pig &\tx{Mean Err.} & 7.9e-3 & 2.2e-3 & 2.1e-3 & 2.0e-3 & 1.4e-11 & 1.5e-14 & 5.1e-3 & 5.5e-11 \\
&\tx{Max Err} & 2.1e-1 & 1.2e-2 & 1.5e-2 & 1.4e-2 & 2.7e-11 & 8.7e-14 & 2.2e-1 & 3.1e-10 \\
&\tx{Time(s)} & x & 2.3e+2 & 1.4e+2 & 5.2e+2 & 3.2e+1 & 3.7e+1 & 1.5e+2 & \colB{7.7e+0} \\
\hline
&\tx{RMS} & 4.3e-2 & 1.1e-2 & 9.1e-3 & 9.9e-3 & 8.8e-13 & 2.8e-13 & 2.7e-2 & {1.3e-13}\\
\ty Scholar &\tx{Mean Err.} & 3.3e-2 & 1.0e-2 & 8.4e-3 & 9.2e-3 & 7.9e-13 & 2.2e-13 & 1.5e-2 & {1.0e-13} \\
&\tx{Max Err.} & 3.3e-1 & 3.3e-2 & 2.2e-2 & 2.4e-2 & 1.9e-12 & 1.3e-12 & 2.4e-1 & {6.0e-13} \\
&\tx{Time(s)} & x & 5.0e+2 & 3.0e+2 & 1.3e+3 & 6.5e+1 & 8.0e+1 & 3.1e+2 & \colB{1.5e+1} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}%
}
\vspace{0.7mm}
\caption{Evaluation of the reconstruction error for the photometric stereo dataset~\cite{PS}. The time taken for the LS method is not included in the evaluation.}
\label{tab:ps1}
\vspace{3mm}
\end{table}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\vspace{-1mm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.76]{sections/figures/psComb.eps}
\vspace{-2mm}
\caption{\textbf{(a)} Normal error maps after the reconstruction, with intensities scaled by $100$ for visualization. Notice that the errors of AS, ROSL and FR-ADM are insignificant, below $10^{-10}$. \textbf{(b)} 3D reconstruction of the objects after the application of the FR-ADM technique.}
\label{fig:psComb}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{figure*}
\vspace{-3mm}
\subsection{Robust Spectral Clustering}
\vspace{-1mm}
We address clustering as a fixed-rank optimization problem with a known number of clusters represented by the matrix rank, where such a rank can become very high. Here, \textit{S-FR} methods can be easily added to the pipeline of Spectral Clustering approaches (SP)\cite{PSCDS} to increase robustness to outliers and improve accuracy. We consider the problem of clustering faces given the number of categories for three face data sets, i.e., the Extended Yale Face Database B~\cite{YaleB} (16128 images of 38 different subjects), the AR Face database~\cite{AR} (4000 images of 126 different subjects) and the MUCT Face Database~\cite{MUCT} (3755 images of 625 different subjects). All of them contain people under different illumination conditions. In addition, MUCT and AR include pose variations, and in the case of AR people use different outfits (see Fig.\ref{fig:clusters} for some examples).
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\vspace{0mm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.62]{sections/figures/clusters2.eps}
\caption{Instances of males and females subjects of the different data sets used in our evaluation.}
\label{fig:clusters}
\vspace{6mm}
\end{figure}
In our experiments we use the Parallel Spectral Clustering in Distributed Systems (PSCDS)~\cite{PSCDS} method as the base code for spectral clustering, but just employ a simple desktop machine. The different \textit{S-FR} methods are incorporated to PSCDS as a preprocessing stage as follows. First, each image is described by the Gist~\cite{Gist} holistic descriptor with $5$ scales of $8$ orientations and $12$ blocks. This produces a vector of $5760$ dimensions. The use of Gist instead of the original images has consistently produced an improvement in accuracy in the range of [15\%, 20\%]. Secondly, all the descriptors of a dataset are combined forming an observation matrix $A = N \times 5760$, where $N$ is the total number of images in the specific dataset. The rank of $A$ is the number of expected clusters $C_{\text{rank}}$. Then, the \textit{S-FR} method under evaluation recovers a subspace $U_A$ of rank $C_{\text{rank}}$ from $A$. The matrix $U_A$ is then used in the pipeline of PSCDS to compute the distance matrix $W_U$, considering five nearest neighbours per sample, followed by the spectral clustering.
We have considered LMAFIT, ROSL, ROSL+, FR-ADM and FR-Nys as representatives of the \textit{S-FR} approaches. Additionally, we also compared against state-of-the-art clustering techniques such as the Robust Subspace Segmentation by Low-Rank Representation (LRR)~\cite{LRR} and the Smooth Representation Clustering (SMR)~\cite{SMR}, specifically designed for clustering purposes. The results of our evaluation are presented in Table~\ref{tab:clustering}, including the average clustering error (ce); the base time, i.e., time taken by the specific \textit{S-FR} method; and the total time, i.e., base time plus the time taken by the PSCDS. For LRR and SMR the total time is that produced by the method.
When considering the Yale-B and AR datasets FR-ADM obtains the lowest clustering errors, 2.7\% and 6.65\% respectively. Moreover, FR-ADM and FR-Nys present the best balance between accuracy and computational time for these datasets. MUCT, is the most challenging dataset with 625 classes, which is a very high rank in comparison to its matrix dimensions ($3755 \times 5760$). These conditions are beyond the recovery boundaries of \textit{S-FR} methods, and even though FR-ADM accuracy is comparable to that obtained by the top method, LRR. Furthermore, FR-ADM computational performance is more than 20 times faster than LRR for this case, supporting the good accuracy-speed trade-off offered by the method.
\singlespacing
\begin{table}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\scriptsize
\tabcolsep=0.11cm
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\cline{3-10}\noalign{\vskip 1pt}
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{ } & PSCDS & LRR & SMR & LMAFIT & ROSL & ROSL+ & FR-ADM & FR-Nys\\
\hline
Yale-B & ce (\%) & 18.7\% & 13.8\% & 28.4\% & 18.8\% & 20.1\% & 30.4\% & 2.7\% & 2.89\%\\
A=16128x5760 & base time & 5.17 & 64.8 & 351.6 & 2.4 & 274.6 & 7.6 & 6.8 & 0.58\\
$C_{\text{rank}}$=38 & total time & 5.17 & 64.8 & 351.6 & 5.6 & 275.5 & 8.7 & 8.8 & \colB{2.5} \\
\hline
AR & ce (\%) & 17.2\% & 36.8\% & 39.7\% & 6.70\% & 7.17\% & 46.0\% & 6.65\% & 7.17\% \\
A=4000x5760 & base time & 5.08 & 606.8 & 105.1 & 17.6 & 662.2 & 48.1 & 13.81 & 1.63 \\
$C_{\text{rank}}$=126 & total time & 5.08 & 606.8 & 105.1 & 21.05 & 665.1 & 49.9 & 16.91 & \colB{3.83} \\
\hline
MUCT & ce (\%) & 55.3\% & 53.4\% & 55.8\% & 56.2\% & 56.3\% & 78.4\% & 55.7\% & 62.8\% \\
A=3755x5760 & base time & 76.7 & 3820 & 3995 & 101.2 & 17696 & 4890 & 85.5 & 67.2 \\
$C_{\text{rank}}$=625 & total time & \colB{76.7} & 3820 & 3995 & 190.9 & 17771 & 4977 & 175.2 & 156.3 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}%
}
\vspace{0.7mm}
\caption{Clustering errors including time evaluation. Base time refers to the time used by the specific \textit{S-FR} method, while total time refers to the time required to perform the full clustering task.}
\label{tab:clustering}
\vspace{3mm}
\end{table}
\section{Problem formulation}
\label{sec:problem}
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:related}
The Accelerated Proximal Gradient (APG)~\cite{APG} will serve as our starting point within the plethora of methods present in the literature. This method, although it is not the first one proposed to solve the RPCA problem (see for instance FISTA~\cite{FISTA}), is an appealing combination of concepts. It approximates the gradients of a given cost function to simplify its optimization and improves its convergence. It also includes Nesterov updates~\cite{Nesterov1} and the critical continuation scheme~\cite{APG}, which all together lead to a method with sub-linear convergence $\mathcal{O}(1/k^2)$, where $k$ is the number of iterations. Its computational complexity per iteration is $\mathcal{O}(n^3)$ for $n\times n$ matrices. Afterwards, authors of \cite{ALM} proposed the Augmented Lagrangian Multiplier method (ALM) in two flavours. First they present the exact ALM (eALM), which uses an Alternating Direction Method (ADM) to minimize an Augmented Lagrangian function in a traditional and exact way. Then, an inexact version is also proposed (iALM), which approximates the original algorithm to reduce the number of times the SVD is used. The convergence rate of eALM depends on the update of $\mu_k$, the penalty parameter of the Augmented Lagrangian. When the sequence $\{\mu_k\}_{k=1}^{k_\text{max}}$ grows geometrically following the continuation principle, eALM is proven to converge Q-linearly $\mathcal{O}(1/\mu_k)$. For iALM, there is not proof of convergence, but it is supposed to be Q-linear too. Both methods have computational complexity of $\mathcal{O}(n^3)$ per iteration.
Recently, ALM was extended in~\cite{LADM}, which included a factorization technique along with a TSVD from the PROPACK suite~\cite{PROPACK} to achieve a complexity of $\mathcal{O}(rn^2)$ per iteration. The bottleneck caused by the TSVD has also been addressed via random projections, leading to the efficient Randomized-TSVD (R-TSVD)~\cite{Halko}. However, although being more efficient than the regular TSVD, results are considerably less accurate. The idea of including a factorization of the data was then improved by LMAFIT~\cite{LMAFIT}, which uses a bi-linear factorization to produce two skinny matrices $U_{m \times k}$ and $V_{k \times n}$, such that $L=UV$, to speed up the process. A similar concept was used in the Active Subspace method (AS)~\cite{AS}, but in this case the bi-linear factorization is given by $ Q_{m \times k}$ and $J_{k \times n}$, such that $Q \in St_{m,k}$. This formulation turns out to be very useful when $m \gg n \gg k$, leading to a complexity per iteration of $\mathcal{O}(mnk)$. Unfortunately, $k$ is an upper bound for the actual rank of $L$ and needs to be given by the user. This is not suitable for \textit{S-LR} scenarios, but fits perfectly in the \textit{S-FR} framework. Another point to highlight about LMAFIT and AS is the utilization of closed-form projectors to impose constraints like orthogonality, low-rank and sparsity. This algebraical way of optimizing functions differs from the geometrical counterparts in the literature on manifold optimization (see~\cite{optiManifold}\cite{Meyer}). Substituting all the required machinery to perform differential geometry (e.g., retractions, lift maps, etc.) by projectors seems a good idea from the point of view of efficiency. However, this method is not absent of problems. The factorization in AS is highly non-convex, an issue that influences the number of iterations required for the convergence of the method, which is notably higher than eALM, despite having the same theoretical convergence rate $\mathcal{O}(1/\mu_k)$.
One of the contributions of our work is to improve the convergence of fixed-rank projection methods. To this end we employ a polar decomposition as in~\cite{Meyer}. This polar decomposition offers us the possibility of exploiting the manifold structure of fixed-rank problems as the product of two Stiefel and an SPD manifold. $\mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n} = (\text{St} \times \text{SPD} \times \text{St})/O_r$. However, we deviate from~\cite{Meyer} to propose more efficient expressions that make use of projectors to speed up the process, giving rise to a better convergence. We also consider worth highlighting a key tool described in the recent work~\cite{ROSL}. There, the authors follow a strategy that resembles the one described in~\cite{AS}, but they add a sub-sampling step based on the Nystrom's method~\cite{Nystrom1} that leads to a linear complexity $\mathcal{O}(r^2(m+n))$ per iteration. We borrow this idea to further speed up our optimization.
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}
\label{sec:conclusion}
\vspace{-1mm}
In this paper we have proposed an efficient, stable and accurate technique, FR-ADM, to perform a robust decomposition of a corrupted matrix into its fixed-rank and sparse components. To this end we have based our algorithm on a polar factorization on a product manifold $(St \times SPD \times St)/O_r$, combining key tools from manifold optimization and fast projectors. We also proposed a fast $\text{SPD}$ projector to speed up computation, along with a proof of its validity in this context. Additionally, Nystrom's sampling techniques have been used to further accelerate the results, achieving a linear complexity. The resulting algorithm has been tested on synthetic cases and the challenging problems of robust photometric stereo and spectral clustering, proving to be as accurate and more efficient than state-of-the-art approaches and paving the way towards large-scale problems.
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
\IEEEPARstart{S}{ystems} with fixed-rank constraints exist in many applications within the fields of computer vision, machine learning and signal processing. Some examples are: photometric stereo, where depth is estimated from a still camera that acquires images of an object under different illumination conditions, leading to a rank constraint; motion estimation, where the type of motion of the objects defines a rank.
This paper addresses the problem of efficient sparse fixed-rank (\textit{S-FR}) matrix decomposition, i.e.: given a matrix $M$ affected by outliers, this is, gross noise of unknown magnitude, we aim to recover an uncorrupted matrix $L$ and a sparse matrix $S$ such that $M = L + S$ and $\text{rank}(L) = r$, with $r$ known beforehand, as defined in (\ref{eq:fr}),
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:fr}
\text{min}_{L, S} \norm{S}_{\ell_1} \text{s.t. } M = L + S,\ \text{rank}(L) = r.\\
\end{equation}
\textit{S-FR} matrix recovery is intimately related to the sparse low-rank (\textit{S-LR}) recovery problem (\ref{eq:rpca}), for which algorithms such as Robust Principal Component Analysis (RPCA)~\cite{Candes11} and Principal Component Pursuit (PCP)~\cite{PCP} are well known due to their extraordinary capabilities to solve it and their application to a wide range of problems.
\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rpca}
\text{min}_{L, S} \norm{L}_* + \lambda \norm{S}_{\ell_1} \text{s.t. } M = L + S.\\
\end{equation}
\vspace{-3mm}
Robust \textit{S-FR} recovery might seem a simpler case of \textit{S-LR} decomposition, or even a straightforward derivation. However, \textit{S-FR} recovery is a hard problem that involves a highly non-convex constraint due to the rank imposition. This factor is not present in the \textit{S-LR} decomposition problem due to the nuclear norm relaxation. Therefore, a careful design is needed in order to produce a stable \textit{S-FR} decomposition method with a good convergence rate.
In addition to the convergence speed, achieving efficient and scalable \textit{S-FR} decompositions requires algorithms with very low computational complexity per iteration. The main bottleneck of these algorithms is the enforcement of the correct rank or its minimization, a step that usually requires the use of a TSVD or an SVD per iteration, which complexity is $\mathcal{O}(mnr)$ for a $m \times n$ matrix of rank $r$. How to reduce this bottleneck is a line of research that has been recently targeted by several works such as \cite{Halko}\cite{LMAFIT}\cite{ROSL}, showing interesting ideas leading to algorithms with quadratic and linear complexities with respect to the input matrix size. The key lessons to learn from these works are two: \textbf{(i)} the factorization of large-scale problems into products of small size matrices~\cite{AS}; and \textbf{(ii)} the use of a sub-sampled version of the input matrix to produce fast and accurate approximations of the solution~\cite{ROSL}.
Our work has been influenced by these concepts and several ideas drawn from state-of-the-art differential geometry techniques. We have experimented with the mentioned concepts and improved upon them in order to create an efficient and precise \textit{S-FR} decomposition algorithm suitable for large scale problems. In this respect we present the following contributions: (\textbf{i}) an optimization method, named FR-ADM\footnote{Code is available at {\small\url{https://github.com/germanRos/FRADM}}} (Fixed-Rank Alternating Direction Method), that solves \textit{S-FR} problems following an ADM scheme to minimize an Augmented Lagrangian cost function; (\textbf{ii}) a novel procedure to impose fixed-rank constraints through a very efficient polar factorization, named \textit{FixedRankOptStep}, which is superior in convergence, stability and speed than the bilinear counterparts used by state-of-the-art methods and; (\textbf{iii}) the use of a simple projector to impose SPD constraints efficiently along with a novel proof of its validity.
We show that our method, based on the \textit{FixedRankOptStep} procedure, outperforms in time, accuracy and region of applicability current state-of-the-art methods. Furthermore, we also show that our proposal FR-ADM can benefit from Nystrom's method~\cite{Nystrom1} to improve its computational efficiency while maintaining a good level of accuracy. These results are supported by thorough experimentation in synthetic and real cases, as detailed in Sec.~\ref{sec:results}.
\section{Summary of Notation}
\label{sec:notation}
Capital letters, such as $M$ represent matrices, while vectors are written in lower-case. $M^T$ stands for the matrix transpose, $M^+$ for its pseudo-inverse and $\textit{tr}(M)$ is the matrix trace operator. $\sigma_k$ stands for the $k$-th largest singular value of a given matrix. The indexation of the $i$-th row and the $j$-th column is defined as $M_{ij}$. Matrix sub-blocks of $M$ are referred to as $M_{[r_1:r_m, c_1:c_n]}$ to index from row $r_1$ to $r_m$ and column $c_1$ to $c_n$. $\norm{M}_F = \sqrt{\textit{tr}(M^T M)}$ is the Frobenius norm and $\norm{M}_{\ell_1} = \sum_{ij} |M_{ij}|, \norm{M}_* = \sum_i \sigma_i$ are the entry-wise $\ell_1$-norm and the matrix nuclear norm, respectively. $I_{m}$ and $I_{m\times n}$ are the square and the rectangular identity matrices. $\text{St}_{m,r}$, is the Stiefel manifold of matrices $U \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times r}$ with $U^T U = I_r$. $\text{SPD}_r$ and $\text{SPSD}_r$ stand for the $r \times r$ Symmetric (Semi-)Positive Definite matrices, respectively. $\mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n}$ is the fixed-rank manifold of matrices $L \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ with $\text{rank}(L)=r$ and $\mathbb{R}_*^{m \times r}$ is the set of full-rank matrices. $O_r$ stands for the Orthogonal group, but be careful, since $\cal{O}$ is also used to describe the complexity of algorithms in big-O notation. We also make use of some proximity operators and projectors defined as: $\textit{Sym}(M) = \frac{1}{2}(M+M^T)$, the symmetric part of M. $P_{ST}[M] = \text{max}(0, M-\delta) + \text{min}(0, M+\delta)$ for the standard soft-thresholding (promotes sparsity); $P_{O}[\cdot]$ for the projector onto the Stiefel manifold, and $P_{\text{SPD}}[\cdot]$ for the projector onto the $\text{SPD}$ manifold (these are defined in Sec.~\ref{sec:polar}).
\section*{Appendix: Convergence analysis of the FixedRankOptFull algorithm}
\label{appendix}
In this Appendix we shall show that the minimization subproblem (\ref{eq:MinimizationFixedRank}), i.e.
\begin{equation}
\textrm{min}_{U\in \textrm{St}_{m,r},B\in \textrm{SPD}_r,V\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}}\norm{M-UB V^T}_F^2\,,
\end{equation}
although highly non-convex, converges geometrically to the global minimum when optimized via the proposed
\textit{FixedRankOptFull} method (Algorithm~\ref{Alg-FROpt}).
\begin{algorithm}
\algsetup{linenosize=\small}
\small
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE Data matrix $M\in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$, initial matrices $U_0\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $B_0\in \textrm{SPD}_r$, $V_0\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}$
\STATE $i\leftarrow 0$
\WHILE{not converged}
\STATE $(U_{i+1},B_{i+1},V_{i+1})\leftarrow FixedRankOptStep(M,U_i,B_i,V_i)$
\STATE $i\leftarrow i+1$
\ENDWHILE
\RETURN{$U^*\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $B^*\in \textrm{SPD}_r$, $V^*\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}$ such that $L=U^*B^*{V^*}^T$ is the
TSVD of $M$ }
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{\textit{FixedRankOptFull} Algorithm}
\label{Alg-FROpt}
\end{algorithm}
\setlength{\floatsep}{0pt}
\setlength{\textfloatsep}{2mm}
\setlength{\intextsep}{2pt}
The \textit{FixedRankOptFull} algorithm performs an alternating directions minimization (ADM)
on each of the submanifolds $\textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $\textrm{St}_{n,r}$ and $\textrm{SPD}_r$ (Algorithm~\ref{Alg-FRStep}).
In each iteration it uses the algorithm \textit{FixedRankOptStep}, described in Sec. \ref{sec:polar}, that performs a single step of the alternating directions minimization.
In Sec. \ref{sec:polar} we provided the exact projectors on each of the submanifolds
$\textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $\textrm{St}_{n,r}$ and $\textrm{SPD}_r$, and proved the validity of the ones corresponding to the Stiefel manifolds. For the case of the $\textrm{SPD}_r$ manifold, a careful analysis is required to prove its validity.
Given that $\text{rank}(M) \geq r = \text{rank}(L)$, and considering $U$ and $V$ as the solutions of an OPP, then a unique solution in the SPD manifolds must exist. This solution is given in the following discussion, but we need some previous results.
\begin{lem}
(see \cite{Stiefel-Procrustes}) Let $\bar{U}$ and $\bar{V}$ be the solutions given by Algorithm \ref{Alg-FRStep}. Suppose $\text{rank}(B_0)=\text{rank}(MV_0)=r$, then $\bar{U}^TMV_0B_0$ and $B_0\bar{U}^TM\bar{V}$ are in $\textrm{SPD}_r$.
\label{lemmaOPP}
\end{lem}
\noindent \textit{Proof}:
Since $\bar{U}\!=\!P_{\textrm{O}}[MV_0B_0]$, if $MV_0B_0\!=\!Q\Sigma S^T$, then $\bar{U}\!=\!QS^T$
and therefore $\bar{U}^TMV_0B_0$ $=SQ^TQ\Sigma S^T$ $=S\Sigma S^T$, which is SPD$_r$ since
$\text{rank}(MV_0)= \text{rank}(B_0)=r$. A similar argument, but without any additional assumption on $\text{rank}(M^T\bar{U})$, since $\text{rank}(M^T\bar{U})=\text{rank}(M^TMV_0)=\text{rank}(MV_0)=r$, shows that $\bar{V}^TM^T\bar{U}B_0$ $=B_0\bar{U}^TM\bar{V} \in \textrm{SPD}_r$ after
minimizing with respect to $V$.$\blacksquare$
Note that in Lemma~\ref{lemmaOPP} it is not neccesary that $B_0\in\text{SPD}_r$, only that it is invertible.
Also, we conclude that $\text{rank}(\bar{U}^TM\bar{V})=r$.
$\bar{U}^TM\bar{V}$, is in general not symmetric, although it can be written as a product of two SPD matrices,
and therefore has positive eigenvalues.
Even though from Lemma~\ref{lemmaOPP} we have that
$\bar{U}^TMV_0B_0$ and $B_0\bar{U}^TM\bar{V}$ are in $SPD_r$, we cannot directly prove that
$\bar{B}=\textit{Sym}(\bar{U}^TM\bar{V})\in \textrm{SPD}_r$, but we can do it passing to
the limit inside Algorithm \ref{Alg-FROpt}.
When passing to the limit the sequences defined by $\{U_i\}$, $\{B_i\}$ and $\{V_i\}$, both conditions are simultaneously
met, as in Lemma~\ref{lemmaSPDLimit}:
\begin{lem}
Suppose that the \textit{FixedRankOptFull} Algorithm converges to a fixed point $(U^*,B^*,V^*)$, then
$U^*\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $B^*\in \textrm{SPD}_r$, and $V^*\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}$.
\label{lemmaSPDLimit}
\end{lem}
\noindent \textit{Proof}: Since $\scalemath{0.92}{(U^*,B^*,V^*)=\textit{FixedRankStep}(M,U^*,B^*,V^*)}$, $U^*$ and $V^*$ are solutions to their respective OPPs and have to be in their respective Stiefel manifolds. Then, by applying Lemma~\ref{lemmaOPP}, both $U^*{}^TMV^*B^*$ and $B^*U^*{}^TMV^*$ are in SPD$_r$. Since $B^*=\textit{Sym}(U^*{}^TMV^*)$, we have that:
\begin{eqnarray}
2B^*{}^2 &=& B^*\textit{Sym}(U^*{}^TMV^*)+\textit{Sym}(U^*{}^TMV^*)B^* \nonumber\\
&=& U^*{}^TMV^*B^*+B^*U^*{}^TMV^*\,,
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent which is on SPD$_r$ since it is a convex manifold. Then, by taking the square root of $B^*{}^2$ we have that
$B^*\in \textrm{SPD}_r$. $\blacksquare$
Now, since the eigenvalues are continuous functions of the matrix entries,
there exists $\epsilon>0$ such that all symmetric matrices in the open ball of radius $\epsilon$ centered at $B^*$ are contained in
$\textrm{SPD}_r$. Thus, if \textit{FixedRankOptFull} converges, then there exists
$n_0\in \mathbb{N}$ such that $B_i\in \textrm{SPD}_r\,\forall i\geq n_0$.
Let us now discuss the convergence of the \textit{FixedRankOptFull} Algorithm.
Given $S\in \textrm{St}_{p,k}$, then $P_S=SS^T$ is the projector onto the column space of
$S$ in $\mathbb{R}^p$. Note that $P_S=P_{SQ}$, where $Q\in O_k$. Then we have the following:
\begin{thm}
If $\text{rank}(MV_0)=r$, the \textit{FixedRankOptFull} algorithm converges Q-linearly to a global minimum of (\ref{eq:MinimizationFixedRank}) given by $(U^*,B^*,V^*)$ such that
$L=U^*B^*V^*{}^T$ is the unique projection of $M$ onto ${\cal F}_{m,n}^{(r)}$. The convergence is Q-linear, in the sense that $||P_{U_{i}}-P_{U^*}||=\mathcal{O}((\frac{\sigma_{r+1}}{\sigma_r})^{2i})$ and
$||P_{V_{i}}-P_{V^*}||=\mathcal{O}((\frac{\sigma_{r+1}}{\sigma_r})^{2i})$.
\label{TheoremGlobalMinimum}
\end{thm}
\noindent \textit{Proof}:
For each $U_i,V_i$, denote by $P_{U_i},P_{V_i}$ the projectors as defined before. Then it is easy to proof, using the alternative definition of $P_O[A]$, that
$P_{U_{i+1}}=P_{\tilde{U}_{i+1}}$, where $\tilde{U}_{i+1}=P_O[MM^TU_i]$. Thus the sequence of subspaces $\{P_{U_i}\}$ is the same as that produced by the Orthogonal Iteration~\cite{MatrixComputations} for the computation
of the first $r$ eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the symmetric matrix $MM^T$ . The Orthogonal Iteration converges Q-linearly in the sense that
$||P_{\tilde{U}_{i}}-P_{\tilde{U}^*}||=\mathcal{O}((\frac{\lambda_{r+1}}{\lambda_r})^i)$, with $\lambda_k$ the eigenvalues of $MM^T$. Since $\lambda_k=\sigma_k^2$, we have that
$||P_{U_{i}}-P_{U^*}||=\mathcal{O}((\frac{\sigma_{r+1}}{\sigma_r})^{2i})$. By a similar argument $||P_{V_{i}}-P_{V^*}||=\mathcal{O}((\frac{\sigma_{r+1}}{\sigma_r})^{2i})$. $\blacksquare$
In our case, $M=L+S$, with $L \in \mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n}$ and $S$ is a perturbation matrix, then $\sigma_{r+1}$ will be much smaller than $\sigma_{r}$ and the error will be largely decreased in each iteration.
We would like to stress that although we do not provide an algebraic proof for $B_i \in \textrm{SPD}_r$ due to its complexity,
Lemma \ref{lemmaSPDLimit} along with the continuity of eigenvalues argument guarantee that
$B_i \in \textrm{SPD}_r$ when we are near an optimum. Starting with $B_0=I_r$ then for the first iteration $B_1$
we have $B_1=\textit{Sym}(U_1^TMV_1)= U_1^TMV_1\in \text{SPD}_r$,
and according to Figure \ref{fig:svd} very near the optimum, thus we can ensure that the whole sequence $\{B_i\}$ is
in $\textrm{SPD}_r$.
This is not a complete proof, but
Theorem \ref{TheoremGlobalMinimum} ensures global convergence despite the nature of $B_i$.
Thus at some point $B_i$ will be in $\textrm{SPD}_r$, which is also shown to always occur in our extensive numerical experiments, even starting from random $B_0$.
\subsection{Polar Factorization on the Fixed-Rank Manifold}
\label{sec:polar}
Imposing rank constraints requires an efficient way of computing the projection of an arbitrary matrix $M \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ with arbitrary rank $k\geq r$
onto the fixed-rank manifold $\mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n}$. A simple solution is provided by the Eckartââ‚-¬â€œYoung theorem~\cite{SVD}, which shows that the optimization problem (\ref{eq:Eck}):
\begin{equation}
\textrm{min}_{\textrm{rank}(L)= r}\norm{M-L}_F^2,
\label{eq:Eck}
\end{equation}
\vspace{-2mm}
\noindent is solved by the truncated SVD (TSVD) of $M$. Despite the success of the TSVD as a tool for producing low-rank approximations, and the many available improvements, as for instance the usage of random projections\cite{Halko}, some problems require the computation of many TSVDs (typically one per iteration) of very large matrices. Thus an efficient alternative to the usual TSVD algorithm is required.
In this section we propose the method \textit{FixedRankOptStep} (Algorithm~\ref{Alg-FRStep}), which computes a fast approximate solution to the projection of a matrix onto the fixed-rank manifold, like the given by the TSVD but much faster.
Additionally, in the Appendix we also propose the method \textit{FixedRankOptFull} (Algorithm~\ref{Alg-FROpt}) that can be seen as a series of iterations of the \textit{FixedRankOptStep} algorithm, providing a solution with a prescribed accuracy and with Q-linear convergence rate to the minimization problem (\ref{eq:Eck}) living on $\mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n}$.
The \textit{FixedRankOptStep} algorithm is suitable for large-scale problems where many TSVDs of large matrices are required, and an approximate solution is faster and enough for convergence, as we will show later.
Following~\cite{Meyer}, we use a polar factorization on $\mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n}$ suggested by the TSVD. Given a matrix
$L \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ of rank $r$, its TSVD factorization is
\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{equation}
L=U\Sigma V^T,
\end{equation}
\noindent where $U\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $V\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}$ and $\Sigma=\text{diag}(\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r)$. Then, a transformation
\begin{equation}
(U,\Sigma, V)\rightarrow (U O,O^T\Sigma O, V O),
\end{equation}
\noindent where $O\!\in\! O_r$, does not change $L$, and allows to write it as
\begin{equation}
L=U'B V'^T,
\end{equation}
\noindent where now $B=O^T\Sigma O\in \textrm{SPD}_r$, $U'=UO$, and $V'=VO$. Thus, the fixed-rank manifold can be seen as the quotient manifold
$(\textrm{St}_{m,r}\times \textrm{SPD}_r\times \textrm{St}_{n,r})/O_r$. From this, we reformulate (\ref{eq:Eck}) in $\mathcal{F}^{(r)}_{m,n}$ as the solution of
(\ref{eq:MinimizationFixedRank}).
\setlength{\textfloatsep}{0mm}
\vspace{-1mm}
\begin{equation}
\textrm{min}_{U\in \textrm{St}_{m,r},B\in \textrm{SPD}_r,V\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}}\norm{M-UB V^T}_F^2.
\label{eq:MinimizationFixedRank}
\vspace{1mm}
\end{equation}
The \textit{FixedRankOptStep} algorithm performs a single step of an alternating directions minimization (ADM)
on each of the submanifolds $\textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $\textrm{St}_{n,r}$ and $\textrm{SPD}_r$ (Algorithm~\ref{Alg-FRStep}).
\setlength{\textfloatsep}{0pt}
\begin{algorithm}
\algsetup{linenosize=\small}
\small
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE Data matrix $M\in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$, previous values $U_0\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $B_0\in \textrm{SPD}_r$, $V_0\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}$
\STATE $\bar{U} \leftarrow \textrm{arg min}_{U\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}}\norm{M-UB_0 V_0^T}_F^2 = P_\textrm{O}[MV_0B_0]$
\STATE $\bar{V} \leftarrow \textrm{arg min}_{V\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}}\norm{M-\bar{U}B_0 V^T}_F^2 = P_\textrm{O}[M^T\bar{U}B_0]$
\STATE $\bar{B} \leftarrow \textrm{arg min}_{B\in \textrm{SPD}_r}\norm{M-\bar{U}B \bar{V}^T}_F^2=Sym(\bar{U}^TM\bar{V})$
\RETURN{$\bar{U}\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}$, $\bar{B}\in \textrm{SPD}_r$, $\bar{V}\in \textrm{St}_{n,r}$. }
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{\textit{FixedRankOptStep} Algorithm}
\label{Alg-FRStep}
\end{algorithm}
\subsubsection{\bf Minimization on the Stiefel Manifold}
The minimization subproblems on Stiefel manifolds involving $U$ and $V$ in Algorithm~\ref{Alg-FRStep}, are not the standard Stiefel Procrustes Problem~\cite{Stiefel-Procrustes}. Here, the Stiefel matrix is left-multiplying instead of right-multiplying, as usually, which allows to provide a fast closed-form solution by using the Orthogonal Procrustes Problem (OPP)~\cite{Orth-Procrustes}, as shown in (\ref{eq:OrthogonalProcrustes}):
\setlength{\textfloatsep}{-8pt}
\begin{equation}
\textrm{min}_{U\in \textrm{St}_{m,r}}\norm{M-UBV^T}_F^2 \Rightarrow\quad U=P_{\textrm{O}}[MVB],
\label{eq:OrthogonalProcrustes}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $P_{\textrm{O}}[A]$ denotes the projector onto the Stiefel Manifold. This can be efficiently computed through a skinny SVD as $A= Q\Sigma S^T \,,Q\in\textrm{St}_{m,r}\,,S\in O_r \Rightarrow P_{\textrm{O}}[A]=QS^T$. Alternatively, if $\text{rank}(A)=r$ (maximal rank, as we shall assume in the following), it can be computed as $P_{\textrm{O}}[A]=A(A^TA)^{-1/2}$. This shows that $P_{\textrm{O}}[A]$ always exists and it is unique. A similar result holds for the minimization of $V$ by simply transposing (\ref{eq:OrthogonalProcrustes}).
\subsubsection{\bf Minimization on the SPD manifold}
The minimization subproblem on the SPD manifold is more challenging. The reason is that, although convex, the SPD manifold is an open manifold and therefore the existence of a global minimum is not guaranteed. Its closure is the SPSD manifold, and there the existence of a solution is neither guaranteed. However, we shall see that in our case there exists a minimun in $\text{SPD}_r$. Let us analyse this by first introducing a novel projector onto the SPD manifold. To this end we consider the SPD Procrustes Problem~\cite{SPDProcrustes} (\ref{SPDProcrustes}):
\vspace{-3mm}
\begin{equation}
\scalemath{0.98}{
\textrm{min}_{B\in \textrm{SPD}_r}\norm{M-UBV^T}_F^2 \Rightarrow B=P_{\textrm{SPD}}[U^TMV],}
\label{SPDProcrustes}
\vspace{-0mm}
\end{equation}
\noindent where the projector $P_{\textrm{SPD}}[A]$ is simply given by $P_{\textrm{SPD}}[A]=\textit{Sym}(A)$. In general, the solution of the SPD Procrustes Problem requires solving a Lyapunov equation~\cite{SPDProcrustes}, but in our case is simpler since $U$ and $V$ are orthogonal. Although in general there is not guarantee that $B=\textit{Sym}(U^TMV)$ is positive definite, we can assure it for our formulation, see the Appendix.
|
\section{}
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
Recent results at the LHC have uncovered hitherto unknown features in high multiplicity events. Perhaps the most
interesting result is the discovery of sQGP-like (ridge-like and flow-like behavior) features in small systems like those created in pp and p-Pb collisions~\cite{Khachatryan:2010gv,CMS:2012qk,Abelev:2012ola,ABELEV:2013wsa,Abelev:2013haa,OrtizVelasquez2014146}. The origin of such effects is still far from being understood, for
instance, it has been shown that hydro calculations, where the formation of a hot and dense QCD medium is implicitly assumed, can describe qualitatively many features of data~\cite{PhysRevC.88.014903,PhysRevLett.111.172303,PhysRevLett.113.252301}. But, other approaches suggest that the phenomenon can be produced by initial state effects~\cite{Ma:2014pva,Schenke:2015aqa,Dumitru:2010iy}. For instance, Pythia 8.180~\cite{Sjostrand:2007gs} gives an effect reminiscent of the collective flow well known from heavy-ion collisions~\cite{Ortiz:2013yxa}. This flow-like behavior is attributed to multi-parton interactions (MPI) and color reconnection (CR)~\cite{Sjostrand:2013cya}.
The impression that the understanding of the initial stages of the heavy ion collisions is
reasonably known contrasts with the opinion of a representative
number of physicists who emphasize the fact that the understanding of
processes transforming the initial stage into a hydrodynamical final
state is still incomplete and requires further theoretical and
experimental knowledge~\cite{Antinori:2014xma}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.5\textwidth}{!}{%
\includegraphics{./cNchVsMpiNorm1}
}
\caption{(Color online). Mid-rapidity ($|\eta|<1$) charged hadron multiplicity as a function of the number of multi-partron interactions for \ensuremath{\rm pp}\xspace collisions at $\sqrt{s}=$ 7 TeV simulated with Pythia 8.180 tune 4C. Each multiplicity interval is normalized to one. The solid line illustrates the average number of MPI in a given multiplicity interval.}
\label{fig:1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In this work the results of an event shape analysis, specifically, a selection on transverse spherocity of mid-rapidity charged hadrons, applied to events generated with Pythia 8.180 are presented. The goal of the study is to show that the use of event shapes allows to extract more information from data. Namely, this technique opens the possibility to isolate jetty-like (high \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace jets) and isotropic (large number of low $Q^{2}$ partonic scatterings) events~\cite{Cuautle:2014yda}. It is worth to notice that the procedure is inverse to the usual approach. Namely, in the majority of cases one tries to apply models, which successfully describe heavy ion collision data, to smaller system,
sometimes forgetting that the premises valid in large systems are not
at all satisfied in smaller ones. For example, the requirement that the
Knudsen number $K= \lambda/R$, where $\lambda$ is the mean free path and $R$ is
the dimension of the system, must be small to allow for a rapid
equilibration; is not really warranted in small systems or similarly, for
particles that exhibit small interaction cross section with the medium.
With the exception of the anisotropic flow measurements~\cite{PhysRevC.90.054901}, where the so-called non-flow contributions are well under control, most of the observables used to study the properties of the hot and dense QCD matter contain a mixture of contributions from the different components present in the collisions i.e., soft and hard QCD processes. For example, as illustrated in this work~\cite{Veldhoen:2012ge}, the identified hadron production measured in central Pb-Pb\xspace collisions is completely different in the jet region and outside the jet peak (bulk)\footnote{A similar result has been obtained from the analysis of p-Pb\xspace data using jet reconstruction and strange hadrons~\cite{Zimmermann:2015npa}.}. However, the low \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace ($<3$ GeV/$c$) part of the inclusive spectra is used to extract expansion velocity and the temperature at the kinetic freeze-out of the system~\cite{PhysRevLett.109.252301}. In this context, it is argued
that the implementation of an event shape analysis would allow for a better
understanding of non-radial flow effects.
\section{Transverse spherocity}
In the present work, the mid-rapidity charged hadron transverse spherocity, \ensuremath{S_{\rm 0}}\xspace, is used to characterize the events through the geometrical distribution of the \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace's of the charged hadrons, which is by definition collinear and infrared safe. The restriction to
the transverse plane avoids the bias from the boost along the
beam axis~\cite{Banfi:2010xy}. It is defined for a unit transverse vector $\mathbf{\hat{n}}$ which minimizes the ratio below:
\begin{equation}
S_{\rm 0} = \frac{\pi^{2}}{4} \left( \frac{\sum_{i} |{{\overrightarrow{\ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace}}}_{i} \times \mathbf{\hat{n}}|}{\sum_{i} {\ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace}_{i}} \right)^{2}.
\end{equation}
By construction, the limits of the variable are related to specific configurations in the transverse plane
\begin{displaymath}
S_{\rm 0} = \left\lbrace \begin{array}{ll}
0 & \textrm{``pencil-like'' limit (hard events)} \\
1 & \textrm{``isotropic'' limit (soft events)}
\end{array} \right. \,.
\end{displaymath}
\noindent
In this study, inelastic \ensuremath{\rm pp}\xspace collisions were generated with Pythia 8.180 tune 4C, this tune describes qualitatively many features of the LHC \ensuremath{\rm pp}\xspace data~\cite{Corke:2010yf}. The event shape was computed considering only primary charged particles at mid-rapidity ($|\eta|<$1) and in the transverse momentum interval $0.15< \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace < 10$ GeV/$c$. Transverse spherocity was only defined for events with more than two hadrons. Different observables like jet production and identified hadron production were studied at mid-rapidity for different \ensuremath{S_{\rm 0}}\xspace and multiplicity (\ensuremath{N_{\rm ch}}\xspace) intervals.
Event shapes studied by experiments at LHC, e.g. ATLAS~\cite{Aad:2012fza} and ALICE~\cite{Abelev:2012sk}, have shown an interesting result: a good agreement between data and models is observed for the average event shape, while the event shape distributions exhibit large discrepancies. This is a very important message: the average measurements do not contain enough information, hence, care needs to be taken when extracting physics from models. For example, in the concrete case of the event generators reported in these references~\cite{Aad:2012fza, Abelev:2012sk}, they overestimate significantly the contribution of back-to-back jets events and underestimate the contribution of isotropic events at high multiplicity.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.85\textwidth}{!}{%
\includegraphics{./so_zbin1}
\includegraphics{./mpi_zbin1}
}
\resizebox{0.85\textwidth}{!}{%
\includegraphics{./so_zbin7}
\includegraphics{./mpi_zbin7}
}
\vspace*{0.5cm}
\caption{(Color online). Transverse spherocity distributions for $\sqrt{s}=$ 7 TeV \ensuremath{\rm pp}\xspace collisions producing low (upper left) and high (bottom left) mid-rapidity charged hadron multiplicity. The corresponding \ensuremath{N_{\rm mpi}}\xspace distributions are shown in the right panels.}
\label{fig:2}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\section{Multi-parton interactions, event multiplicity and transverse spherocity}
MPI are a theoretically ~\cite{PhysRevD.36.2019} expected phenomenon, their effects
have been observed by several experiments~\cite{Zeus:2008, CDF:1997, D0:2010}. MPI in Pythia are crucial for
the description of observables like multiplicity distributions, underlying event,
correlations of the average transverse sphericity with multiplicity, and, together
with color reconnection, to produce flow-like patterns.
Figure~\ref{fig:1} shows the correlation between mid-rapidity charged hadron multiplicity and the number of multi-parton interactions (\ensuremath{N_{\rm mpi}}\xspace) for \ensuremath{\rm pp}\xspace collisions at $\sqrt{s}=$ 7 TeV. Two features are observed. First, the width of the distribution for multi-parton interactions prevents using multiplicity alone as a selective parameter. Namely, in a given multiplicity interval there are events emanating from a very different number of MPI, hence of very different nature. The second feature is the tendency of saturation which is observed at high multiplicity. ALICE has measured the number of independent sources of particle production as a function of the event multiplicity using an approach based on two-particle azimuthal correlations, and it has reported a saturation effect at high multiplicity~\cite{ALICEwpazC}.
The left panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:2} show the transverse spherocity spectra for \ensuremath{\rm pp}\xspace
collisions at 7 TeV for low and high
multiplicity events corresponding to values of ${\rm d}\ensuremath{N_{\rm ch}}\xspace/{\rm
d}\eta$ equal to one and seven times the average value obtained for minimum bias
(MB) \ensuremath{\rm pp}\xspace collisions, respectively. The
right panels show the multi-parton interaction distributions for both multiplicity
classes. A depletion of the low \ensuremath{S_{\rm 0}}\xspace part in the high multiplicity events compared
with the low multiplicities is observed. The
phenomenon is accompanied by a much higher number of multi-parton interaction,
namely, for isotropic events a greater average \ensuremath{N_{\rm mpi}}\xspace is obtained than for jetty-like
events. These results suggest the use of event shapes for a better
selectivity of the events with a certain number of MPI.
\section{Results}
\subsection{Jet production as a function of multiplicity and transverse spherocity}
As discussed earlier, event shapes are tools which allow the classification of the events according to their jet content. To probe the tool, this section shows the results of applying a jet finder to samples of events, where a pre-selection based on transverse spherocity was implemented. The jet finder Fast jet 3.0.6~\cite{Cacciari:2011ma} has been used, that implements the anti-$k_{\rm T}$ algorithm with a jet radius of 0.4. The minimum jet \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace was set to 10 GeV/$c$.
The left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:3} shows the average number of jets as a function of the event multiplicity. Results are presented for different \ensuremath{S_{\rm 0}}\xspace intervals. As expected from transverse spherocity definition, for isotropic events ($\ensuremath{S_{\rm 0}}\xspace>0.8$) the average number of jets is below 1. This number increases when reducing transverse spherocity. Overall, the jet production rises with the event multiplicity, but the largest increase is seen in jetty-like events ($\ensuremath{S_{\rm 0}}\xspace<0.2$). A complementary study is presented in the right panel, where the average jet \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace is plotted as a function of multiplicity. For isotropic events, the small fraction of jets which survives after the \ensuremath{S_{\rm 0}}\xspace cut, exhibits an average \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace which is flat and close to 10 GeV/$c$. On the contrary, a strong dependence is found for jetty-like events where at high multiplicity the average \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace is above 30 GeV/$c$.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.85\textwidth}{!}{%
\includegraphics{./averageNjvsZ}
\includegraphics{./averagepTjvsZ}
}
\vspace*{0.5cm}
\caption{(Color online). Average number of jets, reconstructed with Fast jet 3.0.6, as a function of the event multiplicity is shown in the left panel. The average jet \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace as a function of the event multiplicity is shown in the right panel. Multiplicity is normalized to the average \ensuremath{N_{\rm ch}}\xspace obtained for MB events.}
\label{fig:3}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.85\textwidth}{!}{%
\includegraphics{./inel_vs_high_multiplicity_comp0_ratio_ptopi}
\includegraphics{./inel_vs_high_multiplicity_comp1_ratio_ptopi}
}
\vspace*{0.5cm}
\caption{(Color online). Proton yield normalized to pion yield as a function of transverse momentum. The result for MB is compared to that for high multiplicity events (left). Also a comparison with the cases where an additional selection on transverse spherocity is implemented (right).}
\label{fig:4}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.98\textwidth}{!}{%
\includegraphics{./hspectraNchBin4BinSo0}
\includegraphics{./hspectraNchBin6BinSo0}
\includegraphics{./hspectraNchBin8BinSo0}
}
\resizebox{0.98\textwidth}{!}{%
\includegraphics{./hspectraNchBin4BinSo8}
\includegraphics{./hspectraNchBin6BinSo8}
\includegraphics{./hspectraNchBin8BinSo8}
}
\vspace*{0.5cm}
\caption{(Color online). Transverse momentum distributions of identified hadrons for jetty-like (upper) and isotropic (bottom) events. Results for three different multiplicity classes are shown. A simultaneous blast-wave fit has been implemented, the results (lines) are plotted together with the \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace spectra.}
\label{fig:5}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
The same trend is observed if, instead of jets, inclusive charged hadrons are considered. In this case \ensuremath{\langle p_{\rm T} \rangle}\xspace in low transverse spherocity events shows a steeper rise with multiplicity than in the MB case. In contrast \ensuremath{\langle p_{\rm T} \rangle}\xspace , for isotropic events shows a weaker multiplicity dependence. This suggests that the choice of narrow \ensuremath{S_{\rm 0}}\xspace bins would allow studies with much less fluctuations.
\subsection{Proton-to-pion ratio as a function of multiplicity and transverse spherocity}
The particle ratios are among the important observables in nucleus interactions, for example, the proton yield normalized to that for pions encodes flow information and allows to test new hadronization mechanisms like quark recombination/coalescence~\cite{PhysRevC.82.034907}. Again, multiplicity alone is not able to display prominently the important features. The left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:4} shows that the ratio as a function of \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace is approximately the same for inelastic (minimum bias) and high multiplicity events. In fact, a weak flow-like effect is observed, namely, the depletion of the ratio at low \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace for high multiplicity events with respect to the MB case. For comparison, in the right panel a selection using transverse spherocity is shown, in this case the ratio for low \ensuremath{S_{\rm 0}}\xspace events does not exhibit a ``bump''. On the other hand, for isotropic events (large \ensuremath{N_{\rm mpi}}\xspace implying stronger flow-like behavior) the ratio displays a similar behavior to that observed in LHC data~\cite{Veldhoen:2012ge}. At low \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace there is a depletion when the multiplicity increases, then a crossing point is observed, in this case at \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace$\approx$2.5 GeV/$c$. This crossing is followed by an enhancement and, at higher \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace ($>8$ GeV/$c$), the ratio returns to the value obtained for MB.
This result carries two messages: the jetty-like events have, if any, a much lower flow-like effect than isotropic events; and the \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace spectra and particle ratios should be extracted for both event classes in order to understand the role of jets when one studies, for example, radial flow.
\subsection{Results from the blast-wave analysis and comparison with experimental data}
It has been discussed in a previous letter~\cite{Ortiz:2013yxa} that the transverse momentum distributions of identified hadrons obtained from Pythia 8.180 exhibit flow-like features, the effect has been traced to color reconnection and multi-parton interactions. In heavy ion collisions the radial expansion can be extracted through a blast-wave analysis, where, a simultaneous fit to identified hadron \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace distributions for each multiplicity bin is done. This parameterization assumes a locally thermalized medium, expanding collectively with a common velocity field and undergoing an instantaneous common freeze-out~\cite{PhysRevC.48.2462}. The simultaneous fit to all particle species under consideration can provide insight on the common kinetic freeze-out properties of the system. However, one needs to keep in mind that the values which come out from the fit depend substantially on the fit range.
In this section the results from the blast-wave analysis reported by ALICE for p-Pb\xspace collisions are compared with those obtained from a similar analysis applied to \ensuremath{\rm pp}\xspace collisions simulated with Pythia 8.180 at $\sqrt{s}=$5.02 TeV. The parameters extracted from the fits are studied as a function of event multiplicity and transverse spherocity. For the calculation of the transverse spherocity only primary charged hadrons with transverse momenta above 0.15 GeV/$c$ and $|\eta|<1$ are considered. The event multiplicity (\ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace spectra) is (are) calculated counting primary charged hadrons within $|\eta|<1$ ($|y|<1$). The transverse momentum distributions of the particle species used in the blast-wave analysis are displayed in Table~\ref{tab:1} along with their corresponding fit ranges. Figure~\ref{fig:5} shows
some examples of \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace distributions at high multiplicity and for two extreme transverse spherocity event classes: jetty-like ($\ensuremath{S_{\rm 0}}\xspace<0.2$) and isotropic ($\ensuremath{S_{\rm 0}}\xspace>0.8$). Within 10\% all the MC \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace spectra are well described by the blast-wave model assuming a common transverse velocity $\langle \beta_{\rm T} \rangle$ and temperature $T_{\rm kin}$. Using somewhat different fit ranges for pions, kaons, protons and $\Lambda$; a similar observation is mentioned by the ALICE Collaboration in the analysis of p-Pb\xspace data~\cite{Abelev:2013haa}.
\begin{table}[b
\begin{center}
\caption{\label{tab:1} Fit ranges used in the blast-wave analysis.}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\hline \hline
\textrm{Particle species} &
\textrm{ Fit range }\\
\hline
$\pi^{+}+\pi^{-}$ & 0.5-1.0 GeV/$c$ \\
${\rm K^{+}+K^{-}}$ & 0.3-1.5 GeV/$c$ \\
${\rm K_{S}^{0}}$ & 0.3-1.5 GeV/$c$ \\
${\rm p + \bar{p}}$ & 0.8-2.0 GeV/$c$ \\
$\phi$ & 0.8-2.0 GeV/$c$ \\
$\Lambda$ & 1.0-2.1GeV/$c$ \\
$\Xi^{-}+\bar{\Xi}^{+}$ & 1.2-2.6 GeV/$c$ \\
$\Omega^{-}+\bar{\Omega}^{+}$ & 1.3-2.8 GeV/$c$ \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Finally, Fig.~\ref{fig:6} shows the evolution of $\langle \beta_{\rm T} \rangle$ vs. $T_{\rm kin}$ with event multiplicity and transverse spherocity. The results are compared with ALICE p-Pb\xspace data. The low transverse spherocity (jetty-like) events do
exhibit a high $\langle \beta_{\rm T} \rangle$ value with a low $T_{\rm
kin}$, while the high spherocity events exhibit a
lower $\langle \beta_{\rm T} \rangle$ and higher $T_{\rm kin}$. This represents in
retrospect an evidence: the jetty-like events by their nature will
have a tendency to mimic flow, consequently, in radial flow studies
care needs to be taken to avoid the non flow effects. The comparison of the
simulations with the experiment
demonstrates that in the treatment of the blast wave analysis one has
to be careful to identify effects coming from jets from those from
collective phenomena.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.5\textwidth}{!}{%
\includegraphics{./BlastWaveTwoExtemeEventClassesWithALICE}
}
\caption{(Color online). Results from the combined blast-wave fit to the charged pion, kaon and (anti)proton \ensuremath{p_{\rm{T}}}\xspace distributions in \ensuremath{\rm pp}\xspace collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 5.02 TeV. The distributions were generated with Pythia 8.180, results are presented for jetty-like events (blue circles) and isotropic events (red circles). MC results are compared with experimental data (black squares).}
\label{fig:6}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
The transverse spherocity has been used to study the influence of the multiparton
interactions on the final state in pp collisions. It was demonstrated that the
number of multi-parton interactions is strongly correlated with the final event
multiplicity at least up to a point where a saturation of the number of
multi-parton interactions occurs. The transverse spherociy selection allows to
identify and analyze two extreme cases: the jetty-like and the isotropic events
situated at the two ends of the transverse spherocity spectrum. In the transverse spherocity event classes, narrower \ensuremath{N_{\rm mpi}}\xspace distributions are achieved than in the case without any selection on event shape.
To illustrate the application of these variables, different studies were done, namely, jet production, identified particle ratios and blast-wave
analysis. The results show the benefits of the combined multiplicity and event shape analysis.
We conclude that a more widespread use of event shape variables in the analysis of
the data may bring us a much better understanding of the detail of the collisions.
The results using Pythia 8.180 simulations are qualitatively very similar to the
experimental observations in p-Pb\xspace and Pb-Pb\xspace data (e.g., different particle composition in the jet and in the bulk regions). Suggesting that more differential studies using event shapes reveal interesting features which could be exploited to get physical information as well as to improve models used in the MC generators.
\section{Acknowledgments}
The authors acknowledge the technical support of Luciano Diaz. Support for this work has been received by CONACyT
under the Grant No. 260440; and by DGAPA-UNAM under PAPIIT grants IN105113, IN107911, IN108414 and IA102515. The EPLANET funding has facilitated the necessary meetings at CERN.
\bibliographystyle{elsarticle-num}
|
\section{Introduction}
In environments like MS Excel, the set of built-in features designed to support the users when testing or debugging their spreadsheet programs is quite limited. Examples of the few available features include the visualization of individual cell dependencies or the markup of cells containing suspicious formulas (``smells'' in the sense of \cite{abreu2014smelling} or \cite{Hermans2012a}). Over the last decades a variety of different tools and techniques were proposed in the research literature to help the user avoid, locate and remove errors in spreadsheets~\cite{Jannach2014JSS}. The proposed approaches range from intelligent visualizations over test case generation to the application of novel debugging techniques.
Many of these testing and debugging approaches assume that the users are able to provide test cases, which contain the expected values for the output cells of their spreadsheets \cite{Abraham:2007:GSD:1248820.1248858, JannachEtAl2014ASE}; some techniques require the user at least to reliably indicate if an output cell value or a test case is correct or faulty \cite{Abraham:2006:ATA:1174509.1174656,Hofer2013EEF}.
Providing expected values or even assessing the correctness of individual values might, however, be challenging for the user in particular when the spreadsheets are large and when no known-to-be-correct test cases are available.
We therefore propose to (automatically) modularize the spreadsheet under investigation and ask the user for feedback on the correctness of calculations of smaller and more comprehensible spreadsheet \emph{fragments}. These fragments in some sense correspond to the concept of \emph{unit tests} in standard software development processes based on which the correctness of smaller functional parts of the program can be validated.
The proposed fragment extraction approach is also related to automated refactoring techniques for long methods in imperative programs based, e.g., on control flow and data flow graphs like in \cite{Maruyama:2001:AMR:375212.375233}. However, spreadsheets have no standard control flow graphs and the data flow graphs are much simpler, because the formulas in the cells do not directly change the values of other cells.
Existing refactoring approaches therefore cannot be directly applied and further investigations are required to assess how these methods can be adapted to be applicable for the special and defined structure of spreadsheets.
\section{Example}
Consider the example in Figure \ref{fig:figure_1}, which shows the dependency structure of a typical financial calculation sheet adapted from \cite{JannachEtAl2014ASE}. In the upper part of the spreadsheet (Fragment A), monthly sales data are aggregated with the help of a number of copy-equivalent rows. In the lower part (Fragment B), further data aggregation is done and additional calculations are made on the aggregate values.
Structurally or semantically different cells are denoted by differently styled circles, e.g., the empty circles denote input cells or fixed parameters.
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.477\textwidth]{figure_1.pdf}
\caption{A typical spreadsheet with fragments.}
\label{fig:figure_1}
\end{figure}
Let us assume that the spreadsheet developer observes that the ``final outcome'' in the lower right part of the spreadsheet (Cell Z) only meets his expectations for some but not all tested input value constellations. However, providing the exact expected values -- as required by some automated debugging methods \cite{Abraham:2007:GSD:1248820.1248858, JannachEtAl2014ASE} -- might be cumbersome for the user and error-prone in particular when the spreadsheet is complex.
In this example, we could -- as indicated in Figure \ref{fig:figure_1} -- have two fragments that can be tested individually and in the case of Fragment A use one row of the spreadsheet as a representative for the other copy-equivalent rows.
These fragments could be defined manually by the user; in our work, we are, however, interested in techniques to automatically identify possible fragments and provide adequate tool support.
\section{Design Considerations - Technical Approach}
\subsection{End User Perspective}
As spreadsheet developers are usually not IT experts or programmers, special care has to be taken when designing a tool for fragment-based testing and debugging. We therefore plan to integrate the sketched techniques in our model-based debugging plug-in to Excel called \textsc{\small{Exquisite}} \cite{JannachEtAl2014ASE}. When using this tool, the users can stay within their usual spreadsheet environment; appropriate user-oriented metaphors for those concepts that are not part of typical spreadsheet tools (like test cases, fragments, or unit tests), however, still have to be found and evaluated with users.
Another open question in that context is related to the optimal complexity of the fragments a user should work on. If the fragments are too small, test cases for too many fragments have to be defined by the user; if they are complex and span major parts of the spreadsheet, the cognitive effort for the user when providing the test cases might be too high.
\subsection{Automated Extraction of Fragments}
The main goal of our work is to develop algorithms and heuristics to automatically extract potentially overlapping fragments that are manageable in size and in the best case semantically connected. These fragments can then for example serve as a basis for the manual or automated creation of test cases, e.g., using property-based testing techniques \cite{Fink:1997:PTN:263244.263267}, where the goal is to automatically create test cases which falsify user-specified properties of the output values. In another scenario, the fragments can be used to inspect parts of the spreadsheet which are considered to be ``suspicious'' as a result of a diagnosis or smell detection technique.
We are currently exploring the following fragment construction strategies.
\subsubsection{Collapsing Copy-Equivalent Structures}
In Figure \ref{fig:figure_1}, only the last four cells on the right of Fragment A (including Cell X) contain formulas. When the right-most cells of each row are considered suspicious, it can be sufficient to create a fragment which comprises \emph{one representative row}, so that the user only has to create one test case for all rows.
On the other hand, the left-most cell of Fragment B (Cell Y) is based on the values of several copy-equivalent cells and, e.g., corresponds to the sum of the monthly sales figures. If we defined this cell and a subset of its inputs as another Fragment C (not shown in Figure \ref{fig:figure_1}), the fragment could contain two or more of the copy-equivalent rows such that the user can validate the correctness of the aggregation function, which would be impossible when there is only one input row. With this second technique the user could, however, miss range errors such as an omitted cell of a sum.
\subsubsection{Limiting the Dependency Paths}
Fragments of manageable size like Fragment B in Figure \ref{fig:figure_1} can be obtained by limiting the depth and maybe also the breadth of the dependency paths leading to a suspicious cell. The depth limitation could be based on simple path length restriction heuristics or based on structural or semantic considerations, e.g., by observing that we encounter a set of copy-equivalent cells. Existing techniques developed for spreadsheet visualization and comprehension could be applicable in that context.
\subsection{Interactive Testing and Debugging}
The provision of adequate tool support when testing or debugging a calculation fragment is finally a crucial part of our approach. From a UI perspective, one could for example create a new worksheet which only contains the cells and formulas of the fragment under investigation. This could however remove context information, as neighboring cells outside the fragment would not be visible. Therefore, we propose to only visually dim the cells outside the fragment and make them read-only to help the user focus on the current task.
For debugging purposes, our model-based diagnosis approach presented in \cite{JannachEtAl2014ASE} can be used to find the possible causes whenever there is a discrepancy between the expected and the calculated value of an output cell of a fragment. Because of the small sizes of the fragments, we conjecture that the combination of these approaches could help to quickly find the faulty formulas.
In addition, the proposed test and debugging environment should be able to automatically create appropriate test cases which are easy to validate manually. Again, existing approaches for test case generation from the literature should be applied. Note that when creating these test cases, input values have to be generated only for the cells at the fragment borders (e.g., Cell Y in Fragment B). The developed software environment and Excel plug-in has furthermore to be extended in a way that test cases can be easily stored, adapted and automatically executed, e.g., for regression testing.
\section{Summary}
We argue that providing exact values for expected calculation outcomes in spreadsheet testing and debugging scenarios might be too challenging for users in some situations. We therefore propose to further investigate approaches in which the given spreadsheet is decomposed into smaller fragments which can be more easily validated by the user.
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
The Advanced Thermosphere Modelling of Orbital Prediction (ATMOP) project was designed to provide a European capability for nowcasting and forecasting of the thermosphere. Changes in thermospheric density affect the drag experienced by low-orbiting satellites and hence their orbits. The resulting loss in orbit predictability is problematic for space agencies and satellite operators, with thousands of objects orbiting the Earth and the majority of them in low-earth orbit \citep[see review by][]{vallado14}. Space weather is one cause for these density changes, as the associated changes in solar or geomagnetic activity affects the coupled thermosphere-ionosphere system \citep{rees89,huba14}.
A major focus of ATMOP was to investigate the benefit of data assimilation to predictive models. While this is a standard method in meteorological forecasting, it is a relatively new approach within the space weather community. This paper compares both semi-empirical and physical models using this new approach. Semi-empirical models are more rapid to run, and typically outperform physical models, hence are currently used for operational orbit computations. However, the physical models may perform better in unusual conditions, such as those encountered in geomagnetic storms. Two models are the focus of this work - the first a version of the semi-empirical Drag Temperature Model \citep[DTM-2012;][]{bruinsma03}, and the second the physical Thermosphere Ionosphere Electrodynamics General Circulation Model \citep[TIEGCM;][]{richmond92}.
A large amount of previous work has examined the relative accuracy of thermospheric general circulation models compared to empirical methods. For example, \citet{anderson98} intercompared five models including TIEGCM, in order to determine why several physical models consistently underestimate the ionospheric F region peak electron density. \citet{qian12} examined temporal and spatial variations of thermospheric density via a comparison of TIEGCM with an empirical model, NRLMSISE-00 \citep{picone02}. In-situ observations from satellites are used in these comparisons to determine whether the models accurately represent thermospheric conditions \citep[see also,][]{buonsanto97,pavlov00,forbes05,sutton05,tsagouri13}. Readily available satellite data are vital for space weather operations, being used in data assimilation techniques to improve the thermospheric models that are used to predict the drag experienced by low-orbiting spacecraft \citep{rowell06}.
A typical atmospheric model set up with boundary conditions closely matching reality will nevertheless produce predictions which gradually diverge from reality due to incomplete characterisation of the physics and chaotic effects. Thermospheric models are also strongly influenced by external drivers; geomagnetic and solar drivers (which are generally represented by way of input indices to the models), and the lower and upper boundaries implemented to represent the interaction with the lower atmosphere below and plasmasphere above. By assimilating observations into a physical model at a given time, model fields at that time can be brought closer to the real data values. Bringing the model state closer to reality reduces the divergence of the ensuing prediction from reality, thereby increasing the accuracy of the model forecast. Data assimilation repeats this process regularly, to provide a running forecast with better overall accuracy.
Much previous thermospheric data assimilation work has focused on using Kalman filters \citep{rowell04}, particularly the development of ensemble Kalman filtering methods \citep[EnKF;][]{codrescu04,matsuo12} with recent advances in computer technology. \citet{matsuo12} found the root-mean-square (RMS) error of model-predicted neutral mass density could be reduced by up to 50\% in the case that as many as nine ensemble members are used. \cite{codrescu04} found the error of their model initial state reduced from $\sim$25\% to $\sim$10\% using an EnKF technique with ten members. \citet{matsuo13} used EnKF with inferred neutral density satellite observations to improve a model neutral density specification in the vicinity of the satellite. \citeauthor{matsuo13} found that a global impact was achieved if accompanied by the estimation of the primary driver of the density variable (such as solar EUV flux), highlighting the importance of external forcing to the system.
Two data assimilation methods were developed in ATMOP; one using DTM-2012, and the other TIEGCM. A version of DTM was developed that can assimilate total density data in near-real time, which will make orbit predictions significantly more accurate. Data assimilation techniques were also developed for use with TIEGCM with the aim to create a more physically accurate global analysis and forecast system for the thermosphere. While the assimilation methods developed are described in detail elsewhere \citep[see][and \emph{Henley et al}, manuscript in preparation]{bruinsma12}, this paper provides first results of an intercomparison of the newly developed models. Both TIEGCM and DTM-2012 are compared with observations taken at various periods throughout solar cycles 23 and 24 in order to determine if a more complex physical model with data assimilation could be more accurate for forecasting efforts than the currently-used empirical methods. This validation effort is crucial to determine if these new techniques are beneficial for current space weather operations. The observations and models used for the comparison will be outlined in Section~\ref{obs}, and methods used for analysis described in Section~\ref{method}. The results of the study will be presented in Section~\ref{results}, while some conclusions of the findings and possible future work will be discussed in Section~\ref{concl}.
\section{Observations and Models}
\label{obs}
Atmospheric drag on satellites varies strongly as a function of thermospheric mass density \citep[for further discussion see][]{qian12,vallado14}. This work uses in-situ observations of atmospheric densities in the upper thermosphere for both the data assimilation techniques and the validation and intercomparison of the model results. The thermospheric densities were inferred from accelerometers that fly on low-earth-orbiting satellites, namely the CHAllenging Minisatellite Payload \citep[CHAMP; ][]{wickert01} and the Gravity Recovery And Climate Experiment \citep[GRACE; ][]{tapley04}. See \citet{bruinsma04} for specific details on how the densities are calculated. The height at which the densities are available depends on the satellite orbital height; this is $\sim$450--300~km for CHAMP and $\sim$490--410~km for GRACE (as of 2014 October). The height value is dependant on the time period of observations; CHAMP data are available from 2000 to 2010, and GRACE data from 2002 to present. The satellites observe at $\sim$15 orbits per day at all $360^\circ$ of longitude, with a spacing of $25^\circ$ at the equator per day, and a latitude resolution of 0.5--1$^\circ$. The horizontal resolution is 80 and 40~km along the orbit for CHAMP and GRACE, respectively. Observations are made every 10~s with CHAMP and 5~s with GRACE. The satellite data have a mean and RMS observation error both ranging between 1--10\%, which is a function of latitude and geomagnetic activity.
The drag temperature model used for comparison in this paper, DTM-2012 (hereafter DTM), is an improved version of DTM-2009 \citep{bruinsma12} that is trained on a larger data set. It has been constructed using the full CHAMP and GRACE high-resolution accelerometer inferred density data sets, besides new mean total density data as well as historical mass spectrometer data. The 81-day mean and 1-day delayed solar radio flux at 10.7cm (F10.7) are used as solar inputs, and the A$_\mathrm{m}$ geomagnetic index is also used. DTM is constructed by fitting to the underlying density database, as good as possible in the least-squares sense, to reproduce the mean climatology of the thermosphere \citep[see][]{bruinsma04}. The result includes a density value at a particular latitude and longitude between 200--1000~km, with up to $1^\circ$ resolution. Errors on short time scales of a few days or less can be of the order of tens of percent. A more detailed description of the updated DTM with data assimilation can be found in \citet{bruinsma12}.
The physical model used in this work, TIEGCM, is a first-principles, three-dimensional, non-linear representation of the coupled thermosphere and ionosphere system. TIEGCM uses spherical geographic coordinates, with latitude ranging from $-87.5^\circ$ to $87.5^\circ$ in $5^\circ$ increments, longitude ranging from $-180^\circ$ to $180^\circ$ in $5^\circ$ increments, and a 60-second time step. The lower boundary at $\sim$97~km extends up to $\sim$500--700~km depending on solar activity. The migrating and semi-diurnal tides are specified at the lower boundary using the Global Scale Wave Model \citep{hagan95}, which does not consider the effects of planetary waves and non-migrating tides. The vertical coordinate is a log-pressure scale, ln(p$_\mathrm{0}$/p), where p is pressure and p$_\mathrm{0}$ is a reference pressure, and pressure levels range from $-7$ to $7$ increasing in half-scale-height increments.
Neutral density observations were assimilated into the model using an ensemble optimal interpolation method \citep[EnOI; ][]{oke02, evensen03}. EnOI uses an ensemble approach to help determine how much trust to put in the model prediction at any given time (as opposed to how much trust to put in the observations). An ensemble of nine models are run offline, with each model regularly perturbed with smoothed random temperature fluctuations. A background density error covariance matrix is then calculated from these non-assimilative, independent ensemble members. This is combined with the background and observations to produce a density analysis. The analysis is then converted to a temperature analysis (as density is a derived field in TIEGCM), which is used to initialise the model run. This is the first time an EnOI method has been used for thermospheric data assimilation, with much previous work focusing on EnKF (see Section~\ref{intro}). For further details on the assimilation scheme, see Henley et al$.$ (manuscript in preparation, 2015).
For consistency with DTM input parameters, TIEGCM was run using the Heelis high-latitude ion convection model \citep{heelis82} as a magnetospheric input, which uses F10.7 solar flux and K$_\mathrm{p}$ planetary geomagnetic index as inputs. The model provides various advantages for development, speed, robustness, and scientific return compared to empirical modelling. Results from TIEGCM have been previously compared favourably with CHAMP data on a large scale \citep{sutton08, qian12}, although it has also been noted that TIEGCM RMS errors typically gradually increase with a decline in solar activity \citep{kim11}.
\section{Comparison}
\label{method}
TIEGCM and DTM results were compared with CHAMP and GRACE observations at three periods throughout solar cycles 23 and 24. Solar equinox periods were selected for ease of comparison of model-run results. For solar minimum, a 60-day period was chosen beginning 2009 March 15, and for solar maximum another 60-day period beginning 2003 March 15 was selected. To examine the impact of more severe stormy conditions, a final 60-day period was examined beginning 2003 October 15, which encompasses the Hallowe'en storms. These storms are defined as a sequence of events between 2003 October 28 to November 4, during which massive solar flares and geomagnetic storms occurred. The impact of this event on the near-Earth environment has been heavily studied, including analysis of observations \citep[e.g.,][]{thomson04,mannucci05,bruinsma06} as well as the use of simulations \citep[e.g.,][]{toth07,manchester08}. \citet{gopalswamy05} gives a detailed review of the events, while \citet{oler04} outlines the prediction performance of space weather forecasting centres worldwide following these events.
A large database of observations were assimilated into DTM (see Section~\ref{obs}) before running the model on the time periods selected. TIEGCM was run with 1-hourly data assimilation using the EnOI system (see Section~\ref{obs}) along with CHAMP observations for these periods. It is worth noting the impact of assimilation is at a local level since the satellite data give density values at a particular latitude, longitude, and height, and a localisation scheme is also applied. The CHAMP data are decimated from their original 10~s cadence to 120~s cadences in order to help stability, and this also provides semi-independent CHAMP data sets to use for validation. More formal validation is provided by independant GRACE observations.
The model results were interpolated to the altitude, latitude and longitude of the particular spacecraft at that time for comparison purposes. The interpolation procedure used was the same as that used within the TIEGCM data assimilation code for consistency (Henley et al., manuscript in preparation, 2015). In order to accurately compare the output of the two models, DTM was run for the particular altitude, latitude, and longitude of the spacecraft at time of observation. DTM densities were calculated every 5 or 10 seconds (depending whether CHAMP or GRACE was being compared), while TIEGCM resulting densities were saved every 15 minutes. It is worth noting that both CHAMP and GRACE spacecraft have different local times for the periods studied here, the difference ranging between $\sim$1--2~LT. It useful to compare the model results to these observations for validation purposes since they have an altitude difference of $\sim$100--150km for the time periods studied. However, a more in-depth comparison of latitudinal or longitudinal variation is not undertaken here.
Typical model outputs are presented in Figure~\ref{figure_context}. A 2D map of DTM density at 2009 March 01 00:00UT is shown in the upper row, with an equivalent TIEGCM map in the middle row. CHAMP densities are also plotted in the lower row for an entire 90-minute orbit. Note the CHAMP spacecraft was at an altitude of $\sim$328km during this orbit, however the DTM and CHAMP densities have been interpolated to TIEGCM pressure level 21 ($1.18\times10^{-6}$~Pa) for ease of comparison. TIEGCM tends to have a narrower range of density values compared to DTM. It is also worth noting that both models overestimate the density in the points corresponding to the CHAMP measurements. This is a result that is emulated throughout solar minimum, as will be discussed in the following section.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\noindent\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure_context.eps}
\caption{DTM (upper row) and TIEGCM (middle row) density values on 2009 March 01 00:00UT, and CHAMP (lower row) density values between 2009 March 01 00:00--01:30UT. The DTM and CHAMP values have been interpolated to TIEGCM pressure level 21 at $\sim 10^{-6}$~Pa ($\sim$335km).}
\label{figure_context}
\end{figure}
\section{Results}
\label{results}
The results of the thermospheric model comparison for solar minimum are presented in Figure~\ref{figure_200903}. The lower middle row shows the F10.7 solar flux (magenta) and K$_\mathrm{p}$ indices (black) that were used as inputs to both models. With F10.7 virtually constant at $\sim$70, and K$_\mathrm{p}$ generally below $\sim$3, this can be considered a quiet period in terms of storms, and thus a good indicator of results at typical solar minimum conditions. In soft X-ray range, solar flares are classified as A-, B-, C-, M- or X- class according to peak flux measured near Earth by the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) over 1--8 \AA~in Watts m$^{-2}$. Solar activity was extremely low throughout this period, with no solar flares greater than B-class, as indicated by the GOES flux plot in the lower row of Figure~\ref{figure_200903}. Two B-class flares occurred on 2009 March 26 (see lower row of Figure~\ref{figure_200903}), with no major active regions on the solar disk at the time. A larger number of A- and B- class flares occurred at the end of the period, again with no major active regions on the solar disk.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\noindent\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figure_20090315_20090512.eps}
\caption{Upper row: Orbit-averaged CHAMP (black), DTM (green), and TIEGCM (blue) densities for 2009 March 15 to 2009 May 13. Upper middle: Density difference between CHAMP observations and the two models. Lower middle row: F10.7 (magenta) and K$_\mathrm{p}$ (black) values used as inputs to the models. Lower row: GOES peak flux (red), where the dashed horizontal lines intersecting the right y-axis indicate flare class. The altitude of the CHAMP spacecraft during this period varied between $\sim$350--316~km.}
\label{figure_200903}
\end{figure*}
The upper row of Figure~\ref{figure_200903} shows the orbit-averaged density values of CHAMP (black), TIEGCM (blue), and DTM (green). The upper middle row shows the density difference between CHAMP and TIEGCM (blue), and CHAMP and DTM (green). The results indicate that DTM performs better at solar minimum, with its resulting densities closest to the actual observations from CHAMP. However, TIEGCM also performs very well, with densities only slightly higher than DTM overall. The density values are relatively stable throughout the period. Both models mirror any gradual changes in density, with DTM mirroring rapid changes particularly well during solar minimum conditions.
The upper row of Figure~\ref{combined_short} shows the same results as Figure~\ref{figure_200903}, however for a shorter time period of 12 hours on 2009 March 15. This zoom-in reveals greater detail in the evolution of the densities, showing typical motions of the CHAMP spacecraft as it changes in altitude, latitude, and longitude. Both models mirror the CHAMP trend well, with DTM performing better than TIEGCM as the spacecraft crosses the night-side. It is clear from both figures that the models generally overestimate the density during solar minimum, with resulting model densities consistently higher than observations throughout the period of analysis.
The same analysis was performed on CHAMP and both models at solar maximum, the results of which are shown in Figure~\ref{figure_200303}. It is clear from the lower middle row of the figure that there were more active conditions during this period, with F10.7 solar flux varying between $\sim$100--160, and K$_\mathrm{p}$ index reaching $\sim$7. Although no significantly large storms occurred during this time, the values are sufficiently high to contrast with the solar minimum results. Solar activity was much higher, with consistent flaring throughout the period, including multiple large flares (see lower row of Figure~\ref{figure_200303}). For example, a number of M- and X- class flares occurred between 2003 March 17--19 from a very complex active region just west of solar disk centre. This region was classified as $\beta\gamma\delta$ according to the modified Mount Wilson sunspot classification scheme \citep{brayloughhead64}. The impact of these eruptions is not noticeable from the F10.7 and K$_\mathrm{p}$ values at this time, with no significant Earth-directed coronal mass ejections associated with the flares.
As indicated by the orbit-averaged densities and difference shown in the upper and upper middle rows of Figure~\ref{figure_200303}, TIEGCM generally outperforms DTM at solar maximum. DTM does mirror increases in the CHAMP densities better than the physical model at the sharp increase seen on 2003 March 20 in CHAMP density measurements (likely related to the increased solar activity at this time). DTM also shows a sharp increase on April 30 that mirrors a smaller increase in CHAMP. TIEGCM densities do not change significantly on March 20, but do slightly increase on April 30. However, DTM also shows sharp increases/decreases in values during periods of increased K$_\mathrm{p}$ index that are not reflected in CHAMP or TIEGCM densities (e.g., April 16 and May 9). This suggests DTM is more sensitive to sharp changes in input parameter values than TIEGCM is. The upper row of Figure~\ref{combined_short} shows the solar maximum results over a shorter 12-hour period on 2003 March 15. This confirms that both models generally underestimate thermospheric density at solar maximum (in contrast to solar minimum results), and TIEGCM generally performs better during this period.
The results of analysis during the 2003 October and November storms are shown in Figure~\ref{figure_200310}. The significantly stormy conditions that occur towards the end of 2003 October are evident from GOES soft X-ray flux in the lower row, with multiple X-class flares, including an X17.2 flare on October 28. This resulted in a G5 level (http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/NOAAscales/) geomagnetic storm at Earth that lasted two days. The source regions of these large eruptions are discussed in detail by \citet{zhang03}. It is worth noting that the largest flare ever measured occurred on November 4, believed to be as large as X45 \citep{thomson04}. However, this event was not Earth-oriented and only resulted in high-latitude auroras. The sequence of events are reflected in the large K$_\mathrm{p}$ and F10.7 values shown in the lower middle row of Figure~\ref{figure_200310}. A second large peak in K$_\mathrm{p}$ occurs on November 20, however only M-class flares occurred during this period and F10.7 did not increase as much as previously.
The density values and differences shown in the upper and upper middle rows of Figure~\ref{figure_200310} reflect the particularly active conditions, with two large peaks in density at the end of October and November. Both models perform well in mirroring the observed increased densities, however they both underestimate the values again, particularly at the large peaks. TIEGCM more accurately follows the changes in CHAMP values, with DTM showing a more sporadic variance. Towards the end of the time period DTM values sharply rise, which is not reflected in the observed values. However, this rise does occur soon after an increase in K$_\mathrm{p}$. The zoomed-in plots in the lower row of Figure~\ref{combined_short} confirm TIEGCM being the more accurate model in this case, since it generally follows changes in CHAMP values better than DTM. Compared to results from 2003 March, it seems that TIEGCM reacts best to sharp rises in K$_\mathrm{p}$ values greater than $\sim 8$, and does not react as significantly to changes in more moderate values. \citet{carter14} found the most important source of variability in TIEGCM originates from the K$_\mathrm{p}$ index, so it is unsurprising that it the model results reflect sharp changes in this parameter.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\noindent\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figure_20030315_20030512.eps}
\caption{Upper row: Orbit-averaged CHAMP (black), DTM (green), and TIEGCM (blue) densities for 2003 March 15 to 2003 May 13. Upper middle: Density difference between CHAMP observations and the two models. Lower middle row: F10.7 (magenta) and K$_\mathrm{p}$ (black) values used as inputs to the models. Lower row: GOES peak flux (red), where the dashed horizontal lines intersecting the right y-axis indicate flare class. The altitude of the CHAMP spacecraft during this period varied between $\sim$433--399~km.}
\label{figure_200303}
\end{figure*}
GRACE observations were also available for two time periods at solar minimum (2009 March) and maximum (2003 October). The same analysis as above was performed using GRACE data for these periods, as well as using the data for further analysis of the previous results. The resulting densities from running TIEGCM with assimilation of CHAMP data were interpolated to the altitude, latitude, and longitude of GRACE at the time of the observation in order to gain a better insight into the overall impact of running TIEGCM with assimilation using such a small amount of data. This ensures no bias with interpolating CHAMP-assimilated TIEGCM results to CHAMP observations (and then comparing with same).
Results from the solar minimum period beginning 2009 March 15 (upper and upper middle rows) and the stormy period beginning 2003 October 15 (lower middle and lower rows) are shown in Figure~\ref{grace_interp}, including DTM runs for comparison. DTM was run for the particular time, altitude, latitude, and longitude of GRACE as previously. Comparing the results for the solar minimum period in Figure~\ref{figure_200903}, TIEGCM performs similarly within the same error range, however DTM more significantly outperforms TIEGCM compared to previously. A discrepancy occurs on 2009 May 3 when both models show a slight increase compared to a drop in observed density values, however this is likely due to an issue with the GRACE measurements for that particular date rather than the model results. It is also interesting to note that the models underestimate the observed GRACE values during this period, while they overestimated CHAMP values previously. Comparing the results from the Hallowe'en storm period in Figure~\ref{grace_interp} to those shown in Figure~\ref{figure_200310}, this time TIEGCM outperforms DTM, as it did when compared to CHAMP observations. TIEGCM density values match GRACE observations closer than DTM, which has a large number of outliers during the stormy peaks at the end of 2003 October and 2003 November.
All results from the model comparisons are summarised in Table~\ref{table}, showing monthly mean percentage difference between measured satellite densities and the resulting densities, from various model runs. As found above, the table confirms that DTM performs best compared to CHAMP at solar minimum, followed closely by TIEGCM, with both models slightly overestimating the CHAMP density values. DTM densities are much closer to GRACE observations compared to TIEGCM during this period, with both models underestimating values at the higher satellite altitude. There is a clear difference during solar maximum, with TIEGCM being more accurate at these times, and both models underestimating the CHAMP density associated with higher activity. The sharp changes in density during the Hallowe'en storms result in values being smaller during this period, however TIEGCM again outperforms DTM here, most significantly when compared with the GRACE observations (as is clear from Figure~\ref{figure_200310}, DTM overestimates the density values at the peaks).
The table also notes the differences between running TIEGCM with and without data assimilation, as it is worth determining how much of an improvement the assimilation system made to the physical model. Similar comparisons for DTM are presented in \citet{bruinsma12}. The results indicate that using the EnOI data assimilation technique has a small positive impact on the TIEGCM results, improving performance by $\sim$4\% overall when a 1-hour assimilation cycle is used. The data assimilation technique improves the results greater during periods of solar maximum than minimum, the largest improvement found during the Hallowe'en storms.
\section{Discussion and Conclusions}
\label{concl}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\noindent\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figure_20031015_20031212.eps}
\caption{Upper row: Orbit-averaged CHAMP (black), DTM (green), and TIEGCM (blue) densities for 2003 Ocotber 15 to 2003 December 13. Upper middle: Density difference between CHAMP observations and the two models. Lower middle row: F10.7 (magenta) and K$_\mathrm{p}$ (black) values used as inputs to the models. Lower row: GOES peak flux (red), where the dashed horizontal lines intersecting the right y-axis indicate flare class. The altitude of the CHAMP spacecraft during this period varied between $\sim$422--386~km.}
\label{figure_200310}
\end{figure*}
This paper has characterised the relative merit of two new modelling approaches with data assimilation capabilities developed during the ATMOP project; the physical model, TIEGCM, and the semi-empirical model, DTM. This has been done for 60-day periods for equinox at solar minimum (from 2009 March), solar maximum (from 2003 March), and the Hallowe'en 2003 storms (from 2003 October). Model results were validated against satellite data to investigate whether the improved physical model can outperform the semi-empirical model that is currently used operationally.
The solar minimum equinox results show that the models represent the thermospheric density well, with the DTM model being closest to CHAMP and GRACE observations, followed closely by TIEGCM. Interestingly, both models typically overestimate the CHAMP density, but underestimate the GRACE density. It is worth noting that satellite drag data studied by \citet{solomon11} indicates that the thermosphere was lower in density, and therefore cooler, during the protracted solar minimum period of 2007-2009 than at any other time in the past 47 years. Thus the overestimated values compared to CHAMP here may be representative of this particular `low' rather than representative of general solar minimum conditions - other periods would need to be examined for a more comprehensive picture. GRACE densities were taken from a higher altitude than the \citeauthor{solomon11} study.
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Mean percentage difference between measured CHAMP (upper table) and GRACE (lower table) densities and resulting densities from various model runs. Values were calculated for the time periods beginning in March 2003, October 2003, and March 2009.}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l l c c c c}
\hline\hline
Validating & Model Run & \multicolumn{3}{ c }{Mean \% Difference} \\
\cline{3-5}
Data& & March `03 & Oct. `03 & March `09 \\
\hline
CHAMP & TIEGCM & 30.09 & 9.76 & -26.86 \\
& TIEGCM (DA) & 25.50 & 5.58 & -23.35 \\
& DTM & 51.99 & 19.27 & -21.92 \\
\hline
GRACE & TIEGCM & -- & 10.66 & 46.66 \\
& TIEGCM (DA) & -- & 6.60 & 43.58 \\
& DTM & -- & 43.33 & 5.54 \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table}
\end{table}
The differing results for TIEGCM compared to these spacecraft observations may be related the anomalous constituent concentrations found at varying thermospheric heights during this deep solar minimum period. Previous work has found enhanced concentrations of helium, particularly in the winter hemisphere at $\sim$476km \citep[see][and references therein]{thayer12}, which is within the range of GRACE altitudes during the 2009 period studied here. Comparing CHAMP and GRACE observations in 2007 and 2008, \citeauthor{thayer12} found that altitude and latitude response in thermospheric mass density was influenced by the relative amount of helium (He) and oxygen (O) present. \citet{liu14} compared CHAMP and GRACE data to the semi-empirical NRLMISISE-00 model during the same 2008 period, finding wintertime helium concentrations exceeding model results by 30--70\%.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\noindent\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figure_combined_short.eps}
\caption{Left column: CHAMP, DTM, and TIEGCM densities over 12 hours. Right column: Density difference between CHAMP observations and the two models. The upper to lower rows show results for 12 hours on 2009 March 15, 2003 March 15, and 2003 October 15, respectively. The altitude of the CHAMP spacecraft during these periods varied between $\sim$346--317~km, $\sim$432--401~km, and $\sim$422--391~km.}
\label{combined_short}
\end{figure*}
\citeauthor{liu14} attributes the high concentrations to the extremely low He/O transition altitudes in the winter hemisphere in this cold, contracted thermosphere. This is a particularly important aspect to consider for forecasting purposes since the presence of He instead of O at the same temperature would act to increase the drag coefficient \citep{thayer12}. In this work DTM represents this differing concentration at GRACE altitudes better than the physical model, as is clear from Table~\ref{table}. DTM is trained on large observational data sets including the 2007--2008 period, which is more representative of the deep minimum conditions than data used for training in earlier versions of DTM and the NRLMISISE-00 model. The assimilation scheme used with TIEGCM only has a local impact at the lower CHAMP altitudes during the period being run.
It is clear from the results that while the semi-empirical model runs well during solar minimum, the physical model is more accurate when more stormy conditions are introduced. TIEGCM generally performs better during solar maximum conditions (Figure~\ref{figure_200903}), however DTM also mirrors changes in CHAMP densities well. Both models underestimate the observed density during the period beginning 2003 March. This is similar to the period of increased activity beginning 2003 October, where underestimations also exist (although TIEGCM densities match observations very well, as shown in Figures~\ref{figure_200310} and \ref{grace_interp}). \citet{sutton05} examines the geomagnetic impact of the Hallowe'en storms, and also finds the NRLMSISE-00 model to underestimate densities in comparison with CHAMP data during times of maximum geomagnetic activity.
Since the Hallowe'en storms are such a well-studied event, our results from this period can be compared to previous studies. \citet{sutton05} find density measurements exhibit enhancements of 200--300\%. \citet{sutton06} uses GRACE and CHAMP data to observe the thermosphere neutral density response to the X-class flares on 2003 October 28 and November 4. \citeauthor{sutton06} finds an increase of $\sim$50--60\% in thermospheric density associated with the first flare at low to mid-latitudes, and a $\sim$35--45\% increase in response to the second flare. Figure 1 of \citet{qian12} shows the density response to the two flares using TIEGCM simulations as well as CHAMP observations. A $\sim$100--200\% density enhancement occurs, with storm response largest at high latitudes. These results compare well with the enhancements shown in Figure~\ref{figure_200310}, with increases of up to $\sim$200\% observed, and a slightly larger response found for the first flare compared to the second.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\noindent\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{grace_interp.eps}
\caption{Orbit-averaged DTM and TIEGCM with CHAMP DA densities compared with GRACE observations for the period beginning 2009 March 15 in the upper row, and 2003 October 15 in lower middle row. Density difference between GRACE and the two model runs are shown for the 2009 period in the upper middle row, and for the 2003 period in the lower row. The altitude of the GRACE spacecraft during the 2009 period varied between $\sim$506-454~km, and during the 2003 period varied between $\sim$522-466~km.}
\label{grace_interp}
\end{figure*}
It is interesting to note there is a smaller enhancement observed in GRACE and interpolated model densities in Figure~\ref{grace_interp}, the observations obtained at a higher altitude (by $\sim$100~km) than the CHAMP observations. The storm-time responses examined here may also be affected by constituent composition varying with altitude, as mentioned previously for the solar minimum period studied. \citet{liu14} found the He enhancement causes differing perturbations of mass density with altitude after geomagnetic activity. In fact, these mass density perturbations are less enhanced in the winter hemisphere at GRACE altitudes ($\sim$25\%) than the lower CHAMP altitudes ($\sim$60\%) during the 2008 minimum. This could account for the smaller enhancements observed at GRACE altitudes here, however a more thorough investigation of latitudinal variation would be needed for confirmation.
Although the physical model clearly outperforms the semi-empirical model during stormy conditions, a number of improvements could still be made to the TIEGCM set-up used here. This work focuses on 2-month periods around solar equinox, and future work should also examine the solstice periods. However, for longer periods of study it must be considered that thermospheric neutral density and composition exhibits strong seasonal variation. Here the interaction with the lower atmosphere becomes important, however the standard version of TIEGCM used in this work only includes a simplified representation of the lower boundary (see Section~\ref{obs}). \citet{qian09} found that TIEGCM produces a better representation of the annual/semi-annual variation with gravity wave parameterisation and an eddy diffusion coefficient included at the lower boundary. The standard version of TIEGCM used in this work specifies an eddy diffusion coefficient as a constant at the lower boundary, which decreases exponentially with increasing pressure levels. \citeauthor{qian09} modified this globally uniform value to account for seasonal variation, representing the coefficient as a Fourier series with four harmonics per year. Research following on from the ATMOP project will include forcing the lower boundary of TIEGCM with a non-hydrostatic model of the lower atmosphere, which includes gravity wave parameterisation and non-migrating tides.
This work has presented validation periods at solar maximum and a particularly deep solar minimum. In order to gain a complete picture of how solar variability may be affecting the performance of the two models it may be useful to examine less deep solar minimum periods, as well as `solar medium' periods that lie midway through the ascending and descending phases of a solar cycle. Thermospheric models are known to be strongly influenced by external drivers, including geomagnetic and solar forcing besides boundary forcing. Much previous work has found that, alongside other improvements to the model, simply adjusting the F10.7 solar flux can improve results \citep{thayer12, matsuo13, liu14}. Future work incorporating both lower boundary improvements to TIEGCM and examining results over longer time periods will better highlight the possible impact that seasonal and solar variability may be having on the model densities.
It is clear from Figure~\ref{grace_interp} that interpolating the CHAMP-assimilated TIEGCM density results to higher satellite height did not have a major impact, with similar errors found to previous results. However, with such limited observations used during assimilation (one data point rather than a whole 2D map at each timestep) this is likely highlighting the accuracy of the model rather than saying too much about the assimilation procedure. As mentioned previously, the satellites are at slightly different local times, and enhanced He concentrations are found at the higher GRACE altitude particularly during the deep solar minimum in 2009. This likely introduces additional density errors that may counteract the positive impact of assimilating CHAMP data at these altitudes. At the lower altitudes, a positive but limited improvement has been obtained using data assimilation with a general circulation model, with an overall improvement of $\sim$4\% found. Including more relevant observations in the assimilation procedure would likely increase this percentage improvement.
Future work will also include improvements to the data assimilation techniques developed in the ATMOP project, particularly implementing incremental analysis updates (see Henley et al., manuscript in preparation, 2015, for further discussion). The EnOI method developed could be converted to an EnKF system without much difficulty. An EnOI system is similar to EnKF, however information from the observations which improve the main model does not feed back into the ensemble. Assessment of the other versions of DTM also developed as part of the ATMOP project could be undertaken using the same method as in this paper. DTM-2013 is supplemented by 2.5~years of GOCE satellite data, uses the 30~cm radio flux as a solar proxy, and 3-hour A$_{\mathrm{m}}$ index as geomagnetic proxy. To improve predictions to 3-days out, another method (DTM-nrt) was developed to predict temperature corrections to DTM based on a neural network. Recent research highlights that the DTM-nrt version of the model is more accurate than the DTM-2012 studied here for 24-hour forecasts \citep{choury13}. Comparisons to and assimilation of other types of observations would also be beneficial, for example Fabry-Per{\'o}t interferometer wind measurements, or total electron content. An increase in the availability of more real-time in-situ observations of the thermosphere will aid this work and space weather forecasting in general. Data from missions such as SWARM \citep{friis06} and Drag and Atmospheric Neutral Density Explorer \citep{pilinski08} may prove useful for this purpose.
With further improvements, the use of general circulation models in operational forecasting, in addition to empirical models currently used, is certainly plausible. Future work will allow near-real-time assimilation of thermospheric data into TIEGCM for forecasting.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This work was supported by the European Framework Package 7 Advanced Thermosphere Modelling for Orbit Prediction project (Work Package 5.6). Data from CHAMP and GRACE missions are made available to the community by the Information Systems and Data Center at GFZ (http://isdc.gfz-potsdam.de). Model code for TIEGCM and DTM are made freely available to the community by NCAR (http://www.hao.ucar.edu/modeling/tgcm/) and the ATMOP project (http://www.atmop.eu) respectively. The authors thank the anonymous referees for their constructive suggestions to improve the manuscript.
\copyright~British Crown Copyright 2015, the Met Office.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction\label{sec:intro}}
Gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) are the most luminous explosions in the universe.
They signify the birth of a stellar-mass black hole or a rapidly
rotating magnetized neutron star during core collapses of massive
stars or mergers of compact objects \citep[][for a recent review]{kumarzhang15}.
Multi-wavelength GRB afterglows were predicted \citep{meszarosrees97}
before their first discoveries \citep{costa97,vanparadijs97,frail97}. This was based on a generic external forward
shock model. Regardless of the physical nature of progenitor and central
engine, a relativistic jet is launched, which is decelerated by a
circumburst medium by a pair of external (forward and reverse) shocks.
The reverse shock is likely short-lived. The forward shock, on the
other hand, continues to plough into the medium as the jet is
decelerated. Synchrotron radiation of electrons accelerated from the
external forward shock powers broad-band electromagnetic radiation
with a decreasing amplitude. This is the broad-band afterglow of GRBs \citep{meszarosrees97,sari98,meszaros98,rhoads99,sari99,chevalier00}.
Before 2004, the observations of the broad band late time afterglow
emission of GRBs generally show broken power-law lightcurves and
instantaneous spectra. Detailed studies \citep[e.g.,][]{wijers97,waxman97,wijers99,harrison99,huangyf99,huangyf00,panaitescu01,panaitescu02,yost03,wu04} suggested that
these late-time data are generally
consistent with the predictions of the external forward shock models.
The launch of the {\em Swift} satellite in 2004 \citep {gehrels04}
allowed systematic observations of the multi-wavelength GRB afterglow
at early epochs. These data, especially the early X-ray afterglow
data, presented surprises to modelers. The overall X-ray lightcurves
include five distinct temporal components \citep{zhang06}:
I: an early time steep decay phase connected to the prompt emission
\citep{tagliaferri05,barthelmy05,zhang07c};
II: a shallow decay (or plateau) phase, which may signify continuous
energy injection of energy into the blastwave \citep{zhang06,nousek06,liang07}; III: a normal decay phase
consistent with the forward shock emission of a constant-energy fireball;
IV: a late steep decay phase likely due to a jet break origin \citep[e.g.,][]{liang08,racusin09};
and V: erratic X-ray flares, likely powered by late central engine
activities \citep{ioka05,burrows05,fan05,zhang06,liang06,lazzati07,chincarini07,maxham09,margutti10}. The components I and V are are believed to be of an internal
origin (in contrast to the external shock origin). The other three
components (II, III and IV) may be interpreted within the framework of
the external shock models.
The optical afterglow light curves also show interesting temporal
behaviors \citep{liang06,nardini06,kann06,kann10,kann11,panaitescu08,panaitescu11,lil12,liang13,wang13,yi13}. In the similar spirit as \cite{zhang06}, \cite{lil12} attempted to summarize a ``synthetic'' light curveof
optical emission. They found more components with distinct physical
origins: Ia: prompt optical flares; Ib: an early optical flare of an
external reverse shock origin; II: an early shallow-decay segment; III:
the standard afterglow component (the normal decay component, sometimes with an
early onset hump); IV: the post-jet-break phase; V: late optical flares;
VI: late rebrightening humps; and VII: late supernova (SN) bumps.
The components II, III and IV can
find their counterparts in the canonical X-ray light curve
(components II, III, and IV in \citealt{zhang06}).
Some flares in the optical band have counterparts in X-rays, but some
others do not \citep{swenson13}. Some components (e.g., the reverse
shock component Ib and the supernova component VII) are unique for the
optical band only.
There are two types of temporal breaks in the external shock models.
One type corresponds to the crossing of a characteristc frequency in the
observational band \citep{sari98}. Such spectrally-related breaks
occur at different epochs in different energy bands, and therefore
are {\em chromatic}. A testable feature of such a break is that the
spectral indices before and after the temporal break should be
distinctly different. The second type of breaks are related to the
hydrodynamic or geometric properties of the system. Since both effects
affect the global behavior of the blastwave, these breaks should be
{\em achromatic}, i.e. the temporal breaks in different energy bands
should occur around the same observational time.
Most observed breaks in the GRB lightcurves are likely of a hydrodynamic
or geometric origin. Observationally, essentially all the temporal breaks
observed in the X-ray lightcurves are consistent with having no spectral
changes across the break times \citep{liang07,liang08}. Theoretically,
the spectral breaks, especially the cooling break, are predicted to be
very smooth, and are barely observable from the data (\citealt{uhm14a},
see also \citealt{granot02,vanerten09}).
As a result, one expects that the temporal breaks seen by {\em Swift}
should be strictly achromatic based on the external
forward shock models.
Broad-band afterglow data of GRBs are rapidly accumulating.
Shortly after {\em Swift} detected early X-ray afterglow lightcurves
of GRBs, some authors noticed that the basic requirement of
achromaticity of GRB afterglows is violated at least in some GRBs \citep[e.g.,][]{panaitescu06,fan06,huangky07,liang07,liang08}. In particular, while a significant break
is seen in the X-ray lightcurves of some GRBs, the optical lightcurve
does not show evidence of a break at the corresponding time \citep[e.g.,][]{troja07,molinari07}.
Such a puzzling effect led theorists to suggest various non-forward-shock
models of the X-ray afterglow: the long-lasting reverse shock model
\citep{genet07,uhm07}, the dust scattering model
(Shao \& Dai 2007), and the long-lasting central engine model \citep{ghisellini07,kumar08a,kumar08b}.
Indeed, if most GRB afterglows are chromatic, one must throw away the
standard forward shock paradigm, and probably attribute other factors,
in partular, the long-lasting central engine, to account for the X-ray
afterglow. This would have profound implications for our understanding
of the GRB central engine and emission physics. Yet, there seem to
exist some GRBs (e.g., the latest bright GRB 130427A) whose multi-wavelength
data are consistent with the simplest forward shock afterglow model \citep[e.g.,][]{maselli14,perley14}.
It is therefore natural to ask the following question: in general
how bad or how good are the external forward shock models in interpreting
the GRB afterglow data?
This paper aims at addressing this question through a systematic data analysis
and theoretical modeling of a large sample of multi-wavelength afterglows.
We study a sample of 85 {\em Swift} GRBs up to March 2014, which all have
high-quality X-ray and optical light curve data to allow us to study the compliance
of the data to the external forward shock models.
The sample selection and data analyses are described in \S2.
The theoretical external forward shock model, in particular, the so-called
{\em closure relations} are presented in \S3. In \S4, we grade the afterglows
based on how well they abide by the forward shock models, and categorize
them into five grades and three samples.
A statistical analysis of various observational and theoretical
parameters for the Gold sample is presented in \S5.
Our results are summarized in \S6 with some discussion.
We notice that \cite{lil15} recently carried out a similar analysis,
with the focus on the consistency of the data with afterglow models
in individual temporal segments of X-ray and optical lightcurves,
without analyzing the global achromatic/chromatic behaviors of the afterglows.
Throughout the paper, the subscripts ``O'' and ``X'' denote the
optical and X-ray band, respectively, and the subsripts ``1'' and ``2''
denote the pre- and post-break segments, respectively.
In addition, two spectral regimes are defined:
``I'' for $\nu> {\rm max} (\nu_m, \nu_c)$, and ``II'' for $\nu_m<\nu<\nu_c$,
where $\nu_m$ and $\nu_c$ are the minimum injection frequency and cooling frequency
for synchrotron radiation, respectively.
\section{Sample and Data\label{sec:data}}
We systematically investigate all the {\em Swift} GRBs that have X-ray and optical
afterglow data, over a span of almost 10 years from the launch of {\em Swift} to
March 2014. A sample of $\sim$260
optical light curves are compiled from published papers or GCN
Circulars, and a sample of $\sim$900 X-ray light curves are obtained from
the {\em Swift} XRT data archive. Well-sampled light curves in both X-ray and
optical bands are available for 99 GRBs. Fifteen GRBs do not have well constrained spectral indices either in optical or in X-ray bands to allow us to perform some theoretical constraints (see details below). Fourteen of them are removed from the sample. GRB 070420 is the only GRB without adequate spectral information that is included in our sample. This is because it has a clear chromatic feature, which allows us to group it into the Bad sample even if the spectral information is not available (see details in \S \ref{sec:graderesutl}). The remaining 84 GRBs are included in our final sample, whose information is presented in Table \ref{table:sample}. For the optical data, the correction due to Galactic extinction is taken
into account using the reddening map presented by Schlegel et al. (1998).
Due to large uncertainties, we do not make corrections to the extinction
in the GRB host galaxies.
In order to quantify the rich temporal features of GRB lightcurves,
we fit the lightcurves with a model of multiple components. The basic
component of our model is either a single power-law (SPL) function
\begin{equation}
F_1 = F_{01} t^{-\alpha}
\end{equation}
or a smooth broken power-law (BPL) function
\begin{equation}
F_2 = F_{02} \left[\left(\frac{t}{t_{\rm
b}}\right)^{\alpha_1\omega} +\left(\frac{t}{t_{\rm
b}}\right)^{\alpha_2\omega}\right]^{-1/\omega}, \label{F2}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$, $\alpha_1$, $\alpha_2$ are the temporal slopes,
$t_{\rm b}$ is the break time, and $\omega$ measures the sharpness
of the break. In some afterglow models, a double broken power-law
light curve is expected. For example, it is theoretically expected
that the afterglow light curve may have a shallow segment early on
due to energy injection, then transits to a normal decay segment
when energy injection is over, and finally steepens due to a jet
break (e.g., in the canonical X-ray afterglow lightcurve, Zhang et
al. 2006). We therefore also consider a smooth triple-power-law
(TPL) function to fit some lightcurves. In these cases, we extend equation
(\ref{F2}) (with $t_b$ defined as $t_{b,1}$)
to the following function \citep{liang08}
\begin{equation}\label{STPL}
F_3=(F_{2}^{-\omega_2}+F_4^{-\omega_2})^{-1/\omega_2}
\end{equation}
where $\omega_2$ is the sharpness factor of the second break at
$t_{b,2}$, and
\begin{equation}\label{PL}
F_4=F_2(t_{\rm b,2})\left(\frac{t}{t_{b,2}}\right)^{-\alpha_3}.
\end{equation}
We perform best fits to the data using a subroutine called
MPFIT\footnote{http://www.physics.wisc.edu/~craigm/idl/fitting.html.}.
The sharpness parameter $\omega$ is usually adopted as 3 or 1 in
our fitting. The parameter $t_{b}$ is not significantly affected by
the choice of $\omega$, but the pre- and post-break slopes (i.e. $\alpha_{1}$
and $\alpha_{2}$) somewhat depend on the value of $\omega$ \citep[][]{liang07}.
The larger the value of $\omega$, the sharper the break. The breaks in most X-ray
and optical light curves at later times (e.g. the energy injection breaks and
the jet breaks) can be well fit with $\omega=3$, which is consistent with the fitting
results using other empirical models \citep[e.g.][]{willingale07}. Some very smooth
breaks (e.g., the onset breaks in the early optical lightcurve curves) require $\omega$
being around 1 \cite[][]{liang07,lil12}, and we adopt this value when it is needed.
One focus of our analysis is to study the ``chromaticity'' of the
lightcurves in the X-ray and optical bands. In principle there are
two approaches to do this. The first approach is to blindly search
for $t_b$ using the best fits to the optical and X-ray data,
respectively, and compare how different the two $t_b$ values are.
Such an approach usually gives different break times in the two
bands \citep[][]{liang07,liang08,lil12,lil15}.
The second approach is to start with the achromatic
assumption and investigate how bad the data violate such an assumption.
By doing so, we reduce one free parameter, and impose a same $t_b$ in
both bands in the model. We believe that this second approach is more
reasonable to address the question ``how {\em bad} the external forward shock
models are'', so we adopt the second approach with the assist of the
first approach.
The detailed procedure of our light curve fitting is as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item For each GRB, we first fit the optical and X-ray afterglow light
curves separately, and get the respective fitting parameters, such as
$t_{\rm O,b}$, $t_{\rm X,b}$, and the $\omega$ values of each break).
A minimum number of components (SPL, BPL, or TPL)
are introduced based on eye inspection
of the global features in the lightcurve. If the reduced $\chi^2$ is
much larger than 1, we continue to add more components and re-do the
fits, until the reduced $\chi^2$ becomes close to 1 (usually less than 1.5).
The reduced $\chi^2$ values for some lightcurves are much smaller than 1,
indicating that some model parameters are poorly constrained. For these
cases, we fix some parameters and redo the fits until the reduced $\chi^2$
becomes close to 1. Some GRBs have erratic fluctuations in the lightcurves
with small error bars, so that the reduced $\chi^2$ is much larger than 1.
For these cases, we do not add additional
components to fit the lightcurves, so that their $\chi^2$ values
remain much larger than 1.
\item Next, we jointly fit both optical and X-ray lightcurves by introducing
a same $t_b$. We search for a possible achromatic break time in the range
[$t_{\rm O,b}$, $t_{\rm X,b}$]. We still fit the optical and X-ray lightcures at a test break time $t_{b}$ separately in this step. The individual $\chi^2$ of the optical or X-ray band could not represent the goodness of the jointly fit. To evaluate the goodness of the fits for optical and X-ray lightcurves at $t_{b}$, we introduce a weighted reduced $\chi^2_{total}$, which is essentially the average reduced $\chi^2$ in both bands. Taking GRB 050922C as an
example: a best join fit is achieved at $t_b=17.3$ ks, where the reduced
$\chi^2_{X}$ values are 175/157 and $175/148 \simeq 186/157$ for the
optical and X-ray bands, respectively, so that $\chi^2_{total}$ can be expressed as 361/314.
For all the GRBs, we search for the common $t_b$ with the best $\chi^2_{total}$. We accept the fits with the $\chi^2_{total}\leq 3$, and regard it as not inconsistent with being achromatic\footnote{ The adoption of a separation line at $\chi^2_{total}$ around 3 is somewhat arbitrary, but the value is determined based on close inspection of the fitting results of individual bursts. Our results indicate that most GRB afterglow light curves are well fit with the BPL or SPL light curves models, with a typical value $\chi^2_{total}=1.21\pm0.50$. However, some GRBs (e.g., GRB 050730, 060904B, 080319C, 100901A, 120326A) show a relatively large $\chi^2_{total}$, which are around or even slightly larger than 3. Inspecting their light curves, the relatively large $\chi^2_{total}$ is caused by complicated features in the light curves (such as small flares and fluctuations), especially in the optical band (e.g., GRB 060904B).
However, the PL and BPL fits in any case catch the general features of these light curves.
Since we are interested in the achromatic/chromatic properties rather than the flaring features of the light curves, a relatively loose criterion ($\chi^2_{total} \sim 3$) is reasonable. }. Usually the parameters of this best join fits
does not correspond to the best reduced $\chi^2$ in each band.
\item If both the optical and X-ray lightcurves decay as a SPL, we
do not need to search for a common break time. The weighted reduced
$\chi^2_{total}$ is calculated based on the above algorithm for the SPL fits
in each band.
\item If one band decays as a BPL, while the other band does not have enough
data to search for a break time and decays as a SPL (e.g., the Grade II or IV
in Section 3), we impose $t_b$ identified in the first band as the common $t_b$,
and perform the $\chi^2_{total}$ analysis as described above.
\end{itemize}
The fitted results are presented in Figure \ref{gradeI}-\ref{gradeV}. The
parameters of the PL or BPL fits of all the lightcurves are presented in
Table \ref{table:sample}. Some lightcurves have additional features (e.g.,
steep decay phase, flares, rebrightening features) in one band. We do not
report them in Table \ref{table:sample}. Our analysis below discards these
extra components since they likely arise from additional emission components
(e.g., in the internal dissipation regions such as internal shocks and
internal magnetic dissipation sites) other than the external shock.
\section{External Shock Models: Closure Relations and Light Curve Types}
\subsection{Closure Relations}
The standard external shock models of GRB afterglows have clear theoretical
predictions that can be verified or falsified by the observational data.
These models attribute the multi-wavelength afterglow emission to synchrotron
radiation of electrons accelerated in the shock front as the fireball jet
interacts with the circumburst medium. The models largely do not depend on
the details of the central engine activities, so that the afterglow behaviors
only depend on a limited number of parameters.
In the convention of $F_\nu \propto t^{-\alpha}
\nu^{-\beta}$, where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are the temporal and spectral indices of
the afterglows that can be measured directly from observations, the models predict
certain relationships between $\alpha$ and $\beta$ values, which are called the
``closure relations'' of the models \citep[e.g.,][]{zhangmeszaros04,zhang06,gao13}.
Technically there are many sub-models (e.g., ISM vs. wind,
adiabatic vs. radiative, whether or not there is energy injection), physical regimes
(reverse shock crossing phase, self-similar phase, post-jet-break phase, Newtonian
phase), and spectral regimes (different orders among the observed frequency ($\nu$)
and several characteristic frequencies ($\nu_m$, $\nu_c$, the self-absorption
frequency $\nu_a$). We refer to a comprehensive review of \cite{gao13} and
references therein for the details of various models.
For the time frame of our interest (hours to weeks after the trigger), the reverse
shock crossing phase is usually over, and the blastwave is still in the relativistic
phase. This greatly reduces the number of relevant models. In Table \ref{Tab:alpha-beta},
we summarize the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ predictions of various models studied in this
paper following \cite{zhang06} and Gao et al. (2013). This includes the ISM and
wind models for adiabatic blastwaves\footnote{ In general, the circumburst medium can be described by an arbitrary profile $n \propto r^{-k}$. The ISM model corresponds to $k=0$, and the wind model corresponds to $k=2$. In our closure relations, we only consider these two cases, since they are naturally expected from the ISM and a pre-explosion stellar wind. For other $k$ values, it is not straightforward to imagine a physical mechanism to produce such profiles over a large distance scale of interest. We therefore do not include the arbitrary $k$ models in the standard afterglow models, but discuss them as possible modified afterglow models.}, for both pre- and post-jet break temporal phases,
with and without continuous energy injection, and for two spectral regimes
(I: $\nu> \nu_c$ and II: $\nu_m < \nu < \nu_c$) in the slow cooling ($\nu_m < \nu_c$)
regime. By doing so, we have assumed that $\nu_a< {\rm min}(\nu_m, \nu_c)$, and
${\rm min}(\nu_{\rm X}, \nu_{\rm O}) > \nu_{m}$, which is usually satisfied for optical
and X-ray afterglow emission for typical GRB parameters.
The energy injection model invokes either a long-lasting central engine \citep{dai98,zhangmeszaros01},
or a Lorentz-factor-stratified ejecta \citep{rees98,sari00,uhm12}.
The two scenarios are equivalent with each other in terms of lightcurve
behaviors given a relationship between the central engine parameter
$q$ and the stratification parameter $k$ (Zhang et al. 2006). We adopt the
description of a long-lasting central engine with a power-law luminosity history
$L(t)=L_{0}(\frac{t}{t_{0}})^{-q}$ (Zhang \& M\'esz\'aros 2001), so that the injected
energy is $E_{inj}=\frac{L_{0}t_{0}^{q}}{1-q}t^{1-q}$. The prescription applies when
$q<1$. The relevant closure relations are presented in Table \ref{Tab:alpha-beta}.
Many observations suggest that GRB outflows are collimated. Assuming a conical
jet with opening angle $\theta_j$, a steepening in the afterglow light curve is predicted
when $1/\Gamma > \theta_j$ ($\Gamma$ is the bulk Lorentz factor of the blastwave).
The main reason of this steepening is the so-called ``edge effect'' \citep[e.g.,][]{panaitescu98}\footnote{Sideways expansion has been discussed as another factor of steepening the lightcurves
\citep{rhoads99,sari99}. However, later numerical simulations suggest that this effect
is not important \citep[e.g.,][]{zhangw09}. We do not consider this effect in this paper.}:
The $1/\Gamma$ cone is no longer filled with emission beyond the jet break time (when $1/\Gamma >
\theta_j$). There is a reduction factor in flux $\theta_{j}^{2}/(1/\Gamma)^{2}=\Gamma^{2}\theta_{j}^{2}$.
The relevant closure relations are also presented in Table \ref{Tab:alpha-beta}.
It is possible that in some GRBs the energy injection phase lasts longer than the jet
break time, so that a jet break with energy injection both pre- and post-break phases
can be observed. The relevant closure relations of such models were derived in
\cite{gao13} and are also presented in Table \ref{Tab:alpha-beta}.
\subsection{Type of Afterglow Lightcurves}
For the time domain we are interested in and for the optical and X-ray bands, there are
four types of lightcurves (Fig.\ref{fit}):
(1) Broken power-law lightcurves with an energy injection break:
In reference of the canonical X-ray light curve (Zhang et al. 2006),
as reproduced in Fig.\ref{fit}(a), the energy injection break connects
the shallow decay phase (segment II) to the normal decay phase (segment III),
and a typical light curve is shown in Figure \ref{fit}(b). Before and after
the break, the adiabatic deceleration $\alpha(\beta)$ relations
with and without energy injection (as listed in Table \ref{Tab:alpha-beta},
\citealt{zhang06,gao13}) are used to check whether the data are
consistent with model predictions.
(2) Broken power-law lightcurves with a jet break:
This corresponds to transition from segment III to IV in the canonical
lightcurve, and a typical light curve is shown in Figure \ref{fit}(c)
upper curve. Lightcurves of such a category should satisfy the constant-energy,
isotropic closure relations before the break, and the edge-effect
post-jet-break closure relations after the break, with no energy injection
effect both before and after the break (Table \ref{Tab:alpha-beta}).
The post-break decay index is required to be steeper than 1.5 for this model.
(3) Broken power-law lightcurves with a jet break with energy injection:
This model allows the energy injection extend to a duration longer
than the jet break. The temporal break is still defined by the edge effect
of a canonical jet, but the decay slopes before and after the break
are shallower than the previous case (lower curve in Fig.\ref{fit}(c)),
so that a $q$ parameter is introduced for both pre- and post-break phases.
(4) Single power-law decay: For some GRBs, a SPL function is adequate to
describe the afterglow data (Figure \ref{fit}(d)) after the deceleration
phase. In the X-ray band, there might be a steeper decay phase before
this SPL phase, which is due to the tail emission from the prompt emission
\citep{tagliaferri05,barthelmy05,zhang06}.
We ignore the steep decay phase and treat it as a SPL decay (upper curve
of Fig.\ref{fit}(d)). Similarly, in the optical band, some GRBs show an
early rising phase, which is a signature of the onset of afterglow at
the deceleration radius (peak of the lightcurve, lower curve of
Fig.\ref{fit}(d)). We treat these lightcurves also as SPL decay ones.
For all the types, sometimes there are X-ray flares overlapping on
the power-law decay segments. We do not include the flares in our
data fitting, since they originate from a different emission component
due to late central engine activities \citep[e.g.,][]{zhang06,maxham09}.
One important task is to perform a self-consistency check between the
optical and X-ray bands. If a GRB is consistent with the external
forward shock model, we demand that the GRB satisfies the following
criteria:
\begin{itemize}
\item The X-ray and optical lightcurves are consistent with having
an achromatic break if any;
\item Both the X-ray and optical lightcurves should satisfy closure
relations of a same circumburst medium type (ISM or wind) in both
pre- and post-break temporal segments;
\item Either both bands belong to the same spectral regime, or the
two bands are separated by a cooling break $\nu_c$, with the X-ray
band above the break and the optical band below the break (with
allowance of a grey zone, see more discussion below);
\item The inferred electron spectral index $p$ from both bands
and from both pre- and post-break segments should be consistent
with each other within error;
\item For energy injection models, the energy injection parameter
$q$ values derived from the X-ray and optical bands should be consistent
with each other.
\end{itemize}
Technically, we check the consistency between
the closure relations for individual temporal segment
in individual energy band. To ensure a same $p$ value derived for
different bands, we also check the consistency between the data
and models in the
$\bigtriangleup \beta_{\rm X,O}- \bigtriangleup \alpha_{\rm X,O}$ plane.
Here $\bigtriangleup \alpha_{\rm X,O}=\alpha_{\rm X}-\alpha_{\rm O}$
is the difference between the decay indices in the X-ray and optical
bands, respectively, in a same temporal segment, and $\bigtriangleup
\beta_{\rm X,O}=\beta_{X}-\beta_{O}$ is the difference between the
spectral indices in the X-ray and optical bands, respectively.
Based on the closure relations (Table \ref{Tab:alpha-beta}), one can
derive the $\bigtriangleup \beta_{\rm X,O}- \bigtriangleup \alpha_{\rm X,O}$
relations of all the models (Table \ref{Tab:delta-alpha-betahigh2} and
\ref{Tab:delta-alpha-betalow2}). One can see that even though
$\alpha$ and $\beta$ values can be very different in different models, the
$\Delta \alpha_{\rm X,O}$ and $\Delta \beta_{\rm X,O}$ values have several
well-predicted values. In particular, for the SPL, and jet break models,
both pre- and post-break values are well-defined constants. For the energy
injection breaks, the post-break segment does not depend on the free parameter
$q$. As a result, if one focuses on the second component only, all the models
can be expressed as several representative coordinate values in the
$\bigtriangleup \beta_{\rm X,O}- \bigtriangleup \alpha_{\rm X,O}$ plane.
Considering the possible grey zones (see below for details),
these points define several straight lines in the $\bigtriangleup \beta_{\rm X,O}-
\bigtriangleup \alpha_{\rm X,O}$ space (Fig.\ref{deltaapha-beta} for details).
If the observed data intersect with these model lines
(within error), one can regard them as being consistent with the
model predictions.
Take the energy injection break as an example, our analysis uses the
following procedure: (a) Use the observed spectral indices $\beta_{\rm O}$
and $\beta_{\rm X}$ to predict the post-break temporal
indices $\alpha_{\rm O,2}$ and $\alpha_{\rm X,2}$ in two possible spectral
regimes. Then compare these theoretical predictions with the observational
values. If theoretical values are consistent with the
fitting results within error then go to next step. Otherwise, it
indicates that this GRB does not fall into this light curve type;
(b) Use the identified spectral regime to calculate the electron spectral
index $p$ from the spectral index $\beta$, i.e. $p = 2\beta+1$ for
$\nu_m < \nu < \nu_c$, or $p = 2\beta$ for $\nu > \nu_c$. Compare
the $p$ values derived from the optical and X-ray data, respectively.
If $p_{\rm O} = p_{\rm X}$ within error, then move to the next step. Otherwise,
this GRB does not fall into such a light curve type;
(c) Use the inferred $p$ value and spectral regimes to infer the energy injection
parameter $q$ using the temporal index before the break ($\alpha_{\rm O,1}$
and $\alpha_{\rm X,1}$). Compare the derived $q$ values from optical and X-ray
bands, respectively. If $q_{\rm O} = q_{\rm X}$ within error, then move to the next
step. Otherwise, this GRB does not fall into such a light curve type; (d) Using the
$\bigtriangleup \beta_{\rm X,O}- \bigtriangleup \alpha_{\rm X,O}$ relation to double
check the data, if the data fall into the predicted region in the $\bigtriangleup
\beta_{\rm X,O}- \bigtriangleup \alpha_{\rm X,O}$ plane, then this burst
can be fully interpreted by such a model. Otherwise, the burst does not fall
into this category.
The simplest analytical model (Sari et al. 1998) predicts
$\beta=p/2$ for Regime I ($\nu>\nu_{c}$) and
$\beta=(p-1)/2$ for Regime II ($\nu_{m}<\nu<\nu_{c}$).
Detailed numerical calculations \citep{uhm14a} showed that the
transition between the two regimes may take several orders of magnitude
in observer time. As a result, some ``grey zones'', with
$(p-1)/2 < \beta < p/2$ are allowed by the model.
Therefore the parameter space between the two closure relation lines
defined by the two spectral regimes in the $\alpha-\beta$ plane
is allowed by the theory. Data points falling into this grey zone
should be regarded as consistent with the model.
There are three possibilities: (1) the optical band is in Regime
II, while the X-ray band is in the grey zone; (2) the X-ray band
is in Regime I, while the optical band is in the grey zone; and (3)
both bands are in the grey zone.
For the cases that both the optical and X-ray bands are in the same
spectral regime, we demand that three spectral indices be the same
within error, i.e. $\beta_{\rm O}=\beta_{\rm OX}=\beta_{\rm X}$, where
$\beta_{\rm OX}$ is the spectral index between the optical and
X-ray band in the joint spectral energy distribution
(SED)\footnote{In order to obtain $\beta_{\rm OX}$, we roughly fit
the SED from optical to X-ray bands. For the optical band, we chose
the R-band where extinction correction is negligible. For the X-rays,
we use the Swift XRT data and adopt a typical band 1.5-2 keV, where
the absorption effect is negligible.}. If the
two bands are in different spectral regimes, we demand
$\beta_{\rm O}<\beta_{\rm OX}\leq\beta_{\rm X}$ or
$\beta_{\rm O}\leq\beta_{\rm OX}<\beta_{\rm X}$.
\section{Confronting Data with Models \label{sec:Confron}}
\subsection{Grading criteria and sample definitions}
With the above preparation, everything is in place for us to systematically confront the broad-band data with the external forward shock afterglow models. Based on how badly the data violate the models,
we define the following five grades (see also Table \ref{table:grades}):
\begin{itemize}
\item Grade I: Both X-ray and optical bands have SPL lightcurves
or BPL lightcurves with an acceptable achromatic break. Both bands
satisfy closure relations and are
self-consistent (same medium type, $p$ and $q$ values).
These are the best examples where the GRB afterglow data abide by the
external shock model predictions;
\item Grade II: Some GRBs have a clear break at $t_{b}$ in one
band (e.g., X-rays), but do not have a break in another
band (e.g., optical). The missing break is likely due to incomplete
observational coverage before or after the break. The data are
consistent with the hypothesis of an achromatic break, and both
bands satisfy closure relations self-consistently. These GRBs
are almost as good as Grade I in terms of abiding by the external
shock models;
\item Grade III: Both X-ray and optical bands have SPL lightcurves
or BPL lightcurves with an acceptable achromatic break. However, at least one
temporal segment in one band does not satisfy the closure relations
in a self-consistent manner with respect to other segments/band.
\item Grade IV: This is the Grade II equivalent for Grade III. One band
does not have a break, but the data are consistent with the hypothesis
of having an achromatic break. At least one
temporal segment in one band does not satisfy the closure relations
in a self-consistent manner with respect to other segments/band.
\item Grade V: Clear evidence of chromatic breaks and violation of
closure relations. These GRBs cannot be interpreted within the
one-component external shock models\footnote{Some of these GRBs may be still
interpreted within two-component external shock models with each component
dominating one band \citep[e.g.,][]{depasquale09}. However, the demanded
parameters for the two components are rather contrived.}.
\end{itemize}
With these five grades, we define three samples:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em Gold Sample}: The GRBs in Grade I and II are defined as the Gold sample
GRBs, since no observed information violates any predictions of the external
shock models;
\item {\em Silver Sample}: The GRBs in Grade III and IV are included in this sample.
Even though at least one segment/band does not satisfy the closure relations
self-consistently, the basic requirement of achromaticity is not violated.
We note that the closure relations are the predictions of the simplest analytical
external forward shock models. More complicated models invoking, e.g., a structured
jet \citep{zhangmeszaros02,rossi02,kumar03,granot03} or a circumburst density medium with an arbitrary $k$ value (at least for a certain distance range), predict light curve behaviors
that may not fully abide by the simple closure relations. Furthermore, if the
GRB engine is long-lived and a long-lasting reverse shock outshines the forward
shock, a variety of rich light curve behaviors can be generated, which do not follow
the simple closure relations \citep[e.g.,][]{uhm12,uhm14b}.
So it is possible that the GRBs in the silver sample are still consistent with
the external shock models;
\item {\em Bad Sample}: The GRBs in Grade V violate the basic achromaticity
principle of the external shock models and do not abide by the closure relations,
and therefore cannot be interpreted within the framework of the external shock
models.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Grading results \label{sec:graderesutl}}
The 85 well-sampled GRBs in our sample are graded based on the above-defined
grading criteria. The GRBs in the five grades are presented in Figures
\ref{gradeI} - \ref{gradeV}, respectively. The relevant data of different
grades are presented in Table \ref{table:sample} and \ref{table:parameter}.
\begin{itemize}
\item Grade I: As can be seen from Table \ref{table:sample} and \ref{table:parameter},
and Figure \ref{gradeI}, within errors 43/85 GRBs satisfy the Grade I
criteria. Out of 43 GRBs, 13, 8 and 22 GRBs are constrained to have an energy
injection break, jet break and SPL decay,
respectively.
\item Grade II: within error 2/85 GRBs fall into this grade (Fig.\ref{gradeII}).
\item Grade III: there are 34/85 GRBs falling into this grade (Fig.\ref{gradeIII}).
Among the sample, 15/34 and 19/34 GRBs have SPL and BPL lightcurves,
respectively. GRBs 060906, 080319B and 100219A have
two beaks at different times, respectively.
\item Grade IV: there are 3/85 GRBs falling into this grade (Fig.\ref{gradeIV}).
\item Grade V: there are 3/85 GRBs falling into this grade (Fig.\ref{gradeV}).
Two of them (GRBs 060607A and 070208) show clear chromatic
breaks with good temporal coverage in both bands
at the break times. One GRB (GRB 070420) shows a chromatic behavior
based on the available data and simple model fitting, even though no observational
data are available in the optical band at the break time of the X-ray band, so that
the existence of a break in the optical band (even though very contrived in shape)
at the same epoch is not completely ruled out.
\end{itemize}
Consequently, we get three samples:
\begin{itemize}
\item Gold sample: This sample has 45/85 GRBs, including 13/49, 8/49 and 24/49 GRBs satisfying the energy injection, jet break, jet break with energy injection,
and SPL decay models, respectively. Among them, 27/49 and 18/49 are consistent with the ISM
and wind models, respectively; 17/49, 4/49 and 24/49 GRBs are consistent with being in a same
spectral regime, different spectral regimes (X-ray band in regime I and optical band in
regime II), and grey zone, respectively.
Among the 17 GRBs with the same spectral regime, 15 and 2 GRBs are consistent with being in the
ISM II and wind II spectral regimes, respectively. For the 4 GRBs with different spectral regime,
all of them are consistent with having an ISM medium.
\item Silver sample: This sample has 37/85 GRBs, which may (or may not) be interpreted
within the more complicated numerical external shock models.
\item Bad sample: Only 3/85 GRBs definitely violate the basic achromaticity principle
of the external shock models and therefore belong to the bad sample.
\end{itemize}
Figure \ref{deltaapha-beta}a shows $\bigtriangleup \beta_{\rm X,O}- \bigtriangleup
\alpha_{\rm X,O}$ distributions for Gold sample. For the energy injection sample, we
only used the post-break segment to remove the $q$-dependence.
These are the GRBs that also satisfy
the closure relations in all temporal segments. We do not show the closure relation
$\alpha-\beta$ plots since the energy injection models have an extra $q$-dependence on
the $\alpha$ values. To show the details of how each burst may fall into the model
predictions of each model (grey zone included), in Figure \ref{deltaapha-beta}(b-e)
we show the $\bigtriangleup \beta_{\rm X,O}- \bigtriangleup
\alpha_{\rm X,O}$ distributions of those Gold-Sample GRBs that satisfy the ISM and
wind medium models with $p>2$ and $1<p<2$, respectively.
The Silver sample GRBs are collected in
Figure \ref{deltaapha-beta}f). About half of them fall outside the predicted region
(red box) defined by the models. Even though some fall into the box, they do not satisfy the
closure relations in all the temporal segments in all energy bands.
\section{Statistics of the External Shock Afterglow Model Parameters\label{sec:normal}}
Since the Gold sample (Grade I and II) GRBs comply with the external shock models well,
they serve as an excellent sample to study external shock model parameters. The derived
external shock parameters of the Gold sample GRBs are presented in Table \ref{table:parameter}.
We present some statistical properties of these model parameters in this section.
\subsection{Temporal indices $\alpha$}
Figure \ref{alpha} shows the distributions of the temporal indices $\alpha$ in different
energy bands and different temporal segments. They are all well fitted with
Gaussian distributions for each band/temporal segment.
For the GRBs having a BPL lightcurve, the typical $\alpha$ values are
$\alpha_{\rm O,1}=0.49\pm0.45$, $\alpha_{\rm O,2}=1.44\pm0.39$, $\alpha_{\rm X,1}=0.58\pm0.63$
and $\alpha_{\rm X,2}=1.50\pm0.27$, respectively (Fig.\ref{alpha}a).
For the GRBs with a SPL lightcurve, one has
$\alpha_{\rm O}=1.26\pm0.38$, and $\alpha_{\rm X}=1.39\pm0.26$ (Fig.\ref{alpha}b).
For the BPL sample, we also separate it into the energy injection sample and the jet break
sample and perform the statistics.
For the energy injection breaks, one has $\alpha_{\rm O,1}=0.25\pm0.12$,
$\alpha_{\rm O,2}=1.26\pm0.26$, $\alpha_{\rm X,1}=0.30\pm0.27$ and $\alpha_{\rm X,2}=1.35\pm0.24$, respectively
(Fig.\ref{alpha}c). For the jet breaks, one has $\alpha_{\rm O,1}=0.77\pm0.18$,
$\alpha_{\rm O,2}=1.66\pm0.16$, $\alpha_{\rm X,1}=0.95\pm0.16$ and $\alpha_{\rm X,2}=1.70\pm0.19$, respectively
(Fig.\ref{alpha}d). Both the pre-break and the post-break $\alpha$ values in the energy injection
sample are systematically shallower than those in the jet break sample.
On average, the X-ray lightcurves are steeper than the optical lightcurves,
consistent with the expectations of the theoretical models (i.e. the X-ray band is more likely
above $\nu_c$ while the optical band is more likely below $\nu_c$).
Another self-consistency check is to compare the observed change of decay slope, $\Delta \alpha =
\alpha_2 - \alpha_1$, with the model predictions. From the closure relations (Table \ref{Tab:alpha-beta}), one can derive
\begin{itemize}
\item For energy injection breaks:
\begin{equation}
\label{deltaalpha1} \Delta \alpha=\cases{ \frac{(1-q)(2+\beta)}{2},
& ISM II ($p>2$)\cr
\frac{(1-q)(19+2\beta)}{16},
& ISM II ($1<p<2$) ,\cr
\frac{(1-q)(1+\beta)}{2},
& ISM I ($p>2$), wind II ($p>2$), wind I ($p>2$) \cr
\frac{(1-q)(7+\beta)}{8},
& ISM I ($1<p<2$)\cr
\frac{(1-q)(5+2\beta)}{8},
& wind II ($1<p<2$)\cr
\frac{(1-q)(3+\beta)}{4},
& wind I ($1<p<2$)\cr
}
\end{equation}
\item For jet breaks:
\begin{equation}
\label{deltaalpha2} \Delta \alpha=\cases{ \frac{3}{4},
& ISM I and II ($p>2$ and $1<p<2$) \cr
\frac{1}{2},
& wind I and II ($p>2$ and $1<p<2$) \cr
}
\end{equation}
\item For jet breaks with energy injection:
\begin{equation}
\label{deltaalpha3} \Delta \alpha=\cases{ \frac{(q+2)}{4},
& ISM II ($p>2$), ISM I ($p>2$ and $1<p<2$)\cr
\frac{(3q+6)}{16},
& ISM II ($1<p<2$),\cr
\frac{q}{2},
& wind II and wind I ($p>2$ and $1<p<2$) \cr
}
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
Figure \ref{a1a2gold} shows a comparison between the observed
$\Delta\alpha_{\rm obs}$ and the theoretically predicted $\Delta\alpha_{\rm th}$
for each GRB derived from the measured $\beta$ and $q$ values using the
corresponding closure relations. One can see that the two are consistent with each other.
Figure \ref{deltaalpha} displays the observed $\Delta\alpha$ distributions of
various samples. For the Gold sample, the $\Delta \alpha$ distributions of
optical and X-ray data are consistent with each other, i.e.
$\Delta\alpha_{\rm O}=0.94\pm0.23$ and $\Delta\alpha_{\rm X}=0.88\pm0.28$ (Fig.\ref{deltaalpha}a).
Furthermore, the $\Delta\alpha$ values of both bands in sub-groups (energy injection breaks and
jet breaks) are also consistent with each other: $\Delta\alpha_{\rm O}=1.05\pm 0.17$
and $\Delta \alpha_{\rm X}=1.10 \pm 0.21$ for the energy injection breaks, and
$\Delta\alpha_{\rm O}=0.75\pm 0.22$ and $\Delta \alpha_{\rm X}=0.75 \pm 0.22$ for
the jet breaks (Fig.\ref{deltaalpha}b). The Silver sample,
on the other hand, shows a poorer statistical behavior (Fig.\ref{deltaalpha}c and d).
\subsection{Spectral indices $\beta$}
Figure \ref{beta} shows the spectral index
distributions for the Gold sample.
In general, the distributions can be fitted with gaussian functions.
For the global sample, one has $\beta_{\rm O}=0.70\pm0.15$, and
$\beta_{\rm X}=0.98\pm0.15$ (Fig.\ref{beta}a). In the Gold sample, 17/45
GRBs have both the optical and X-ray bands in the same spectral regime.
One has $\beta_{\rm O}=0.77\pm0.19$, and $\beta_{\rm X}=0.89\pm0.15$,
which are consistent with each other (Fig.\ref{beta}b).
The rest 28/45 GRBs are identified to have X-ray and optical bands
separated by a cooling break. The results show
$\beta_{\rm O}=0.68\pm0.18$, $\beta_{\rm X}=1.01\pm0.14$, with
$\Delta \beta=\beta_{\rm X}-\beta_{\rm O}=0.37\pm 0.18$, which is
consistent with the theoretically expected value $0< \Delta \beta \leq0.5$
(Fig.\ref{beta}c).
We investigate the $\beta$ distributions in different types of lightcurves.
For the energy injection sample, one has $\beta_{\rm O}=0.78 \pm 0.12$, and
$\beta_{\rm X} = 1.01 \pm 0.13$ (Fig.\ref{beta}d); for the jet break sample,
one has $\beta_{\rm O}=0.59 \pm 0.11$, and
$\beta_{\rm X} = 0.97 \pm 0.08$ (Fig.\ref{beta}e); and for the SPL sample,
one has $\beta_{\rm O}=0.74 \pm 0.24$, and
$\beta_{\rm X} = 0.95 \pm 0.19$ (Fig.\ref{beta}f).
We also investigate the $\beta$ distributions in different ambient medium types.
For the ISM model (27/45 GRBs), one has $\beta_{\rm O}=0.72 \pm 0.21$, and
$\beta_{\rm X} = 0.98 \pm 0.10$ (Fig.\ref{beta}g); and for the wind model (18/45 GRBs),
one has $\beta_{\rm O}=0.70 \pm 0.10$, and
$\beta_{\rm X} = 1.00 \pm 0.20$ (Fig.\ref{beta}h). The ISM model is more favored
than the wind model, which is consistent with the previous results
\citep[e.g.,][]{panaitescu02,yost03,zhang06,schulze11}.
\subsection{Electron spectral index $p$}
Figure \ref{pvalue} shows the distributions of the electron spectral
index $p$ of the Gold sample. It has a Gaussian distribution with
$p=2.33\pm0.48$ (Fig.\ref{pvalue}a), which is very consistent with
the typical value of $p$ for relativistic shocks due to 1st-order
Fermi acceleration \citep[e.g.,][]{achterberg01,ellison02}. It also
has a wide distribution, which is consistent with previous studies
\citep[e.g.,][]{shen06,liang07,liang08,curran10}.
The $p$ distribution in different sub-samples are also generally
consistent with each other. Within the Gold sample, those GRBs with
optical and X-ray bands in the same spectral regime have $p=2.58 \pm 0.39$,
whereas those with optical and X-ray bands in different spectral regimes
have $p=2.17 \pm 0.44$ (Fig.\ref{pvalue}a). For the three light curve sub-samples,
one has $p=2.34 \pm 0.38$ for the energy injection break sample, $p=1.91 \pm
0.37$ for the jet break sample, and $p=2.48 \pm 0.47$ for the SPL sample,
respectively (Fig.\ref{pvalue}b).
For the two medium type models, one has $p=2.43 \pm 0.57$ for the ISM
model, and $p=2.28 \pm 0.33$ for the wind model, respectively (Fig.\ref{pvalue}c).
\subsection{Break time $t_{b}$}
Figure \ref{tbdist} shows the distributions of the observed achromatic break times, $t_b$.
The global distribution in the Gold sample gives $\log (t_b \rm /ks) = (3.8 \pm 0.9)$.
Separating the energy injection sample and jet break sample, one has $\log (t_b \rm /ks)
= (3.6 \pm 1.9)$ for the energy injection break sample, $\log (t_b \rm /ks) = (3.9 \pm 0.7)$
for the jet break sample. The energy injection ends (which depends on central engine) is
on average earlier than the jet break time (which depends on geometry of the jet).
The distribution of the energy injection break time is wider
than the jet break time distribution.
\subsection{Energy injection parameter $q$}
Within the Gold sample, 13/45 GRBs show an energy injection type break, i.e.
either an energy injection break or a jet break with energy injection. Among them,
4/13 and 9/13 GRBs satisfy the ISM and wind model, respectively. The
distributions of the energy injection parameter $q$ of various samples are
shown in Figure \ref{qvalue}.
The global sample has $q=0.22\pm0.11$. The ISM and wind models have
$q=0.20\pm0.12$ and $q=0.23\pm0.13$, respectively, which are consistent
with each other.
\subsection{Shock magnetic field equipartition factor $\epsilon_{B}$}
Among the derived shock parameters, the magnetic field equipartition factor
$\epsilon_B$ is of special interest. If the shock simply compresses the
upstream magnetic field, then the expected $\epsilon_B$ is low, of the order
of $10^{-6}-10^{-7}$. If, however, various plasma instabilities are playing
a role to amplify the magnetic fields \citep[e.g.,][]{medvedev99,nishikawa09},
one would expect a relatively large $\epsilon_B$ as high as 0.1.
Early afterglow modeling \citep[e.g.,][]{wijers99,panaitescu01,panaitescu02,yost03}
derived a relatively large $\epsilon_B$, with a typical value $\sim 0.01$.
On the other hand, modeling of GeV emission in several Fermi/LAT-detected
GRBs led to the suggestion that $\epsilon_B$ should be relatively low at
least for some GRBs \citep{kumar09,kumar10}. \cite{santana14} derived
$\epsilon_B$ for a large sample of GRBs, and derived a medium value of
$10^{-5}$.
With our Gold sample, we can constrain $\epsilon_B$ independently.
Even though in most GRBs, $\epsilon_B$ cannot be constrained due to
the degeneracy of the data, one can still place interesting upper limits
to $\epsilon_B$ based on the medium type and spectral regime of the GRBs.
For example, in the ISM model $\nu_c$ decreases with time. For a regime II
($\nu_m < \nu < \nu_c$) GRB, the last data point in the light curve would set
a lower limit on $\nu_c$ at that epoch, and hence, an upper limit on
$\epsilon_B$. Similarly, in the wind model $\nu_c$ increases with time.
For a regime II GRB, the first data point in the light curve would set
a lower limit on $\nu_c$ at that point, and hence, an upper limit on
$\epsilon_B$.
In the Appendix, we present expressions of
$\nu_m$, $\nu_c$, $F_{\nu,\rm{max}}$ and the kinetic energy of the afterglow,
$E_{\rm k,iso}$. For the $p>2$ cases, we adopt the formalism in previous
works \citep{zhang07,gao13,lv14}. New expressions for the $1<p<2$ regime
are also presented following \cite{gao13}. We then derive the expressions
of $\epsilon_B$ in various models, Eqs. (\ref{ISMeb1}), (\ref{ISMeb2}),
(\ref{windeb1}), and (\ref{windeb2}), which are used to constrain $\epsilon_B$.
The derived upper limits of $\epsilon_B$ are presented in Figure \ref{epsilonB}, with other
parameters fixed as $\epsilon_e = 0.1$, $n=1$ or $A_\ast=1$. One can see that in general
these upper limits point towards a relatively low $\epsilon_B$ value. In some cases for the
ISM model, the upper limits are even lower than $10^{-5}$. These results are consistent with
the findings of \cite{kumar09,kumar10}, \cite{santana14}, and \cite{duran14}.
\subsection{Energetics}
The isotropic $\gamma$-ray energy $E_{\rm \gamma,iso}$ is calculated as
\begin{equation}\label{Eiso}
E_{\rm \gamma,iso}=\frac{4 \pi D^{2}_{\rm L}S_{\gamma}k}{1+z},
\end{equation}
where $S_{\rm \gamma}$ is the gamma-ray fluence in the BAT band,
$D_{\rm L}$ is the luminosity distance of the source at redshift
$z$, and the parameter $k$ is a factor to correct the observed $\gamma$-ray
energy in a given band pass to a broad band (e.g., $1-10^4$ keV in the rest
frame) with the observed GRB spectra \citep{bloom01}. It is well
known that a typical GRB spectrum is well fitted with the so-called
Band function \citep{band93}. If the Band parameters are measured
for a burst, these parameters are used to derive the $k$ parameter.
However, owing to the narrowness of the {\em Swift}/BAT
band, the spectra of many {\em Swift} GRBs in our sample are adequately
fitted with a single power-law, $N\propto E^{-\Gamma}$, so that the Band
parameters are not well constrained. For these GRBs, we use an empirical
relation between $E_p$ and BAT-band photon index $\Gamma$
\citep{zhang07b,sakamoto09,virgili12} to estimate $E_p$.
Taking typical values of the photon indices
$\alpha=-1.1$ and $\beta=-2.2$ \citep{preece00,kaneko06},
we can derive $E_{\rm \gamma,iso}$ values of the GRBs with redshift measurements
in our Gold sample, which range from $10^{51}$ to $10^{55}$ erg, with a
typical value $\log (E_{\rm \gamma,iso} \rm /erg)=53.15\pm0.69$
(Fig.\ref{Edistri}(a)).
The isotropic kinetic energy of the afterglow $E_{\rm K,iso}$ can be derived
from the afterglow data. In general, broad-band modeling is needed to
precisely measure $E_{\rm K,iso}$ \citep{panaitescu01,panaitescu02}.
Most GRBs do not have adequate data to perform such an analysis.
More conveniently, one may use the X-ray data only to constrain $E_{\rm K,iso}$,
since the X-ray band is usually above $\nu_c$, so that the X-ray flux does
not depend on the ambient density and only weakly depends on $\epsilon_e$
\citep{kumar99,freedman01,berger03,lloydronning04,zhang07}, see
Appendix for detailed derivations. For the cases with energy injection,
$E_{\rm K,iso}$ is a function of time during the energy injection phase.
Following \cite{zhang07}, we calculate $E_{\rm K,iso}$ at two different
epochs, one at the break time $t_b$, when energy injection is over,
and another at a putative deceleration time $t_{\rm dec} \sim {\rm max}
(60~{\rm s}, T_{90})$. We use the X-ray flux at $t_b$ to derive
$E_{\rm K,end}$, and then derive $E_{\rm K,dec}=E_{\rm K,end}
(t_{\rm dec} / t_b)^{1-q}$. The total injected energy is calculated
as $E_{\rm K,inj}=E_{\rm K,end}-E_{\rm K,dec}$. Based on our constraints
on $\epsilon_B$, we take $\epsilon_B = 10^{-5}$ for all the GRBs in our
calculations. Other parameters are taken as typical values:
$\epsilon_e = 0.1$, $n=1$ or $A_\ast=1$, and $Y=1$.
In Figure \ref{Edistri}, we present several statistical results of the $E_{\rm K,iso}$ calculations. For the GRBs with energy injection, the distributions are log ($E_{\rm K,end} \rm /erg)=54.99\pm0.86$ (Fig.\ref{Edistri}b), log ($E_{\rm K,inj}\rm /erg)=54.95\pm 0.61 $ (Fig.\ref{Edistri}c), and log ($E_{\rm K,dec} \rm /erg)=53.29\pm0.45$ (Fig.\ref{Edistri}d). For the entire Gold sample, one has log ($E_{\rm K,dec}\rm /erg)=54.66\pm1.18$ (Fig.\ref{Edistri}d). It is interesting to see that the energetics of the energy-injection sample reache a similar level as the no-energy-injection sample after the energy injection is over. Clear correlations are found among different energy components: $E_{\rm K,end} - E_{\rm K,inj}$ relation $E_{\rm K,inj,52}=0.69E^{1.02\pm0.02}_{\rm K,end,52}$ (Fig.\ref{Erelation}a), $E_{\rm K,dec} - E_{\rm K,inj}$ relation $E_{\rm K,inj,52}=41.7E^{0.76\pm0.20}_{\rm K,dec,52}$ (Fig.\ref{Erelation}b), $E_{\rm \gamma,iso} - E_{\rm K,end}$ relation $E_{\rm K,end,52}=476.3E^{0.53\pm0.23}_{\rm \gamma,iso,52}$ (Fig.\ref{Erelation}c), $E_{\rm \gamma,iso} - E_{\rm K,dec}$ relations in the entire Gold sample, $E_{\rm K,dec,52}=56.2E^{0.93\pm0.19}_{\rm \gamma,iso,52}$ (Fig.\ref{Erelation}d), in the energy injection sample, $E_{\rm K,dec,52}=8.9E^{1.10\pm0.29}_{\rm \gamma,iso,52}$ (Fig.\ref{Erelation}e), and in the no-energy-injection sample, $E_{\rm K,dec,52}=316.2E^{0.55\pm0.21}_{\rm \gamma,iso,52}$ (Fig.\ref{Erelation}f), respectively. In particular, the$E_{\rm K,inj,52}=41.7E^{0.76\pm0.20}_{\rm K,dec,52}$ correlation suggests a substantial energy injection during the shallow decay phase for most GRBs.
\subsection{Radiative efficiency $\eta_{\gamma}$}
The GRB radiative efficiency, defined as \citep{lloydronning04}
\begin{equation}\label{efficency}
\eta_{\gamma}=\frac{E_{\rm \gamma,iso}}{E_{\rm \gamma,iso}+E_{\rm K,iso}},
\end{equation}
is an essential parameter to probe how efficient a burst converts its global energy to prompt $\gamma$-ray emission.
As mentioned above, if there is continuous energy injection, the kinetic energy of the afterglow $E_{\rm K,iso}$ takes different values if one chooses different epochs. In principle, $\eta_\gamma$ can be defined for two different epochs, $t_{\rm dec}$ and $t_b$, which have different physical meanings (see a discussion in \citealt{zhang07}).
Figure \ref{efficiency} shows the radiative efficiencies calculated at $t_{\rm dec}$ and $t_b$ as a function of $E_{\rm \gamma,iso}$ along with their histograms. No significant correlation between $\eta_\gamma$ and $E_{\rm \gamma,iso}$ is found. The fireball internal shock model predicts a relatively small efficiency of a few per cent \citep[e.g.,][]{kumar99,panaitescu99,maxham09,gaomeszaros15}. Previous constraints on GRB radiative efficiencies give relatively large values, as large as above $90\%$ \citep[e.g.,][]{lloydronning04,zhang07,racusin11} for some GRBs. This challenges the internal shock models, and favors alternative prompt emission models, such as dissipation of magnetic fields \citep{zhangyan11} or photospheric emission \citep{lazzati13}.
The derived efficiencies can be fit with rough log-normal distributions (Fig.\ref{efficiency}b, d, f). For the entire sample, one has $\rm log (\eta_{\rm \gamma,dec}/\%)=0.75\pm0.86$. For the sub-sample GRBs without energy injection, the radiative efficiency is lower, with $\rm log (\eta_{\rm \gamma,dec}/\%)=0.37\pm0.61$. For the sub-sample GRBs with energy injection, the radiative efficiencies read $\rm log (\eta_{\rm \gamma,dec}/\%)=0.92\pm1.25$ for $t_{\rm dec}$, and $\rm log (\eta_{\rm \gamma,end}/\%)=-0.89\pm0.97$ for $t_b$, respectively.
The derived efficiencies are somewhat smaller than the values derived in previous work \citep[e.g.][]{zhang07}. The main reason is the adoption of a smaller value of $\epsilon_B \sim 10^{-5}$, so that the derived $E_{\rm K,iso}$ are systematically larger. This greatly alleviates the low-efficiency problem of the internal shock models. Nonetheless, some GRBs still have tens of percent efficiency, which demands a contrived setup for the internal shock models \citep[e.g.,][]{beloborodov00,kobayashisari01}. If $t_{\rm dec}$ is adopted, which is more natural for most prompt emission model to calculate efficiency (see \citealt{zhang07} for a detailed discussion), $\eta_\gamma$ is still typically too large for the internal shock model. This is on the other hand consistent with the suggestion that internal collision-induced magnetic reconnection and turbulence (ICMART) is the dominant process to power GRB prompt emission in the majority of GRBs, which can typically gives tens of percent radiative efficiency \citep{zhangyan11,deng15}. This conclusion is also consistent with independent studies of modeling the GRB prompt emission spectrum \citep{uhmzhang14} and quasi-thermal photosphere emission component \citep{gaozhang15}.
\subsection{Jet opening angle and geometrically-corrected gamma-ray energy}
In the Gold sample, 8/45 GRBs show a jet break. These include five GRBs of without
energy injection and one more with energy injection. The ambient medium type of
all 6 GRBs is ISM. Five out of these six GRBs have redshift information
(Table \ref{table:jet}).
Under the assumption of a conical jet, one can derive the jet opening angle
based on observational data \citep{rhoads99,sari99,frail01}:
\begin{equation}\label{jet}
\theta_{j}=0.070 ~{\rm rad}~\left(\frac{t_{b}}{1\ \rm
day}\right)^{3/8} \left(\frac{1+z}{2}\right)^{-3/8}
\left(\frac{E_{\rm K,iso}}{10^{53}\ \rm ergs}\right)^{-1/8}
\left(\frac{n}{0.1\ \rm cm^{-3}}\right)^{1/8}.
\end{equation}
We then calculate the geometrically corrected $\gamma$-ray energy
\begin{equation}\label{Eiso}
E_{\gamma}=(1-\cos\theta_{j})E_{\rm \gamma,iso},
\end{equation}
and kinetic energy
\begin{equation}\label{Eiso}
E_{\rm K}=(1-\cos\theta_{j})E_{\rm K,iso}.
\end{equation}
Here $E_{\rm K,iso}$ is taken as $E_{\rm K,end}$ for the energy injection sample.
The medium density is taken as $n=1$ cm$^{-3}$.The results are presented in Table \ref{table:jet} and
Figure \ref{jetbreak}. The best fitting results give $\theta_{j} = (2.8 \pm 1.5)^{\rm \circ} $, $\log (E_{\gamma}/\rm erg) = 49.86 \pm 0.65$, and $\log (E_{\rm K}/\rm erg) = 50.89 \pm 0.54$.
\section{Conclusions and Discussion\label{sec:normal}}
The chromatic afterglow behavior observed in some GRBs has raised the concern regarding
whether the external forward shock models are still adequate to interpret
the broad-band afterglows of GRBs and whether alternative ideas, e.g., a long-lasting
engine-driven afterglow, are needed to account for the data.
In order to answer ``how bad/good the external shock models are'',
in this paper, we systematically studied 85 {\em Swift} GRBs up to March 2014, which
all have high-quality X-ray and optical light curves and spectral data to allow us
to study the compliance
of the data to the external forward shock models. The results of this study
can be summarized as the following.
Based on how well the data abide by the external forward shock afterglow models,
we categorized GRBs into five grades and three samples:
\begin{itemize}
\item A Gold sample (Grade I and II) includes 45/85 GRBs.
These GRBs are fully consistent
with the theoretical predictions of the external shock models, including having
an acceptable achromatic break and fulfilling various closure relations between
the temporal decay indices $\alpha$ and spectral indices $\beta$.
\item A Silver sample (Grade III and IV) includes 37/85 GRBs. These GRBs
are also consistent with having an acceptable achromatic break, even though one or more
afterglow segments do not comply with the closure relations. These GRBs are
potentially interpretable within the framework of external shock models.
\item A Bad sample (Grade V) only includes 3/85 GRBs. These GRBs show direct
evidence of chromatic behaviors, which cannot be accounted for within
single-component external shock models.
\end{itemize}
The bottom line of this study is to address how bad/good the external shock models
are. Our results show that external shock models work very well for at least
$\sim$ 53\% of GRBs (our Gold sample). These GRBs can be interpreted within the
simplest afterglow models. If more advanced modeling invoking other factors (e.g.,
structured jet or long-lasting reverse shock) is carried out, up to $\sim 96\%$
of GRBs (including the Silver sample) {\em may be} accounted for within the
external shock models. Only less than 4\% GRBs
truly violate the basic expectations of the external shock models, and demand
another emission component (e.g., central engine afterglow) to account for emission
in at least one band (e.g., the X-ray band).
Several caveats deserve mentioning. First, we only focused on the main afterglow
components (SPL, BPL or TPL) of the X-ray and optical lightcurves. In some
GRBs, there are additional components overlapping with these main components,
such as the X-ray steep decay phase, X-ray flares, and optical re-brightening
features, which are not included in the analysis. These features are usually
chromatic, and demand additional emission components to interpret
the data. The general conclusion that a lot of GRBs have extended central
engine activities \citep{zhang06} remain valid. The true duration of the
GRB central engine activities may be much longer than what is measured by
the GRB duration $T_{90}$ \citep{zhangbb14}.
Second, we adopted a relatively ``loose'' criterion ( $\chi^2_{total} \leq3$) to define ``achromaticity''
by requiring the X-ray and optical lightcurves to have a same break time. Searching for break times independently in the two bands often results in
somewhat different break times, but many GRBs can be made being consistent
with achromatic. The relatively large $\chi^2_{total} \sim 3$ in some GRBs
is mostly caused by the additional features (small flares and fluctuations which we
do not care) in the otherwise (broken) power law lightcurves.
We therefore believe that our approach is appropriate
to address the question of ``how bad the models are''. On the other hand, if in
the future high-quality data indeed show slight chromatic behaviors with high confidence,
one should take cautious to the fraction numbers presented in this paper, and consider
how such slight chromatic behaviors may impact the models.
Finally, we only studied 85 GRBs that have both bright X-ray and bright optical
emission data to allow us to perform the test. There are more GRBs detected
by {\em Swift} ($\sim 900$ with X-ray lightcurves and $\sim 260$ with optical
lightcurves). Due to the complicated sample selection effects,
we do not guarantee that the fractions of Gold, Silver and Bad
samples are reliable numbers for the entire GRB population. In any case,
85 GRBs represent a reasonably large sample, so that our statistics are valid
at least for the ``bright'' sample of GRBs.
With the Gold sample, we further performed a series of statistical analyses
of various observational properties and model parameters. Following interesting
conclusions can be drawn:
\begin{itemize}
\item Temporal index $\alpha$: The temporal indices $\alpha$ in different bands
and different temporal segments satisfy the afterglow model predictions. On
average, the X-ray lightcurves are steeper than optical. For BPL lightcurves,
the degrees of the break, $\Delta\alpha$, are consistent with the theoretical
predictions of the energy injection models or jet break models;
\item Spectral index $\beta$: The spectral indices $\beta$
in the optical and X-ray bands are
$\beta_{O}=0.70\pm0.15$, $\beta_{X}=0.98\pm0.15$, respectively.
Some (17/45) have X-ray and optical bands in the same spectral segment,
while most (28/45) have the two bands separated by $\nu_c$ or in the grey zone.
Statistically, $\Delta\beta = 0.37 \pm 0.18$ is consistent with the theoretical
value 0-0.5, a range of $\Delta\beta$, including those expected
in the grey zone \citep{uhm14a}.
\item Electron spectral index $p$: The typical value $p=2.33\pm0.48$ is very consistent with the theoretical predictions for relativistic shocks. A wide range of $p$ values are observed, which is consistent with previous findings.
\item Break time $t_b$: The typical break time is found to be $\log (t_b \rm /ks) = 3.8 \pm 0.9$. The break time of energy injection sample ($\log (t_b \rm /ks) = 3.96\pm 1.9$) is statistically earlier than that of the jet break break sample ($\log (t_b \rm /ks) = 3.9 \pm 0.7$).
\item Energy injection parameter $q$: the central value is $q=0.22\pm0.11$, and the ISM and wind models are consistent with each other, with $q=0.20\pm0.12$ and $q=0.23\pm0.13$, respectively.
\item Magnetization parameter $\epsilon_B$: The derived upper limits of $\epsilon_B$ suggests that the typical value of this parameter is low (say, $10^{-5}$), which is consistent with previous work \citep{kumar09,kumar10,santana14,duran14}.
\item Energetics: The typical isotropic $\gamma$-ray energy is $\log (E_{\rm \gamma,iso}\rm /erg) = 53.15 \pm 0.69$. For the energy injection case, the typical isotropic kinetic energy in the blastwave is log ($E_{\rm K,dec}\rm /erg)=53.29\pm0.45$ at the deceleration time, and log ($E_{\rm K,end}\rm /erg)=54.99\pm0.86$ when energy injection is over. For GRBs without energy injection, the typical blastwave kinetic energy is log ($E_{\rm K,dec}\rm /erg)=54.66\pm1.18$. Clear correlations among various energy components are found.
\item Radiative efficiency $\eta_\gamma$: With a small $\epsilon_B \sim 10^{-5}$ adopted, the derived radiative efficiency $\eta_\gamma$ is lower than previous studies. For the entire Gold sample, $\rm log (\eta_{\rm \gamma,dec}/\%)=0.75\pm0.86$. Yet, the efficiency is still large for some GRBs, especially the ones with energy injection. For these GRBs, the efficiency measure at the deceleration time has $\rm log (\eta_{\rm \gamma,dec}/\%)=0.92\pm1.25$, which still challenges the internal shock model.
\item Jet opening angle $\theta_j$: For the jet break sample, we derived the typical jet opening angle as $\theta_{j} = (2.5 \pm 1.5)^{\rm \circ}$. The jet-corrected $\gamma$-ray energy and kinetic energy are $\log (E_{\gamma}\rm /erg) = 49.86 \pm 0.65$ and $\log (E_{\rm K}\rm /erg) = 50.89 \pm 0.54$, respectively.
\end{itemize}
\acknowledgments
We thank an anonymous referee for helpful suggestions, and M. De Pasquale for a comment. This work is supported by the National Basic Research Program (973 Programme) of China (Grant No. 2014CB845800), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants 11303005, U1331202), the Guangxi Science Foundation (2013GXNSFFA019001), the Strategic Priority Research Program ``The Emergence of Cosmological Structures''(Grant No. XDB09000000) and CSC follow support. BZ acknowledges NASA NNX14AF85G for support. HG acknowledges NASA NNX 13AH50G. DAK acknowledges support by DFG grants Kl 766/16-1 and Kl 766/16-3."
\clearpage
|
\section{Introduction} \vspace{-10pt}
Matching two potentially heterogenous language objects is central to many natural language applications~\cite{RetrievalQA,bordes2014semantic}. It generalizes the conventional notion of similarity (e.g., in paraphrase identification \cite{socher2011}) or relevance (e.g., in information retrieval\cite{wu2013learning}), since it aims to model the correspondence between ``linguistic objects" of different nature at different levels of abstractions. Examples include top-$k$ re-ranking in machine translation (e.g., comparing the meanings of a French sentence and an English sentence~\cite{ibmmodel}) and dialogue (e.g., evaluating the appropriateness of a response to a given utterance\cite{emnlpmatch}).
Natural language sentences have complicated structures, both sequential and hierarchical, that are essential for understanding them. A successful sentence-matching algorithm therefore needs to capture not only the internal structures of sentences but also the rich patterns in their interactions. Towards this end, we propose deep neural network models, which adapt the convolutional strategy (proven successful on image~\cite{cnn} and speech~\cite{cnn_speech}) to natural language. To further explore the relation between representing sentences and matching them, we devise a novel model that can naturally host both the hierarchical composition for sentences and the simple-to-comprehensive fusion of matching patterns with the same convolutional architecture. Our model is generic, requiring no prior knowledge of natural language (e.g., parse tree) and putting essentially no constraints on the matching tasks. This is part of our continuing effort\footnote{Our project page: \url{http://www.noahlab.com.hk/technology/Learning2Match.html}} in understanding natural language objects and the matching between them~\cite{nipsmatch, emnlpmatch}.
Our main contributions can be summarized as follows. First, we devise novel deep convolutional network architectures that can naturally combine 1) the hierarchical sentence modeling through layer-by-layer composition and pooling, and 2) the capturing of the rich matching patterns at different levels of abstraction; Second, we perform extensive empirical study on tasks with different scales and characteristics, and demonstrate the superior power of the proposed architectures over competitor methods.
\paragraph{Roadmap} We start by introducing a convolution network in Section \ref{s:senCNN} as the basic architecture for sentence modeling, and how it is related to existing sentence models. Based on that, in Section \ref{s:matchmodel}, we propose two architectures for sentence matching, with a detailed discussion of their relation. In Section \ref{s:opt}, we briefly discuss the learning of the proposed architectures. Then in Section \ref{s:expts}, we report our empirical study, followed by a brief discussion of related work in Section \ref{s:related}.
\vspace{-10pt}
\section{Convolutional Sentence Model} \label{s:senCNN} \vspace{-10pt}
We start with proposing a new convolutional architecture for modeling sentences. As illustrated in Figure \ref{f:senCNN}, it takes as input the embedding of words (often trained beforehand with unsupervised methods) in the sentence aligned sequentially, and summarize the meaning of a sentence through layers of convolution and pooling, until reaching a fixed length vectorial representation in the final layer. As in most convolutional models~\cite{cnn, cnn_speech}, we use convolution units with a local ``receptive field" and shared weights, but we design a large feature map to adequately model the rich structures in the composition of words. \vspace{-5pt}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[c]{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{pics/arc1.png} \vspace{-7pt}
\end{tabular}
\caption{The over all architecture of the convolutional sentence model. A box with dashed lines indicates all-zero padding turned off by the gating function (see top of Page 3).}
\label{f:senCNN}
\end{center}
\end{figure} \vspace{-10pt}
\paragraph{Convolution} \vspace{-10pt} \label{s:convunit}
As shown in Figure \ref{f:senCNN}, the convolution in Layer-1 operates on sliding windows of words (width $k_1$), and the convolutions in deeper layers are defined in a similar way. Generally,with sentence input $\mathbf{x}$, the convolution unit for feature map of type-$f$ (among $F_\ell$ of them) on Layer-$\ell$ is
\begin{equation}
z^{(\ell, f)}_{i} \overset{\text{def}}{=}
z^{(\ell,f)}_{i}(\mathbf{x}) = \sigma(\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(\ell,f)} \hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i} + b^{(\ell,f)}), \;\; f = 1,2,\cdots,F_{\ell}
\end{equation}
and its matrix form is $\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell)}_{i} \overset{\text{def}}{=}\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell)}_{i}(\mathbf{x}) =
\sigma(\ensuremath{\mathbf{W}}^{(\ell)} \hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i} + \b^{(\ell)})$,
where
\begin{itemize}
\item $z^{(\ell,f)}_{i}(\mathbf{x})$ gives the output of feature map of type-$f$ for location $i$ in Layer-$\ell$;
\item $\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(\ell, f)}$ is the parameters for $f$ on Layer-$\ell$, with matrix form $\ensuremath{\mathbf{W}}^{(\ell)} \overset{\text{def}}{=} [\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(\ell,1)},\cdots,\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(\ell,F_{\ell})}] $;
\item $\sigma(\cdot)$ is the activation function (e.g., Sigmoid or Relu~\cite{relu})
\item $\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i}$ denotes the segment of Layer-$\ell\hspace{-3pt}-\hspace{-3pt}1$ for the convolution at location $i$ , while
\[
\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(0)}_{i} = \ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}_{i:i+k_1-1} \overset{\text{def}}{=} [ \ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}_{i}^\top, \;\, \ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}_{i+1}^\top,\;\cdots,\;\, \ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}_{i+k_1-1}^\top]^\top
\]
concatenates the vectors for $k_{1}$ (width of sliding window) words from sentence input $\mathbf{x}$.
\end{itemize}
\paragraph{Max-Pooling}\vspace{-10pt}
We take a max-pooling in every two-unit window for every $f$, after each convolution
\[
z_i^{(\ell,f)} = \max(z_{2i-1}^{(\ell-1,f)}, z_{2i}^{(\ell-1,f)}), \;\;\ell = 2,4,\cdots.
\]
The effects of pooling are two-fold: 1) it shrinks the size of the representation by half, thus quickly absorbs the differences in length for sentence representation, and 2) it filters out undesirable composition of words (see Section \ref{s:someAnalysis} for some analysis).
\paragraph{Length Variability} The variable length of sentences in a fairly broad range can be readily handled with the convolution and pooling strategy. More specifically, we put all-zero padding vectors after the last word of the sentence until the maximum length. To eliminate the boundary effect caused by the great variability of sentence lengths, we add to the convolutional unit a gate which sets the output vectors to all-zeros if the input is all zeros. For any given sentence input $\mathbf{x}$, the output of type-$f$ filter for location $i$ in the $\ell^{th}$ layer is given by
\begin{equation}
z^{(\ell, f)}_{i} \overset{\text{def}}{=}
z^{(\ell,f)}_{i}(\mathbf{x}) = g(\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i})\cdot \sigma(\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(\ell,f)} \hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i} + b^{(\ell,f)}),
\end{equation}
where $g(\mathbf{v}) = 0$ if all the elements in vector $\mathbf{v}$ equals 0, otherwise $g(\mathbf{v}) = 1$. This gate, working with max-pooling and positive activation function (e.g., Sigmoid), keeps away the artifacts from padding in all layers. Actually it creates a natural hierarchy of all-zero padding (as illustrated in Figure \ref{f:senCNN}), consisting of nodes in the neural net that would not contribute in the forward process (as in prediction) and backward propagation (as in learning).
\subsection{Some Analysis on the Convolutional Architecture} \label{s:someAnalysis} \vspace{-10pt}
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.6\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\vspace{-5pt}
\begin{tabular}[c]{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{pics/catExample.png}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-10pt}
\caption{The cat example, where in the convolution layer, gray color indicates less confidence in composition.} \vspace{-5pt}
\label{f:cat}
\end{center}
\end{wrapfigure}
The convolutional unit, when combined with max-pooling, can act as the compositional operator with local selection mechanism as in the recursive autoencoder~\cite{RAE}. Figure \ref{f:cat} gives an example on what could happen on the first two layers with input sentence ``\texttt{\small The cat sat on the mat}". Just for illustration purpose, we present a dramatic choice of parameters (by turning off some elements in $\ensuremath{\mathbf{W}}^{(1)}$) to make the convolution units focus on different segments within a 3-word window. For example, some feature maps (group 2) give compositions for ``\texttt{\small the cat}" and ``\texttt{\small cat sat}", each being a vector. Different feature maps offer a variety of compositions, with confidence encoded in the values (color coded in output of convolution layer in Figure \ref{f:cat}). The pooling then chooses, \emph{for each composition type}, between two adjacent sliding windows, e.g., between ``\texttt{\small on the}" and ``\texttt{\small the mat}" for feature maps group 2 from the rightmost two sliding windows.
\paragraph{Relation to Recursive Models} Our convolutional model differs from Recurrent Neural Network (RNN, \cite{RNN}) and Recursive Auto-Encoder (RAE, \cite{RAE}) in several important ways. First, unlike RAE, it does not take a single path of word/phrase composition determined either by a separate gating function~\cite{RAE}, an external parser~\cite{socher2011}, or just natural sequential order~\cite{socherRNN}. Instead, it takes multiple choices of composition via a large feature map (encoded in $\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(\ell,f)}$ for different $f$), and leaves the choices to the pooling afterwards to pick the more appropriate segments(in every adjacent two) for each composition. With any window width $k_{\ell}\geq 3$, the type of composition would be much richer than that of RAE. Second, our convolutional model can take supervised training and tune the parameters for a specific task, a property vital to our supervised learning-to-match framework. However, unlike recursive models~\cite{socherRNN, RAE}, the convolutional architecture has a fixed depth, which bounds the level of composition it could do. For tasks like matching, this limitation can be largely compensated with a network afterwards that can take a ``global" synthesis on the learned sentence representation.
\paragraph{Relation to ``Shallow" Convolutional Models} The proposed convolutional sentence model takes simple architectures such as~\cite{Shenwww2014,emnlp14_kim} (essentially the same convolutional architecture as SENNA~\cite{senna}), which consists of a convolution layer and a max-pooling over the entire sentence for each feature map. This type of models, with local convolutions and a global pooling, essentially do a ``soft" local template matching and is able to detect local features useful for a certain task. Since the sentence-level sequential order is inevitably lost in the global pooling, the model is incapable of modeling more complicated structures. It is not hard to see that our convolutional model degenerates to the SENNA-type architecture if we limit the number of layers to be two and set the pooling window infinitely large.
\section{Convolutional Matching Models} \vspace{-10pt} \label{s:matchmodel}
Based on the discussion in Section \ref{s:senCNN}, we propose two related convolutional architectures, namely \textsc{Arc-I} and \textsc{Arc-II}), for matching two sentences. \vspace{-5pt}
\subsection{Architecture-I (\textsc{Arc-I})} \vspace{-10pt}
Architecture-I (\textsc{Arc-I}), as illustrated in Figure \ref{f:1DCNN}, takes a conventional approach: It first finds the representation of each sentence, and then compares the representation for the two sentences with a multi-layer perceptron (\textsc{MLP})~\cite{DeepAI}. It is essentially the Siamese architecture introduced in \cite{bordes2014semantic, cnn}, which has been applied to different tasks as a nonlinear similarity function \cite{Sun_2013_ICCV}. Although \textsc{Arc-I} enjoys the flexibility brought by the convolutional sentence model, it suffers from a drawback inherited from the Siamese architecture: it defers the interaction between two sentences
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.6\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[c]{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{pics/1dCNN_B.png}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-10pt}
\caption{Architecture-I for matching two sentences.} \vspace{-5pt}
\label{f:1DCNN}
\end{center}
\end{wrapfigure}
(in the final MLP) to until their individual representation matures (in the convolution model), therefore runs at the risk of losing details (e.g., a city name) important for the \emph{matching task} in representing the sentences. In other words, in the forward phase (prediction), the representation of each sentence is formed without knowledge of each other. This \emph{cannot} be adequately circumvented in backward phase (learning), when the convolutional model learns to extract structures informative for matching on a population level.
\subsection{Architecture-II (\textsc{Arc-II})} \vspace{-10pt}
In view of the drawback of Architecture-I, we propose Architecture-II (\textsc{Arc-II}) that is built directly on the interaction space between two sentences. It has the desirable property of letting two sentences meet before their own high-level representations mature, while still retaining the space for the individual development of abstraction of each sentence. Basically, in Layer-1, we take sliding windows on both sentences, and model all the \emph{possible} combinations of them through ``one-dimensional" (1D) convolutions. For segment $i$ on $S_X$ and segment $j$ on $S_Y$, we have the feature map
\begin{equation}
z^{(1, f)}_{i,j} \overset{\text{def}}{=}
z^{(1,f)}_{i,j}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}) = g(\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(0)}_{i,j})\cdot \sigma(\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(1,f)} \hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(0)}_{i,j} + b^{(1,f)}),
\end{equation}
where $\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(0)}_{i,j} \in \mathbb{R}^{2k_1 D_{e}}$ simply concatenates the vectors for sentence segments for $S_X$ and $S_Y$:
\[
\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(0)}_{i,j} = [\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}_{i:i+k_1-1}^\top,\;\; \ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}_{j:j+k_1-1}^\top]^\top.
\]
Clearly the 1D convolution preserves the location information about both segments. After that in Layer-2, it performs a 2D max-pooling in non-overlapping $2\times 2$ windows (illustrated in Figure \ref{f:order})
\begin{equation}
z_{i,j}^{(2,f)} = \max(\{z_{2i-1,2j-1}^{(1,f)}, z_{2i-1,2j}^{(1,f)},z_{2i,2j-1}^{(1,f)},z_{2i,2j}^{(1,f)}\}). \label{e:2dpool}
\end{equation}
In Layer-3, we perform a 2D convolution on $k_3\times k_3$ windows of output from Layer-2:
\begin{equation}
z^{(3, f)}_{i,j} = g(\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(2)}_{i,j})\cdot \sigma(\mathbf{W}^{(3,f)} \hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(2)}_{i,j} + b^{(3,f)}).
\end{equation}
This could go on for more layers of 2D convolution and 2D max-pooling, analogous to that of convolutional architecture for image input~\cite{cnn}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[c]{cc}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{pics/2dCNN_D.png}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Architecture-II (\textsc{Arc-II}) of convolutional matching model}
\label{f:2DCNN}
\end{center} \vspace{-10pt}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{The 2D-Convolution} After the first convolution, we obtain a low level representation of the interaction between the two sentences, and from then we obtain a high level representation $\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell )}_{i,j}$ which encodes the information from both sentences. The general two-dimensional convolution is formulated as
\begin{equation}
\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell)}_{i,j} = g(\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i,j})\cdot \sigma(\ensuremath{\mathbf{W}}^{(\ell)} \hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i,j} + \b^{(\ell,f)}), \;\;\ell = 3,5,\cdots
\end{equation}
where $ \hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i,j}$ concatenates the corresponding vectors from its 2D receptive field in Layer-$\ell\hspace{-3pt}-\hspace{-3pt}1$. This pooling has different mechanism as in the 1D case, for it selects \emph{not only} among compositions on different segments but also among different local matchings. This pooling strategy resembles the dynamic pooling in \cite{socher2011} in a similarity learning context, but with two distinctions: 1) it happens on a fixed architecture and 2) it has much richer structure than just similarity.
\subsection{Some Analysis on \textsc{Arc-II}}\vspace{-5pt}
\paragraph{Order Preservation}
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[c]{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{pics/pooling.png}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Order preserving in 2D-pooling.}
\label{f:order}
\end{center}
\vspace{-10pt}
\end{wrapfigure}
Both the convolution and pooling operation in Architecture-II have this order preserving property. Generally, $\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell)}_{i,j}$ contains information about the words in $S_X$ before those in $\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell)}_{i+1,j}$, although they may be generated with slightly different segments in $S_Y$, due to the 2D pooling (illustrated in Figure \ref{f:order}). The orders is however retained in a ``conditional" sense. Our experiments show that when \textsc{Arc-II} is trained on the $(S_X, S_Y, \tilde{S}_Y)$ triples where $\tilde{S}_Y$ randomly shuffles the words in $S_Y$, it consistently gains some ability of finding the correct $S_Y$ in the usual contrastive negative sampling setting, which however does not happen with \textsc{Arc-I}. \vspace{-5pt}
\paragraph{Model Generality} It is not hard to show that \textsc{Arc-II} actually subsumes \textsc{Arc-I} as a special case. Indeed, in \textsc{Arc-II} if we choose (by turning off some parameters in $\ensuremath{\mathbf{W}}^{(\ell,\cdot)}$) to keep the representations of the two sentences separated until the final MLP, \textsc{Arc-II} can actually act fully like \textsc{Arc-I}, as illustrated in Figure \ref{f:specialcase}. More specifically, if we let the feature maps in the first convolution layer to be either devoted to $S_X$ or devoted to $S_Y$ (instead of taking both as in general case), the output of each segment-pair is naturally divided into two corresponding groups. As a result, the output for each filter $f$, denoted $\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}^{(1, f)}_{1:n,1:n}$ ($n$ is the number of sliding windows), will be of rank-one, possessing essentially the same information as the result of the first convolution layer in \textsc{Arc-I}. Clearly the 2D pooling that follows will reduce to 1D pooling, with this separateness preserved. If we further limit the parameters in the second convolution units (more specifically $\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(2,f)}$) to those for $S_X$ and $S_Y$, we can ensure the individual development of different levels of abstraction on each side, and fully recover the functionality of \textsc{Arc-I}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[c]{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{pics/subsume.png}
\hspace{160pt}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-10pt}
\caption{\textsc{Arc-I} as a special case of \textsc{Arc-II}. Better viewed in color.}
\label{f:specialcase}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\newpage
As suggested by the order-preserving property and the generality of \textsc{Arc-II}, this architecture offers not only the capability but also the inductive bias for the individual development of internal abstraction on each sentence, despite the fact that it is built on the interaction between two sentences. As a result, \textsc{Arc-II} can naturally blend two seemingly diverging processes: 1) the successive composition within each sentence, and 2) the extraction and fusion of matching patterns between them, hence is powerful for matching linguistic objects with rich structures. This intuition is verified by the superior performance of \textsc{Arc-II} in experiments (Section \ref{s:expts}) on different matching tasks.
\section{Training} \label{s:opt} \vspace{-10pt}
We employ a discriminative training strategy with a large margin objective. Suppose that we are given the following triples $(\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}, \ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^+, \ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^-)$ from the oracle, with $\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}$ matched with $\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^+$ better than with $\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^-$. We have the following ranking-based loss as objective:
{\small
\[
e(\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}, \ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^+, \ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^-; \Theta)\hspace{-1pt} = \hspace{-1pt}
\max(0, 1+\textsf{s}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^-)-\textsf{s}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^+)), \;\;\
\]}
where $\textsf{s}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}})$ is predicted matching score for $(\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}})$, and $\Theta$ includes the parameters for convolution layers and those for the MLP. The optimization is relatively straightforward for both architectures with the standard back-propagation. The gating function (see Section \ref{s:convunit}) can be easily adopted into the gradient by discounting the contribution from convolution units that have been turned off by the gating function. In other words,
We use stochastic gradient descent for the optimization of models. All the proposed models perform better with mini-batch ($100\sim200$ in sizes) which can be easily parallelized on single machine with multi-cores.
For regularization, we find that for both architectures, early stopping~\cite{earlystoping} is enough for models with medium size and large training sets (with over 500K instances). For small datasets (less than 10k training instances) however, we have to combine early stopping and dropout~\cite{dropout} to deal with the serious overfitting problem. \hspace{-10pt}
We use 50-dimensional word embedding trained with the \text{Word2Vec}~\cite{word2vec}: the embedding for English words (Section \ref{s:expt1} \& \ref{s:expt3}) is learnt on Wikipedia ($\sim$1B words), while that for Chinese words (Section \ref{s:expt2}) is learnt on Weibo data ($\sim$300M words). Our other experiments (results omitted here) suggest that fine-tuning the word embedding can further improve the performances of all models, at the cost of longer training. We vary the maximum length of words for different tasks to cope with its longest sentence. We use 3-word window throughout all experiments\footnote{Our other experiments suggest that the performance can be further increased with wider windows.}, but test various numbers of feature maps (typically from 200 to 500), for optimal performance. \textsc{Arc-II} models for all tasks have eight layers (three for convolution, three for pooling, and two for MLP), while \textsc{Arc-I} performs better with less layers (two for convolution, two for pooling, and two for MLP) and more hidden nodes. We use ReLu~\cite{relu} as the activation function for all of models (convolution and MLP), which yields comparable or better results to sigmoid-like functions, but converges faster. \vspace{-10pt}
\section{Experiments} \label{s:expts} \vspace{-10pt}
We report the performance of the proposed models on three matching tasks of different nature, and compare it with that of other competitor models. Among them, the first two tasks (namely, Sentence Completion and Tweet-Response Matching) are about matching of language objects of heterogenous natures, while the third one (paraphrase identification) is a natural example of matching homogeneous objects. Moreover, the three tasks involve two languages, different types of matching, and distinctive writing styles, proving the broad applicability of the proposed models. \vspace{-10pt}
\subsection{Competitor Methods}
\begin{itemize}
\item \textsc{WordEmbed:} We first represent each short-text as the sum of the embedding of the words it contains. The matching score of two short-texts are calculated with an MLP with the embedding of the two documents as input; \vspace{-3pt}
\item \textsc{DeepMatch:} We take the matching model in \cite{nipsmatch} and train it on our datasets with 3 hidden layers and 1,000 hidden nodes in the first hidden layer; \vspace{-3pt}
\item \textsc{uRAE+MLP:} We use the Unfolding Recursive Autoencoder~\cite{socher2011}\footnote{Code from: \url{http://nlp.stanford.edu/~socherr/classifyParaphrases.zip}} to get a 100-dimensional vector representation of each sentence, and put an MLP on the top as in \textsc{WordEmbed}; \vspace{-3pt}
\item \textsc{SENNA+MLP/sim:} We use the SENNA-type sentence model for sentence representation;\vspace{-3pt}
\item \textsc{SenMLP:} We take the whole sentence as input (with word embedding aligned sequentially), and use an MLP to obtain the score of coherence. \vspace{-3pt}
\end{itemize}
All the competitor models are trained on the same training set as the proposed models, and we report the best test performance over different choices of models (e.g., the number and size of hidden layers in MLP).
\subsection{Experiment I: Sentence Completion} \label{s:expt1} \vspace{-10pt}
This is an artificial task designed to elucidate how different matching models can capture the correspondence between two clauses within a sentence.
Basically, we take a sentence from Reuters~\cite{rcv1}with two ``balanced" clauses (with 8$\sim$ 28 words) divided by one comma, and use the first clause as $S_X$ and the second as $S_Y$. The task is then to recover the original second clause for any given first clause. The matching here is considered heterogeneous since the relation between the two is nonsymmetrical on both lexical and semantic levels.
We deliberately make the task harder by using negative second clauses similar to the original ones\footnote{We select from a random set the clauses that have 0.7$\sim$0.8 cosine similarity with the original. The dataset and more information can be found from http://www.noahlab.com.hk/technology/Learning2Match.html}, both in training and testing. One representative example is given as follows:
\begin{wraptable}{r}{0.32\textwidth}
\vspace{-25pt}
\begin{tabular}{ll}
Model & P@1(\%)\\ \hline
Random Guess & 20.00 \\ \hline
\textsc{DeepMatch} &32.50 \\ \hline
\textsc{WordEmbed} &37.63 \\ \hline
\textsc{SenMLP} & 36.14 \\ \hline
\textsc{SENNA+MLP} & 41.56\\ \hline
\textsc{uRAE+MLP} & 25.76 \\ \hline
\hline
\sc{Arc-I} & 47.51 \\ \hline
\sc{Arc-II} &\bf{49.62} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\text{Sentence Completion}.}
\label{t:sc} \vspace{-20pt}
\end{wraptable}
$S_X$: \emph{\small Although the state has only four votes in the Electoral College,} \vspace{-3pt}
$S_Y^+$: \emph{\small its loss would be a symbolic blow to republican presidential candi} \vspace{-5pt}
\hspace{20pt}\emph{\small date Bob Dole.} \vspace{-3pt}
$S_Y^-$: \emph{\small but it failed to garner enough votes to override an expected veto by}\vspace{-5pt}
\hspace{20pt}\emph{\small president Clinton.} \vspace{-3pt}
\vspace{-2pt}
All models are trained on 3 million triples (from 600K positive pairs), and tested on 50K positive pairs, each accompanied by four negatives, with results shown in Table \ref{t:sc}. The two proposed models get nearly half of the cases right\footnote{Actually \textsc{Arc-II} can achieve 74+\% accuracy with random negatives.},
with large margin over other sentence models and models without explicit sequence modeling. \textsc{Arc-II} outperforms \textsc{Arc-I} significantly, showing the power of joint modeling of matching and sentence meaning. As another convolutional model, \textsc{SENNA+MLP} performs fairly well on this task, although still running behind the proposed convolutional architectures since it is too shallow to adequately model the sentence. It is a bit surprising that \textsc{uRAE} comes last on this task, which might be caused by the facts that 1) the representation model (including word-embedding) is not trained on Reuters, and 2) the split-sentence setting hurts the parsing, which is vital to the quality of learned sentence representation.
\subsection{Experiment II: Matching A Response to A Tweet} \vspace{-10pt}
\label{s:expt2}
\begin{wraptable}{r}{0.32\textwidth}
\vspace{-10pt}
\begin{tabular}{ll}
Model & P@1(\%)\\ \hline
Random Guess & 20.00 \\ \hline
\textsc{DeepMatch} &49.85 \\ \hline
\textsc{WordEmbed} &54,31 \\ \hline
\textsc{SenMLP} & 52.22 \\ \hline
\textsc{SENNA+MLP} & 56.48 \\ \hline
\hline
\sc{Arc-I} & 59.18 \\ \hline
\sc{Arc-II} &\bf{61.95 }\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\text{Tweet Matching}.}
\label{t:weibo}
\vspace{-30pt}
\end{wraptable}
We trained our model with 4.5 million original (tweet, response) pairs collected from Weibo, a major Chinese microblog service \cite{emnlpmatch}. Compared to Experiment I, the writing style is obviously more free and informal. For each positive pair, we find ten random responses as negative examples, rendering 45 million triples for training. One example (translated to English) is given below, with $S_X$ standing for the tweet, $S_Y^+$ the original response, and $S_Y^-$ the randomly selected response:
$S_X$: \emph{\small Damn, I have to work overtime this weekend! } \vspace{-3pt}
$S_Y^+$: \emph{\small Try to have some rest buddy.} \vspace{-3pt}
$S_Y^-$: \emph{\small It is hard to find a job, better start polishing your resume.}
We hold out 300K original (tweet, response) pairs and test the matching model on their ability to pick the original response from \emph{four} random negatives, with results reported in Table \ref{t:weibo}. This task is slightly easier than Experiment I , with more training instances and purely random negatives. It requires less about the grammatical rigor but more on detailed modeling of loose and local matching patterns (e.g., \texttt{\small work-overtime}$\Leftrightarrow$ \texttt{\small rest}). Again \textsc{Arc-II} beats other models with large margins, while two convolutional sentence models \textsc{Arc-I} and \textsc{SENNA+MLP} come next.
\subsection{Experiment III: Paraphrase Identification} \vspace{-10pt} \label{s:expt3}
Paraphrase identification aims to determine whether two sentences have the same meaning, a problem considered a touchstone of natural language understanding. This experiment
\begin{wraptable}{r}{0.4\textwidth}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
Model & Acc. (\%)& F1(\%) \\ \hline
Baseline & 66.5 &79.90 \\ \hline
Rus et al. (2008) &70.6 &80.50 \\ \hline
\hline
\textsc{WordEmbed} & 68.7 & 80.49 \\ \hline
\sc{SENNA+MLP} & {68.4} & {79.70} \\ \hline
\textsc{SenMLP} & 68.4 & 79.50 \\ \hline \hline
\sc{Arc-I} & {69.6} & {80.27} \\ \hline
\sc{Arc-II} &{69.9} & {80.91}\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The results on \text{Paraphrase}.}
\label{t:paraphrase}
\vspace{-10pt}
\end{wraptable}
is included to test our methods on matching homogenous objects. Here we use the benchmark MSRP dataset~\cite{paraphrase2008}, which contains 4,076 instances for training and 1,725 for test. We use all the training instances and report the test performance from early stopping. As stated earlier, our model is not specially tailored for modeling synonymy, and generally requires $\geq\hspace{-5pt}100K$ instances to work favorably. Nevertheless, our generic matching models still manage to perform reasonably well, achieving an accuracy and F1 score close to the best performer in 2008 based on hand-crafted features~\cite{paraphrase2008}, but still significantly lower than the state-of-the-art (76.8\%/83.6\%), achieved with unfolding-RAE and other features designed for this task~\cite{socher2011}. \vspace{-8pt}
\subsection{Discussions}\vspace{-10pt}
\textsc{Arc-II} outperforms others significantly when the training instances are relatively abundant (as in Experiment I \& II). Its superiority over \textsc{Arc-I}, however, is less salient when the sentences have deep grammatical structures and the matching relies less on the local matching patterns, as in Experiment-I. This therefore raises the interesting question about how to balance the representation of matching and the representations of objects, and whether we can guide the learning process through something like curriculum learning~\cite{CL}.
As another important observation, convolutional models (\textsc{Arc-I} \& II, \textsc{SENNA+MLP}) perform favorably over bag-of-words models, indicating the importance of utilizing sequential structures in understanding and matching sentences. Quite interestingly, as shown by our other experiments, \textsc{Arc-I} and \textsc{Arc-II} trained purely with random negatives automatically gain some ability in telling whether the words in a given sentence are in right sequential order (with around 60\% accuracy for both). It is therefore a bit surprising that an auxiliary task on identifying the correctness of word order in the response does not enhance the ability of the model on the original matching tasks.
We noticed that simple sum of embedding learned via Word2Vec~\cite{word2vec} yields reasonably good results on all three tasks. We hypothesize that the Word2Vec embedding is trained in such a way that the vector summation can act as a simple composition, and hence retains a fair amount of meaning in the short text segment. This is in contrast with other bag-of-words models like \textsc{DeepMatch}~\cite{nipsmatch}. \vspace{-8pt}
\section{Related Work} \label{s:related}\vspace{-10pt}
Matching structured objects rarely goes beyond estimating the similarity of objects in the same domain~\cite{Sun_2013_ICCV,VishproG,socher2011}, with few exceptions like~\cite{bordes2014semantic,Shenwww2014}. When dealing with language objects, most methods still focus on seeking vectorial representations in a common latent space, and calculating the matching score with inner product\cite{Shenwww2014,baoxunACL}. Few work has been done on building a deep architecture on the interaction space for texts-pairs, but it is largely based on a bag-of-words representation of text~\cite{nipsmatch}.
Our models are related to the long thread of work on sentence representation. Aside from the models with recursive nature~\cite{RNN,RAE,socher2011} (as discussed in Section 2.1), it is fairly common practice to use the sum of word-embedding to represent a short-text, mostly for classification~\cite{yangqiu}. There is very little work on convolutional modeling of language. In addition to \cite{senna,Shenwww2014}, there is a very recent model on sentence representation with dynamic convolutional neural network~\cite{oxford_cnn}. This work relies heavily on a carefully designed pooling strategy to handle the variable length of sentence with a relatively small feature map, tailored for classification problems with modest sizes. \vspace{-8pt}
\section{Conclusion}\vspace{-10pt}
We propose deep convolutional architectures for matching natural language sentences, which can nicely combine the hierarchical modeling of individual sentences and the patterns of their matching. Empirical study shows our models can outperform competitors on a variety of matching tasks.
\paragraph{Acknowledgments:
{\small B. Hu and Q. Chen are supported in part by National Natural Science Foundation of China 61173075. Z. Lu and H. Li are supported in part by China National 973 project 2014CB340301.}
\vspace{-10pt}
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
\small{
\section{Introduction} \vspace{-10pt}
Matching two potentially heterogenous language objects is central to many natural language applications~\cite{RetrievalQA,bordes2014semantic}. It generalizes the conventional notion of similarity (e.g., in paraphrase identification \cite{socher2011}) or relevance (e.g., in information retrieval\cite{wu2013learning}), since it aims to model the correspondence between ``linguistic objects" of different nature at different levels of abstractions. Examples include top-$k$ re-ranking in machine translation (e.g., comparing the meanings of a French sentence and an English sentence~\cite{ibmmodel}) and dialogue (e.g., evaluating the appropriateness of a response to a given utterance\cite{emnlpmatch}).
Natural language sentences have complicated structures, both sequential and hierarchical, that are essential for understanding them. A successful sentence-matching algorithm therefore needs to capture not only the internal structures of sentences but also the rich patterns in their interactions. Towards this end, we propose deep neural network models, which adapt the convolutional strategy (proven successful on image~\cite{cnn} and speech~\cite{cnn_speech}) to natural language. To further explore the relation between representing sentences and matching them, we devise a novel model that can naturally host both the hierarchical composition for sentences and the simple-to-comprehensive fusion of matching patterns with the same convolutional architecture. Our model is generic, requiring no prior knowledge of natural language (e.g., parse tree) and putting essentially no constraints on the matching tasks. This is part of our continuing effort\footnote{Our project page: \url{http://www.noahlab.com.hk/technology/Learning2Match.html}} in understanding natural language objects and the matching between them~\cite{nipsmatch, emnlpmatch}.
Our main contributions can be summarized as follows. First, we devise novel deep convolutional network architectures that can naturally combine 1) the hierarchical sentence modeling through layer-by-layer composition and pooling, and 2) the capturing of the rich matching patterns at different levels of abstraction; Second, we perform extensive empirical study on tasks with different scales and characteristics, and demonstrate the superior power of the proposed architectures over competitor methods.
\paragraph{Roadmap} We start by introducing a convolution network in Section \ref{s:senCNN} as the basic architecture for sentence modeling, and how it is related to existing sentence models. Based on that, in Section \ref{s:matchmodel}, we propose two architectures for sentence matching, with a detailed discussion of their relation. In Section \ref{s:opt}, we briefly discuss the learning of the proposed architectures. Then in Section \ref{s:expts}, we report our empirical study, followed by a brief discussion of related work in Section \ref{s:related}.
\vspace{-10pt}
\section{Convolutional Sentence Model} \label{s:senCNN} \vspace{-10pt}
We start with proposing a new convolutional architecture for modeling sentences. As illustrated in Figure \ref{f:senCNN}, it takes as input the embedding of words (often trained beforehand with unsupervised methods) in the sentence aligned sequentially, and summarize the meaning of a sentence through layers of convolution and pooling, until reaching a fixed length vectorial representation in the final layer. As in most convolutional models~\cite{cnn, cnn_speech}, we use convolution units with a local ``receptive field" and shared weights, but we design a large feature map to adequately model the rich structures in the composition of words. \vspace{-5pt}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[c]{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{pics/arc1.png} \vspace{-7pt}
\end{tabular}
\caption{The over all architecture of the convolutional sentence model. A box with dashed lines indicates all-zero padding turned off by the gating function (see top of Page 3).}
\label{f:senCNN}
\end{center}
\end{figure} \vspace{-10pt}
\paragraph{Convolution} \vspace{-10pt} \label{s:convunit}
As shown in Figure \ref{f:senCNN}, the convolution in Layer-1 operates on sliding windows of words (width $k_1$), and the convolutions in deeper layers are defined in a similar way. Generally,with sentence input $\mathbf{x}$, the convolution unit for feature map of type-$f$ (among $F_\ell$ of them) on Layer-$\ell$ is
\begin{equation}
z^{(\ell, f)}_{i} \overset{\text{def}}{=}
z^{(\ell,f)}_{i}(\mathbf{x}) = \sigma(\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(\ell,f)} \hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i} + b^{(\ell,f)}), \;\; f = 1,2,\cdots,F_{\ell}
\end{equation}
and its matrix form is $\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell)}_{i} \overset{\text{def}}{=}\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell)}_{i}(\mathbf{x}) =
\sigma(\ensuremath{\mathbf{W}}^{(\ell)} \hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i} + \b^{(\ell)})$,
where
\begin{itemize}
\item $z^{(\ell,f)}_{i}(\mathbf{x})$ gives the output of feature map of type-$f$ for location $i$ in Layer-$\ell$;
\item $\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(\ell, f)}$ is the parameters for $f$ on Layer-$\ell$, with matrix form $\ensuremath{\mathbf{W}}^{(\ell)} \overset{\text{def}}{=} [\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(\ell,1)},\cdots,\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(\ell,F_{\ell})}] $;
\item $\sigma(\cdot)$ is the activation function (e.g., Sigmoid or Relu~\cite{relu})
\item $\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i}$ denotes the segment of Layer-$\ell\hspace{-3pt}-\hspace{-3pt}1$ for the convolution at location $i$ , while
\[
\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(0)}_{i} = \ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}_{i:i+k_1-1} \overset{\text{def}}{=} [ \ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}_{i}^\top, \;\, \ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}_{i+1}^\top,\;\cdots,\;\, \ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}_{i+k_1-1}^\top]^\top
\]
concatenates the vectors for $k_{1}$ (width of sliding window) words from sentence input $\mathbf{x}$.
\end{itemize}
\paragraph{Max-Pooling}\vspace{-10pt}
We take a max-pooling in every two-unit window for every $f$, after each convolution
\[
z_i^{(\ell,f)} = \max(z_{2i-1}^{(\ell-1,f)}, z_{2i}^{(\ell-1,f)}), \;\;\ell = 2,4,\cdots.
\]
The effects of pooling are two-fold: 1) it shrinks the size of the representation by half, thus quickly absorbs the differences in length for sentence representation, and 2) it filters out undesirable composition of words (see Section \ref{s:someAnalysis} for some analysis).
\paragraph{Length Variability} The variable length of sentences in a fairly broad range can be readily handled with the convolution and pooling strategy. More specifically, we put all-zero padding vectors after the last word of the sentence until the maximum length. To eliminate the boundary effect caused by the great variability of sentence lengths, we add to the convolutional unit a gate which sets the output vectors to all-zeros if the input is all zeros. For any given sentence input $\mathbf{x}$, the output of type-$f$ filter for location $i$ in the $\ell^{th}$ layer is given by
\begin{equation}
z^{(\ell, f)}_{i} \overset{\text{def}}{=}
z^{(\ell,f)}_{i}(\mathbf{x}) = g(\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i})\cdot \sigma(\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(\ell,f)} \hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i} + b^{(\ell,f)}),
\end{equation}
where $g(\mathbf{v}) = 0$ if all the elements in vector $\mathbf{v}$ equals 0, otherwise $g(\mathbf{v}) = 1$. This gate, working with max-pooling and positive activation function (e.g., Sigmoid), keeps away the artifacts from padding in all layers. Actually it creates a natural hierarchy of all-zero padding (as illustrated in Figure \ref{f:senCNN}), consisting of nodes in the neural net that would not contribute in the forward process (as in prediction) and backward propagation (as in learning).
\subsection{Some Analysis on the Convolutional Architecture} \label{s:someAnalysis} \vspace{-10pt}
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.6\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\vspace{-5pt}
\begin{tabular}[c]{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{pics/catExample.png}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-10pt}
\caption{The cat example, where in the convolution layer, gray color indicates less confidence in composition.} \vspace{-5pt}
\label{f:cat}
\end{center}
\end{wrapfigure}
The convolutional unit, when combined with max-pooling, can act as the compositional operator with local selection mechanism as in the recursive autoencoder~\cite{RAE}. Figure \ref{f:cat} gives an example on what could happen on the first two layers with input sentence ``\texttt{\small The cat sat on the mat}". Just for illustration purpose, we present a dramatic choice of parameters (by turning off some elements in $\ensuremath{\mathbf{W}}^{(1)}$) to make the convolution units focus on different segments within a 3-word window. For example, some feature maps (group 2) give compositions for ``\texttt{\small the cat}" and ``\texttt{\small cat sat}", each being a vector. Different feature maps offer a variety of compositions, with confidence encoded in the values (color coded in output of convolution layer in Figure \ref{f:cat}). The pooling then chooses, \emph{for each composition type}, between two adjacent sliding windows, e.g., between ``\texttt{\small on the}" and ``\texttt{\small the mat}" for feature maps group 2 from the rightmost two sliding windows.
\paragraph{Relation to Recursive Models} Our convolutional model differs from Recurrent Neural Network (RNN, \cite{RNN}) and Recursive Auto-Encoder (RAE, \cite{RAE}) in several important ways. First, unlike RAE, it does not take a single path of word/phrase composition determined either by a separate gating function~\cite{RAE}, an external parser~\cite{socher2011}, or just natural sequential order~\cite{socherRNN}. Instead, it takes multiple choices of composition via a large feature map (encoded in $\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(\ell,f)}$ for different $f$), and leaves the choices to the pooling afterwards to pick the more appropriate segments(in every adjacent two) for each composition. With any window width $k_{\ell}\geq 3$, the type of composition would be much richer than that of RAE. Second, our convolutional model can take supervised training and tune the parameters for a specific task, a property vital to our supervised learning-to-match framework. However, unlike recursive models~\cite{socherRNN, RAE}, the convolutional architecture has a fixed depth, which bounds the level of composition it could do. For tasks like matching, this limitation can be largely compensated with a network afterwards that can take a ``global" synthesis on the learned sentence representation.
\paragraph{Relation to ``Shallow" Convolutional Models} The proposed convolutional sentence model takes simple architectures such as~\cite{Shenwww2014,emnlp14_kim} (essentially the same convolutional architecture as SENNA~\cite{senna}), which consists of a convolution layer and a max-pooling over the entire sentence for each feature map. This type of models, with local convolutions and a global pooling, essentially do a ``soft" local template matching and is able to detect local features useful for a certain task. Since the sentence-level sequential order is inevitably lost in the global pooling, the model is incapable of modeling more complicated structures. It is not hard to see that our convolutional model degenerates to the SENNA-type architecture if we limit the number of layers to be two and set the pooling window infinitely large.
\section{Convolutional Matching Models} \vspace{-10pt} \label{s:matchmodel}
Based on the discussion in Section \ref{s:senCNN}, we propose two related convolutional architectures, namely \textsc{Arc-I} and \textsc{Arc-II}), for matching two sentences. \vspace{-5pt}
\subsection{Architecture-I (\textsc{Arc-I})} \vspace{-10pt}
Architecture-I (\textsc{Arc-I}), as illustrated in Figure \ref{f:1DCNN}, takes a conventional approach: It first finds the representation of each sentence, and then compares the representation for the two sentences with a multi-layer perceptron (\textsc{MLP})~\cite{DeepAI}. It is essentially the Siamese architecture introduced in \cite{bordes2014semantic, cnn}, which has been applied to different tasks as a nonlinear similarity function \cite{Sun_2013_ICCV}. Although \textsc{Arc-I} enjoys the flexibility brought by the convolutional sentence model, it suffers from a drawback inherited from the Siamese architecture: it defers the interaction between two sentences
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.6\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[c]{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{pics/1dCNN_B.png}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-10pt}
\caption{Architecture-I for matching two sentences.} \vspace{-5pt}
\label{f:1DCNN}
\end{center}
\end{wrapfigure}
(in the final MLP) to until their individual representation matures (in the convolution model), therefore runs at the risk of losing details (e.g., a city name) important for the \emph{matching task} in representing the sentences. In other words, in the forward phase (prediction), the representation of each sentence is formed without knowledge of each other. This \emph{cannot} be adequately circumvented in backward phase (learning), when the convolutional model learns to extract structures informative for matching on a population level.
\subsection{Architecture-II (\textsc{Arc-II})} \vspace{-10pt}
In view of the drawback of Architecture-I, we propose Architecture-II (\textsc{Arc-II}) that is built directly on the interaction space between two sentences. It has the desirable property of letting two sentences meet before their own high-level representations mature, while still retaining the space for the individual development of abstraction of each sentence. Basically, in Layer-1, we take sliding windows on both sentences, and model all the \emph{possible} combinations of them through ``one-dimensional" (1D) convolutions. For segment $i$ on $S_X$ and segment $j$ on $S_Y$, we have the feature map
\begin{equation}
z^{(1, f)}_{i,j} \overset{\text{def}}{=}
z^{(1,f)}_{i,j}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}) = g(\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(0)}_{i,j})\cdot \sigma(\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(1,f)} \hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(0)}_{i,j} + b^{(1,f)}),
\end{equation}
where $\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(0)}_{i,j} \in \mathbb{R}^{2k_1 D_{e}}$ simply concatenates the vectors for sentence segments for $S_X$ and $S_Y$:
\[
\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(0)}_{i,j} = [\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}_{i:i+k_1-1}^\top,\;\; \ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}_{j:j+k_1-1}^\top]^\top.
\]
Clearly the 1D convolution preserves the location information about both segments. After that in Layer-2, it performs a 2D max-pooling in non-overlapping $2\times 2$ windows (illustrated in Figure \ref{f:order})
\begin{equation}
z_{i,j}^{(2,f)} = \max(\{z_{2i-1,2j-1}^{(1,f)}, z_{2i-1,2j}^{(1,f)},z_{2i,2j-1}^{(1,f)},z_{2i,2j}^{(1,f)}\}). \label{e:2dpool}
\end{equation}
In Layer-3, we perform a 2D convolution on $k_3\times k_3$ windows of output from Layer-2:
\begin{equation}
z^{(3, f)}_{i,j} = g(\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(2)}_{i,j})\cdot \sigma(\mathbf{W}^{(3,f)} \hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(2)}_{i,j} + b^{(3,f)}).
\end{equation}
This could go on for more layers of 2D convolution and 2D max-pooling, analogous to that of convolutional architecture for image input~\cite{cnn}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[c]{cc}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{pics/2dCNN_D.png}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Architecture-II (\textsc{Arc-II}) of convolutional matching model}
\label{f:2DCNN}
\end{center} \vspace{-10pt}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{The 2D-Convolution} After the first convolution, we obtain a low level representation of the interaction between the two sentences, and from then we obtain a high level representation $\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell )}_{i,j}$ which encodes the information from both sentences. The general two-dimensional convolution is formulated as
\begin{equation}
\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell)}_{i,j} = g(\hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i,j})\cdot \sigma(\ensuremath{\mathbf{W}}^{(\ell)} \hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i,j} + \b^{(\ell,f)}), \;\;\ell = 3,5,\cdots
\end{equation}
where $ \hat{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell-1)}_{i,j}$ concatenates the corresponding vectors from its 2D receptive field in Layer-$\ell\hspace{-3pt}-\hspace{-3pt}1$. This pooling has different mechanism as in the 1D case, for it selects \emph{not only} among compositions on different segments but also among different local matchings. This pooling strategy resembles the dynamic pooling in \cite{socher2011} in a similarity learning context, but with two distinctions: 1) it happens on a fixed architecture and 2) it has much richer structure than just similarity.
\subsection{Some Analysis on \textsc{Arc-II}}\vspace{-5pt}
\paragraph{Order Preservation}
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[c]{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{pics/pooling.png}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Order preserving in 2D-pooling.}
\label{f:order}
\end{center}
\vspace{-10pt}
\end{wrapfigure}
Both the convolution and pooling operation in Architecture-II have this order preserving property. Generally, $\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell)}_{i,j}$ contains information about the words in $S_X$ before those in $\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}^{(\ell)}_{i+1,j}$, although they may be generated with slightly different segments in $S_Y$, due to the 2D pooling (illustrated in Figure \ref{f:order}). The orders is however retained in a ``conditional" sense. Our experiments show that when \textsc{Arc-II} is trained on the $(S_X, S_Y, \tilde{S}_Y)$ triples where $\tilde{S}_Y$ randomly shuffles the words in $S_Y$, it consistently gains some ability of finding the correct $S_Y$ in the usual contrastive negative sampling setting, which however does not happen with \textsc{Arc-I}. \vspace{-5pt}
\paragraph{Model Generality} It is not hard to show that \textsc{Arc-II} actually subsumes \textsc{Arc-I} as a special case. Indeed, in \textsc{Arc-II} if we choose (by turning off some parameters in $\ensuremath{\mathbf{W}}^{(\ell,\cdot)}$) to keep the representations of the two sentences separated until the final MLP, \textsc{Arc-II} can actually act fully like \textsc{Arc-I}, as illustrated in Figure \ref{f:specialcase}. More specifically, if we let the feature maps in the first convolution layer to be either devoted to $S_X$ or devoted to $S_Y$ (instead of taking both as in general case), the output of each segment-pair is naturally divided into two corresponding groups. As a result, the output for each filter $f$, denoted $\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}^{(1, f)}_{1:n,1:n}$ ($n$ is the number of sliding windows), will be of rank-one, possessing essentially the same information as the result of the first convolution layer in \textsc{Arc-I}. Clearly the 2D pooling that follows will reduce to 1D pooling, with this separateness preserved. If we further limit the parameters in the second convolution units (more specifically $\ensuremath{\mathbf{w}}^{(2,f)}$) to those for $S_X$ and $S_Y$, we can ensure the individual development of different levels of abstraction on each side, and fully recover the functionality of \textsc{Arc-I}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[c]{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{pics/subsume.png}
\hspace{160pt}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-10pt}
\caption{\textsc{Arc-I} as a special case of \textsc{Arc-II}. Better viewed in color.}
\label{f:specialcase}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\newpage
As suggested by the order-preserving property and the generality of \textsc{Arc-II}, this architecture offers not only the capability but also the inductive bias for the individual development of internal abstraction on each sentence, despite the fact that it is built on the interaction between two sentences. As a result, \textsc{Arc-II} can naturally blend two seemingly diverging processes: 1) the successive composition within each sentence, and 2) the extraction and fusion of matching patterns between them, hence is powerful for matching linguistic objects with rich structures. This intuition is verified by the superior performance of \textsc{Arc-II} in experiments (Section \ref{s:expts}) on different matching tasks.
\section{Training} \label{s:opt} \vspace{-10pt}
We employ a discriminative training strategy with a large margin objective. Suppose that we are given the following triples $(\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}, \ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^+, \ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^-)$ from the oracle, with $\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}$ matched with $\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^+$ better than with $\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^-$. We have the following ranking-based loss as objective:
{\small
\[
e(\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}}, \ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^+, \ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^-; \Theta)\hspace{-1pt} = \hspace{-1pt}
\max(0, 1+\textsf{s}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^-)-\textsf{s}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}^+)), \;\;\
\]}
where $\textsf{s}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}})$ is predicted matching score for $(\ensuremath{\mathbf{x}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}})$, and $\Theta$ includes the parameters for convolution layers and those for the MLP. The optimization is relatively straightforward for both architectures with the standard back-propagation. The gating function (see Section \ref{s:convunit}) can be easily adopted into the gradient by discounting the contribution from convolution units that have been turned off by the gating function. In other words,
We use stochastic gradient descent for the optimization of models. All the proposed models perform better with mini-batch ($100\sim200$ in sizes) which can be easily parallelized on single machine with multi-cores.
For regularization, we find that for both architectures, early stopping~\cite{earlystoping} is enough for models with medium size and large training sets (with over 500K instances). For small datasets (less than 10k training instances) however, we have to combine early stopping and dropout~\cite{dropout} to deal with the serious overfitting problem. \hspace{-10pt}
We use 50-dimensional word embedding trained with the \text{Word2Vec}~\cite{word2vec}: the embedding for English words (Section \ref{s:expt1} \& \ref{s:expt3}) is learnt on Wikipedia ($\sim$1B words), while that for Chinese words (Section \ref{s:expt2}) is learnt on Weibo data ($\sim$300M words). Our other experiments (results omitted here) suggest that fine-tuning the word embedding can further improve the performances of all models, at the cost of longer training. We vary the maximum length of words for different tasks to cope with its longest sentence. We use 3-word window throughout all experiments\footnote{Our other experiments suggest that the performance can be further increased with wider windows.}, but test various numbers of feature maps (typically from 200 to 500), for optimal performance. \textsc{Arc-II} models for all tasks have eight layers (three for convolution, three for pooling, and two for MLP), while \textsc{Arc-I} performs better with less layers (two for convolution, two for pooling, and two for MLP) and more hidden nodes. We use ReLu~\cite{relu} as the activation function for all of models (convolution and MLP), which yields comparable or better results to sigmoid-like functions, but converges faster. \vspace{-10pt}
\section{Experiments} \label{s:expts} \vspace{-10pt}
We report the performance of the proposed models on three matching tasks of different nature, and compare it with that of other competitor models. Among them, the first two tasks (namely, Sentence Completion and Tweet-Response Matching) are about matching of language objects of heterogenous natures, while the third one (paraphrase identification) is a natural example of matching homogeneous objects. Moreover, the three tasks involve two languages, different types of matching, and distinctive writing styles, proving the broad applicability of the proposed models. \vspace{-10pt}
\subsection{Competitor Methods}
\begin{itemize}
\item \textsc{WordEmbed:} We first represent each short-text as the sum of the embedding of the words it contains. The matching score of two short-texts are calculated with an MLP with the embedding of the two documents as input; \vspace{-3pt}
\item \textsc{DeepMatch:} We take the matching model in \cite{nipsmatch} and train it on our datasets with 3 hidden layers and 1,000 hidden nodes in the first hidden layer; \vspace{-3pt}
\item \textsc{uRAE+MLP:} We use the Unfolding Recursive Autoencoder~\cite{socher2011}\footnote{Code from: \url{http://nlp.stanford.edu/~socherr/classifyParaphrases.zip}} to get a 100-dimensional vector representation of each sentence, and put an MLP on the top as in \textsc{WordEmbed}; \vspace{-3pt}
\item \textsc{SENNA+MLP/sim:} We use the SENNA-type sentence model for sentence representation;\vspace{-3pt}
\item \textsc{SenMLP:} We take the whole sentence as input (with word embedding aligned sequentially), and use an MLP to obtain the score of coherence. \vspace{-3pt}
\end{itemize}
All the competitor models are trained on the same training set as the proposed models, and we report the best test performance over different choices of models (e.g., the number and size of hidden layers in MLP).
\subsection{Experiment I: Sentence Completion} \label{s:expt1} \vspace{-10pt}
This is an artificial task designed to elucidate how different matching models can capture the correspondence between two clauses within a sentence.
Basically, we take a sentence from Reuters~\cite{rcv1}with two ``balanced" clauses (with 8$\sim$ 28 words) divided by one comma, and use the first clause as $S_X$ and the second as $S_Y$. The task is then to recover the original second clause for any given first clause. The matching here is considered heterogeneous since the relation between the two is nonsymmetrical on both lexical and semantic levels.
We deliberately make the task harder by using negative second clauses similar to the original ones\footnote{We select from a random set the clauses that have 0.7$\sim$0.8 cosine similarity with the original. The dataset and more information can be found from http://www.noahlab.com.hk/technology/Learning2Match.html}, both in training and testing. One representative example is given as follows:
\begin{wraptable}{r}{0.32\textwidth}
\vspace{-25pt}
\begin{tabular}{ll}
Model & P@1(\%)\\ \hline
Random Guess & 20.00 \\ \hline
\textsc{DeepMatch} &32.50 \\ \hline
\textsc{WordEmbed} &37.63 \\ \hline
\textsc{SenMLP} & 36.14 \\ \hline
\textsc{SENNA+MLP} & 41.56\\ \hline
\textsc{uRAE+MLP} & 25.76 \\ \hline
\hline
\sc{Arc-I} & 47.51 \\ \hline
\sc{Arc-II} &\bf{49.62} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\text{Sentence Completion}.}
\label{t:sc} \vspace{-20pt}
\end{wraptable}
$S_X$: \emph{\small Although the state has only four votes in the Electoral College,} \vspace{-3pt}
$S_Y^+$: \emph{\small its loss would be a symbolic blow to republican presidential candi} \vspace{-5pt}
\hspace{20pt}\emph{\small date Bob Dole.} \vspace{-3pt}
$S_Y^-$: \emph{\small but it failed to garner enough votes to override an expected veto by}\vspace{-5pt}
\hspace{20pt}\emph{\small president Clinton.} \vspace{-3pt}
\vspace{-2pt}
All models are trained on 3 million triples (from 600K positive pairs), and tested on 50K positive pairs, each accompanied by four negatives, with results shown in Table \ref{t:sc}. The two proposed models get nearly half of the cases right\footnote{Actually \textsc{Arc-II} can achieve 74+\% accuracy with random negatives.},
with large margin over other sentence models and models without explicit sequence modeling. \textsc{Arc-II} outperforms \textsc{Arc-I} significantly, showing the power of joint modeling of matching and sentence meaning. As another convolutional model, \textsc{SENNA+MLP} performs fairly well on this task, although still running behind the proposed convolutional architectures since it is too shallow to adequately model the sentence. It is a bit surprising that \textsc{uRAE} comes last on this task, which might be caused by the facts that 1) the representation model (including word-embedding) is not trained on Reuters, and 2) the split-sentence setting hurts the parsing, which is vital to the quality of learned sentence representation.
\subsection{Experiment II: Matching A Response to A Tweet} \vspace{-10pt}
\label{s:expt2}
\begin{wraptable}{r}{0.32\textwidth}
\vspace{-10pt}
\begin{tabular}{ll}
Model & P@1(\%)\\ \hline
Random Guess & 20.00 \\ \hline
\textsc{DeepMatch} &49.85 \\ \hline
\textsc{WordEmbed} &54,31 \\ \hline
\textsc{SenMLP} & 52.22 \\ \hline
\textsc{SENNA+MLP} & 56.48 \\ \hline
\hline
\sc{Arc-I} & 59.18 \\ \hline
\sc{Arc-II} &\bf{61.95 }\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\text{Tweet Matching}.}
\label{t:weibo}
\vspace{-30pt}
\end{wraptable}
We trained our model with 4.5 million original (tweet, response) pairs collected from Weibo, a major Chinese microblog service \cite{emnlpmatch}. Compared to Experiment I, the writing style is obviously more free and informal. For each positive pair, we find ten random responses as negative examples, rendering 45 million triples for training. One example (translated to English) is given below, with $S_X$ standing for the tweet, $S_Y^+$ the original response, and $S_Y^-$ the randomly selected response:
$S_X$: \emph{\small Damn, I have to work overtime this weekend! } \vspace{-3pt}
$S_Y^+$: \emph{\small Try to have some rest buddy.} \vspace{-3pt}
$S_Y^-$: \emph{\small It is hard to find a job, better start polishing your resume.}
We hold out 300K original (tweet, response) pairs and test the matching model on their ability to pick the original response from \emph{four} random negatives, with results reported in Table \ref{t:weibo}. This task is slightly easier than Experiment I , with more training instances and purely random negatives. It requires less about the grammatical rigor but more on detailed modeling of loose and local matching patterns (e.g., \texttt{\small work-overtime}$\Leftrightarrow$ \texttt{\small rest}). Again \textsc{Arc-II} beats other models with large margins, while two convolutional sentence models \textsc{Arc-I} and \textsc{SENNA+MLP} come next.
\subsection{Experiment III: Paraphrase Identification} \vspace{-10pt} \label{s:expt3}
Paraphrase identification aims to determine whether two sentences have the same meaning, a problem considered a touchstone of natural language understanding. This experiment
\begin{wraptable}{r}{0.4\textwidth}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
Model & Acc. (\%)& F1(\%) \\ \hline
Baseline & 66.5 &79.90 \\ \hline
Rus et al. (2008) &70.6 &80.50 \\ \hline
\hline
\textsc{WordEmbed} & 68.7 & 80.49 \\ \hline
\sc{SENNA+MLP} & {68.4} & {79.70} \\ \hline
\textsc{SenMLP} & 68.4 & 79.50 \\ \hline \hline
\sc{Arc-I} & {69.6} & {80.27} \\ \hline
\sc{Arc-II} &{69.9} & {80.91}\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The results on \text{Paraphrase}.}
\label{t:paraphrase}
\vspace{-10pt}
\end{wraptable}
is included to test our methods on matching homogenous objects. Here we use the benchmark MSRP dataset~\cite{paraphrase2008}, which contains 4,076 instances for training and 1,725 for test. We use all the training instances and report the test performance from early stopping. As stated earlier, our model is not specially tailored for modeling synonymy, and generally requires $\geq\hspace{-5pt}100K$ instances to work favorably. Nevertheless, our generic matching models still manage to perform reasonably well, achieving an accuracy and F1 score close to the best performer in 2008 based on hand-crafted features~\cite{paraphrase2008}, but still significantly lower than the state-of-the-art (76.8\%/83.6\%), achieved with unfolding-RAE and other features designed for this task~\cite{socher2011}. \vspace{-8pt}
\subsection{Discussions}\vspace{-10pt}
\textsc{Arc-II} outperforms others significantly when the training instances are relatively abundant (as in Experiment I \& II). Its superiority over \textsc{Arc-I}, however, is less salient when the sentences have deep grammatical structures and the matching relies less on the local matching patterns, as in Experiment-I. This therefore raises the interesting question about how to balance the representation of matching and the representations of objects, and whether we can guide the learning process through something like curriculum learning~\cite{CL}.
As another important observation, convolutional models (\textsc{Arc-I} \& II, \textsc{SENNA+MLP}) perform favorably over bag-of-words models, indicating the importance of utilizing sequential structures in understanding and matching sentences. Quite interestingly, as shown by our other experiments, \textsc{Arc-I} and \textsc{Arc-II} trained purely with random negatives automatically gain some ability in telling whether the words in a given sentence are in right sequential order (with around 60\% accuracy for both). It is therefore a bit surprising that an auxiliary task on identifying the correctness of word order in the response does not enhance the ability of the model on the original matching tasks.
We noticed that simple sum of embedding learned via Word2Vec~\cite{word2vec} yields reasonably good results on all three tasks. We hypothesize that the Word2Vec embedding is trained in such a way that the vector summation can act as a simple composition, and hence retains a fair amount of meaning in the short text segment. This is in contrast with other bag-of-words models like \textsc{DeepMatch}~\cite{nipsmatch}. \vspace{-8pt}
\section{Related Work} \label{s:related}\vspace{-10pt}
Matching structured objects rarely goes beyond estimating the similarity of objects in the same domain~\cite{Sun_2013_ICCV,VishproG,socher2011}, with few exceptions like~\cite{bordes2014semantic,Shenwww2014}. When dealing with language objects, most methods still focus on seeking vectorial representations in a common latent space, and calculating the matching score with inner product\cite{Shenwww2014,baoxunACL}. Few work has been done on building a deep architecture on the interaction space for texts-pairs, but it is largely based on a bag-of-words representation of text~\cite{nipsmatch}.
Our models are related to the long thread of work on sentence representation. Aside from the models with recursive nature~\cite{RNN,RAE,socher2011} (as discussed in Section 2.1), it is fairly common practice to use the sum of word-embedding to represent a short-text, mostly for classification~\cite{yangqiu}. There is very little work on convolutional modeling of language. In addition to \cite{senna,Shenwww2014}, there is a very recent model on sentence representation with dynamic convolutional neural network~\cite{oxford_cnn}. This work relies heavily on a carefully designed pooling strategy to handle the variable length of sentence with a relatively small feature map, tailored for classification problems with modest sizes. \vspace{-8pt}
\section{Conclusion}\vspace{-10pt}
We propose deep convolutional architectures for matching natural language sentences, which can nicely combine the hierarchical modeling of individual sentences and the patterns of their matching. Empirical study shows our models can outperform competitors on a variety of matching tasks.
\paragraph{Acknowledgments:
{\small B. Hu and Q. Chen are supported in part by National Natural Science Foundation of China 61173075. Z. Lu and H. Li are supported in part by China National 973 project 2014CB340301.}
\vspace{-10pt}
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
\small{
|
\section{Introduction}
Magnetocaloric materials for room-temperature cooling applications have attracted strong interested mainly for two reasons. On the one hand magnetic cooling devices obviate the need for greenhouse gases as freezing agents. On the other hand there are promising material candidates with high cooling efficiency gains.\cite{Sandeman2012} Magnetocaloric effects (MCE) emerge in any magnetic material due to the interdependence of thermal and magnetic properties. MCE can be induced by application and removal of an external magnentic field.\cite{Planes2009}. One can distinguish between two classes of MCE: Materials which heat up upon magnetization show the direct MCE whereas materials that cool down upon magnetization show the inverse magnetocaloric effect.\cite{Gomez2013} This work is related to three different non-stoichiometric Heusler alloys namely Ni-Mn-Sn, Ni-Co-Mn-Sn and Ni-Co-Mn-Al. All of them are known to show the inverse magnetocaloric effect.\cite{Yuzuak2013, Kainuma2008} Depending on the experimental conditions there are two measures for the MCE. These are the isothermal entropy change $\Delta S$ and the adiabatic temperature change $\Delta T_{\text{ad}}$.\cite{Sandeman2012} Recently there has been a lot a progress in the investigation of $\Delta T_{\text{ad}}$ in bulk materials. Although, to the best of the authors knowledge, this property not been reported yet for Heusler alloys in thin films. However, direct measurements of the adiabatic temperature change in thin films are a challenging task. Thin films with a thickness of hundreds of nanometers provide an amount of mass that is still significantly smaller than the necessary minimum sample sizes even differential scanning calorimeters with high sensitivity would need.\cite{Jeppesen2008} Furthermore thin films are commonly grown on single crystaline substrates with a thickness of hundreds of micrometers. Since these substrates provide a huge heat sink $\Delta T_{\text{ad}}$ cannot be determined directly on these samples. In this study we report on a method in order to elude this issue, i.e. adding a sacrificial Vanadium layer between the substrate and the magnetocaloric Heusler alloy. In a subsequent wet-chemical treatment the vanadium layer can be etched selectively thus resulting in a freestanding Heusler film.
\section{Experimental details}
Vanadium layers and all Heusler films are grown on MgO(001) single crystalline substrates using a ultrahigh vacuum sputtering system with a base pressure typically better than $1\times10^{-9}$ mbar. The 3 inch sputter sources are arranged in a confocal sputter-up geometry. The distance between target and sample is 21 cm. The Heusler alloy films are deposited from elemental Ni, Co, Mn, Sn, and Al targets. The substrate temperature of $500^\circ\text{C}$ is applied during the deposition process. To ensure a homogeneous stoichiometry the sample is rotated with 5 rpm. Argon flow is regulated to a sputtering pressure of $2.3\times 10^{-3}$ mbar. To prevent surface oxidation all samples are coated with a $2.5$nm MgO capping layer deposited by electron beam evaporation. The stoichiometry of the films is determined by X-Ray fluorescence measurements. Due to the relatively low fluorescence yield of Alumnium the stoichiometry of NiCoMnAl samples are determined by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES). In order to obtain depth profiles TEM lamellas are fabricated perpendicular to the sample surface. Subsequently EDX line scans are measured on these lamellas. The crystalline structure is analyzed via temperature dependent X-Ray diffraction. The samples is cooled in a custom-build liquid nitrogen cryostat. Therefore a temperature range from $-150^{\circ}\text{C}$ to $200^\circ\text{C}$ is accessible. XRD is measured in Bragg-Brentano geometry with Cu $K_\alpha$ radiation. Film thickness and density are measured via X-Ray reflectometry. The temperature dependent magnetization is measured using a vibrating sample magnetometer under 10 mT external field applied in in-plane direction. The electrical resistivity is measured using a standard 4-probe setup within a helium-cooled cryostat. The wet-chemical etching procedure is performed with the commercially available acid "`Chromium Etchant No. 1"' by MicroChemicals GmbH. Depending on the preparation conditions of the Vanadium layer it takes five to ten minutes in undiluted acid to remove the Heusler layer completely from the substrate. Afterwards, the brittle layer is washed in deionized water and ethanol. In order to contact the freestanding sample for four-probe measurements a special sample carrier is prepared. This carrier consists of a $\text{SiO}_x$ substrate with four micro-fabricated gold conduction lines on top. The Heusler layer is dried onto this sample carrier. This thin films then sticks to the sample carrier due to wetting effects. This procedure is also convenient to fasten thin films with thicknesses down to $20\text{nm}$ to a TEM grid. This provides practical advantages for TEM imaging since time-consuming preparation steps such as the thinning of the samples thus become unnecessary.
\section{Results and discussion}
Vanadium is an appropriate candidate as a sacrificial layer due to the small lattice mismatch to both the substrate and Heusler alloys. Lattice constants in table \ref{tab:latticeconst} were determined by XRD. It is noteworthy that the lattice constants slightly shift for Vanadium buffered layers, i.e. $5.92\AA$ for NiCoMnSn.
\begin{table}[h!]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
\hline
Material & lattice const. $\left[\AA\right]$ \\
\hline
Vanadium & $3.05$\\
MgO(100) & $4.21$\\
NiMnSn & 5.98 \\
NiCoMnSn & 5.97 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{lattice constants}
\label{tab:latticeconst}
\end{table}
Vanadium is known to crystallize in a body centered cubic structure and MgO in a face centered cubic structure. Vanadium can be grown epitactically on MgO with a mismatch of $2.3\%$ if the two lattices are twisted by $45$ degree to each other. Also the Heusler alloys can be grown epitactically on Vanadium with a lattice mismatch of $2.0\%$.
Vanadium deposition at room temperature leads to an amorphous layer. Even post-annealing does not lead to crystallization. A minimum sample temperature of $200^\circ$C is necessary to ensure epitactical growth. An even higher deposition temperature results in a lower surface roughness.
In former studies of Vanadium as spacer material in a Heusler sandwich structures it is reported that Vanadium is likely to interdiffuse into Heusler materials. This interdiffusion starts above a certain critical temperature and may cause significant problems. \cite{Slomka1999}. In order to determine this critical temperature an ex-situ post annealing study on MgO(001)/V(35nm)/NiMnSn(200nm)/MgO(2.5nm) is carried out. The samples are annealed for one hour each at different temperatures. However, for substrate temperatures higher than $550^\circ$C the Heusler peaks shift to larger lattice constants which indicates undesirable structural changes. Consequently interdiffusion determines an upper temperature limit. A depth profile of a Heusler sample which was deposited at $500^\circ$C substrate temperature is investigated by means of EDX. Results are shown in figure \ref{fig:edx}. Within the range of uncertainties of this method no interdiffusion of Vanadium into the Heusler layer can be observed. This result is in agreement with a depth profile from Sputter-Auger-Electron-Spectroscopy (AES).
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{edx_linescan}
\caption{EDX linescan on a TEM lamella: Depth profile on NiCoMnAl on V-Buffer. Lines between data points are a guide to the eye.}
\label{fig:edx}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{v_t_series}
\caption{XRD pattern of NiMnSn: Temperature series for different substrate temperatures during the deposition of NiMnSn.}
\label{fig:xrd_t_series}
\end{figure}
However, it not possible to fabricate a crystalline Heusler thin film at room temperature. NiMnSn samples are deposited at different substrate temperatures ranging from $20^\circ$C to $550^\circ$C. XRD pattern are shown in figure \ref{fig:xrd_t_series}. The XRD analysis of this temperature series shows that those XRD peaks which belong to the Heusler emerge at substrate temperatures higher than $300^\circ$C. Therefore the appropriate interval for substrate temperatures during the deposition process is identified between $300^\circ$C and $500^\circ$. Furthermore a depth profile of the samples is measured by means of sputter AES. Within the uncertainties of this method no interdiffusion of Vanadium is observed.
\begin{figure}[h!
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Graph2
\caption{XRD pattern of NiMnSn: as prepared (red), freestanding on glass at $20^\circ$C (black) and $80^\circ$C (blue).
\label{fig:xrd1
\end{figure}
A comparion of the structural properties between an as-prepared sample and a freestanding sample is carried out on $\text{Ni}_{50.2}\text{Mn}_{34.4}\text{Sn}_{15.4}$. Figure \ref{fig:xrd1} shows the corresponding XRD pattern. The red curve belonging to the as-prepared samples clearly shows a cubic structure, i.e. Austenite, via the $(002)_A$ and $(004)_A$ peaks. The shoulder on the right hand side of the $(004)$ indicates that there is some martensitic contribution. Due to the distortion of the martensitic lattice the $(400)_M$ and $(004)_M$ Martensite peaks can only be observed in a $2\theta-\omega$ scan with a non-zero $\omega$-offset. The black curve is measured on the same sample after removing the substrate and drying the Heusler layer onto a glass sample carrier. The cubic Austenite-Peaks have vanished. Instead four Martensite peaks, namely $(002)_M$, $(200)_M$, $(400)_M$ and $(004)_M$ have emerged. In this case there is no $\omega$-offset needed to measure these peaks since the Heusler film does not dry smoothly on the glass surface but wrinkles. Consequently the film appears similarly to a polycrystalline sample in XRD. Both the red and the black curve are measured at the same temperature, but the crystal structure is clearly different. This means that the Austenite transition temperature is shifted to higher temperatures by removing the substrate. The substrate causes a strain in the Heusler film which hinders the martensitic transition. Hence by removing the substrate it is favorable for the sample to be in the martensitic state. Heating this sample to $80^\circ$ C restores the austenitic structure (blue curve). The two copper peaks result from the copper heating block underneath the sample which was only installed for this measurement. A similar broadening and displacement of the hysteresis due to substrate contraints has already been studied on epitaxial NiMnGa film. \cite{Buschbeck2009}
\begin{figure}[h!
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{RTA1
\caption{XRD pattern of NiCoMnSn: as prepared (red) and after rapid thermal annealing for 30 seconds (black).
\label{fig:rta1
\end{figure}
As already mentioned, Vanadium will not crystallize if it is deposited at room temperature. Therefore it is investigated whether a rapid thermal annealing (RTA) process leads to a subsequent crystallization. Figure \ref{fig:rta1} shows the XRD pattern of this investigation on NiCoMnSn. The as-prepared sample (red curve) clearly does not show any crystalline Heusler structure. This sample was exposed to RTA for 30 seconds at 960 Watt resulting in a maximum temperature of $740^\circ$ C. The XRD results of this post-annealing process are shown in black. The distribution of the crystallites is investigated by means of an $\omega$-scan on the cubic (004) peak. This rocking curve shows a FWHM of $1.2^\circ$. The peaks at $2\theta = 48.7^\circ$ are due to $\text{Ni}_3\text{Mn}$-phases. It is noteworthy that there is no Vanadium peak to be seen in the XRD pattern. Thus, RTA is a convenient method to achieve crystallization of NiCoMnSn on an amorphous Vanadium layer.
\begin{figure}[h!
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{VSM
\caption{VSM measurement on NiCoMnSn in a constant measurement field of 100 Oe.
\label{fig:vsm
\end{figure}
The Martensite Phase of NiCoMnSn is known to show a considerably smaller magnetization than its Austenite Phase. Therefore the Martensitic transition can be observed by measuring the magnetic moment of the sample as a function of the temperature. A comparision of the magnetic properties of as-prepard and freestanding NiCoMnSn is carried out by means of vibration sample magnetometry (VSM). Results are shown in figure \ref{fig:vsm}. NiMnSn has a Curie temperature of approximately 300 K\cite{Auge2012}, i.e. room temperature. Substitution some amount of Nickel by Cobald leads to an increasing Curie temperature. For applications at room temperature a higher Curie temperature is obviously favorable. Both the as-prepared and the freestanding sample show the same behaviour on the heating branch, i.e. Austenite start and Austenite finish temperatures are in good agreement. In contrast the Martensite start temperature is shifted by 10 K and the Martensite finish temperature is shifted by 100 K to lower temperatures resulting in a broadening of the hysteresis.
\begin{figure}[h!
\begin{minipage}{0.59\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{NiCoMnAl1
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.39\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{NiCoMnAl2}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Temperature dependent XRD of NiCoMnAl. Curves are plotted from bottom to top in the sequence of measurements. (left) The Hysteresis of the Martensitic transformation is extracted form these data. Arrows are only intended as guide to the eye. (right)
\label{fig:NiCoMnAl
\end{figure}
Magnetic field induced transformation in NiCoMnAl has been studied in bulk materials some time ago \cite{Kainuma2008}. However, we report on the transformation behavior of a thin film $\text{Ni}_{41}\text{Co}_{10.4}\text{Mn}_{34.8}\text{Al}_{13.8}$ sample on a Vanadium buffer which is investigated via temperature dependent XRD. A more detailed study on freestanding NiCoMnAl samples can be found elsewhere\cite{Teichert2014}.
Results are shown in figure \ref{fig:NiCoMnAl}. The measurement sequence is started at room temperature. At first the sample is heated to 370 K until the net area of the $(004)_A$ peak reaches its maximum value. Subsequently the sample is cooled down to 210 K, i.e. the minimum value of the $(004)_A$ peak and again heated up to $370 K$. The structural hysteresis is obtained from these data by plotting the $(004)_A$ peak net area as a function of the temperature. From the above figure it can clearly be seen that the shape of the Vanadium (002) peaks also changes during the Martensitic transformation. Therefore $\omega$-scans are performed on $2\theta = 60.87^\circ$ for each temperature step. It turns out that the FWHM of these rocking curves also changes from $0.67^\circ$ at 370 K to $0.99^\circ$ at 210 K. This indicates in change in the distribution of crystallites which in turn can be understood a strain effect due to the lattice interaction with the Heusler film.
\section{Conclusion}
Freestanding magnetocaloric thin film can be prepared by selective wet-chemical etching of sacrificial Vanadium layers. A multilayer system of Vanadium and a MCE Heusler alloy can be grown epitactically at substrate temperatures between $300\circ$ C and $500^\circ$ C without interdiffusion issues. Releasing the MCE film from the substrate leads to a lowering of the Martensite transition temperature due to the lack of substrate constraints which hinder the transition. Crystalline Heusler film can also be prepared by deposition onto and amorphous Vanadium seed layer and a subsequent rapid thermal annealing process. The differences in the transition behavior can be investigated via VSM. Both Martensite start und Martensite finish temperatures are lower for freestanding films. This broadening of the hysteresis is possibly due to surface oxidation effects. NiCoMnAl magnetocaloric films can also be prepared in thin films. These films excert a strain to the Vanadium buffer during the Martensitic transition.
\section{Acknowledgement}
The authors thank M. Meinert and C. Sterwerf for helpful discussions and K. Fritz for preliminary work on RTA. This work is supported by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) in the scope of project A6 within SPP 1599.
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $k$ be an algebraically closed field of positive characteristic $p$. An \emph{$F$-splitting} of a $k$-scheme $X$ is an $\mathcal{O}_X$-linear map splitting the map $F^*:\mathcal{O}_X\to F_*\mathcal{O}_X$ induced by the absolute Frobenius morphism; $X$ is \emph{$F$-split} if such a splitting exists.
Originally introduced by Mehta and Ramanathan in their study of Schubert varieties \cite{mehta:85a}, a scheme being $F$-split has remarkable consequences, including the vanishing of all higher cohomology groups of any ample line bundle.
The slightly stronger notion of (global) $F$-regularity\footnote{What we call $F$-regularity is called global $F$-regularity in \cite{smith:00a}.} \cite{hochster:88,smith:00a}
(see Definition \ref{defn:frob}) is closely connected to the property of being log-Fano \cite{schwede:10a}. Both notions have been extended to pairs $(X,\Delta)$ of a normal variety $X$ and an effective $\mathbb{Q}$-divisor $\Delta$ \cite{schwede:10a}.
In this article, we study the $F$-splitting and $F$-regularity properties of normal varieties equipped with an effective action by a diagonalizable group. On one end of the spectrum, normal toric varieties are always $F$-regular \cite{smith:00a}. On the other hand, characterizations of $F$-split and $F$-regular normal singularities with good $\mathbb{G}_m$ action have been given by Watanabe \cite{watanabe:91a} in terms of their Demazure representations. Moving to the case $H$ finite, any elliptic curve $E$ can be realized as a double cover of $\mathbb{P}^1$ (as long as $\chara k \neq 2$) inducing a $\mu_2$-action, and there is a classical characterization in terms of this cover when $E$ if $F$-split (see Example \ref{ex:elliptic}). Our main result, which we state below, allows us to uniformly treat these three above cases, along with those of many other varieties, including toric vector bundles.
Let $X$ be a normal variety with an effective action by a diagonalizable group $H$.
Let $X^\circ$ be the open subvariety of $X$ consisting of those points with finite stabilizers, and assume that $X^\circ$ admits a geometric quotient $\pi:X^\circ\to Y$, $Y=X^\circ/H$. This is the case if e.g.~$H$ is a torus, or $X$ is quasiprojective. We define an effective $\mathbb{Q}$-divisor $\Delta$ on $Y$
by
$$
\sum_{P\subset Y}\frac{\mu(P)-1}{\mu(P)} P,
$$
where $\mu(P)$ is the order of the stabilizer of the generic point of any irreducible component of $\pi^{-1}(P)\subset X^\circ$.
\begin{mainthm}[Theorem \ref{thm:main}]
Let $X$ be an $H$-variety as above. Then $X$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular) if and only if the pair $(Y,\Delta)$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular).
\end{mainthm}
The machinery we develop actually gives a bijection between $H$-invariant $F$-splittings of $X$ and $F$-splittings of $(Y,\Delta)$, as well as giving a partial description of the set of all $F$-splittings of $X$ in terms of the quotient pair $(Y,\Delta)$ (see Remark \ref{rem:bijection}). Furthermore, we relate $F$-splittings of $X$ compatible with $H$-invariant subvarieties to certain splittings of $(Y,\Delta)$ (Propositions \ref{prop:comp1} and \ref{prop:comp2}).
The main obstruction to applying our main theorem in practice is that the quotient $Y$ is potentially non-separated. To deal with this, we show that $(Y,\Delta)$ can be replaced by a pair $({Y^{\mathrm{sep}}},{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$ such that ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$ is a variety, and $(Y,\Delta)$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular) if and only if $({Y^{\mathrm{sep}}},{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$ is, see Proposition \ref{prop:sep} and Theorem \ref{thm:sep}.
The main theorem has a number of applications. We recover that normal toric varieties are $F$-regular, along with Watanabe's characterization of normal singularities with $\mathbb{G}_m$ action which are $F$-split or $F$-regular (Theorem \ref{thm:watanabe}).
Given a torus $T$, a \emph{complexity-one} $T$-variety is a $T$-variety $X$ for which $\dim T=\dim X-1$; we give an explicit characterization of $F$-split and $F$-regular complexity-one $T$-varieties, see Theorem \ref{thm:compone}. We also are able to give combinatorial criteria for the $F$-splitting or $F$-regularity of a large class of toric vector bundles. In particular, we characterize $F$-split and $F$-regular rank two vector bundles (Corollary \ref{cor:rktwo}), recover Xin's result \cite{xin:14a} that the cotangent bundle of a smooth toric variety is $F$-split (Corollary \ref{cor:cotangent}), and answer a question of Lauritzen by providing an example of an $F$-split toric vector bundle $\mathcal{E}$ such that $\mathcal{E}^*$ is not $F$-split (Example \ref{ex:lauritzen}).
Further applications include a better understanding of the $F$-splitting and $F$-regularity of cyclic covers (\S\ref{sec:cyclic}), $H$-varieties with toroidal affine quotients (\S\ref{sec:affine}), surjectively graded algebras (\S\ref{sec:surj}), and Cox rings (\S\ref{sec:cox}).
We also study \emph{diagonal splittings} of a $T$-variety $X$, that is, splittings of $X\times X$ which are compatible with the diagonal. Payne showed that normal toric varieties are not always diagonally split, and gave a combinatorial characterization of those which are \cite{payne:09a}. We give a necessary and sufficient criterion for a $T$-invariant splitting of $X\times X$ to be compatible with the diagonal, generalizing Payne's result to higher complexity $T$-varieties, see Theorem \ref{thm:diag-criterion}.
While certainly less explicit than Payne's characterization of diagonally split toric varieties, our criterion can be effectively applied in many instances, particularly for complexity-one $T$-varieties. We also deduce two easier-to-check necessary criteria for the existence of a diagonal splitting.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In \S \ref{sec:primer-torus-actions},
we discuss the action of a diagonalizable group on a normal variety, as well as constructing the log pair $(Y, \Delta)$. Preliminaries on the Frobenius morphism are contained in \S \ref{sec:frob}. We prove our main result in \S \ref{sec:tfrob}, and discuss invariant compatible splittings in \S \ref{sec:compat}. We show how to replace our potentially non-separated quotient $Y$ by a variety in \S \ref{sec:sep}. In \S \ref{sec:special}, we consider a number of special cases: cyclic covers, $T$-varieties with toroidal affine quotients, $\mathbb{G}_m$ actions, complexity-one actions, surjectively graded algebras, and Cox rings. We dedicate all of \S \ref{sec:vb} to the special case of toric vector bundles. Finally, \S \ref{sec:diag} contains our results on diagonal splittings of $T$-varieties.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
The authors would like to thank Kevin Tucker and Karl Schwede for helpful conversations. The first author's work was supported by Polish National Science Centre (NCN) contract number 2012/07/B/ST1/03343. The second and third authors would like to thank ICMS for research in groups support.
\section{Diagonalizable Group Scheme Actions}
\label{sec:primer-torus-actions}
\subsection{Preliminaries}
We will work over an algebraically closed field $k$.
Let $H$ be a \emph{diagonalizable group scheme} over $k$, that is, a subgroup scheme of a torus $\mathbb{G}_m^r$ for some $r\geq 0$. For general facts about diagonalizable group schemes, see e.g.~\cite[Exp. I \S 4.4]{sga3}, \cite[\S 2.2]{waterhouse:79}, \cite{jantzen:03}. Thus $H$ is isomorphic to a product of copies of the multiplicative group $\mathbb{G}_m$ and group schemes of $n$-th roots of unity $\mu_n = \mathbb{G}_m[n]$. We denote by $M$ the character group $\mathfrak{X}(H)=\Hom_{k-\text{gp.sch.}}(H, \mathbb{G}_m)$ of $H$.
By an \emph{$H$-variety} we mean a normal variety\footnote{An integral separated scheme of finite type over $k$.} $X$ together with an \emph{effective} action $H\times X\to X$. We say that $H$ acts \emph{almost freely} if for all $x\in X(k)$, the stabilizer $H_x$ is finite (as a group scheme over $k$). Note that the set of all points $x\in X$ such that $H_x$ is finite forms an open subvariety $X^\circ$ of $X$ which we call the \emph{almost-free locus}. We will always suppose that the following holds:
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:cover-condition}
X^\circ\textit{ admits an open cover by }H\textit{-invariant affine open subsets.}
\end{equation}
Condition \eqref{eqn:cover-condition} is not automatically fulfilled (see e.g.~\cite[B.3.4.1]{hartshorne:77a}), but it is always satisfied if $H$ is connected \cite{sumihiro:74a}, or if $X$ is quasi-projective:
\begin{lemma}
Condition \eqref{eqn:cover-condition} is fulfilled if $X$, or more generally, $X^\circ$ is quasi-projective.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The group scheme $H$ splits splits as a product $H\cong H_\mathrm{red}^0\times G$, where $H_\mathrm{red}^0$ is the reduced connected component of the identity, and $G$ is finite. If $X^\circ$ is quasi-projective, it is well known \cite[Theorem 4.3.1]{birula:02a} that there is a good geometric quotient $X^\circ\to X^\circ/G$, where $Y=X^\circ/G$ is quasi-projective. Furthermore, $Y$ is normal \cite[pp.~126]{shafarevich:13a}. Since the action of $H_\mathrm{red}^0$ on $X^\circ$ commutes with that of $G$, it descends to an action on $Y$, and $Y$ has an $H_\mathrm{red}^0$-invariant affine cover by \cite{sumihiro:74a}. Pulling this back to $X^\circ$ gives the necessary $H$-invariant affine cover.
\end{proof}
Suppose now that the $H$-action on $X$ is almost free, that is $X=X^\circ$. In this situation, there is a normal (potentially non-separated) scheme $Y=X/H$ which is a geometric quotient of $X$. We denote by $\pi:X\to Y$ the quotient map. Let $\mathcal{A}=\pi_* \mathcal{O}_X$, with the associated $M$-grading $\mathcal{A} = \bigoplus_{u\in M} \mathcal{A}_u$, so that $X=\spec_Y \mathcal{A}$. Our first goal is to describe the $H$-variety $X$, or equivalently the graded algebra $\mathcal{A}$, in terms of divisors on $Y$. We treat the case of tori first. Let $\CaDiv_\mathbb{Q} Y$ denote the group of $\mathbb{Q}$-divisors on $Y$ with Cartier multiple.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:p-div}
Let $T$ be a torus, and let $X=\spec_Y \mathcal{A}$, be a $T$-variety with an almost free action with quotient $\pi:X\to Y$. Then there exists a homomorphism $\mathcal{D}:\mathfrak{X}(T)\to \CaDiv_\mathbb{Q} Y$ and a $T$-equivariant isomorphism
\[ X \cong \spec_Y \bigoplus_{v\in \mathfrak{X}(T)} \mathcal{O}_Y(\lfloor \mathcal{D}(v) \rfloor)\cdot\chi^v. \]
\end{prop}
The above proposition follows almost immediately from Theorem 3.4 of \cite{altmann:06a}. However, the authors of loc.~cit.~only state and prove this theorem for the case that the ground field has characteristic zero. We believe that their proof applies essentially unchanged in the case of positive characteristic. Instead of verifying all the details here, we present a slightly different argument here for the special case in which we are interested.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:free}
Suppose that a torus $T$ acts freely on a $T$-variety $V$. Then $V$ is a Zariski locally trivial $T$-torsor over $V/T$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Luna's \'etale slice theorem \cite{luna:73}, which holds for tori in arbitrary characteristic (cf. \cite[Remark 1.1]{alper:10}), there is an \'etale cover $Y\to V/T$ such that the pullback of $V$ to $Y$ is a $T$-torsor. But by \'etale descent for tori (cf.~e.g.~\cite[III.4]{milne:80a}), $V\to V/T$ must already be a $T$-torsor in the Zariski topology.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{prop:p-div}]
We adapt the proof of Theorem~3.4 of \cite{altmann:06a}. Since $\mathfrak{X}(T)$ is free and the action of $T$ on $X$ is effective (so that each $\mathcal{A}_v$ is non-zero), there exists a (non-unique) homomorphism $\mathfrak{X}(T)\to k(X)^*$, $v\mapsto f_v$ satisfying $f_v\in k(X)_{v}$ for all $v\in \mathfrak{X}(T)$.
There exists a finite subgroup scheme $S\subset T$ containing all stabilizer groups $T_x$. Indeed, by \cite{sumihiro:74a}, it suffices to show that a linear action of a torus on $\mathbb{A}^n$ only admits finitely many different stabilizer groups, and this is a straightforward calculation.
Let $T'=T/S$, leading to an inclusion $\mathfrak{X}(T')\subset \mathfrak{X}(T)$. Set $X'= X/S = \spec_Y \bigoplus_{u\in \mathfrak{X}(T')} \mathcal{A}_u$. Then $T'$ acts freely on $X'$, so by Lemma~\ref{lemma:free}, $X'$ is a $T'$-torsor over $X'/T'=X/T=Y$ in the Zariski topology. Equivalently, $\mathcal{A}_v$ is an invertible sheaf for $v\in \mathfrak{X}(T')$ and the multiplication maps $\mathcal{A}_v\otimes \mathcal{A}_{v'}\to \mathcal{A}_{v+v'}$ are isomorphisms for $v, v'\in \mathfrak{X}(T')$. Thus there exists a unique homomorphism $\mathcal{D}:\mathfrak{X}(T')\to \CaDiv(Y)$ such that for all $v\in \mathfrak{X}(T')$ the map
\[ \mathcal{A}_{v} \to k(Y), \quad f \mapsto ff^{-1}_v\in k(Y) \]
identifies $\mathcal{A}_{v}$ with $\mathcal{O}_Y(\mathcal{D}(v))$. Since $\mathfrak{X}(T)/\mathfrak{X}(T')$ is torsion and $\mathbb{Q}$ is uniquely divisible, there exists a unique extension $\mathcal{D}:\mathfrak{X}(T)\to \CaDiv_\mathbb{Q} Y$. If $f$ is a local section of $\mathcal{O}_Y(\lfloor \mathcal{D}(v)\rfloor)$ and $n>0$ is such that $nv\in \mathfrak{X}(T')$, we have $f^n f_v^n= f^nf_{nv}\in \mathcal{A}_{nv}$, and hence $ff_v\in \mathcal{A}_v$ since $\mathcal{A}$ is normal. Thus, multiplication by $f_v$ defines homomorphisms
\[ \beta_v : \mathcal{O}_Y(\lfloor \mathcal{D}(v)\rfloor) \to \mathcal{A}_{v} \]
as desired, and it's clear that they are multiplicative.
We check that the induced homomorphism $\beta=\bigoplus \beta_v$ is an isomorphism. This is clearly local on $Y$, so we can assume that $Y=\spec A_0$, $X=\spec A$, $A=\bigoplus_{v\in \mathfrak{X}(T)} A_v$. Let $B_v = f^{-1}_v A_v \subseteq k(Y)$ be the fractional ideal corresponding to $\mathcal{O}_Y(\lfloor \mathcal{D}(v)\rfloor)$. Then $\beta$ corresponds to the map
\[ \beta: B=\bigoplus_{v\in \mathfrak{X}(T)} B_v\cdot \chi^v \to \bigoplus_{v\in \mathfrak{X}(T)} A_v = A . \]
which multiplies elements of $B_v$ by $f_v$.
It suffices to check that $B$ is a normal domain and that $\beta$ induces an isomorphism on fraction fields. This follows by the last paragraph of the proof of Theorem~3.4 in \cite{altmann:06a}.
\end{proof}
In general, if $H$ is a subgroup scheme of a torus $T$, passing from $X$ to $X'=(T\times X)/H$ allows us to reduce questions about $H$-varieties to questions about $T$-varieties:
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:xprime}
Let $\phi:H\to G$ be a homomorphism of diagonalizable group schemes whose cokernel is a torus. In the situation above, consider the $\mathfrak{X}(G)$-graded $\mathcal{O}_Y$-algebra
\[ \mathcal{A}' = \bigoplus_{v\in \mathfrak{X}(G)} \mathcal{A}_{\phi^*(v)}\cdot \chi^v = (\mathcal{O}_Y[\mathfrak{X}(G)]\otimes \mathcal{A})^H \]
where $\mathcal{O}_Y[\mathfrak{X}(G)]$ is given the $\mathfrak{X}(H)$-grading in which $\chi^v$ has weight $-\phi^*(v)$. The kernel of the map $f:\mathcal{A}'\to\mathcal{A}$ identifying $\mathcal{A}'_v = \mathcal{A}_{\phi^*(v)}\cdot \chi^v$ with $\mathcal{A}_{\phi^*(v)}$ is generated by $\chi^v - 1$ for $v\in \ker(\phi^*)$. Let $X'=\spec_Y \mathcal{A}'$, with the induced $H$-equivariant map $f:X\to X'$. Then $X'$ is a $G$-variety with an almost free action satisfying condition~\eqref{eqn:cover-condition}, and is identified by construction with the quotient $(G\times X)/H$ where $H$ acts on $G$ via the inverse of $\phi$. Moreover, for any two points $x\in X(k)$, $x'\in X'(k)$ with the same image in $Y$, the $G$-stabilizer of $x'$ is the image of the $H$-stabilizer of $x$ under $\phi$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Self-evident.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:p-div}
Let $H$ be a diagonalizable group scheme, and choose an injective homomorphism $\phi:H\to T$ into a torus $T$. As before, let $X=\spec_Y \mathcal{A}$, $\mathcal{A}=\bigoplus_{u\in M}\mathcal{A}_u$ be an $H$-variety with an almost free action satisfying condition~\eqref{eqn:cover-condition}, with quotient $\pi:X\to Y$. Let $X'=(T\times X)/H= \spec_Y \mathcal{A}'$, $\mathcal{A}'= \bigoplus_{v\in \mathfrak{X}(T)} \mathcal{A}_{\phi^*(v)}\cdot \chi^v$ be as in Lemma~\ref{lemma:xprime}.
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item There exists a homomorphism $\mathcal{D}:\mathfrak{X}(T)\to \CaDiv_\mathbb{Q} Y$ and an $H$-equivariant isomorphism
\[ X \cong \spec_Y \left(\bigoplus_{v\in \mathfrak{X}(T)} \mathcal{O}_Y(\lfloor \mathcal{D}(v) \rfloor)\cdot\chi^v\right)/(\chi^v-1\,:\, v\in\ker(\phi^*)). \]
\item Let $s:M\to \mathfrak{X}(T)$ be a set-theoretic section of $\phi^*$, and let $z(u,u') = s(u)+s(u')-s(u+u')$ be the associated $1$-cocycle. There exists a $1$-cocycle $g:M\times M\to k(Y)^*$ with $g_{u, u'}$ a section of $\mathcal{O}_Y(\lfloor \mathcal{D}(z(u, u'))\rfloor)$ for all $u, u'\in M$, and an $H$-equivariant isomorphism
\[
X \cong \spec_Y \bigoplus_{u\in M} \mathcal{O}_Y(\lfloor \mathcal{D}(s(u))\rfloor)\cdot\chi^u,
\]
where the multiplication on the right hand side is defined by the formula
\[
(f\cdot \chi^u)(f'\cdot \chi^{u'}) = (g_{u,u'}^{-1} ff')\cdot \chi^{u+u'}.
\]
\item There exists a unique homomorphism $\bar\mathcal{D}:M\to \CaDiv_{\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}} Y$ making the diagram
\[
\xymatrix{
\mathfrak{X}(T) \ar[r]^\mathcal{D} \ar[d]_{\phi^*} & \CaDiv_\mathbb{Q} Y \ar[d] \\
M \ar[r]_{\bar\mathcal{D}} & \CaDiv_{\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}} Y
}
\]
commute. In other words, $\mathcal{D}(\ker(\phi^*)) \subseteq \CaDiv_\mathbb{Z} Y$, so in particular $\mathcal{D}(z(u, u'))$ is integral for $u, u'\in M$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Apply Proposition~\ref{prop:p-div} to $X'$, taking as $S$ used in the proof a subgroup scheme of $H$, and use Lemma~\ref{lemma:xprime} to obtain the first isomorphism. For the second assertion, take the multiplicative system $v\mapsto f_v:\mathfrak{X}(T)\to k(X')^*$ used in the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:p-div} and consider it as a homomorphism $\mathfrak{X}(T)\to k(X)^*$ with $f_v$ semi-invariant of weight $\phi^*(v)$. This makes sense because each $f_v$ is in $k(Y)\cdot \mathcal{A}'_v = k(Y) \cdot \mathcal{A}_{\phi^*(v)}$.
Define $g_{u, u'} = f_{z(u, u')}^{-1} = f_{s(u)}^{-1}f_{s(u')}^{-1}f_{s(u+u')}$.
Then $f \mapsto ff_{s(u)}^{-1}$ defines a homomorphism as desired, which is an isomorphism on the graded pieces. Finally, $\mathcal{D}(v)$ is integral for $v\in \ker(\phi^*)$ by construction (this is where we use the fact that $S\subseteq H$), which shows the last assertion.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
In \cite[\S 3]{altmann:12a} Altmann and Petersen construct finite covers of $\mathbb{P}^1$ with abelian Galois group using so-called $A$-divisors. Such an $A$-divisor is a special instance of the map $\bar\mathcal{D}$ from Theorem \ref{thm:p-div} in the case $Y=\mathbb{P}^1$ and $H$ a finite group scheme.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
The use of $X'=(T\times X)/H$ in order to understand the action of a diagonalizable group $H$ with torsion is reminiscent of the construction of the \emph{Cox sheaf} of a variety $Y$ when $\Cl(Y)$ has torsion; see \cite[\S 1.4]{coxbook} for details.
\end{rem}
\subsection{Basic setup} \label{ss:setup}
In the rest of the article, unless stated otherwise, we fix the following setup. The base field $k$ is algebraically closed of characteristic $p>0$, $H$ is a diagonalizable group scheme over $k$ with character group $M$, $\phi:H\to T$ is an injective homomorphism into a torus $T$, $s:M\to \mathfrak{X}(T)$ is a set-theoretic section of $\phi^*$, and $z(u, u') = s(u)+s(u')-s(u+u')$. We consider an $H$-variety $X$ such that the almost-free locus $X^\circ$ satisfies condition~\eqref{eqn:cover-condition}, and $\pi:X^\circ\to Y$ is the quotient map. We let $X'=(T\times X^\circ)/H$ as in Lemma~\ref{lemma:xprime}, considered as a $T$-variety, with quotient map $\pi'$. Let $\mathcal{A} = \pi_* \mathcal{O}_{X^\circ} = \bigoplus_{u\in M} \mathcal{A}_u$, $\mathcal{A}' = \pi'_* \mathcal{O}_{X'} = \bigoplus_{v\in \mathfrak{X}(T)} \mathcal{A}_{\phi^*(v)}\cdot \chi^v$. We fix a homomorphism $v\mapsto f_v : \mathfrak{X}(T)\to k(X)$ with $f_v$ semi-invariant of weight $v$, and define
$g_{u, u'} = f^{-1}_{z(u, u')}$.
If $H$ itself is a torus, we can always assume that $H=T$, so that $z=0$ and $g_{u,u'}=1$. Theorem~\ref{thm:p-div} gives us $\mathcal{D}:\mathfrak{X}(T)\to \CaDiv_\mathbb{Q} Y$, $\bar\mathcal{D}:M\to \CaDiv_{\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}} Y$, and the isomorphism
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:pdiv}
X^\circ \cong \spec_Y \bigoplus_{u\in M} \mathcal{O}_Y(\lfloor \mathcal{D}(s(u))\rfloor)\cdot\chi^u, \quad
\chi^u\cdot\chi^{u'} = g_{u, u'}^{-1} \chi^{u+u'}.
\end{equation}
This representation of $X$ induces an isomorphism of $k$-algebras
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:sinv}
k(X)^{\mathrm{s-inv}} \cong \bigoplus_{u\in M} k(Y) \chi^u, \quad \chi^u\cdot\chi^{u'} = g^{-1}_{u,u'}\cdot \chi^{u+u'}
\end{equation}
Here $k(X)^{\mathrm{s-inv}}$ is the subalgebra of $k(X)$ which is generated by the semi-invariant functions. We write $\mathcal{D}$ and $\bar D$ in the form
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:d}
\mathcal{D}(v) = \sum_P \alpha_P(v)\cdot P, \quad \bar\mathcal{D}(u) = \sum_P \bar\alpha_P(u)\cdot P
\end{equation}
where the sums range over all prime divisors $P$ in $Y$, and homomorphisms $\alpha_P : \mathfrak{X}(T)\to \mathbb{Q}$, $\bar\alpha_P: M\to \mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}$ with $\bar\alpha_P(\phi^*(v)) \equiv \alpha_P(v)$ modulo 1.
For any $\bar\alpha: M\to \mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}$, let $\mu(\bar\alpha)$ denote the order of $\bar\alpha$, i.e., the smallest natural number $n>0$ such that $n \cdot \bar\alpha(u) = 0$ for all $u\in M$. For a prime divisor $P\subseteq Y$, we denote by $\mu(P)$ the order of the stabilizer of a generic point of $\pi^{-1}(P)$. We denote by $\Delta$ the $\mathbb{Q}$-divisor
\[ \Delta = \sum_{P} \frac{\mu(P) - 1}{\mu(P)}\cdot P \]
on $Y$.
We let $B=X\setminus X^\circ$, and for a prime divisor $D\subseteq X$ contained in $B$, we denote by $\rho_D : M\to \mathbb{Z}$ the unique homomorphism satisfying $\nu_D(f)=-\rho_D(u)$ if $f\in k(X)^*$ has weight $u$ (cf. Lemma~\ref{lemma:boundary} below). We also define a polytope
$$
P_X=\{u\in M_\mathbb{Q}\ |\ \rho_D(u)\leq 1\}
$$
where $D$ ranges over all prime divisors $D$ contained in $B$. For $u\in M$ and $n\in\mathbb{Z}$, we will write $u\in n\cdot P_X$ meaning that the image of $u$ in $M_\mathbb{Q}$ is in $n\cdot P_X$.
\begin{prop}[{cf. \cite[Corollary 7.11]{altmann:06a}}]\label{prop:stab}
In the above situation, let $P$ be a prime divisor on $Y$. Then the stabilizer of every generic point of the preimage has character group $\ker(\bar\alpha_P:M\to \mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z})$, and hence is isomorphic to $\mu_{n}$ where $n=\mu(\bar\alpha_P)$. In particular, $\mu(P) = \mu(\bar\alpha_P)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We can assume that $H=T$, by replacing $X$ by $X'=(T\times X)/H$, which has the same $\mathcal{D}$ and stabilizers as $X$. We may shrink $Y$ until it contains no $P' \neq P$ in the support of $\mathcal{D}$ (i.e., $\alpha_{P'} = 0$ for $P'\neq P$). If $P$ itself is not in the support of $\mathcal{D}$, we see that $X$ is a $T$-torsor over $Y$. In any case, we may shrink $Y$ further so that $Y$ and $X$ are affine with coordinate rings $A_0$ and $A$, respectively, and $P$ is principal. Choosing a basis of $M$ such that all but one basis element is contained in $\ker(\alpha_P)$, we may reduce to the case $M=\mathbb{Z}$. But then the stabilizer must be of the form $\mu_{n}$, and by the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:p-div}, $n$ is exactly the smallest integer such that $n \alpha_P P$ is a $\mathbb{Z}$-divisor, that is, $n=\mu(\alpha_P)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:boundary}
Let $X$ be an $H$-variety as above, $D$ any prime divisor not intersecting the almost-free locus $X^\circ$, and $H_\mathrm{red}^0$ the reduced connected component of the identity in $H$. Then the stabilizer of $H_\mathrm{red}^0$ (and hence of $H$) at the generic point of $D$ is one-dimensional. If $$\rho_D\in \mathfrak{X}(H_\mathrm{red}^0)^*= \Hom(\mathfrak{X}(H_\mathrm{red}^0),\mathbb{Z})=\Hom(M,\mathbb{Z})$$ is the associated primitive co-character such that the generic point is attractive under the corresponding one-parameter subgroup, then any non-zero rational function $f$ of weight $u\in M$ vanishes to order $-\rho_D(u)$ on $D$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Both claims follow from the proof of \cite[Proposition 3.2]{hausen:10a}.
\end{proof}
\begin{ex}[Blow up of a flag variety $F(1,1,1)$]
\label{ex:main}
We consider the variety $W=F(1,1,1)=SL_3/B$ of complete flags in $k^3$. It is well known that $W$ is isomorphic to the hypersurface \[W=V(x_0z_0 - x_1z_1 + x_2z_2) \subset \mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^2.\]
We denote $\mathbb{G}_m^2$ by $T$ and obtain a $T$-action on $W$ given by the weight matrix
\[
\begin{array}{rrrrrrrl}
&x_0&x_1&x_2&z_0&z_1&z_2&
\vspace{2mm}\\
\ldelim({2}{0.5ex}
&0&1&0&0&-1&0&\rdelim){2}{0.5ex} \\
&0& 0&1&0&0&-1& \quad.
\end{array}
\]
It is easy to see that the locus $W^\circ$ of finite stabilizers is covered by the two open subsets $U_1 = [x_0x_1x_2 \neq 0]$ and $U_2 = [z_0z_1z_2 \neq 0]$. In particular, there are no divisors contained in $W\setminus W^\circ$.
We have
\[ U_1 \cong T \times \underbrace{V(z_0-z_1+z_2)}_{\cong \mathbb{P}^1}; \quad U_2\cong \underbrace{V(x_0-x_1+x_2)}_{\cong \mathbb{P}^1} \times T\]
with the canonical $T$-action on the right-hand-sides. In particular the torus acts with trivial stabilizers on $W^\circ$. The quotient morphisms are both induced by
\[\pi:\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^2 \dashrightarrow \mathbb{P}^1;\quad (x_0:x_1:x_2,\; z_0:z_1:z_2) \mapsto (x_0z_0:x_1z_1).\]
The image of the intersection $U_1 \cap U_2$ under this quotient is $\mathbb{P}^1 \setminus \{0,1,\infty\}$. Hence, $Y = W^\circ/T$ is the projective line with doubled points $0$,$1$, and $\infty$.
Let us choose $y_0,y_1$ as coordinates for $\mathbb{P}^1$. Via the embedding of function fields induced by the dominant morphism $\pi$ we have $y_0 = x_0z_0$ and $y_1 = x_1z_1$. For the structure sheaves of $U_1$ and $U_2$ we obtain
\[\mathcal{O}_{U_1} = \mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}[(\nicefrac{x_1}{x_0})^{\pm1}, (\nicefrac{x_2}{x_0})^{\pm1}]\]
and
\[\mathcal{O}_{U_2} = \mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}[(\nicefrac{z_1}{z_0})^{\pm1}, (\nicefrac{z_2}{z_0})^{\pm1}]\]
with generators living in degrees $\pm (0,1)$ and $\pm (1,0)$. We have $\nicefrac{y_1}{y_0}=\frac{x_1z_1}{x_0z_0}$ and using the equation $x_0z_0 - x_1z_1 + x_2z_2=0$ we obtain $\frac{x_2z_2}{x_0z_0}=\nicefrac{y_1}{y_0}-1$. This gives
\[\frac{z_1}{z_0}=\frac{y_1}{y_0} \cdot \frac{x_0}{x_1},\qquad \frac{z_2}{z_0}=\left(\frac{y_1}{y_0}-1\right)\cdot\frac{x_0}{x_2}.\]
Note, that $\div(\nicefrac{y_1}{y_0}) = [0]-[\infty]$ and $\div(\nicefrac{y_1}{y_0}-1) = [1]-[\infty]$. Hence,
setting $\mathcal{D}_1(a,b) = 0$ and $\mathcal{D}_2(a,b)= (a+b)\cdot[\infty]-a\cdot[0]-b\cdot[1]$ gives
\[\mathcal{O}_{U_1} = \bigoplus_{u\in\mathbb{Z}^2} \mathcal{O}(\mathcal{D}_1(u)), \qquad \mathcal{O}_{U_2} = \bigoplus_{u\in\mathbb{Z}^2} \mathcal{O}(\mathcal{D}_2(u)).\]
Since $\mathcal{D}_1(u)$ and $\mathcal{D}_2(u)$ coincide on $\mathbb{P}^1 \setminus \{0,1,\infty\}$, they induce a divisor $\mathcal{D}(u)$ on the non-separated prevariety $Y$ (which was covered by two instances if $\mathbb{P}^1$). We obtain
\[W^\circ =U_1 \cup U_2 = \spec_Y \bigoplus_{u\in\mathbb{Z}^2} \mathcal{O}(\mathcal{D}(u)).\]
Now, consider the one-parameter subgroup $\lambda: \mathbb{G}_m \hookrightarrow T$ acting with weights
\[
\begin{array}{rrrrrrrl}
&x_0&x_1&x_2&z_0&z_1&z_2&
\vspace{2mm}\\
(&0& 0&1&0&0&-1&).
\end{array}
\]
The fixed point set of these action consists of two connected components: the lines $(0:0:1,*:*:0)$ and $(*:*:0,0:0:1)$, which are in fact both $T$-invariant. The first one contains sources and the second one contains sinks of the $\mathbb{G}_m$-action, which is free in a neighborhood of these sets.
A local calculation shows that the exceptional divisors of the blowup $\widetilde W \to W$ in these lines consist of $\lambda$-fixed points, as well.
In particular we have $\widetilde W^\circ = W^\circ$ and we then obtain two prime divisors $D_+$ and $D_-$ in $\widetilde W \setminus \widetilde W^\circ$. Lemma~\ref{lemma:boundary} implies that $\rho_{D_+} = (0,1)$ and $\rho_{D_-} = -(0,1)$ holds.
We obtain $P_W = M_\mathbb{Q}$ and $P_{\widetilde W} = \{(a,b) \in M_\mathbb{Q} \mid -1 \leq b \leq 1\}$. The boundary divisor $\Delta$ is trivial in both cases (since $\mathcal{D}(u)$ was integral).
We continue this example and discuss the $F$-splitting and $F$-regularity of $W$ and $\widetilde W$ in Example \ref{ex:bl1}.
\end{ex}
\begin{ex}[Cyclic covers]\label{ex:cyclic}
Set $H=\mu_n \subseteq \mathbb{G}_m = T$, and $X$ be an $H$-variety satisfying \eqref{eqn:cover-condition}. In this case, $M=\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}$, and we choose the ``elementary school arithmetic'' section $\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}\to \mathbb{Z}$ with image in $[0, n-1)$. Then Theorem~\ref{thm:p-div} states that
\[ X \cong \spec_Y \bigoplus_{i=0}^{n-1} \mathcal{O}_Y\left(\left\lfloor \frac{i}{n} D \right\rfloor\right) \]
for some divisor $D$ on $Y$, with multiplication of the $i$-th and $j$-th graded piece defined by the usual product if $i+j<n$, and using division (``carrying'') by a section $g$ of $\mathcal{O}_Y(D)$ if $i+j\geq n$ (in which case $z(i,j)=n$). This can be seen in an elementary way if $X=\spec A$, $A=\bigoplus_{i=0}^{n-1} A_i$ is affine: let $f_1\in A_1$ be a nonzero element, and let $g = f_1^n\in A_0$. This defines a homomorphism $A_0[t]/(t^n-g)\to A$ sending $t$ to $f_1$, inducing an isomorphism of fraction fields, and hence identifying $A$ with the integral closure of $A_0$ in ${\rm Frac}(A_0)(g^{1/n})$. This also gives us maps $A_i\to {\rm Frac}(A_0)$ sending $f$ to $f/f_1^i$, and it is easily seen that the image is $\{h\in {\rm Frac}(A_0)\,:\, n\div(h) + i\div(g)\geq 0\}$. If we define $\mathcal{D}(i) = \frac{i}{n}\cdot \div (g)$, we now get the desired isomorphisms $\tilde A_i \cong \mathcal{O}_Y(\lfloor \mathcal{D}(i)\rfloor)$. Moreover, we have $g_{i, j} = g$ if $i+j\geq n$, $g_{i,j}=1$ otherwise.
Suppose that the divisor $D=\div (g)$ is reduced, so that $X= \spec A[t]/(t^n-g)$. Then $X'=\spec A[t, q, q^{-1}]/(t^n - gq)$ where $t$ has weight $1$ and $q$ has weight $n$, and the map $A[t, q, q^{-1}]/(t^n - gq)\to A[t]/(t^n-g)$ sends $q$ to $1$. The stabilizer at a point of $X'$ mapping to $D$ is $H=\mu_n$. In particular, if $n$ is divisible by the characteristic of $k$, this gives an example of a $T$-variety with a point whose stabilizer is non-reduced.
\end{ex}
\section{Preliminaries on Frobenius}\label{sec:frob}
We fix now a prime $p$, and assume that our algebraically closed field $k$ has characteristic $p$. Let $X$ be a $k$-scheme.
By $F_X:X\to X$ (or simply $F$) we denote the \emph{absolute Frobenius} of $X$, that is, the identity map on the underlying topological space and the $p$-th power map $F^* : \mathcal{O}_X \to F_* \mathcal{O}_X = \mathcal{O}_X$ on the structure sheaf. This means that $F_* \mathcal{O}_X$ is just $\mathcal{O}_X$ as a sheaf of rings, but has an $\mathcal{O}_X$-module structure defined by $x\ast f = x^p f$.
\begin{defn} Let $X$ be a $k$-scheme.\label{defn:frob}
\begin{enumerate}[(1)]
\item (Mehta--Ramanathan \cite{mehta:85a}, see also \cite[\S 1.1]{brion:05a}) A \emph{Frobenius splitting (or \emph{$F$-splitting})} of $X$ is an $\mathcal{O}_X$-linear map $\sigma: F_* \mathcal{O}_X\to \mathcal{O}_X$ satisfying $\sigma \circ F^* = id$.
\item We say that an $F$-splitting $\sigma$ is \emph{compatible} with a closed subscheme $Z\subseteq X$ defined by a sheaf of ideals $\mathcal{I}_Z$ if $\sigma(F_* \mathcal{I}_Z) \subseteq \mathcal{I}_Z$.
\item ({Ramanan--Ramanathan, cf. \cite[1.4.1]{brion:05a}}) Assume $X$ is normal and let $D$ be an effective divisor on $X$, giving rise to a reflexive sheaf $\mathcal{O}_X(D)$ and a section $s:\mathcal{O}_X\to \mathcal{O}_X(D)$. We say that a $F$-splitting $\sigma: F_{*} \mathcal{O}_X\to \mathcal{O}_X$ is a \emph{$D$-splitting} if it extends along $s$ to a map $F_{*} (\mathcal{O}_X(D))\to \mathcal{O}_X$.
\item Assume that $X$ is normal, and let $\Delta$ be an effective $\mathbb{Q}$-divisor on $X$. By an $F$-splitting of the pair $(X, \Delta)$ we mean a $D$-splitting of $X$, where $D = \lceil (p-1) \Delta \rceil$.
\item ({\cite[Definition 3.1]{schwede:10a}}) Assume that $X$ is normal, $\Delta$ an effective $\mathbb{Q}$-divisor on $X$. We say $(X,\Delta)$ is \emph{$F$-regular}\footnote{In \cite{schwede:10a}, what we call $F$-regularity is called \emph{global} $F$-regularity.} if for every effective divisor $D>0$, there exists some $e>0$ such that the map $\mathcal{O}_X\to F_*^e \mathcal{O}_X(\lceil (p^e-1) \Delta \rceil + D)$ splits as a map of $\mathcal{O}_X$ modules. We say that $X$ is $F$-regular if $(X,0)$ is $F$-regular.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
Note that if a pair $(X,\Delta)$ is $F$-regular, then it is automatically $F$-split.
The following theorem provides a useful criterion for checking $F$-regularity:
\begin{thm}[{\cite[Theorem 3.9]{schwede:10a}}]\label{thm:schwede}
The pair $(X,\Delta)$ is $F$-regular if and only if there exists an effective divisor $C>0$ on $X$ satisfying the following two properties:
\begin{enumerate}
\item There exists an $e>0$ such that the map
$$\mathcal{O}_X\to F_*^e \mathcal{O}_X(\lceil (p^e-1) \Delta \rceil + C)$$
splits.
\item The pair $(X\setminus C, \Delta_{X\setminus C})$ is $F$-regular.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{rem}\label{rem:psplit}
Suppose that a normal scheme is $D$-split for some effective divisor $D=\sum a_P P$. Then $a_P< p$ for all $P$. In particular, if $(X, \Delta)$ is $F$-split for a $\mathbb{Q}$-divisor $\Delta=\sum b_P P$, then $b_P \in [0, 1]$ for all $P$. Indeed, if $D'\leq D$ is an effective divisor and $X$ is $D$-split, then it is $D'$-split as well, so the claim is that $X$ cannot be $D$-split for $D= p P$ with a single prime divisor $P$. Shrinking $X$, we can moreover assume that $P$ is Cartier. In this situation, $F_* \mathcal{O}_X(D) = F_* \mathcal{O}_X(pP) = F_* (F^* \mathcal{O}_X(P)) = (F_* \mathcal{O}_X)\otimes \mathcal{O}_X(P)$ by the projection formula. Using this identification, $\mathcal{O}_X\to F_* \mathcal{O}_X(D)$ is the composition of the canonical section $s_P:\mathcal{O}_X\to\mathcal{O}_X(P)$ and $F^*\otimes id: \mathcal{O}_X(P) = \mathcal{O}_X\otimes\mathcal{O}_X(P)\to (F_*\mathcal{O}_X)\otimes\mathcal{O}_X(P)= F_*\mathcal{O}_X(D)$. Thus if $\mathcal{O}_X \to F_* \mathcal{O}_X(D)$ splits, so does $s_P:\mathcal{O}_X\to \mathcal{O}_X(P)$, which is impossible.
\end{rem}
\begin{lem} \label{lem:dsplit}
Let $X$ be an integral normal $k$-scheme, $K$ its function field, $D = \sum a_P P$ a divisor on $X$, and $\sigma_K: F_*^e K \to K$ a $K$-linear map. Denote by $\nu_P$ the valuation of $K$ of $X$ corresponding to a prime divisor $P$. Then $\sigma_K$ restricts to a map
$F_*\mathcal{O}_X(D)\to \mathcal{O}_X$
if and only if for all prime divisors $P$ on $X$
\[ \nu_P(f) \geq -a_P + p^e \quad \Rightarrow \quad \nu_P(\sigma_K(f)) \geq 1 \quad \text{for all } f\in K. \]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
As $\mathcal{O}_X(D)$ can be identified with the sheaf of rational functions with poles of order $\leq a_P$ along each prime divisor $P$, we see that $\sigma_K$ restricts as desired if and only if $\nu_P(f) \geq -a_P \Rightarrow \nu_P(\sigma_K(f)) \geq 0$. Since $\sigma_K(g^{p^e} f) = g\sigma_K(f)$, substituting $f{g^{p^e}}_P$ for $f$ where $\nu_P(g_P) = -1$ yields the desired result.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}\label{rem:duality}
When we calculate examples, it will often be convenient to relate $F$-splittings to sections of the $(p-1)$-st power of the anticanonical sheaf. Let $X$ be normal, $\Delta$ an effective $\mathbb{Q}$-divisor, and $D$ any divisor on $X$. If $U\subseteq X$ is the smooth locus, the relative dualizing sheaf of $F^e:U \to U$ is $\omega_{U}\otimes (F^e)^* \omega_{U}^{-1} = \omega_{U}^{1-p^e}$.
By Grothendieck duality, we have for any $e\geq 0$ an $\mathcal{O}_U$-linear isomorphism
$$
\mathcal{H}\kern -.5pt om_{\mathcal{O}_U}(F_*^e \mathcal{O}_U(\lceil (p^e-1)\Delta+D\rceil),\mathcal{O}_U) \cong \mathcal{O}_U(\lfloor(1-p^e)(K_U+\Delta)-D\rfloor),
$$
Using the $S_2$-property, we can push this isomorphism forward to $X$, see e.g. \cite[Remark 2.5]{schwede:10a}. Taking global sections, we obtain an identification
$$
\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}(F_*^e \mathcal{O}_X(\lceil (p^e-1)\Delta+D\rceil),\mathcal{O}_X) \cong H^0\left(X,\mathcal{O}_X(\lfloor(1-p^e)(K_X+\Delta)-D\rfloor)\right).
$$
\end{rem}
\begin{ex}\label{ex:toricsplit}
If $X$ is a toric variety defined by a fan $\Sigma$, then $-K_X$ can be chosen to be the complement of the open orbit, in which case a basis for its sections is given by monomials $\chi^{-u}$, where $u$ is a lattice point in the polytope
$$
P_X=\{u\in M_\mathbb{Q}\ |\ \rho(u)\leq 1\ \forall\rho\in\Sigma{(1)}\}.
$$
Here, $M$ is the character lattice of the torus acting on $X$, $\Sigma^{(1)}$ is the set of rays of $\Sigma$, and $\rho(u)$ denotes the value of the primitive generator of $\rho$ on $u$. By the above remark, Laurent polynomials $\sum_{u\in M\cap (p-1)P_X}a_u\chi^u$ correspond to maps $F_* \mathcal{O}_X\to \mathcal{O}_X$. For such a map to be a splitting, the coefficient of $\chi^0$ must be equal to one; this condition is also sufficient if $X$ is complete \cite{payne:09a}. See also Lemma~\ref{lemma:invariant}.
\end{ex}
\section{Torus Actions and Frobenius}\label{sec:tfrob}
Consider the setup and notation of \S\ref{ss:setup}, and assume that $H$ has no $p$-torsion (see Remark~\ref{rem:with-p-torsion} below for what we can say without this assumption). Our main result on Frobenius splittings and $F$-regularity is the following:
\begin{thm}\label{thm:main}
The $H$-variety $X$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular) if and only if $(Y,\Delta)$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular).
\end{thm}
We start by endowing the sheaves $F_* \mathcal{O}_X$ and $\mathcal{H}\kern -.5pt om(F_* \mathcal{O}_X, \mathcal{O}_X)$ with an $H$-equivariant structure. This is rather straight-forward, but can cause some confusion, as we work with the absolute Frobenius morphisms, which are \emph{not} morphisms of $k$-schemes.
To remedy this, one usually introduces the relative ($k$-linear) Frobenius morphisms $F_{X/k}:X\to X'$ where $X'=X\otimes_{k, F_k} k$ is the ``Frobenius twist'' of $X$. On the other hand, in commutative algebra and in the literature on $F$-splittings and $F$-singularities, it is customary to work with the absolute Frobenius morphisms, and indeed it would be annoying to have to keep track of the various twists of everything in sight, especially since we will be interested in iterates of the Frobenius.
Fortunately, in our situation the group $H=\spec k[M]$ is naturally defined over $\mathbb{F}_p$ (that is, we are given an $\mathbb{F}_p$-group scheme $H_0=\spec \mathbb{F}_p[M]$ and an isomorphism $H\cong H_0\otimes_{\mathbb{F}_p} k$). We can now view the action of $H$ on $X$ over $k$ as an action of $H_0$ on $X$ considered as an $\mathbb{F}_p$-scheme. The Frobenius $F_{H_0}:H_0\to H_0$ is simply the multiplication by $p$ map on the group scheme, and induces the multiplication by $p$ map on $M$. From the point of view of $H_0$, an iterate of the absolute Frobenius $F^e_X:X\to X$ is $F^e_{H_0}$-equivariant. In particular, the push-forward $F^e_* \mathcal{O}_X$ has a canonical $H_0$-equivariant structure, \emph{when we view $X$ as an $H_0$-scheme with $H_0$ acting via $F^e_{H_0}$}. In particular, as $\ker(F_H^e)$ acts trivially on $X$ in this action, the push-forward decomposes as $F_*^e \mathcal{O}_X=\bigoplus_{u\in M/p^eM} (F_*^e \mathcal{O}_X)_u$.
If $X=\spec A$ is affine, with $A=\bigoplus_{u\in M} A_u$, then the twisted action corresponds to the grading $A=\bigoplus_{u\in M} A_{u/p^e}$, with the convention that $A_{u/p^e}=0$ if $u$ is not a multiple of $p^e$ (note the absence of $p$-torsion in $M$). The push-forward $F^e_* \mathcal{O}_X$ corresponds to $A$ with the usual grading, and for $u\in M$ the $u$-graded piece of the graded module $\Hom(F^e_* \mathcal{O}_X, \mathcal{O}_X)$ consists of $\sigma:A\to A$
satisfying
\[ \sigma(f^{p^e} g) = f\sigma(g) \quad \text{ and }\quad
\sigma(A_{u'}) \subseteq A_{(u'-u)/p^e}. \]
The isomorphism \eqref{eqn:sinv} of \S \ref{ss:setup} induces for all $u\in M$ homomorphisms of $k(Y)$-vector spaces:
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:rationaliso}
\sigma\mapsto\bar\sigma:\Hom_{k(X)}(F_*^ek(X)^{\mathrm{s-inv}},k(X)^{\mathrm{s-inv}})_u \to \Hom_{k(Y)}(F_*^ek(Y),k(Y)),
\end{equation}
defined by $\bar\sigma(f) = \sigma(f\cdot\chi^u)_0\in k(Y)$, the degree $0$ part of $\sigma(f\cdot \chi^u)$
with respect to the $M$ grading.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:rationaliso}
The homomorphisms \eqref{eqn:rationaliso} are isomorphisms.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The inverse map $\bar\sigma \mapsto \sigma$ is defined by
\[ \sigma(f\cdot \chi^{u'}) = \sigma(f)\cdot \chi^{(u'-u)/p^e}, \]
if $u'-u \in p^e M$, and zero otherwise.
\end{proof}
The following lemma allows us to relate $F$-splittings of $X^\circ$ to $F$-splittings of $(Y, \Delta)$:
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:piotr}
Let $E$ be any divisor on $Y$, with pullback $\widetilde{E}$ to $X^\circ$. Then the isomorphism \eqref{eqn:rationaliso} induces isomorphisms
$$\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_{X^\circ}}(F_*^e\mathcal{O}_{X^\circ}(\widetilde{E}),\mathcal{O}_{X^\circ})_u\cong \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*^e\mathcal{O}_Y(\lceil (p-1)\Delta+\mathcal{D}(s(u)) \rceil+E),\mathcal{O}_Y).$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume first that $H=T$, that is, $H$ is a torus. Without loss of generality, we may assume that $Y=\spec A_0$ is affine, $X^\circ=\spec A$ is affine with $A=\bigoplus_{u\in M}A_u$, and $\mathcal{D}(u)=\alpha(u)P$ for some $\alpha:M\to \mathbb{Q}$ and a prime principal divisor $P=V(g)$. Furthermore, we may assume that $E=\beta \cdot P$ for some $\beta\in\mathbb{Z}$.
Consider an $A$-linear map $\sigma:F_* A(\widetilde E)\to A$ of degree $u$, that is, $\sigma(g^{-\beta} A_w)\subset A_{(w-u)/p^e}$, where we put $A_w=0$ if $w \notin M$.
Such a map is determined by its restriction to $g^{-\beta}A_{u}$. Indeed, for $f\in g^{-\beta}A_{p^ew+u}$, we have $f=(f'/h)\chi^{p^ew}$ for $f'\in g^{-\beta}A_{u}$, $h\in A_0$ and
$$
\sigma(f)=\sigma\left(\frac{f'}{h}\chi^{p^ew}\right)=\frac{1}{h}\chi^w\sigma\left(f'h^{p^e-1}\right)
$$
with $\sigma$ vanishing on graded pieces not of this form.
Note that this map
$$
\Hom_{A}(F_*^e A(\widetilde{E}),A)_u \to \Hom_{A_0}(F_*^e g^{-\beta}A_u,A_0)
$$
is induced by the isomorphism \eqref{eqn:rationaliso}. Here, we are viewing $g^{-\beta}A_u$ as a submodule of $K$, where $K$ is the field of fractions of $A_0$.
Now, an $A_0$-linear map $\tau:g^{-\beta}A_{u}\to A_0$ extends to an $A$-linear map if and only if
\[ \tau\left( g^{-\lfloor \alpha(p^ew+u)\rfloor-\beta} \cdot A_{0}\right) \subseteq g^{-\lfloor \alpha(w) \rfloor} \cdot A_0, \]
for all $w\in M$. Here we extend $\tau$ to a map $F_*K\to K$ by localization.
But this is equivalent to
\begin{equation}\label{cond2}
\nu(f) \geq -\lfloor \alpha(p^ew+u)\rfloor -\beta
\quad \Rightarrow \quad \nu(\tau(f)) \geq -\lfloor \alpha(w)\rfloor
\quad (\text{for all }w\in M),
\end{equation}
where $\nu$ is the valuation corresponding to $P$.
Consider now \eqref{cond2} for all $w\in M$ and for $f'=fg^\lambda$ as $\lambda\in \mathbb{Z}$ varies. This translates to the condition
\[ \nu(\tau(f)) \geq -\min \{ \lfloor \alpha(w) +\lambda \rfloor \,|\, w\in M,\lambda\in\mathbb{Z}\ \nu(f) \geq - \lfloor p^e(\alpha(w) +\lambda)+\alpha(u)\rfloor-\beta ) \}. \]
But as $w$ and $\lambda$ vary, the quantity $\alpha(u)+\lambda$ (appearing here twice) traces all numbers of the form $b/\mu$ with $b\in \mathbb{Z}$, $\mu=\mu(\bar\alpha)$. We can thus rewrite the above inequality as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:ineq} \nu(\tau(f)) \geq -\min \left\{ \left\lfloor \frac{b}{\mu} \right\rfloor \,|\, b\in\mathbb{Z}, \, \nu(f) \geq - \left\lfloor \frac{p^eb+\mu (\alpha(u)+\beta)}{\mu}\right\rfloor \right\}. \end{equation}
Furthermore, the right hand side of \eqref{eqn:ineq} is
$$
-\left \lfloor
\frac{1}{\mu}
\left\lceil
\frac{
-\mu(\nu(f)+\alpha(u)+\beta)}{p^e}\right\rceil
\right \rfloor=
\left \lceil
\frac{1}{\mu}
\left\lfloor
\frac{
\mu(\nu(f)+\alpha(u)+\beta)}{p^e}\right\rfloor
\right \rceil
$$
so \eqref{eqn:ineq} is equivalent to requiring
\begin{equation*} \nu(\tau(f)) \geq \left\lceil \frac{1}{\mu} \left\lfloor \frac{\mu(\nu(f)+\alpha(u)+\beta)}{p^e} \right\rfloor \right\rceil.
\end{equation*}
Now consider an $f$ with $0\leq \nu(f)+\alpha(u)+\beta<p^e$; we can always reduce to this case by multiplying $f$ by a monomial in $g^{p^e}$. In such a situation, the right hand side of \eqref{eqn:ineq} is at most $1$, and it equals $0$ if and only if $\nu(f)+\alpha(u)+\beta < p^e/\mu$.
We conclude that the system of inequalities \eqref{eqn:ineq} can be reduced to
\[ \nu(\tau(f)) \geq 1 \quad \text{if} \quad \nu(f) \geq \left\lceil \frac{p^e}{\mu} -\alpha(u)\right\rceil-\beta. \]
On the other hand, a $K$-linear map $\tau:F_* K\to K$ restricts to an element of $\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*\mathcal{O}_Y(\lceil (p^e-1)\Delta+\mathcal{D}(u) \rceil+E),\mathcal{O}_Y)$ if and only if
\[ \nu(f) \geq -\left\lceil \alpha(u)+(p^e-1)\frac{\mu-1}{\mu} \right \rceil-\beta+ p^e \quad \Rightarrow \quad \nu(\tau(f)) \geq 1 \quad \text{for all } f\in K \]
by Lemma \ref{lem:dsplit}.
But, since $\alpha(u) \in \frac{1}{\mu}\mathbb{Z}$, we have
$$
-\left\lceil \alpha(u)+(p^e-1)\frac{\mu-1}{\mu} \right \rceil+p^e=\left\lceil \frac{p^e}{\mu} -\alpha(u)\right\rceil
$$
and the claim follows.
To treat the general case, we first apply the above argument to $X'=(T\times X^\circ)/H$. Note that the isomorphisms \eqref{eqn:rationaliso} for $X$ and $X'$ induce identifications for $v\in \mathfrak{X}(T)$
\begin{align*}
\Hom_{k(X)}(F_*^ek(X)^{\mathrm{s-inv}},k(X)^{\mathrm{s-inv}})_{\phi^*(v)}
&\cong \Hom_{k(X')}(F_*^ek(X')^{\mathrm{s-inv}},k(X')^{\mathrm{s-inv}})_v \\
\sigma&\mapsto\sigma'
\end{align*}
which can be explicitly described as $\sigma'(f\cdot \chi^{v'}) = \sigma(f\cdot \chi^{\phi^*(v')})_{\phi((v'-v)/p^e)}$ if $v-v'\in p^e\mathfrak{X}(T)$, $0$ otherwise. It is clear from this description that $$\sigma\in \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_{X^\circ}}(F_*^e\mathcal{O}_{X^\circ}(\widetilde{E}),\mathcal{O}_{X^\circ})$$ if and only if $\sigma'\in \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_{X'}}(F_*^e\mathcal{O}_{X'}(\widetilde{E}'),\mathcal{O}_{X'})$, where $\tilde E'$ is the pull-back of $E$ to $X'$.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
Our proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma:piotr}, while direct, is perhaps not too illuminating. Let us explain why we expected Lemma~\ref{lemma:piotr} and Theorem~\ref{thm:main} to be true in the first place. In the case when $H$ is a torus, there is a relation between $K_X$ and $K_Y$, along with a formula relating sections of their integral multiples which implicitly involves the divisor $\Delta$ \cite[\S 8.1 and 8.3]{tsurvey}.
The relation between sections of $(1-p)K$ and $F$-splittings (Remark~\ref{rem:duality}) then suggests our main theorem. To turn this expectation into a proof, one would need to check that the identifications of \cite{tsurvey} are compatible with the Frobenius trace maps. This is the approach taken in \cite{schwede:10b} for the situation of finite covers.
\end{rem}
The next goal is to relate $F$-splittings on $X$ and $X^\circ$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:extends}
We have
$$
\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}\left(F_* \mathcal{O}_X,\mathcal{O}_X\right)=\bigoplus_{u\in M\cap (p-1)P_X}\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_{X^\circ}}\left(F_* \mathcal{O}_{X^\circ},\mathcal{O}_{X^\circ}\right)_u
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider any non-zero eigensection $\sigma_u\in \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_{X^\circ}}\left(F_* \mathcal{O}_{X^\circ},\mathcal{O}_{X^\circ}\right)_u$. The claim is that this section extends to $X$ if and only if $u\in (p-1)P_X$. Now, a semi-invariant $f\in F_* \mathcal{O}_{X^\circ}$ of weight $w$ is regular on a general point of a prime divisor $D$ from above exactly if $-\rho_D(w)\geq 0$. On the one hand, $\sigma_u(f)$ has weight $u+w$, so is regular if and only if $\sigma_u(f)$ is zero, or $-\frac{1}{p}\rho_D(w+u)\geq 0$. But $\sigma_u(f)=0$ if $u+w\notin pM$.
Hence $\sigma_u$ extends to $X$ if $u\in (p-1)P_X$.
On the other hand, since $\sigma_u\neq0$, there locally exists a semi-invariant function $f$ of some weight $w$ such that $\sigma_u(f)\neq 0$. This implies that for any weight $w'\in w+pM$ there locally is a semi-invariant function $f'$ of weight $w'$ with $\sigma_u(f')\neq 0$. We can choose $w'$ such that $0\leq -\rho_D(w')<p$, in which case we must have $-\frac{1}{p}\rho_D(w'+u)\geq 0$, that is, $\rho_D(u)\leq -\rho_D(w')<p$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:invariant}
Consider a section
$$\sigma\in \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}\left(F_* \mathcal{O}_X,\mathcal{O}_X\right)$$
with decomposition $\sigma=\bigoplus_{u\in M}\sigma_u$ into eigensections. If $\sigma$ is an $F$-splitting, then so is $\sigma_0$. Conversely, if $\sigma_0$ is an $F$-splitting and $\sigma_u=0$ for all $u\in pM$, $u\neq 0$, then so is $\sigma$. Finally, $\bar \sigma_0$ is a splitting if and only if $\sigma_0$ is.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Such a section $\sigma$ is an $F$-splitting if and only if $\sigma(1)=1$. Since $1$ is an eigenfunction of weight $0$ in both $\mathcal{O}_X$ and $F_* \mathcal{O}_X$, $\sigma(1)=1$ implies that $\sigma_0(1)=1$ as well, hence $\sigma_0$ is an $F$-splitting. On the other hand, since $\sigma_u(1)$ has weight $u$ in $\mathcal{O}_X$, and the weight of any semi-invariant function in $\mathcal{O}_X$ is a multiple of $p$, we get that $\sigma(1)=\sum_{u\in pM} \sigma_u(1)$ and the second claim follows.
For the final claim, note that $\sigma_0(1)=\bar \sigma_0(1)\in k(Y)\subset k(X)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:fregboundary}
If $X^\circ$ is $F$-regular, then so is $X$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $X^\circ$ is $F$-regular. Since $X$ is normal, the property of being $F$-regular is independent of sets of codimension at least two, and we may assume that $X$ is non-singular and $B:=X\setminus X^\circ$ is a Cartier divisor. By Theorem \ref{thm:schwede}, it suffices to show that the map
$ \mathcal{O}_X\to F_* \mathcal{O}_X(B)$
splits.
Since $X^\circ$ is $F$-regular, it is $F$-split. Let $\sigma$ be any splitting, which may assume to be $H$-invariant (Lemma \ref{lemma:invariant}). Hence, $\sigma$ extends to a splitting $F_*\mathcal{O}_X\to \mathcal{O}_X$ (Lemma \ref{lemma:extends}). Working locally on an affine invariant chart, consider any $f \in F_*\mathcal{O}_X(B)$ homogeneous of weight $u$. We must show that $\sigma(f)\in \mathcal{O}_X$. Now, $f \in F_*\mathcal{O}_X(B)$ implies that $\rho_D(u)\leq 1$ for any component $D$ of $B$. But then
$$
\left\lfloor \frac{1}{p}u(\rho_D) \right\rfloor \leq 0
$$
so $\sigma(f)$ must be regular on $X$, since $\sigma(f)$ has weight $u/p$, and equals $0$ if $u/p\notin M$. Hence, $\sigma$ gives a splitting of $\mathcal{O}_X\to F_* \mathcal{O}_X(B)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main}]
We first deal with the statement concerning $F$-splitting.
By Lemma \ref{lemma:invariant}, if $X$ has an $F$-splitting, it has an invariant $F$-splitting. By Lemma \ref{lemma:extends}, $X$ has an invariant $F$-splitting if and only if $X^\circ$ has an invariant $F$-splitting. Finally, $X^\circ$ has an invariant $F$-splitting if and only if $(Y,\Delta)$ has an $F$-splitting by Lemma \ref{lemma:piotr} applied in the case $u=0$, $E=0$.
We now deal with $F$-regularity.
By Lemma \ref{lemma:fregboundary}, we may assume that $X=X^\circ$. Firstly, assume that $X$ is $F$-regular, and let $D$ be an effective divisor on $Y$. Then there is a splitting of $\mathcal{O}_X\to F_*^e \mathcal{O}(\widetilde D)$ which we may assume to be $H$-invariant (cf. Lemma \ref{lemma:invariant}) which leads to a splitting of $\mathcal{O}_Y\to F_*^e\mathcal{O}_Y(\lceil (p^e-1)\Delta\rceil+D)$ by Lemma \ref{lemma:piotr}. Hence, $(Y,\Delta)$ is $F$-regular.
Conversely, assume that $(Y,\Delta)$ is $F$-regular. Since $X$ and $Y$ are normal, we may remove a set of codimension at least two to arrive at the situation that $Y=U\cup C$ for some effective divisor $C$ and some non-singular affine $U$ over which $X$ is a torsor. Now, since $(Y,\Delta)$ is $F$-regular, the map $\mathcal{O}_Y\to F_*^e\mathcal{O}_Y(\lceil (p^e-1)\Delta\rceil+C)$ splits for some $e$, so by Lemma \ref{lemma:piotr} the map $\mathcal{O}_X\to F_*^e \mathcal{O}( \widetilde{C})$ splits as well, where $\widetilde{C}$ is the preimage of $C$ in $X$. Furthermore, $X\setminus \widetilde{C}$ is affine, and non-singular since it is an $H$-torsor over $U$ and $H$ is smooth \cite[\S 4]{milne:80a}. It follows that $X\setminus\widetilde{C}$ is $F$-regular \cite[Remark 3.3]{schwede:10a}. Hence, by Theorem \ref{thm:schwede}, $X$ is $F$-regular.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}\label{rem:bijection}
Our proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main} actually shows that
$H$-invariant $F$-splittings of $X$ are in bijection with $F$-splittings of $(Y,\Delta)$. Furthermore, combining Lemmas \ref{lemma:extends} and \ref{lemma:piotr} gives a graded isomorphism
$$
\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}\left(F_* \mathcal{O}_X,\mathcal{O}_X\right)\cong \bigoplus_{u\in M\cap (p-1)P_X} \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*\mathcal{O}_Y(\lceil (p-1)\Delta+\mathcal{D}(u) \rceil),\mathcal{O}_Y).$$
Lemma \ref{lemma:invariant} providing a sufficient criterion for a section $\sigma$ of the right hand side to correspond to a splitting.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem} \label{rem:with-p-torsion}
Many of the statements above continue to hold if we allow $H$ to have $p$-torsion. Note that in this generality, if $X=\spec A$, $A=\bigoplus_{u\in M} A_u$, the twisted action (using the $e$-th Frobenius on $H$) on $X$ corresponds to the grading
\[ A = \bigoplus_{u\in M} A'_u \quad \text{where} \quad A'_u = \bigoplus_{w\,:\,p^ew = u} A_u, \]
and $\Hom(F^e_* \mathcal{O}_X, \mathcal{O}_X)_u$ consists of those $\sigma:A\to A$ which satisfy $\sigma(f^{p^e} g) = f\sigma(g)$ and $\sigma(A_{u'}) \subseteq A'_{u'-u}$, i.e., if $f\in A_u$ then $\sigma(f)_{w} = 0$ unless $p^e w = u'-u$. In this case, the map \eqref{eqn:rationaliso} is defined as $\bar\sigma(f) = \sigma(f\cdot \chi^u)_0$, the degree $0$ part of $\sigma(f\cdot \chi^u)$ with respect to the original grading on $A$ (note that $A'_0$ itself is graded by $M[p^e]$). Lemma~\ref{lemma:rationaliso} is still true, with the inverse map $\bar\sigma\mapsto\sigma$ given by the more complicated formula
\begin{equation} \label{eq:complicated} \sigma(f\cdot \chi^u) = \sum_{w\,:\, p^e w = u'-u } \bar\sigma(\lambda_{u,w} f)\cdot \chi^{w},
\end{equation}
where
\[ \lambda_{u, w} = \frac{\chi^{u+p^ew}}{\chi^u(\chi^w)^{p^e} } = g_{u, p^ew} g_{(p^e-1)w,w}g_{(p^e-2)w,w}\ldots g_{2w,w}g_{w,w}\in k(Y). \]
Moreover, Lemmas~\ref{lemma:piotr} and \ref{lemma:extends} continue to hold, as does the first statement of Lemma \ref{lemma:invariant}. Furthermore, any invariant $F$-splitting $\sigma$ of $X$ induces an $F$-splitting $\bar\sigma$ of $(Y,\Delta)$. Hence, $X$ $F$-split (or $F$-regular) implies the same for $(Y,\Delta)$. The problem with the other direction in Theorem~\ref{thm:main} is that $\sigma:F_*\mathcal{O}_X\to\mathcal{O}_X$ (of weight $u=0$) does not have to be a splitting if $\bar\sigma$ is, as Example~\ref{example:with-p-torsion} below shows. In fact, $\sigma$ is a splitting if and only if $\bar\sigma$ is a splitting satisfying $\bar\sigma((\chi^u)^{p^e})=0$ for every $u\in M[p^e]$. In more intrinsic terms, this condition is equivalent to $\bar\sigma(f)=0$ for every $f\in k(Y)$ which is not a $p$-th power but which becomes a $p$-th power in $k(X)$. We do not know if Theorem \ref{thm:main} still holds if $H$ has $p$-torsion.
\end{rem}
\begin{ex} \label{example:with-p-torsion}
Let $H = \mu_p$, $X=\mathbb{A}^1_k$ with coordinate $x$ and the standard $\mu_p$-action. Then $Y=\mathbb{A}^1_k$ with coordinate $y$, and $\pi^* y = x^p$. In this case, for $u=0$ and $f=1$, the formula \eqref{eq:complicated} simplifies to
\[ \sigma(1) = \sum_{i=0}^{p-1} \bar\sigma(y^i)x^i. \]
In particular, $\sigma$ is a splitting if and only if $\bar\sigma(y^i) = 0$ for $0<i<p$, $\bar\sigma(1)=1$, that is, if $\bar\sigma$ is $\mathbb{G}_m$-invariant for the standard action of $\mathbb{G}_m$ on $Y$.
\end{ex}
\section{Compatible Splittings}\label{sec:compat}
We again consider an $H$-variety $X$, and use notation established in \S \ref{ss:setup}, assuming again that $H$ has no $p$-torsion. We now establish two results concerning compatible splittings. Recall that $H_\mathrm{red}^0$ is the reduced connected component of the identity in $H$.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:comp1}
Consider an $H_\mathrm{red}^0$-invariant splitting $\sigma\in \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}(F_*\mathcal{O}_X,\mathcal{O}_X)$. Then $\sigma$ is compatible with $B:=X\setminus X^\circ$, that is, $\sigma(F_* \mathcal{I}_B)= \mathcal{I}_B$. In particular, any $H$-invariant splitting is compatible with $B$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
To begin, assume that $H=H^0_\mathrm{red}$.
Without loss of generality, $X$ is affine with coordinate ring $A=\bigoplus_{u\in M} A_u$.
Let $\omega$ be the cone in $M_\mathbb{Q}$ generated by those $u\in M$ with $A_u\neq 0$, and $\omega'$ the face of elements invertible in the monoid $\omega$. Then the ideal $I_B$ of $B$ is given by $\bigoplus_{u\in M\cap(\omega\setminus \omega')} A_u$. Since $\sigma$ is $H$-invariant, it maps homogeneous elements of degree $u$ to degree $u/p$, so $\sigma(F_*(I_B))=I_B$.
Now to conclude the proof note that for general $H$, any $H$-invariant splitting is also $H_\mathrm{red}^0$-invariant.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}\label{prop:comp2}
Now let $S$ be any closed subscheme of $Y$ and $$\sigma\in \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}(F_*\mathcal{O}_X,\mathcal{O}_X)$$ an $F$-splitting of $X$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If the splitting $\sigma$ is compatible with $\overline {\pi^{-1}(S)}\subset X$, then its $H$-invariant part $\sigma_0$ is also compatible with $\overline{ \pi^{-1}(S)}\subset X$.
\item Suppose the $H$-invariant part $\sigma_0$ is compatible with $\overline{ \pi^{-1}(S)}\subset X$. Then $\bar\sigma_0\in\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*\mathcal{O}_Y,\mathcal{O}_Y)$ is compatible with $S$.
\item Conversely, suppose that no component of $S$ is contained in the support of $\Delta$ and $\bar\sigma_0$ is compatible with $S\subset Y$. Then $\sigma_0$ is compatible with $\overline{ \pi^{-1}(S)}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By \cite[Lemma 1.1.7]{brion:05a} we may assume that $X=X^\circ$ and that $X$ and $Y$ are affine with respective coordinate rings $A_0$ and $A=\bigoplus_{u\in M} A_u$. Let $I_S\subset A_0$ be the ideal of $S$; then the ideal of $\pi^{-1}(S)=\overline {\pi^{-1}(S)}$ is $A\cdot I_S=\bigoplus_{u\in M} A_u\cdot I_S$.
Let $\sigma=\sum_{u\in M} \sigma_u$ be the isotypical decomposition of $\sigma$.
First, assume that $\sigma$ is compatible with $\overline {\pi^{-1}(S)}$. Consider any $f\in F_* (A\cdot I_S)$, without loss of generality homogeneous of degree $w$. Then $\sigma(f)\in A\cdot I_S$, and so we have that $\sigma_u(f)\in A_{(w-u)/p} \cdot I_S$. In particular, $\sigma_0(f)\in A_{w/p} \cdot I_S\subset A\cdot I_S$, so $\sigma_0$ is compatible with $\overline {\pi^{-1}(S)}$.
Now if $\sigma_0$ is compatible with $\overline {\pi^{-1}(S)}$, then for any degree zero element $f\in F_* (A_0 \cdot I_S)=F_*(I_S)$, we have $\sigma_0(f)\in I_S$, so $\bar\sigma_0\in\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*\mathcal{O}_Y,\mathcal{O}_Y)$ is compatible with $S$.
On the other hand, suppose that $\bar\sigma_0(I_S)= I_S$, and that $S$ is contained in the support of $\Delta$. Then again by \cite[Lemma 1.1.7]{brion:05a}, we may shrink $Y$ and only consider the case that $\mathcal{D}$ is trivial, that is, $A=\bigoplus_{u\in M} A_0\cdot \chi^u$. But then for $f\in F_*(I_S\cdot A_0\cdot \chi^u)$, $\sigma_0(f)\in I_S\cdot A_0\cdot \chi^{u/p}$ as desired, where $\chi^{u/p}=0$ if $u/p\notin M$.
\end{proof}
\section{Separations}\label{sec:sep}
We have been able to characterize $F$-regularity and the existence of an $F$-splitting for an $H$-variety $X$ in terms of the quotient pair $(Y,\Delta)$ in Theorem \ref{thm:main}. However, the quotient $Y$ need not in general be separated. We now describe how to replace the pair $(Y,\Delta)$ with a pair $({Y^{\mathrm{sep}}},{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$ such that ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$ is separated.
Recall that an open subscheme $U\subset Y$ is \emph{big} if $\codim_Y (Y\setminus U)>1$.
\begin{defn}
A \emph{separation} of a $k$-scheme $Y$ is rational map $\mathfrak{s}:Y \dashrightarrow {Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$, such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$ is separated.
\item The map $\mathfrak{s}$ is defined on a big open subset $U \subset Y$ which maps locally isomorphically to a big open subset of ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
Recall that a \emph{prevariety} is an integral scheme of finite type over $k$. We will use the following proposition to replace our quotient $Y=X^\circ/T$ with a variety.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:sep}
Every normal prevariety admits a separation.
\end{prop}
\begin{rem}
In \cite{hausen:10a}, separated quotients of $T$-varieties are produced by considering the inverse limit of GIT-quotients. In this setting, the image of the quotient map into the GIT-limit gives a separation of $X^\circ/T$ and the distinguished component of the limit which contains the image coincides with the Chow-quotient introduced in \cite{altmann:06a}.
\end{rem}
To prove the proposition, we need several facts about centers of valuations.
\begin{defn}
Consider a valuation $\nu$ of $k(Y)$. A center of $\nu$ is an irreducible closed subset $C \subset Y$ such that $\mathcal{O}_{C, Y}\subseteq \mathcal{O}_\nu$ and $\mathcal{O}_{C,Y} \hookrightarrow \mathcal{O}_\nu$ is a local ring homomorphism.
\end{defn}
\begin{lem}
A prevariety $Y$ is separated if and only if every valuation of $k(Y)$ has at most one center.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Theorem 4.3]{hartshorne:77a}
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:image-center}
Consider dominant morphism $\phi:Y \rightarrow Y'$ from a prevariety $Y$ to a prevariety $Y'$ and a valuation $\nu$ of $k(Y)$ with center $C \subset Y$. Then $C':=\overline{\phi(C)}$ is a center of $\nu|_{k(Y')}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Note that we have a local ring homomorphism $\mathcal{O}_{Y',C'} \hookrightarrow \mathcal{O}_{Y,C}$ induced by $\phi$ and a local ring homomorphism $\mathcal{O}_{Y,C} \hookrightarrow \mathcal{O}_\nu$ by the definition of a center. Hence, the composition is a local ring homomorphism as well.
\end{proof}
\begin{defn}
A \emph{multiple center} of a prevariety $Y$ is a closed subset $C\subset Y$ which is the center of some valuation $\nu$, such that $\nu$ has more than one center.
We define the \emph{non-separated locus} of a prevariety $Y$ to be the union of all multiple centers.
\end{defn}
\begin{lem}
The locus of non-separateness of a prevariety $Y$ is a Zariski closed subset.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We consider some open affine covering $\{U_i\}_{i\in I}$ of $Y$ and denote $U_i \cap U_j$ by $U_{ij}$. We set $A_i = \mathcal{O}_Y(U_i)$ and denote the sub-algebra of the function field generated by $A_i$ and $A_j$ by $A_iA_j$ and its spectrum by $\widetilde{U}_{ij}$. We have a birational map $\phi_{ij}: \widetilde{U}_{ij} \dashrightarrow {U}_{ij}$ and a commutative diagram as follows
$$
\xymatrix{
& \widetilde{U}_{ij}\ar@{-->}^{\phi_{ij}}[dd] \ar^{f_{ij}}[rd] \ar_{f_{ji}}[ld] & \\
U_i & & U_j\\
& {U}_{ij} \ar@{_{(}->}[lu] \ar@{^{(}->}[ru]&
}
$$
Now, we denote the indeterminacy locus of $\phi_{ij}$ by $V_{ij}$. We claim that
\[\bigcup_{i,j \in I} \overline{f_{ij}(V_{ij})} \subset Y\]
equals the locus of non-separateness.
Assume we have a point $y$ in this finite union. This means there is a pair $(i,j)$ and component of the $C$ of $V_{ij}$ such that $y \in \overline{f_{ij}(C)}$. Now, we may choose a valuation $\nu$, which has center $C$. This implies that $f_{ij}(C)$ and $f_{ji}(C)$ are centers of $\nu$, as well. Since $C$ lies in the locus of indeterminacy, $f_{ij}(C)$ and $f_{ji}(C)$ do not intersect $U_{ij}$. Hence, $\overline{f_{ij}(C)} \neq \overline{f_{ji}(C)}$. Hence, $y$ lies in the locus of non-separateness.
Assume instead that we have a point $y$ in the non-separated locus. This means it belongs to some multiple center $V$ of some valuation $\nu$. Hence, we have another center $V'$ of the same valuation. They cannot both intersect the same affine chart, since affine varieties are separated. Hence, we have two charts $U_i$ and $U_j$, such that $U_i \cap V' = U_j \cap V = \emptyset$ but $U_i \cap V \neq \emptyset$ and $U_j \cap V' \neq \emptyset$. In particular $\nu$ has no center on the intersection $U_{ij}$. The fact that $\nu$ has a center on $U_i$ and $U_j$ is equivalent to the inclusions of the coordinate ring $A_i,A_j \subset \mathcal{O}_\nu$. But then we have $A_iA_j \subset \mathcal{O}_{\nu}$ as well. Hence, $\nu$ has a center $C$ on $\widetilde{U}_{ij}$ and we have $\overline{f_{ij}(C)} = V$ and $\overline{f_{ij}(C)} = V'$, by Lemma \ref{lem:image-center}. Since $\nu$ has no center on $U_{ij}$, it follows that $C$ is contained in the indeterminacy locus $V_{ij}$ of $\phi_{ij}$. Hence, $V$ and $V'$ are contained in $\overline{f_{ij}(V_{ij})}$ and $\overline{f_{ji}(V_{ij})}$ respectively.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{prop:sep}]
Consider the non-separated locus inside the prevariety $Y$. From the components of codimension $1$, several components have the same local ring. For every one of the local rings occurring, choose one of these components and remove the rest. The remaining prevariety $Y'$ is ``separated in codimension one'', i.e. the non-separated locus $V$ of $Y'$ has codimension $>1$. If we remove this locus from $Y'$ we obtain a variety ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}=Y'\setminus V$. Now, the rational map $\mathfrak{s}$ is just the inverse of the inclusion ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}} \hookrightarrow Y$. Let $D$ be a prime divisor in $Y$. Then by construction, there is a prime divisor $D' \subset {Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$ with the same local ring as $D$. In other words, for every prime divisor in $Y$ there is an open subset intersecting $D$ which is mapped isomorphically to an open subset of ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
If $Y$ is a smooth prevariety of dimension one, then it admits a unique separation $\mathfrak{s}:Y\to {Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$, and $\mathfrak{s}$ is a morphism.
\end{rem}
Consider a separation $\mathfrak{s}:Y\dashrightarrow {Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$. For any $\mathbb{Q}$-divisor $D=\sum_{P\subset Y}a_P\cdot P$ on $Y$, we define
$$
{\mathfrak{s}_{\mathrm{max}}} D :=\sum_{P'\subset {Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}}\max\{a_P\ |\ P\subset \mathfrak{s}^{-1}(P')\}\cdot P'.
$$
With this we have $\mathfrak{s}_*\mathcal{O}(-D) = \mathcal{O}(-{\mathfrak{s}_{\mathrm{max}}} D)$.
A separation of a pair $(Y,\Delta)$ consists of a separation $\mathfrak{s}:Y \dashrightarrow {Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$ along with the $\mathbb{Q}$-divisor ${\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}:={\mathfrak{s}_{\mathrm{max}}}\Delta$ on ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$.
By Proposition \ref{prop:sep}, such a separation always exists, although it is not necessarily unique.
\begin{rem}
Note that ${\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}$ is the unique minimal divisor on ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$ such that $\mathfrak{s}^*({\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}) \geq \Delta$.
\end{rem}
We may use the following result, coupled with Theorem \ref{thm:main} and Proposition \ref{prop:comp2} to characterize (compatible) $F$-splittings and $F$-regularity of a $T$-variety in terms of properties of a separated quotient.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:sep}
Consider a normal pair $(Y,\Delta)$ and a separation $\mathfrak{s}:(Y,\Delta) \dashrightarrow ({Y^{\mathrm{sep}}},{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{claim:one} The pair $(Y,\Delta)$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular) if and only if $({Y^{\mathrm{sep}}},{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular).
\item\label{claim:two} Let $S\subset Y$ be a closed subscheme such that $\overline{U\cap S}=S$, where $U$ is the open subset of $Y$ on which $\mathfrak{s}$ is regular. Then $(Y,\Delta)$ is $F$-split is compatible with $S$ if and only if $({Y^{\mathrm{sep}}},{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$ is $F$-split compatible with $\overline{\mathfrak{s}(S)}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Due to our normality assumption, we may without loss of generality assume that $\mathfrak{s}$ is regular on all of $Y$ with image ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$. Now, since $\mathfrak{s}$ is a local isomorphism between the pairs $({Y^{\mathrm{sep}}},{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$ and $(Y,\mathfrak{s}^*{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$, we have an isomorphism between
$$
\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_{Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}}(F_*^e\mathcal{O}_{Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}(\lceil (p^e-1){\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}\rceil+D),\mathcal{O}_{Y^{\mathrm{sep}}})
$$
and
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:yhom}
\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*^e\mathcal{O}_Y(\lceil (p^e-1)\mathfrak{s}^*({\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})\rceil+\mathfrak{s}^*(D)),\mathcal{O}_Y)
\end{equation}
for any effective divisor $D$ on $Y$ which preserves the property of being a splitting.
Furthermore, \eqref{eqn:yhom} is equal to
\begin{equation*}
\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*^e\mathcal{O}_Y(\lceil (p^e-1)\Delta\rceil+\mathfrak{s}^*(D)),\mathcal{O}_Y)
\end{equation*}
by definition of ${\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}$.
This proves claim \ref{claim:one} with regards to $F$-splitting. For $F$-regularity, note that $\mathfrak{s}^*(\mathfrak{s}_*(C))\geq C$ for any divisor $C$ on $Y$, and the claim follows.
Claim \ref{claim:two} follows immediately from the above isomorphism and \cite[Lemma 1.1.7]{brion:05a}.
\end{proof}
We are now going to reformulate the description of splittings of $X^\circ$ (Lemma \ref{lemma:piotr}) in terms of ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$. Remember from \S\ref{ss:setup} that $X^\circ$ has a description as \[X^\circ \cong \spec_Y \bigoplus_{u\in M} \mathcal{O}\left(\lfloor \mathcal{D}(s(u))\rfloor\right)\cdot\chi^u\]
where $\mathcal{D}:\mathfrak{X}(T)\to\CaDiv_\mathbb{Q} Y$.
We define $h:M\to \CaDiv_\mathbb{Q} {Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$ by $h(u) = {\mathfrak{s}_{\mathrm{max}}}((p-1)\Delta+\mathcal{D}(s(u)))$.
If $H$ is a torus, i.e. $M$ is torsion-free and $s$ is the identity, we may view $h$ as a convex and piecewise linear function on $M_\mathbb{Q}$.
\begin{lem}
\label{lemma:homs-separated} For $u \in (p-1)P_X$ we have
$$\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}(F_*\mathcal{O}_X,\mathcal{O}_X)_u\cong \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*\mathcal{O}_{Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}(\lceil h(u) \rceil),\mathcal{O}_{Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}).$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
As in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:sep} we have
$$
\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_{Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}}(F_*\mathcal{O}_{Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}({\mathfrak{s}_{\mathrm{max}}}(\lceil(p-1)\Delta\rceil+\mathcal{D}(s(u)))),\mathcal{O}_{Y^{\mathrm{sep}}})
$$
being equal to
\[
\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*\mathcal{O}_Y(\lceil (p-1)\Delta\rceil+\mathcal{D}(s(u))),\mathcal{O}_Y). \qedhere
\]
\end{proof}
\begin{ex}[Blowup of a flag variety (continued)]\label{ex:bl1}
For $W^\circ = \widetilde W^\circ$ from Example~\ref{ex:main} we had as a non-separated quotient the projective line with doubled points $\{0,1,\infty\}$. The separation is just the ordinary $\mathbb{P}^1$ and the morphism $W^\circ \rightarrow Y \to {Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}=\mathbb{P}^1$ is again given by
\[\pi:\mathbb{P}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^2 \dashrightarrow \mathbb{P}^1;\quad (x_0:x_1:x_2,\; z_0:z_1:z_2) \mapsto (x_0z_0:x_1z_1).\]
The piecewise linear function $h:P_W \rightarrow \Div_\mathbb{Q} \mathbb{P}^1$ defined by $h(u):={\mathfrak{s}_{\mathrm{max}}} \mathcal{D}(u)$ is given by
\[ h(a,b) = \max\{-a,0\}[1] \;+\; \max\{-b,0\}[1] \;+\; \max\{a+b,0\}[\infty].\]
For $\widetilde W$ we obtain just the restriction $h|_{P_{\widetilde W}}$.
Since $({Y^{\mathrm{sep}}},{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}) = (\mathbb{P}^1,0)$ for $W$ and $\widetilde W$ we deduce by Theorem~\ref{thm:main} and Theorem~\ref{thm:sep}
that both varieties are $F$-regular (and hence $F$-split) for every prime $p$.
We continue our discussion in Example \ref{ex:bl2}, showing that both varieties are \emph{diagonally split}.
\end{ex}
\section{Special Cases}\label{sec:special}
In this section, we consider some special cases and examples of $H$-varieties where criteria for $F$-splitting and $F$-regularity simplify.
\subsection{Cyclic Covers}\label{sec:cyclic}
Let $X$ be a normal $n$-fold cyclic cover of a normal variety $Y$ with reduced branch divisor $D$, and assume that $n$ is relatively prime to $p$. Let $\Delta$ be the boundary divisor as in \S \ref{ss:setup}.
Then by Theorem \ref{thm:main}, we have that $X$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular) if and only if
$(Y,\Delta)$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular).
Note that the support of $\Delta$ is exactly $D$, and $\Delta$ is of the form
\[\Delta=\sum_i \frac{n_i-1}{n_i}D_i,\]
where the $D_i$ are the irreducible components of $D$ and each $n_i$ divides $n$.
If the ramification index of every point $x\in X$ in the ramification locus is equal to $n$, then we simply have \[\Delta=\frac{n-1}{n}D.\]
Note that our result for cyclic covers is simply a special case of \cite{schwede:10b}, which gives criteria for $F$-splitting and $F$-regularity to preserved under arbitrary finite morphisms with tame ramification.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:dc}
Let $X$, $Y$, $\Delta$ and $D$ be as above with $\Delta=\frac{n-1}{n}D$ and $X$, $Y$ projective.
Suppose that $\mathcal{O}_Y((n-1)D)\cong \omega_Y^{-n}$.
Then $X$ is $F$-split if and only if:
\begin{enumerate}
\item We have $p\equiv 1 \pmod n$, that is, $p-1=\alpha n$ for some $\alpha\in \mathbb{N}$; and\label{crit:one}
\item The isomorphism $\mathcal{O}_Y((n-1)D)\cong \omega_Y^{-n}$ induces a non-zero map $$\phi:\mathcal{O}_Y(\alpha(n-1)D)\to \omega_Y^{1-p},$$ and a multiple of $\phi(1)$ corresponds to an $F$-splitting of $Y$ under Grothendieck duality.\label{crit:two}
\end{enumerate}
Furthermore, $X$ is never $F$-regular.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{thm:main}, we are checking whether or not the pair $(Y,\frac{n-1}{n}D)$ is $F$-split (or $F$-regular). By Remark \ref{rem:duality}, maps $F_*\mathcal{O}_Y(\lceil (p-1) \frac{n-1}{n}D \rceil)\to \mathcal{O}_Y$ are given by sections of
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{L}=\omega^{1-p}_Y\left(-\left\lceil (p-1) \frac{n-1}{n}D\right\rceil\right).
\end{equation*}
Now, $\mathcal{L}^n$ is a sub-bundle of
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:ll}
\omega^{n(1-p)}\left(-(p-1)(n-1)D\right)\cong \mathcal{O}_Y
\end{equation}
with equality if and only if $(p-1) \frac{n-1}{n}D$ is an integral divisor, that is $p\equiv 1 \pmod n$.
Since $Y$ is projective, $H^0(Y,\mathcal{L})$ is at most one-dimensional, and must vanish unless
$p\equiv 1 \pmod n$. Hence, condition \eqref{crit:one} must hold for $X$ to be $F$-split.
If $\mathcal{L}$ has no sections, then $X$ is not $F$-split; assume instead that the space of global sections is generated by some non-zero $f\in H^0(Y,\mathcal{L})$. Then $f^n\in H^0(Y,\mathcal{L}^n)$ corresponds to the isomorphism $\mathcal{O}_Y(((p-1) (n-1)D)\cong \omega_Y^{(1-p)n}$ via \eqref{eqn:ll}, and $f$ induces a map $\phi$ as in condition \eqref{crit:two}.
Hence, assuming condition \eqref{crit:one}, condition \eqref{crit:two} is necessary and sufficient for $F$-splitting. Furthermore, $X$ is never $F$-regular, since again by duality,
$$
\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}\left(F_*^e \mathcal{O}_Y\left(\left\lceil (p^e-1)\frac{n-1}{n}D\right\rceil+E\right),\mathcal{O}_Y\right)=0
$$
for any non-trivial effective divisor $E$.
\end{proof}
\begin{ex}[Elliptic curves as double covers]\label{ex:elliptic}
Let $X$ be a smooth elliptic curve, and $p>2$. Then an affine model of $X$ can be given by
$$
y^2=x(x-1)(x-\lambda),
$$
for $\lambda\neq 0,1$ which realizes $X$ as a double cover of $\mathbb{P}^1$ with branch divisor $D=\{0\}+\{1\}+\{\lambda\}+\{\infty\}$.
The curve $X$ is $F$-split if and only if it is ordinary \cite[1.3.9]{brion:05a}, and it is classically known that this is the case if and only if the coefficient of
coefficient of $x^{(p-1)/2}$ in $(x-\lambda)^{(p-1)/2}(x-1)^{(p-1)/2}$ is non-zero \cite[Corollary 4.2]{hartshorne:77a}.
We can easily recover this result using Proposition \ref{prop:dc}. Indeed, taking $1,x$ as a basis of $\mathcal{O}(1)$ with $(1)_0=\{\infty\}$ and $(x)_0=\{0\}$, we have an isomorphism $\mathcal{O}(D)\to \mathcal{O}(4)$ sending $1$ to $x(x-1)(x-\lambda)$. The section $\phi(1)=(x(x-1)(x-\lambda))^{(p-1)/2}\in\mathcal{O}(2(p-1))$ corresponds to a splitting of $\mathbb{P}^1$ if and only if the coefficient of $x^{p-1}$ is non-zero, cf. Example \ref{ex:toricsplit}. But this is the same as requiring that the coefficient of $x^{(p-1)/2}$ in $(x-\lambda)^{(p-1)/2}(x-1)^{(p-1)/2}$ is non-zero.
\end{ex}
\begin{defn}\label{defn:ordinary}
Based on the above example, we say that the pair $(\mathbb{P}^1,\frac{1}{2}(c_1+c_2+c_3+c_4))$ is \emph{ordinary} if and only if the coefficient of $x^{(p-1)/2}$ in $(x-\lambda)^{(p-1)/2}(x-1)^{(p-1)/2}$ is non-zero, where $\lambda$ is the cross-ratio $(c_1,c_2;c_3,c_4)$. By the above, the pair $(\mathbb{P}^1,\frac{1}{2}(c_1+c_2+c_3+c_4))$ is $F$-split if and only if it is ordinary.
\end{defn}
\begin{ex}[Elliptic curves as triple covers]\label{ex:trielliptic}
In the situation of Proposition \ref{prop:dc}, we can also take $Y=\mathbb{P}^1$, $n=3$, $D=\{0\}+\{1\}+\{\infty\}$. The curve $X$ is a triple cover of $\mathbb{P}^1$, and is a smooth elliptic curve as long as $p>3$. By Proposition \ref{prop:dc}, $X$ is $F$-split if and only if $p\equiv 1 \pmod 3$. Indeed,
we again have an isomorphism $\mathcal{O}(D)\to \mathcal{O}(3)$ sending $1$ to $(x(x-1))$
where we take a basis of $\mathcal{O}(1)$ as in Example \ref{ex:elliptic}.
Then $\phi(1)\in\mathcal{O}(2(p-1))$ is given by $x^{2(p-1)/3}(x-1)^{2(p-1)/3}$, and the coefficient of $x^{(p-1)}$ is clearly non-zero.
\end{ex}
\begin{ex}[K3 double covers]
Let $Y=\mathbb{P}^2$, $D$ be a smooth sextic curve in $Y$, and $X$ a double cover of $Y$ ramified over $D$. Then $X$ is a smooth K3 surface.
If $f\in k[x,y,z]$ is a sextic polynomial such that $D=V(f)$ and $p>2$, then Proposition \ref{prop:dc} implies that $X$ if $F$-split if and only the coefficient of $(xyz)^{p-1}$ in $f^{p-1}$ is non-zero.
More generally, similar statements can be made for K3 surfaces arising as double covers of smooth toric surfaces $Y$. Indeed, let $P_Y$ be as in Example \ref{ex:toricsplit}. A smooth section $f$ of $\omega_Y^{-2}$ can be written as
$$
f=\sum_{u\in 2P\cap M} a_u\chi^u
$$
and for $p>2$ the corresponding K3 double cover is $F$-split if and only if the constant term of $f^{p-1}$ is non-zero.
\end{ex}
\begin{ex}[A Fano threefold]
Consider a homogeneous quartic polynomial $f\in k[x,y,z,w]$, $\chara k>2$, and let $X$ be a double cover of $\mathbb{P}^3$ with branch locus $V(f)$. Then $X$ is a smooth Fano threefold of degree $16$, which is $F$-split if and only if $(\mathbb{P}^3,\frac{1}{2}V(f))$ is $F$-split by Theorem \ref{thm:main}. By Remark \ref{rem:duality} and Example \ref{ex:toricsplit}, $(\mathbb{P}^3,V(f))$ is $F$-split if and only if the coefficient of
$x^\alpha y^\beta z^\gamma w^\delta$
in $f^{(p-1)/2}$ is non-zero for some
$\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta\in\mathbb{N}$ with $\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta\leq p-1$.
For example, taking $f=x^4+y^4+z^4+w^4$, we see that $X$ is $F$-split if and only if $\chara k\geq 5$.
A similar analysis can be carried out for any cyclic cover of a toric variety.
\end{ex}
\subsection{Affine Quotients}\label{sec:affine}
\begin{defn}
We say that a pair $(Y,\Delta)$ is a \emph{toroidal} if the formal completion of $(Y,\Delta)$ at every closed point $y$ is isomorphic to the formal completion of a pair $(V_y,B_y)$, where $V_y$ is toric and $B_y$ is the toric boundary divisor.
\end{defn}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:logsmooth}
Let $X$ be an $H$-variety where $H$ has no $p$-torsion, $(Y,\Delta)$ as in \S \ref{ss:setup}, and $({Y^{\mathrm{sep}}},{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$ any separation. Assume that ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$ is affine and $({Y^{\mathrm{sep}}},\lceil {\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}} \rceil)$ is toroidal. Then $X$ is $F$-regular.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Combine Theorem \ref{thm:main}, Theorem \ref{thm:sep}, and Lemma \ref{lemma:logsmooth} below.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:logsmooth}
Let $Y$ be a normal affine variety, $\Delta$ an effective $\mathbb{Q}$-divisor, and assume that the coefficients $\Delta$ are all less than $1$. If $(Y,\lceil \Delta\rceil )$ is toroidal, then the pair $(Y,\Delta)$ is $F$-regular.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $Y$ is affine, we can argue as in the proof of \cite[Proposition 1.1.6]{brion:05a} to show that $(Y,\Delta)$ is $F$-regular if the pair is $F$-regular in a formal neighborhood of each closed point.
Hence, we are are reduced to showing the following: let $Y$ be toric, $B$ the toric boundary divisor, and $\Delta$ an effective $\mathbb{Q}$-divisor with $\Delta <B$ and whose coefficients are all smaller than $1$. Then $(Y,\Delta)$ is $F$-regular.
Due to the assumption on the coefficients of $\Delta$, there exists some $e\in \mathbb{N}$ such that
$$\lceil(p^e-1)\Delta \rceil+B \leq (p^e-1)B.$$
Now, the canonical toric splitting $\chi^u\to \chi^{u/{p^e}}$ (with $\chi^{u/{p^e}}=0$ if $u/{p^e}\notin M$) splits $\mathcal{O}_Y\to F_*^e \mathcal{O}_Y( (p^e-1)B)$, hence also $\mathcal{O}_Y\to F_*^e \mathcal{O}_Y( \lceil (p^e-1)\Delta \rceil +B)$, and by Theorem \ref{thm:schwede} we conclude that $(Y,\Delta)$ is $F$-regular.
\end{proof}
\subsection{\texorpdfstring{$\mathbb{G}_m$-Actions}{Gm-actions}}
The $F$-splitting and $F$-regularity of normal affine $\mathbb{G}_m$-varieties $X$ with $\mathcal{O}_X^{\mathbb{G}_m}=k$ was studied in \cite{watanabe:91a}.
By a classical result of Demazure \cite{demazure:88a}, such $X$ may be described as
$$X=\spec_Y \bigoplus_{n\in\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}} \mathcal{O}(\lfloor nD \rfloor)$$
where
$$D=\sum_i \frac{p_i}{q_i} P_i$$
is a $\mathbb{Q}$-Cartier divisor on a projective variety $Y$. Assuming that $p_i,q_i$ are relatively prime, the \emph{fractional part} of $D$ is
$$D'=\sum_i \frac{q_i-1}{q_i} P_i.$$
\begin{thm}[{\cite[Theorem 3.3]{watanabe:91a}}]\label{thm:watanabe}
Let $X$ be as above. Then $X$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular) if and only if $(Y,D')$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular).
\end{thm}
Theorem \ref{thm:watanabe} is a special case of our Theorem \ref{thm:main}. Indeed, for $H=\mathbb{G}_m$ and $X$ as above, $X^\circ/H=Y$ and our $\Delta$ is exactly the $D'$ from above.
\begin{rem}
Suppose now that in the above setting, $Y$ is a complete intersection in $\mathbb{P}^n$, cut out by hypersurfaces $Y_i$. Assume furthermore that the fractional part of $D$ is of the form
$$
D'=\frac{1-a}{a}(V\cap Y)
$$
for some reduced hypersurface $V\subset \mathbb{P}^n$. Hara \cite[Theorem 4.2]{hara:95a} shows that
\[ \spec_Y \bigoplus_{n\in\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}} \mathcal{O}\left(\lfloor nD\rfloor\right)\]
is $F$-split if and only if
\[ \spec_{\mathbb{P}^n} \bigoplus_{n\in\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}} \mathcal{O}\left(\lfloor nE\rfloor\right)\]
is $F$-split for some (or equivalently, for all) ample divisor(s) $E$ on $\mathbb{P}^n$ with fractional part
$$
E'=\frac{1-a}{a}V+\frac{p-1}{p}\sum Y_i.
$$
Reinterpreted using our notation here, this shows that
$(Y,D')$ is $F$-split if and only if $(\mathbb{P}^n,E')$ is $F$-split.
\end{rem}
\subsection{Complexity-One Actions}
Let $X$ be a $T$-variety of complexity one, that is, $X$ is a normal variety with an effective action by an algebraic torus $T$ satisfying
$\dim X=\dim T+1$. Using notation as in \S \ref{ss:setup}, we have that $Y$ is a potentially non-separated smooth curve. Then there is a unique smooth quasiprojective curve $C$ which is a separation of $Y$. Let $\psi:X^\circ \to C$ be the composition of the quotient map $\pi$ with the separation $Y\to C$. For any point $c\in C$, let $\mu(c)$ be the maximal order of the stabilizer of a general point of $\psi^{-1}(c)$.
We can completely characterize $F$-split and $F$-regular complexity one $T$-varieties in terms of the curve $C$ and the stabilizers of the fibers of $\psi$:
\begin{thm}\label{thm:compone}
The complexity-one $T$-variety $X$ is $F$-split in exactly the following cases:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $C$ is affine.\label{case:uno}
\item $C$ is an ordinary elliptic curve, and $T$ acts freely on $X^\circ$.
\item $C=\mathbb{P}^1$, $\mu(c)=1$ for all but at most three points $c_1,c_2,c_3$, and $\mu(c_1),\mu(c_2),\mu(c_3)$ is one of the triples in Table \ref{table:triples}.\label{case:tres}
\item $C=\mathbb{P}^1$, $\mu(c)=1$ for all but four points $c_1,c_2,c_3,c_4$ which have $\mu(c_i)=2$, $p\geq 3$, and the pair $(\mathbb{P}^1,\sum \frac{1}{2}c_i)$ is ordinary (see Definition \ref{defn:ordinary}).\label{case:quattro}
\end{enumerate}
Furthermore, $X$ is $F$-regular exactly in case \ref{case:uno}, or case \ref{case:tres} as described in Table \ref{table:triples}.
\end{thm}
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{ll@{\qquad}l}
\toprule
triple & $F$-split & $F$-regular\\
\midrule
$(1,*,*)$&$p\geq 2$&$p\geq 2$\\
$(2,2,*)$&$p\geq 3$&$p\geq 3$\\
$(2,3,3)$&$p\geq 5$&$p\geq 5$\\
$(2,3,4)$&$p\geq 5$&$p\geq 5$\\
$(2,3,5)$&$p\geq 7$&$p\geq 7$\\
$(2,3,6)$&$p\equiv 1 \pmod 3$&No\\
$(2,4,4)$&$p\equiv 1 \pmod 4$&No\\
$(3,3,3)$&$p \equiv 1 \pmod 3$&No\\
\bottomrule
\\
\end{tabular}\caption{Stabilizer orders for $F$-split and $F$-regular complexity-one $T$-varieties}\label{table:triples}
\end{table}
\begin{rem}
In the case that $\dim X=2$, $X$ is affine, and $Y$ is projective, we recover \cite[Theorem 4.2]{watanabe:91a}.
\end{rem}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:compone}]
Consider the separation $(C,{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$ of $(Y,\Delta)$. Then by Theorem \ref{thm:sep}, $X$ is $F$-split or $F$-regular if and only if $(C,{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$ has the same property.
Suppose first that $C$ is affine. The separation $(C,{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$ of $(Y,\Delta)$ is toroidal, so $X$ is $F$-split and $F$-regular by Theorem \ref{thm:logsmooth}.
For the other cases, we may appeal to \cite[Theorem 4.2]{watanabe:91a} coupled with our Theorem \ref{thm:main}. However, since the proof of loc.~cit.~is rather terse, we include a proof here for completeness.
We now consider the case of $C$ projective.
Using the duality of Remark \ref{rem:duality}, we see that a necessary condition for $(C,{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$ to be $F$-split (or $F$-regular) is that
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:deg1}\deg \lceil (p-1){\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}\rceil\leq (p-1)(2g-2)&\qquad\textrm{if $F$-split}\\
\label{eqn:deg2}\deg \lceil (p^e-1){\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}\rceil< (p^e-1)(2g-2)&\qquad\textrm{for some $e$ if $F$-regular}.
\end{align}
Here, $g$ is the genus of the curve $C$.
Since ${\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}$ is effective, we immediate conclude that
$g\leq 1$ if $X$ is $F$-split, with ${\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}=0$ in the case $g=1$. In the case $g=1$, we thus conclude that $X$ is $F$-split if and only if ${\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}=0$ and $C$ is $F$-split. The condition on ${\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}$ is equivalent to saying that $T$ acts freely on $X$, and an elliptic curve is $F$-split if and only if it is ordinary, see e.g. \cite[1.3.9]{brion:05a}. By the above degree requirement, we also see that if $X$ is $F$-regular, then we must have $C=\mathbb{P}^1$.
We now analyze the case $C=\mathbb{P}^1$.
Let $S$ be the finite subset of $\mathbb{P}^1$ containing those points $y$ with $\mu(y)\neq 1$.
Note that we have
$${\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}=\sum_{y\in S} \frac{\mu(y)-1}{\mu(y)}y.$$
Assuming that $X$ is $F$-split, the above degree bound leads to
$$
\sum_{y\in S} \frac{1}{\mu(y)} \geq \#S-2,
$$
with strict inequality if $X$ is $F$-regular.
A straightforward calculation shows that the only possible multiplicities $\mu(y)$ which can occur for $X$ $F$-split are the triples listed in Table \ref{table:triples} or $(2,2,2,2)$. Equation \eqref{eqn:deg1} shows that the stated conditions on $p$ are also necessary. Likewise, by \eqref{eqn:deg2} the only multiplicities $\mu(y)$ which can occur for $X$ $F$-regular are the triples listed in Table \ref{table:triples}.
Note that the case $(2,2,2,2)$ is covered in Example \ref{ex:elliptic}, and the case $(3,3,3)$ is covered in Example \ref{ex:trielliptic}.
It remains to show that for each triple, the condition on $p$ is also sufficient for $F$-splitting (or $F$-regularity). Fix the anticanonical divisor $-K_{\mathbb{P}^1}=\{0\}+\{\infty\}$ as in Example \ref{ex:toricsplit}.
A section
$$\sum_{i=1-p}^{p-1} a_i \chi^i\in H^0(\mathbb{P}^1,\mathcal{O}((1-p)K_{\mathbb{P}^1}))$$
has a multiple which splits $\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}\to F_*\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}$ if and only if $a_0\neq 0$.
Now, we may assume that the points $c_1,c_2,c_3$ are respectively $0$, $\infty$, and $1$.
Let $(\mu(c_1),\mu(c_2),\mu(c_3))$ be one of the triples from Table \ref{table:triples} with $p$ satisfying the requisite bound. Set $$\alpha_i=\frac{\mu(c_i)-1}{\mu(c_i)}.$$ Then ${\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}=\sum \alpha_i c_i$, and $\sum \lceil (p-1)\alpha_i \rceil\leq 2(p-1)$.
Hence, there exists $\beta\in \mathbb{N}$ such that
$$
(\chi^1-1)^{\lceil(p-1)\alpha_3\rceil}\cdot \chi^{-\beta}
$$
is a section of $H^0(\mathbb{P}^1,F_*\mathcal{O}(\lceil (1-p)(K_{\mathbb{P}^1}+{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})\rceil)$ and the coefficient $a_0$ of $\chi^0$ is non-zero. We conclude that a multiple of this section corresponds to a splitting $\sigma$ of $(\mathbb{P}^1,{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$, so $X$ is $F$-split.
If we are in the situation where we are claiming that $X$ is $F$-regular, then there exists $e\in \mathbb{N}$ such that $\sum \lceil (p^e-1)\alpha_i \rceil < 2(p^e-1)$. Composing the splitting $\sigma$ from above with itself, we get that $\sigma^e$ splits $\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}\to F^e_*\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(\lceil (p^e-1){\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}\rceil)$; Let $\tau$ be the corresponding section of $H^0(\mathbb{P}^1,F_*^e \mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(\lceil (1-p^e)(K_{\mathbb{P}^1}+{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})\rceil))$.
By choice of $e$, we have
$$\lceil (1-p^e)(K_{\mathbb{P}^1}+{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})\rceil>0,$$
so there exists an effective divisor $D>0$ with $\tau$ a section of $F_*^e \mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(\lceil (1-p^e)(K_{\mathbb{P}^1}+{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})\rceil-D)$.
Hence, $\sigma^e$ splits $\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}\to F_*^e\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(\lceil (p^e-1){\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}\rceil-D)$, so by Theorem \ref{thm:schwede}, $(\mathbb{P}^1,{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$ and $X$ are $F$-regular.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}\label{rem:genus}
We can define the genus of a pair $(C,{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$ by
\[g(C,{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})=\frac{\deg{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}} + 2g(C)}{2}.\]
By the above theorem, $F$-split implies that $g(C,{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}) \leq 1$, and $F$-regular that $g(C,{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}) < 1$.
\end{rem}
\begin{ex}
By \cite[Proposition 6.3]{smith:00a}, any smooth Fano variety in characteristic zero is $F$-regular after reducing to characteristic $p$ for $p$ sufficiently large. We illustrate this with the list of complexity-one smooth Fano threefolds from \cite{suess:14a}. For the threefolds 2.24, 3.8, and 3.10, the stabilizer orders are given by the triple $(2,2,2)$.\footnote{Note that only special elements in these three deformation families admit a two-torus action.} Hence, these threefolds are $F$-split and $F$-regular exactly in characteristics $p$ with $p\geq 3$. All other threefolds on the list have stabilizer orders given by the triple $(1,*,*)$ and are $F$-split and $F$-regular in arbitrary characteristic.
\end{ex}
\subsection{Surjectively Graded Algebras}\label{sec:surj}
Let $A$ be an $F$-finite noetherian $\mathbb{Z}^n$-graded normal integral domain of characteristic $p$. Then $A$ is \emph{surjectively graded} \cite{hashimoto:03a} if for all $u,u'\in\mathbb{Z}^n$ with $A_u,A_{u'}\neq 0$, the multiplication map $A_u\otimes_{A_0}A_{u'}\to A_{u+u'}$ is surjective.
Then Hashimoto shows the following:
\begin{thm}[{cf. \cite[Theorem 5.1]{hashimoto:03a}}]
Assume that $\bigoplus_{n\in \mathbb{Z}} A_{nu}$ is $F$-regular for some $u$ in the interior of the weight cone of $A$ with $A_u\neq 0$. Then $A$ is $F$-regular as well.
\end{thm}
Surjectively graded algebras fit nicely into our framework as well. Let $A$ be a surjectively graded finitely generated normal $k$-algebra, $X=\spec A$.
Constructing $X^\circ$, $Y$, and $\Delta$ as in \S\ref{ss:setup}, we have that $\Delta=0$. Indeed, if $A$ is surjectively graded, then the sheaf
\[\mathcal{A}\cong \bigoplus_{v\in M} \mathcal{O}_Y(\lfloor \mathcal{D}(v)\rfloor) \]
of $\mathcal{O}_Y$-algebras is also (locally) surjectively graded.
But it is straightforward to check that this implies that $\mathcal{D}(v)$ is integral for all $v\in M$, and hence $\Delta=0$.
We may thus conclude by our Theorem \ref{thm:main} that $X=\spec A$ is $F$-regular if any only if $X^\circ/T$ is $F$-regular.
\subsection{Cox Rings and Related Constructions}\label{sec:cox}
Let $Y$ be a normal variety with finitely generated class group $\Cl(Y)$. The \emph{Cox sheaf} of $Y$ is the $\Cl(Y)$-graded sheaf
\[\mathcal{R}(Y)=\bigoplus_{[D]\in\Cl(Y)}\mathcal{O}_Y(D).\]
This definition appears to depend on choice of representatives $D$ of classes $[D]\in\Cl(Y)$, but any two choices lead to isomorphic sheaves. Furthermore, choosing representatives for a generating set of $\Cl(Y)$ leads to an $\mathcal{O}_Y$-algebra structure on $\mathcal{O}_Y$, and any two choices lead to isomorphic $\mathcal{O}_Y$-algebras \cite[\S 1.4]{coxbook}.
The \emph{Cox ring} of $Y$ is the ring $R(Y)=H^0(Y,\mathcal{R}(Y))$. It is a natural generalization of the homogeneous coordinate ring of projective space. Note that in general it need not be finitely generated. However, it is always integral and normal \cite[\S 1.5]{coxbook}.
\begin{prop}[{\cite[cf. Proposition 4.6]{gongyo:12a}}]\label{prop:cox}
Suppose that $R(Y)$ is finitely generated, and assume that $\Cl(Y)$ has no $p$-torsion. Then
\[X=\spec R(Y)\]
is $F$-split ($F$-regular) if and only if $Y$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular).
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $H=\spec k[\Cl(Y)]$.
In this situation, $U=\spec_{\mathcal{O}_Y} \mathcal{R}(Y)$ is an $H$-invariant open subset of $X$ of codimension at least one \cite[\S 1.6]{coxbook}, hence $X$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular) exactly when $U$ is. But by construction, $H$ acts on $U$ with finite stabilizers, $U/H=Y$, and the boundary divisor $\Delta\subset Y$ is trivial. The claim now follows from our Theorem \ref{thm:main}.
\end{proof}
A related situation occurs when considering a normal variety $Z$ embedded in some other variety $Y$ as above with $R(Y)$ finitely generated.
For simplicity, we shall assume that $Y$ is toric, in which case $R(Y)$ is a polynomial ring; generalizations are left to the reader.
Consider $Z\subset Y$ a normal variety. Let $U\subset \spec R(Y)$ be as in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:cox}, and let $I\subset R(Y)$ be the $\Cl(Y)$-homogeneous ideal of $\overline{\pi^{-1}(Y)}\subset \sec R(Y)$, where $\pi:U\to Y$ is the quotient map.
\begin{prop}
Let $Z$, $Y$, and $I$ be as above.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $V(I)$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular), then so is $Z$.
\item Suppose that $Y$ is smooth, $V(I)$ normal, and any component of $V(I)\setminus U$ of dimension $\dim V(I)-1$ has infinite $H$-stabilizer. Then $Z$ being $F$-split ($F$-regular) implies that $V(I)$ is as well.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The first claim is a straightforward application of our Theorem \ref{thm:main}. For the second claim, note that $Y$ smooth implies that $H$ acts freely on $U$. Then $Z$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular) if and only if $V(I)\cap U$ is by loc.~cit. Under the further assumptions, $V(I)$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular) if and only if $V(I)\cap U$ is.
\end{proof}
\begin{ex}[Elliptic curves in $\mathbb{P}^1\times \mathbb{P}^1$]
Any form $f\in k[x_0,x_1,y_0,y_1]$ of bidegree $(2,2)$ defines a (possibly singular) elliptic curve $E$ embedded in $\mathbb{P}^1\times \mathbb{P}^1$. Assume that $V(f)\subset \mathbb{A}^4$ is normal. Then the corresponding curve $E$ is $F$-split if and only if the coefficient of $(x_0x_1y_0y_1)^{p-1}$ in $f^{p-1}$ is non-zero. Indeed, by the above proposition, $E$ is $F$-split if and only if $k[x_0,x_1,y_0,y_1]/(f)$ is $F$-split, and Fedder's criterion \cite{fedder:83a} implies that the latter is $F$-split if and only if $f^{p-1}\notin\langle x_0^p,x_1^p,y_0^p,y_1^p\rangle$.
\end{ex}
\section{Toric vector bundles}\label{sec:vb}
Toric vector bundles and their projectivizations provide a natural class of normal varieties with action by a lower-dimensional torus. We apply our general results here to discuss the $F$-splitting and $F$-regularity of certain toric vector bundles. Note that in relation to positivity properties of toric vector bundles, it was asked in \cite{hering:10a} exactly which toric vector bundles are $F$-split. Our Theorems \ref{thm:main} and \ref{thm:vb-quotient} give a complete answer in the special case of \emph{two-step} bundles defined below.
Given a vector bundle $\mathcal{E}$, we denote by $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E})$ the corresponding projective bundle, whose fibers are the spaces of lines in the fibers of $\mathcal{E}$.\footnote{By some authors, this bundle is denoted by $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E}^*)$.}
To begin with, we have the following well known result.
\begin{prop}[{cf. \cite[\S 1.1]{brion:05a}}]
A vector bundle $\mathcal{E}$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular) if and only if its projectivization $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E})$ is $F$-split ($F$-regular).
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
There is a natural $\mathbb{G}_m$-action on $\mathcal{E}$ given by the diagonal action on each fiber. The fixed point set is given by the zero-section and $\mathbb{G}_m$ acts with trivial stabilizers elsewhere. Now, $(\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E}),0)$ is the corresponding quotient pair and we obtain the result by applying Theorem \ref{thm:main}.
\end{proof}
Now, let $X$ be a toric variety corresponding to a fan $\Sigma$ with embedded torus $T$, see \cite{fulton:93a} for details. Throughout this section, $M$ will be the character lattice of $T$, and $\Sigma^{(1)}$ the set of rays of $\Sigma$. A \emph{toric vector bundle} on $X$ is a vector bundle $\mathcal{E}$ on $X$ equipped with a $T$-equivariant structure. This equivariant structure turns both $\mathcal{E}$ and $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E})$ into $T$-varieties.
To a toric vector bundle $\mathcal{E}$ of rank $r$, Klyachko \cite{klyachko:89a} associated a $k$-vector space $E$ of dimension $r$ and a full decreasing filtration $E^\rho(\lambda)$ of $E$ for every ray $\rho \in \Sigma^{(1)}$
\[
\cdots \supset E^{\rho}(\lambda-1) \supset E^{\rho}(\lambda) \supset E^{\rho}(\lambda+1) \supset \cdots.
\]
fulfilling the following compatibility condition:
For each maximal cone $\sigma \in \Sigma$, there are lattice points $u_1, \ldots, u_r \in M$ and a decomposition into one-dimensional subspaces $E = L_1 \oplus \cdots \oplus L_r$ such that
\[
E^{\rho}(\lambda) = \bigoplus_{\rho(u_i) \, \geq \, \lambda} L_i,
\]
for each $\rho \preceq \sigma$ and all $\lambda \in \mathbb{Z}$. Here $\rho(u_i)$ denotes the value of a primitive generator of $\rho$ on $u_i$.
From this data one can reconstruct $\mathcal{E}$ as follows. The sections of $\mathcal{E}$ on the chart $U_\sigma$ of $X$ corresponding to $\sigma$ are given as a submodule of $k[\sigma\check{\ } \cap M] \otimes E$ via
\[
H^0(U_\sigma,\mathcal{E})_u = \bigcap_{\rho \preceq \sigma} E^{\rho}(\rho(u)).
\]
Note, that the description of toric vector bundles by filtration behaves well with standard constructions as tensor product and dualization. Indeed, the dual bundle corresponds to the filtrations $E^{*\rho}(\lambda) = E^\rho(-\lambda)^\perp$ of the dual vector space $E^*$.
\begin{defn}
We say that a toric vector bundle $\mathcal{E}$ is a \emph{two-step bundle} if every filtration $E^\rho(\lambda)$ has most two steps where the dimension jumps (i.e.~at most one proper subset of $E$ occurs).
\end{defn}
Clearly, any rank two toric vector bundle is a two-step bundle, since $E$ is two-dimensional in this case.
\begin{ex}
By \cite{klyachko:89a} the tangent and cotangent bundles are examples of two-step bundles, since their filtrations have the following form:
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{T}^{\rho}(\lambda) = \left \{ \begin{array}{ll} N \otimes k & \text{ for } \lambda < 0 \\
\langle \rho \rangle & \text{ for } \lambda = 0, \\
0 & \text{ for } \lambda > 0,
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\Omega^{\rho}(\lambda) = \left \{ \begin{array}{ll} M \otimes k & \text{ for } \lambda < 0 \\
\rho^\perp & \text{ for } \lambda = 0, \\
0 & \text{ for } \lambda > 0.
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation*}
\end{ex}
For a given two-step bundle $\mathcal{E}$, let $E_1,\ldots,E_\ell$ be the proper subspaces of $E$ occurring in the filtrations $E^\rho(\lambda)$. For every $E_i$ and every ray $\rho \in \Sigma^{(1)}$ we define
\[\mu_i(\rho) = \max \{\lambda \mid E_i \subset E^\rho(\lambda)\} -\min \{ \lambda \mid E^\rho(\lambda) \neq E\}.\]
Now we set
\[\mu_i = \max\{\mu_i(\rho) \mid \rho \in \Sigma^{(1)}\}.\]
Consider $Y = \Bl_{F_1,\ldots,F_\ell}\mathbb{P}(E)$, the successive blowup of $\mathbb{P}(E)$ in the strict transforms of the subspaces $F_i$. Let the corresponding (strict transforms) of the exceptional divisors be denoted by $D_i$; we define the exceptional divisor of the blowup in a hyperplane to be the hyperplane itself. Note that $Y$ and this configuration of divisors is independent of the ordering of the $E_i$ on a big open subset.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:vb-quotient}
Let $(Y,\Delta)$ be the quotient pair for $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E})$, where $\mathcal{E}$ is a two-step toric vector bundle. A separation of $(Y,\Delta)$ is given by
\[{Y^{\mathrm{sep}}} = \Bl_{E_1,\ldots,E_\ell} \mathbb{P}(E),\qquad {\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}= \sum_i \frac{\mu_i-1}{\mu_i} D_i. \]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The claim follows directly from the arguments of \cite[Proposition 3.5 and \S 6.2]{gonzalez:12a} and \cite[Theorem 5.9]{hausen:10a}.
\end{proof}
For two-step toric vector bundles $\mathcal{E}$, we can thus apply Theorem \ref{thm:sep} together with Theorem \ref{thm:main} to determine when $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E})$ and $\mathcal{E}$ are $F$-split or $F$-regular.
In the following, we consider several special cases.
Note that the following Corollary was obtained by \cite{xin:14a} for the case of $F$-splitting using arguments different than ours:
\begin{cor}\label{cor:cotangent}
The cotangent bundle of a smooth toric variety $X$ is always $F$-regular. In particular, it is $F$-split.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
In this case, we have $({Y^{\mathrm{sep}}},{\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})=(\mathbb{P}^{n-1},0)$, where $n=\dim X$.
\end{proof}
On the other hand, the Frobenius pullback of the cotangent bundle is not even $F$-split:
\begin{ex}
We consider the vector bundle $\mathcal{E}=F^*\Omega_X$ on a smooth complete toric variety $X=X_\Sigma$ of dimension $n$. This bundle is given by the filtrations
\[
E^{\rho}(\lambda) =
\begin{cases}
M\otimes k & \lambda < 0 \\
\rho^\perp & 0 \leq \lambda \leq p\\
0 & \lambda > p
\end{cases}
\]
In particular it is a two-step bundle and we see that a separation of the corresponding quotient pair is given by $({Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}, {\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})$, where ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}=\mathbb{P}(M\otimes k)$ and
$${\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}=\sum_{\rho\in\Sigma^{(1)}} \frac{p-1}{p}\mathbb{P}(\rho^\perp).$$
We obtain
\[\deg \lfloor (1-p)(K_{{Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}} + {\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}})\rfloor = (p-1)(n - (\#\Sigma^{(1)})).\]
Since $\#\Sigma^{(1)}>n$ for $X$ complete, the right hand side is negative, and we conclude using Remark \ref{rem:duality} that $\mathcal{E}$ cannot be $F$-split.
\end{ex}
It is known that the cotangent bundle for flag varieties is also $F$-split, see \cite{kumar:99a}. We ask:
\begin{question}
Let $X$ be any smooth $F$-split (or $F$-regular) variety. Is $\Omega_X$ always $F$-split (or $F$-regular)?
\end{question}
The tangent bundle on a smooth toric variety is not always $F$-split (see Example \ref{ex:tbundle} below), but it is in the case of projective space.
\begin{cor}
The tangent bundle of $\mathbb{P}^{n}$ is always $F$-regular. In particular, it is $F$-split.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
In this case, we have ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$ is the blowup of $\mathbb{P}^{n-1}$ in $n+1$ general points, and ${\Delta^{\mathrm{sep}}}=0$. The claim now follows from the above discussion and the following lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
The blowup of $\mathbb{P}^{n}$ in $n+2$ general points is $F$-regular.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
After applying a projective transformation, we can take the $n+2$ points to be $n+1$ toric fixed points of $\mathbb{P}^n$, along with the point $1$.
The blowup $X$ of $\mathbb{P}^n$ in the $n+1$ fixed points is toric, and choosing $-K_X$ to be the standard toric anticanonical divisor, a basis for $H^0(X,\mathcal{O}(-K_X))$ is given by monomials $\chi^u$ for $u=(u_1,\ldots,u_n)\in\mathbb{Z}^n$ satisfying
\begin{align*}
&-1\leq u_i\leq n-1 &&i=1,\ldots,n;\\
&1-n\leq \sum u_i\leq 1. &&
\end{align*}
Consider the global section
$$
\tau=(1-\chi^{e_n})\prod_{i=1}^{n-1}(1-\chi^{-e_i})
$$
Here $e_i$ is the standard basis of $\mathbb{Z}^n$. The coefficient of $\chi^0$ in $\tau^{p-1}$ is $1$. Hence, under the Grothendieck duality used in Remark \ref{rem:duality}, $\tau^{p-1}$ corresponds to an $F$-splitting of $X$. Furthermore, this lifts to an $F$-splitting of the blowup $\widetilde{X}$ of $X$ in the point $1$, since $\tau$ vanishes to order $n$ at the point $1$, see \cite[Exercise 1.3.13]{brion:05a}.
But in fact, $\tau$ is a global section of $\mathcal{O}(-K_X-E)$ for $E$ any one of the exceptional divisors of $X\to \mathbb{P}^n$, excluding one. Hence, by Grothendieck duality, we have a splitting of $\mathcal{O}_{\widetilde{X}}\to F_* \mathcal{O}_{\widetilde{X}}(E)$. But $\widetilde{X}\setminus E$ is an open subvariety of a toric variety, so $\widetilde{X}$ is $F$-regular by Theorem \ref{thm:schwede}.
\end{proof}
We can give the most precise answer as to when $\mathcal{E}$ is $F$-split or $F$-regular in the case of rank two toric vector bundles.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:rktwo}
Let $\mathcal{E}$ be a rank two toric vector bundle with associated vector space $E$ and proper lines $E_i$. Then $\mathcal{E}$ is $F$-split if and only if either there are at most three lines $E_i$ with values $\mu_i>1$, and the $\mu_i$ form a triple as in Table \ref{table:triples}; or $p\geq 3$, there are exactly four lines $E_1,E_2,E_3,E_4$ with $\mu_i>1$, for these four lines we have $\mu_i=2$, and the coefficient of $y^{(p-1)/2}$ in $(y-\lambda)^{(p-1)/2)}(y-1)^{(p-1)/2}$ is non-zero, where $\lambda$ is the cross-ratio of four colinear points $v_i\in E_i$, $i=1,2,3,4$.
Likewise, $\mathcal{E}$ is $F$-regular if and only if either there are at most three lines $E_i$ with values $\mu_i>1$, and the $\mu_i$ form a $F$-regular triple as in Table \ref{table:triples}.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
This is a direct application of Theorem \ref{thm:compone}.
\end{proof}
N.~Lauritzen raised the question if there is an $F$-split vector bundle $\mathcal{E}$ such that the dual bundle $\mathcal{E}^*$ is not $F$-split \cite{openproblems}. Corollary~\ref{cor:rktwo} implies that for toric bundles of rank two this cannot happen, since in the cases where $\mathcal{E}$ is F-split the quotient pairs of $\mathcal{E}$ and $\mathcal{E}^*$ are isomorphic. In the following examples, we will see a number of two-step toric bundles of higher rank satisfying this property.
\begin{ex}\label{ex:lauritzen}
Let $X=X_\Sigma$ be a toric variety, $\Sigma^{(1)} = \{\rho_1, \ldots, \rho_\ell\}$. We consider the toric vector bundle $\mathcal{E}$ on $X$ given by
\[
E^{\rho_i}(\lambda) =
\begin{cases}
E & \lambda < 0 \\
E_i & \lambda = 0\\
0 & \lambda > 0
\end{cases}
\]
where the $E_i$ are hyperplanes in $E$ in sufficiently general position, and $\dim E=n+1$.
If for example $X$ is regular, this collection of filtrations fulfills the necessary compatibility condition.
Now, a separation for the quotient pair of $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E})$ is given by $(\mathbb{P}^n,0)$, and for $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E}^*)$ by
$(\Bl_{\ell} \mathbb{P}^n, 0)$, where $\Bl_{\ell} \mathbb{P}^n$ is the blowup of $\mathbb{P}^n$ is $\ell$ general points.
Since $\mathbb{P}^n$ is $F$-regular, $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E})$ is as well; in particular, it is $F$-split. On the other hand, on ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}=\Bl_{\ell} \mathbb{P}^n$ the sheaf $\mathcal{O}((1-p)K_{Y^{\mathrm{sep}}})$ has no global section if $\ell \geq h^0(\mathbb{P}^n,\mathcal{O}(n+1))$, so in this case $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E}^*)$ cannot be $F$-split.
We can modify this example to give a counterexample where $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E})$ is $F$-split but not $F$-regular, and $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E}^*)$ is not $F$-split. Indeed,
consider the bundle $\mathcal{E}$ as above, except that for $2(n+1)$ of the rays the filtrations $E^{\rho_i}(\lambda)$ have value $E_i$ for two steps in the filtration instead of just one. In this case, the boundary divisor $\Delta$ is $\sum_i \frac{1}{2}E_i$, the sum being over the indices for those $2(n+1)$ rays.
Since $\deg \Delta=n+1$, $(Y,\Delta)$ cannot be $F$-regular, but it will be $F$-split if the $E_i$ are sufficiently general. On the other hand, $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E}^*)$ will still not be $F$-split.
\end{ex}
\begin{ex}\label{ex:tbundle}
In \cite[Example 4.2]{gonzalez:12a}, a smooth toric variety is constructed such that the quotient for the tangent bundle is given by ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}=\Bl_{14}\mathbb{P}^{n-1}$. In characteristic $p \neq 2,3$, $9$ of the $14$ points form the complete base locus of a pencil of cubics \cite{totaro:08a}. Hence, $\omega_{Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}^{1-p}$ does not admit any global sections and ${Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$ and hence $\mathcal{T}_X$ is not $F$-split. On the other hand, $\Omega_X$ is always $F$-split by Corollary~\ref{cor:cotangent}.
\end{ex}
The situation for toric rank two bundles motivates the following modified version of Lauritzen's question.
\begin{question}
Is there an $F$-split (non-toric) rank two vector bundle $\mathcal{E}$ such that the dual bundle $\mathcal{E}^*$ is not F-split?
\end{question}
\section{Diagonal splittings}\label{sec:diag}
\begin{defn}
A \emph{diagonal splitting} of a scheme $X$ is a splitting of $X\times X$ compatible with the diagonal \cite{ramanathan:87a}.
By a \emph{diagonal splitting of a pair} $(X,\Delta)$ we mean a
splitting of \[(X \times X,\;\Delta\!\times\!X + X\!\times\!\Delta )\] which is compatible with the diagonal.
More generally, by a \emph{diagonal splitting of a triple} $(X;\Delta_+,\Delta_-)$ we mean a
splitting of \[(X \times X,\;\Delta_+\!\times\!X + X\!\times\!\Delta_- )\] which is compatible with the diagonal.
\end{defn}
\noindent Note that $X$ being diagonally split has strong consequences for the syzygies of $X$, see e.g. \cite[1.5]{brion:05a}
\begin{ex}
\label{ex:diag-splitting-curves}
If $C$ is a complete curve and $(C,\Delta)$ is diagonally split, then $g(C,\Delta)\leq\nicefrac{1}{2}$ has to hold (see Remark \ref{rem:genus} for a definition of $g(C,\Delta)$). Likewise, if $(C;\Delta_+, \Delta_-)$ is diagonally split, then we must have $g_+:=g(C,\Delta_+) \leq \nicefrac{1}{2}$ and $g_- := g(C,\Delta_-) \leq \nicefrac{1}{2}$.
\end{ex}
\begin{proof}
The diagonal has bidegree $(1,1)$ in $C \times C$. Hence,
\[D:=-K_{C\times C}-(\Delta_+\!\times\!X + X\!\times\!\Delta_-)\]
has bidegree $(2-2g_+,\;2-2g_-)$. Hence, if $g_+$ or $g_-$ is larger than $\nicefrac{1}{2}$, then $D$ and all its positive multiples have empty linear systems. By Remark~\ref{rem:duality} this implies that there is no such splitting. For $(C,\Delta)$ we get the claim by considering $(C; \Delta,\Delta)$.
\end{proof}
Now, let $X$ be an $H$-variety as in \S \ref{ss:setup} and assume that $H$ has no $p$-torsion. The product $X\times X$ admits a natural $H\times H$-action. However, the diagonal is invariant only with respect to the diagonal subgroup $H \subset H\times H$. This embedding of groups corresponds to the surjection of character lattices
\[M\times M \to M;\quad (u_1,u_2) \mapsto u_1+u_2.\]
Hence, semi-invariant functions of degree $(u,-u)$ with respect to the $H\times H$-action are exactly the invariant functions with respect to the diagonal action. Now, by using Proposition~\ref{prop:comp2}, we see that we may assume that a diagonal splitting of $X$ is of the form
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:diag}
\sigma = \sum_{w \in M} \sigma_{(w,-w)}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_{(w,-w)} \in \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}(F_*\mathcal{O}_{X\times X},\mathcal{O}_{X\times X})_{(w,-w)}$.
\begin{rem}
\label{rem:pushforward-to-quotient}
Note that by \S\ref{sec:tfrob}, given an element $\sigma_w \in \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}(F_*\mathcal{O}_X,\mathcal{O}_X)_{w}$ we may interpret is as an element of $\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*k(Y),k(Y))$ which we as before we will denote by $\bar \sigma_w$ in the following. Remember that Lemma~\ref{lemma:piotr} ensures that \[\bar \sigma_w \in \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*\mathcal{O}_Y(\lceil (p-1)\Delta + \mathcal{D}(w) \rceil),\mathcal{O}_Y).\]
This extends to $X \times X$ with the full $H\!\times\!H$-action as follows. For \[\sigma_{(w,-w)}=\sum_{i} \sigma_i \otimes \sigma^i \in \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}(F_*\mathcal{O}_X,\mathcal{O}_X)_{w} \otimes \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}(F_*\mathcal{O}_X,\mathcal{O}_X)_{-w}\]
we have $\bar \sigma_{(w,-w)} = \sum \bar \sigma_i \otimes \bar \sigma^i$. This defines an element of $\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_V}(F_*\mathcal{O}_V,\mathcal{O}_V)$ of some open subset of $V \subset Y \times Y$ intersecting the diagonal.
\end{rem}
We now give a characterization of those invariant splittings $\sigma$ of $X\times X$ which are compatible with the diagonal. For simplicity, we will assume that $H$ is equal to a torus $T$.
For every class $[w] \in M/pM$ we define \[\bar \sigma_{[w]} = \sum_{u \in [w]} \bar{\sigma}_{(u,-u)}.\]
In the following we denote the ideal sheaves of the diagonals in $X \times X$ and $Y \times Y$ by $I_X$ and $I_Y$, respectively.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:diag-criterion}
A Frobenius splitting $\sigma$ of $X \times X$ is compatible with the diagonal if and only if for every $[w] \in M/pM$ we have $\bar{\sigma}_{[w]} \equiv \bar{\sigma}_{[0]}\; (\mathsf{mod}\; I_Y)$ and $\bar{\sigma}_{[w]}$ is compatible with the diagonal, that is, $\bar{\sigma}_{[w]}(F_* I_Y)\subset I_Y$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We consider generators of $F_* I_X$ as an $\mathcal{O}_{X\!\times\!X}$-module. There are two types of generators we have to take into account. One coming from the diagonal of $T \times T$ the other one from the diagonal of $Y \times Y$:
\begin{align}
f \cdot \chi^0 \otimes \chi^{0} - f \cdot \chi^u \otimes \chi^{-u}&, \qquad u \in M; f \in k(Y) \times k(Y)
\label{eq:ideal-1}
\\
f \;\cdot\; (\chi^w \otimes \chi^u)&, \qquad u,w \in M \text{ and } f \in I_Y.\label{eq:ideal-2}
\end{align}
In fact, these elements generate $F_* I_X$ as a $k$-vector space.
Assume first that we have an element $g$ of the form (\ref{eq:ideal-2}). Then $\sigma(g)$ will vanish if $u \neq -w$. Assume that $u = -w$. We obtain
\begin{align*}
\sigma(f \;\cdot\; (\chi^w \otimes \chi^{-w})) = & \sum_{u \in [w]} \sigma_{(u,-u)}(f \;\cdot\; (\chi^w \otimes \chi^{-w}))\\
= & \sum_{u \in [w]} \bar{\sigma}_{(u,-u)}(f) \;\cdot\; \chi^{w-u} \otimes \chi^{u-w}\\
= & \left(\sum_{u \in [w]} \bar{\sigma}_{(u,-u)}(f)\right)\chi^0 \otimes \chi^0 \quad + \\
& + \quad \sum_{u \in [w]} \bar{\sigma}_{(u,-u)}(f)\cdot(\chi^{w-u} \otimes \chi^{u-w} - \chi^0 \otimes \chi^0).
\end{align*}
Note that the first summand of the right-hand-side is an element of $I_X$ if and only if $\sum_{u \in [w]} \bar{\sigma}_{(u,-u)}(f)=\bar \sigma_{[w]}(f)$ is an element of $I_Y$. The second summand is always an element of $I_X$, since $(\chi^{w-u} \otimes \chi^{u-w} - \chi^0 \otimes \chi^0)$ lies $I_X$.
Assume instead we have an element $g$ of the form (\ref{eq:ideal-1}). Then we obtain
\begin{align*}
\sigma(g) &= \sigma(f \cdot \chi^0 \otimes \chi^{0} - f\cdot\chi^u \otimes \chi^{-u})\\
&= \sigma(f \cdot \chi^0 \otimes \chi^{0}) - \sigma(f\cdot\chi^u \otimes \chi^{-u})\\
&= \sum_{u \in [0]}\sigma_{(u,-u)}(f \cdot \chi^0 \otimes \chi^{0}) - \sum_{u \in [w]}\sigma_{(u,-u)}(f \cdot \chi^w \otimes \chi^{-w})\\
&= \sum_{u \in [0]}\bar \sigma_{(u,-u)}(f) \cdot \chi^{-u} \otimes \chi^{u} - \sum_{u \in [w]}\bar \sigma_{(u,-u)}(f) \cdot \chi^{w-u} \otimes \chi^{u-w}\\
&\equiv (\bar \sigma_{[0]}(f) - \bar \sigma_{[w]}(f)) \cdot \chi^0 \otimes \chi^0.
\end{align*}
Here, the congruence is modulo elements of the form $( \chi^0 \otimes \chi^0 - \chi^{u} \otimes \chi^{-u}) \in I_X$ as above.
Now, the right-hand-side lies in $I_X$ if and only if $(\bar \sigma_{[0]}(f) - \bar \sigma_{[w]}(f))$ is an element of $I_Y$.
\end{proof}
We obtain the following corollary, which is a simple generalization of the corresponding result on toric varieties in \cite{payne:09a}.
\begin{cor}
\label{prop:section-weight-criterion}
Consider a $T$-variety $X$, and suppose $\sigma$ is a splitting of $X\times X$ compatible with the diagonal. Then for every class $[w] \in M/p M$ there must be a representative $u \in [w]$ such that the homogeneous component of weight $(u,-u)$ in $\sigma$ is non-trivial. In particular $\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}(F_*\mathcal{O}_X, \mathcal{O}_X)_u \neq 0$ and $\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}(F_*\mathcal{O}_X, \mathcal{O}_X)_{-u} \neq 0$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof} For $\sigma$ to be a splitting, $\bar \sigma_{[0]}$ must be non-trivial, and the result follows by Theorem \ref{thm:diag-criterion}.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}[The toric case]
In the toric case, the criterion that for all $[w] \in M/p M$, there must be a representative $u \in [w]$ such that $\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}(F^*\mathcal{O}_X, \mathcal{O}_X)_{\pm u} \neq 0$ is exactly the criterion that the polytope $\mathbb{F}_X:=P_X\cap -P_X$ contains a representative of every class $[w] \in M/p M$, cf. Lemma \ref{lemma:extends}. Payne shows that this criterion is both necessary and sufficient \cite{payne:09a}. The sufficiency of this criterion is easily seen: for any lattice point $u\in \mathbb{F}_X$, $\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}(F^*\mathcal{O}_X, \mathcal{O}_X)_{\pm u} \cong k$ by Remark \ref{rem:bijection}. Since $X$ is complete, $[0]\cap
(P_X\cap -P_X)=0$, so by Lemma \ref{lemma:invariant}, $\sum_u 1\cdot \chi^u\otimes \chi^{-u}$ corresponds to an invariant splitting $\sigma$ of $X\times X$, where the sum is taken over a choice of representative $u$ for each class of $M/pM$. Now, by Theorem \ref{thm:diag-criterion}, this splitting is compatible with the diagonal.
It was Payne's result which was one of our original motivations for studying $F$-splittings of higher complexity $T$-varieties. As Payne points out, the diagonal of $X\times X$ is not $T\times T$-invariant, but it is invariant with respect to the action of the diagonal torus. We were struck by the fact that Payne's polytope $\mathbb{F}_X=P_X\cap -P_X$ is exactly the polytope corresponding to the anticanonical divisor on the Chow quotient $Z$ of $X\times X$ by the diagonal torus $T$. In fact, our machinery (\S \ref{sec:tfrob} and Proposition \ref{prop:comp2}) can be used to show that a toric variety $X$ is $F$-split if and only if the above quotient $Z$ is split compatibly with some point in the interior of $Z$ (note that $Z$ is a toric variety with respect to the quotient torus $(T\times T)/T$). This is easily seen to be equivalent to Payne's criterion discussed above. We leave the details to the reader.
\end{rem}
Our next goal is to give a simpler necessary condition for a complexity-one $T$-variety to be diagonally split. To begin with, suppose that $Y$ is any complete variety, and let $\mathcal{D}:M\to \Div_{\mathbb{Q}}(Y)$ be as in \eqref{eqn:d}. We set
\[U=\spec_{Y}\bigoplus_{u \in M} \mathcal{O}(\mathcal{D}(u)).\]
Then the quotient pair of $U$ is $(Y,\Delta)$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:shifting}
Assume we are given a diagonal splitting $\sigma$ of $U$ of the form \eqref{eqn:diag}. Let $\Delta_+,\Delta_-$, be effective $\mathbb{Q}$-divisors on $Y$. Suppose that for every $w\in pM$ with $\sigma_{(w,-w)}$ non-trivial there are functions $f^p_w \in K(Y) \subset F_*K(Y)$ satisfying $f_0^p = 1$ and with
\[\div(f^{\pm p}_{w}) + \lceil (p-1)\Delta + \mathcal{D}(\pm w)\rceil \geq \lceil(p-1)\Delta_\pm\rceil.\]
Then there
is a diagonal splitting of $(Y;\Delta_+,\Delta_-)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Remember that using Remark~\ref{rem:pushforward-to-quotient} we obtain $\bar \sigma_{(w,-w)}$ as an element of
\[\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*\mathcal{O}_Y(\lceil(p-1)\Delta + \mathcal{D}(w)\rceil),\mathcal{O}_Y) \otimes \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*\mathcal{O}_Y(\lceil(p-1)\Delta + \mathcal{D}(-w)\rceil),\mathcal{O}_Y).\]
By our hypothesis on the $f^p_{w}$, multiplying with $f^p_{w} \otimes f^{-p}_{w}$ gives an element of
\[\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*\mathcal{O}_Y(\lceil(p-1)\Delta_+\rceil,\mathcal{O}_Y) \otimes \Hom_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(F_*\mathcal{O}_Y(\lceil(p-1)\Delta_-\rceil,\mathcal{O}_Y).\]
We set
\[\sigma' = \sum_{w} (f^p_{w}\chi^{w} \otimes f^{-p}_{w}\chi^{-w}) \cdot \sigma_{(w,-w)}.\]
By definition, this is a homogeneous element in $$\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_{X\!\times\!X}}\!(F_* K({X \times X}),K({X \times X}))_{(0,0)}.$$ We obtain
\begin{align*}
\bar \sigma' &= \sum_{w} \bar{(f^p_{w} \otimes f^{-p}_{w}) (\chi^w \otimes \chi^{-w})\sigma_{(w,-w)}}\\
& = \sum_{w} (f^p_{w} \otimes f^{-p}_{w}) \bar\sigma_{(w,-w)}.
\end{align*}
Now, we claim that $\bar \sigma'$ gives the desired splitting on $Y \times Y$. To see that it is indeed a splitting, note, that
$\sigma(1) = \sigma_{(0,0)}(1) = 1$. In particular, all other homogeneous components of $\sigma(1)$ vanish. Hence, multiplying one of these components with some element of the form $f_{w}^p\chi^{w} \otimes f_{w}^{-p}\chi^{-w}$ does not contribute to the degree-$(0,0)$ part of $\sigma'(1)$. We thus obtain $\sigma'(1) = \sigma(1) = 1$. The same holds for $\bar \sigma'(1)$ which is just the restriction of $\sigma'(1)$ to the invariant functions.
It remains to show that $\bar\sigma'$ is compatible with the diagonal. We have
\[(1 - f^p_{w}\chi^{w} \otimes f^{-p}_{w}\chi^{-w}) \in I_X,\]
so $\sigma(g)$ and $\sigma'(g)$ differ only by an element of $I_X$. On the other hand, for some element $g \in F_*I_X$ we obtain $\sigma(g) \in I_X$, since $\sigma$ is compatible with the diagonal. Hence, $\sigma'(F_*I_X) \subset I_X$ holds. Since $\sigma'$ is of degree $(0,0)$ we also have $\sigma'(F_*I_{(0,0)}) \subset I_{(0,0)}$. Then we are done, since $I_{(0,0)}$ gives the ideal sheaf for the diagonal of $Y \times Y$ and $\bar{\sigma}'$ is just the restriction of $\sigma'$ to the degree $(0,0)$ part.
\end{proof}
Let us denote by $\supp_1 \sigma$ the set of degrees $w \in M$ such that
the homogeneous component of degree $(w,-w)$ of $\sigma$ is non-trivial.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:sublattice-diagonal-split}
Consider the subset $\bar M \subset M$ of those $u \in M$ such that $\mathcal{D}(u)$ is principal. Suppose there is a diagonal splitting $\sigma$ of $U$ satisfying
\[\supp_1 \sigma \cap pM \subset p \bar M.\]
Then there exists a diagonal splitting of $(Y,\Delta)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This is just Lemma~\ref{lem:shifting} applied to the case $\div(f_w^p) = \mathcal{D}(w)$.
\end{proof}
Let's now consider the case that the torus action on $X$ is of complexity one. This means that $C={Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}$ is a curve. If $X$ is diagonally split, it is $F$-split as well and by Theorem~\ref{thm:compone} we know that $g(C,\Delta) \leq 1$, i.e. the curve is either elliptic or $\mathbb{P}^1$.
\begin{prop}
If $g(C,\Delta) > \nicefrac{1}{2}$ then an invariant diagonal splitting has to have a non-trivial component in a non-zero degree $(w,-w) \in pM \times pM$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
If an invariant splitting doesn't have a non-trivial component in a non-zero degree $(w,-w) \in pM \times pM$, then (by restricting to an open subset subset of $X$) Lemma~\ref{lem:sublattice-diagonal-split} would provide us with a diagonal splitting of $(C,\Delta)$, which is impossible by Example~\ref{ex:diag-splitting-curves}.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:diag-nec-crit-cplx-one}
Let $X$ be a complete diagonally split T-variety of complexity one. Then $C=\mathbb{P}^1$ and we are in the cases $(1,*,*)$ or $(2,2,2)$ from Theorem~\ref{thm:compone}.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By restricting to an open subset $U$ of $X$ we assume that $Y={Y^{\mathrm{sep}}}=C$. Given a diagonal splitting $\sigma$ of form \eqref{eqn:diag} let $M' \subset M$ be the sublattice generated by $\supp_1 \sigma$. Note that by Proposition~\ref{prop:section-weight-criterion} the quotient $M'/(M' \cap pM)$ surjects to $M/pM \cong M \otimes_\mathbb{Z} \mathbb{F}_p$ but this implies that $M' \cap pM =pM'$. Indeed, given a $\mathbb{Z}$-basis $e_1',\ldots, e_\ell'$ of $M'$ we may consider its image in $M/pM$. By our condition on $\supp_1 \sigma$, the images of the basis vectors span $M/pM$. But this implies that they are linearly independent over $\mathbb{F}_P$. Now, given an integral linear combination $u' = \sum_i \lambda_i e'_i$ of the basis elements which lies in $pM$ gives rise to a linear combinations
$0 = \sum_i \overline{\lambda}_i \overline{e}_i'$ in $M/pM$. By linear independence the coefficients $\overline{\lambda}_i$ have to vanish. Hence, their representatives $\lambda_i$ are elements of $p\mathbb{Z}$ and $u'$ is an element of $pM'$.
Let us now consider the case of pairs $(C,\Delta)$ of genus $1$. Remember that
\[\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_{C}}(F_*\mathcal{O}_{C}((p-1)\Delta),\mathcal{O}_{C})^* \cong H^0\left(C,\mathcal{O}_C(\lceil(1-p)(K_C+\Delta)\rceil)\right).
\]
Hence, by Lemma~\ref{lemma:piotr} we have $\deg \mathcal{D}(w) \leq 0$ and $\deg \mathcal{D}(-w) \leq 0$ for every $w$ in the support of $\sigma$. By linearity this implies $\deg \mathcal{D}(w)=0$ for $w \in M'$. Again by Lemma~\ref{lemma:piotr}, $\mathcal{D}(w)$ has to be a principal divisor for $w$ in the support of $\sigma$ and hence for every $w \in M'$, as well. Hence, we can take $\overline M = M'$ and apply Lemma~\ref{lem:sublattice-diagonal-split}, using that $M'\cap pM=pM'$. We obtain a diagonal splitting of $(C, \Delta)$. But this is impossible by Example~\ref{ex:diag-splitting-curves}.
By Table \ref{table:triples}, the remaining cases we must rule out are those of
pairs $(C,\Delta)$ of genus larger than $ \nicefrac{3}{2}$, that is, the cases of the triples
$(2,2,r)$ ($r>2$), $(2,3,3)$, $(2,3,4)$, and $(2,3,5)$.
We set $\overline M$ to be the sublattice of $M'$ consisting of those $u$ such that $\deg \mathcal{D}(u) = 0$. Our first claim is that $\supp_1 \sigma \cap pM \subset \overline M$. Indeed, if $\deg \mathcal{D}(w) > 0$ for some $w \in pM$, one can check case by case that $\deg \mathcal{D}(w)$ would be at least $p \cdot (2 - \deg \Delta)$. Now, we would have
\[(1-p)\deg(\Delta + K_C) - \deg\mathcal{D}(w) < 0\]
and there cannot be a non-trivial homomorphism in degree $w$. On the other hand, if $\deg \mathcal{D}(w) < 0$ than we have $\deg \mathcal{D}(-w) > 0$. Hence, we must have $\deg\mathcal{D}(w)=0$ for all degrees in $\supp_1 \sigma \cap pM$.
We can apply the same methods as in the genus $1$ case if $\mathcal{D}(w)$ is integral for every $w \in \overline M$. If we are in the case $(2,3,5)$ this has to hold true, since there is no way to obtain $\nicefrac{a}{2} + \nicefrac{b}{3} + \nicefrac{c}{5}$ being an integer without all the summands being integers.
For the remaining cases, we will use the diagonal splitting of $U$ to construct a diagonal splitting of $(C;\Delta_+,\Delta-)$. Here, writing $\Delta=a_1[c_1] + a_2[c_2]+a_3[c_3]$, we take $\Delta_+=a_1[c_1] + a_3[c_3]$ and $\Delta_-=a_2[c_2] + a_3[c_3]$. Note that by properly ordering $a_1,a_2,a_3$, we have $\deg \Delta_+ = a_1+a_3 > 1$ and $\deg \Delta_-=a_2+a_3 >1 $ so as before, by Example~\ref{ex:diag-splitting-curves} we will obtain a contradiction.
We will discuss the case $\Delta = \nicefrac{2}{3}[c_1] + \nicefrac{2}{3}[c_2]+\nicefrac{1}{2}[c_3]$ in detail; the other cases follow similarly.
We wish, for any $w\in\supp_1\sigma \cap pM$, to produce a function $f_w$ as in Lemma \ref{lem:shifting}. Write such $w$ as $w = (\ell p)w'$ with $\ell \in \mathbb{N}$ and $w' \in M'$ a primitive lattice element. Now, we have seen above that $\mathcal{D}(w')$ is of degree $0$. If $\mathcal{D}(\ell w')$ is integral, then we set $D_w = \mathcal{D}(\ell w')$ and have $\mathcal{D}(w) = pD_w$. Since $D_w$ has degree zero, it is principal, that is, $D_w=\div f_w$ for some rational function $f_w$. Furthermore, this $f_w$ satisfies the requirements of Lemma \ref{lem:shifting}, since
$$
\lceil (p-1)\Delta + \mathcal{D}(\pm w) \mp pD_w\rceil = \lceil (p-1)\Delta \rceil \geq \lceil (p-1)\Delta_+\rceil,\lceil (p-1)\Delta_-\rceil.
$$
Assume now instead that $\mathcal{D}(\ell w')$ is not integral. Since it has degree $0$, up to changing the roles of $c_1$ and $c_2$ we have $\mathcal{D}(w')=\nicefrac{1}{3}[c_1] - \nicefrac{1}{3}[c_2] + D_0$, with $D_0$ some integral divisor of degree $0$. This means that
\begin{align*}
\lceil (p-1)\Delta + \mathcal{D}(w) \rceil &= \left\lceil\frac{(2+\ell) p - 2}{3}\right\rceil[c_1]+\left\lceil\frac{(2-\ell) p - 2}{3}\right\rceil[c_2] + \left\lceil \frac{p}{2}\right\rceil[c_3] + \ell p D_0.
\end{align*}
Now, if $\ell \equiv 0 \mod 3$ , then $\mathcal{D}(\ell w')$ is integral so the case above applies. Suppose instead that
$\ell \equiv 2 \mod 3$. Then we obtain
\begin{align*}
\lceil (p-1)\Delta + \mathcal{D}( w) \rceil &= \left\lceil\frac{(2+2) p - 2}{3}\right\rceil[c_1]+\left\lceil\frac{(2-2) p - 2}{3}\right\rceil[c_2] + \left\lceil\frac{p}{2}\right\rceil[c_3] +p D_w'\\
&= \left\lceil\frac{4p - 2}{3}\right\rceil[c_1]+ \left\lceil\frac{p}{2}\right\rceil[c_3]+ p D_w';\\
\lceil (p-1)\Delta + \mathcal{D}(-w) \rceil &= \left\lceil\frac{(2-2) p - 2}{3}\right\rceil[c_1]+\left\lceil\frac{(2+2) p - 2}{3}\right\rceil[c_2] + \left\lceil\frac{p}{2}\right\rceil[c_3] -p D_w'\\
&= \left\lceil\frac{4p - 2}{3}\right\rceil[c_2]+ \left\lceil\frac{p}{2}\right\rceil[c_3]+ p D_w'
\end{align*}
with $D'_w$ being an integral divisor of degree $0$, hence of the form $\div f_w$ for some rational function $f_w$.
Since
\begin{align*}
\lceil (p-1)\Delta + \mathcal{D}(w) - pD_w'\rceil &\geq \lceil (p-1)\Delta_{+}\rceil\\
\lceil (p-1)\Delta + \mathcal{D}(-w) + pD_w'\rceil &\geq \lceil (p-1)\Delta_{-}\rceil
\end{align*}
the function $f_w$ fulfills the requirements for Lemma \ref{lem:shifting}.
If instead $\ell \equiv -2 \mod 3$, a similar analysis also produces a function $f_w$ satisfying the requirements of Lemma \ref{lem:shifting}.
Now, applying Lemma~\ref{lem:shifting} we obtain a diagonal splitting of $(C;\Delta_+,\Delta_-)$. But as we have seen, this is impossible.
\end{proof}
\begin{ex}[Blowup of a flag variety (continued)]\label{ex:bl2}
Once more consider the variety $\widetilde W$ from Example~\ref{ex:main}. Remember, that the piecewise linear function from Lemma \ref{lemma:homs-separated} describing the homogeneous components of $\Hom(F_*\mathcal{O}_{\widetilde W}, \mathcal{O}_{\widetilde W})$ was given in Example~\ref{ex:bl1} by
\[ h(a,b) = \max\{-a,0\}[1] \;+\; \max\{-b,0\}[1] \;+\; \max\{a+b,0\}[\infty].\]
Now, for every pair of integers $w=(a,-b)$ with $0\leq a,b \leq p-1$ we set $w'=(a-p,-b)$ and we have $w,w' \in (p-1)P_{\widetilde W}$.
Moreover, we obtain\\
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{align*}
h(w) &= b[1] \;+\; \max\{a-b,0\}[\infty], \\
h(w') &= (p-a)[0]\;+\; b[1],
\end{align*}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{align*}
h(-w) &= a[0] \;+\; \max\{b-a,0\}[\infty],\\
h(-w')&= (b+p-a)[\infty],
\end{align*}
\end{minipage}
\smallskip
Recall (Remark \ref{rem:duality}) that there is an isomorphism
\[
\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}}(F_*\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(D), \mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}) \cong H^0(\mathbb{P}^1, \mathcal{O}((1-p)K_{\mathbb{P}^1}-D)).
\]
We will denote this correspondence by the symbol $\triangleq$.
For $w$ and $w'$ as above and $K = K_{\mathbb{P}^1} = -[0]-[\infty]$ we consider
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{(w,-w)} &\triangleq \sum_{i=0}^{p-a-1} y^{1-p+i}(y-1)^{p-1}\otimes y^{-i}\quad \\
&\in H^0(\mathcal{O}(-K-\lceil h(w)\rceil)) \otimes H^0(\mathcal{O}(-K-\lceil h(-w)\rceil)), \\
\sigma_{(w',-w')} &\triangleq \sum_{i=p-a}^{p-1} y^{1-p+i}(y-1)^{p-1} \otimes y^{-i}\\
&\in H^0(\mathcal{O}(-K-\lceil h(w')\rceil)) \otimes H^0(\mathcal{O}(-K-\lceil h(-w)'\rceil))
\end{align*}
as elements of
\[\Hom(F_*\mathcal{O}_{\widetilde W}, \mathcal{O}_{\widetilde W})_{w} \otimes \Hom(F_*\mathcal{O}_{\widetilde W}, \mathcal{O}_{\widetilde W})_{-w} =\Hom(F_*\mathcal{O}_{\widetilde W \times \widetilde W}, \mathcal{O}_{\widetilde W \times \widetilde W})_{(w,-w)}\]
and $\Hom(F_*\mathcal{O}_{\widetilde W \times \widetilde W}, \mathcal{O}_{\widetilde W \times \widetilde W})_{(w',-w')}$, respectively.
We set $\sigma$ to be the sum of all these $\sigma_{(w,-w)}$ and $\sigma_{(w',-w')}$. Then we obtain
\begin{align}
\bar \sigma_{[w]} &\triangleq \sum_{i=0}^{p-1} y^{1-p+i}(y-1)^{p-1}\otimes y^{-i} \label{eq:4}\\ \nonumber
&= \frac{(y\otimes 1 - 1\otimes y)^{p-1}}{y^{p-1} \otimes 1} \cdot (y-1)^{p-1} \;\in H^0(\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1,\mathcal{O}(-K_{\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1}-\text{diag}))
\end{align}
Hence, we have $\bar \sigma_{[w]} = \bar \sigma_{[0]}$ for every $w \in M$. Moreover, $\bar \sigma_{[w]}$ is compatible with the diagonal. It remains to show that $\sigma$ is actually a splitting. To see this, note, that $\sigma_0$ is the only non-trivial homogeneous component $\sigma_{(w,-w)}$ with $w \in pM$. Moreover, $\bar{\sigma}_0 = \bar{\sigma}_{[0]}$ defines a splitting for $\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1$, since the monomial $1$ occurs with coefficient $1$ in (\ref{eq:4}). Hence, we have $\sigma(1) = \sigma_0(1) = 1$.
We just proved that the blowup $\widetilde W$ of the flag variety $W$ is diagonally split. This implies also that the blow up in only one of the curves and $W$ itself are diagonally split. The latter was previously known, since all flag varieties are diagonally split by \cite{ramanathan:87a}.
\end{ex}
\begin{ex}
Consider the blowup $X$ of $\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1$ in a curve of degree $(0,1,1)$; this is number 4.8 in the classification of Fano threefolds by Mori and Mukai \cite{mori:81a}. There is a $\mathbb{G}_m^2$-action here defined by the weight matrix
\[
\begin{array}{rrrrrrrl}
&u_0&u_1&v_0&v_1&w_0&w_1&
\vspace{2mm}\\
\ldelim({2}{0.5ex}
&1&0&0&0&0&0&\rdelim){2}{0.5ex} \\
&0& 0&1&0&-1&0& \quad
\end{array}
\]
where the $u_i,v_i,w_i$ are homogeneous coordinates on the three factors of $\mathbb{P}^1$.
We may assume that the center of the blow up is the curve $C=\{1\} \times V(v_0w_0-v_1w_1)$. The quotient is again a non-separated $\mathbb{P}^1$ with the points $0,1,\infty$ doubled. The separation is just $\mathbb{P}^1$ and the corresponding quotient map is given by
\[(u_0:u_1, v_0:v_1,w_0:w_1) \mapsto (v_0w_0:v_1w_1)\]
and we have two prime divisors in $X \setminus X^\circ$ with corresponding one-parameter subgroups $\pm \rho \in N \cong \mathbb{Z}^2$, with $\rho=(0,1)$. This and the piecewise linear function $h:P_X \to \Div_\mathbb{Q} \mathbb{P}^1$ can be obtained similarly to Example~\ref{ex:main} or read off from the data given in \cite{suess:14a}. For $h$ we obtain
\[ h(a,b) = \max\{-a,0\}[1] \;+\; \max\{-b,0\}[1] \;+\; \max\{a,0\}[\infty].\]
One checks that $\sigma_{(w,-w)}$ as defined in Example \ref{ex:bl2} is again an element of $H^0(\mathcal{O}(-K-\lceil h(w)\rceil)) \otimes H^0(\mathcal{O}(-K-\lceil h(-w)\rceil))$ and similarly for $\sigma_{(w',-w')}$. Hence, we can again take the sum of all $\sigma_{(w,-w)}$ and $\sigma_{(w',-w')}$ to obtain a diagonal splitting for $X$.
\end{ex}
\bibliographystyle{alpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
In recent years CFT in $4d$ has been receiving an increasing attention. The
reason is well-known, it is due in part to being one of the poles in the AdS/CFT
correspondence, in part to the new applications to strongly correlated systems
and in part to the increasing interest in applying the standard model of
elementary particles to very high energy problems and its coupling to gravity.
In turn this has spurred a lot of interest and activity in the theoretical
aspects of conformal symmetry and conformal field theories. Recent reviews on
the latter are \cite{Nakayama,Rychkov}, older references relevant to the content
of this paper are \cite{Osborn93,Osborn96}. One of the most striking recently
obtained results is the derivation of the general structures of conformal
covariant correlators and OPE's of any kind of tensor fields in coordinate
space,
\cite{Weinberg:2010fx,Costa:2011mg,Stanev1,Zhiboedov,Stanev2,Costa:2014rya,
Elkhidir:2014woa}. The analysis of $3$-point functions of conserved currents and
the energy-momentum tensor was also considered in momentum space,
\cite{Cappelli:2001pz,Coriano:2012wp,Bzowski:2013sza}.
The above mentioned correlators in coordinate space are in general {\it
unregulated} expressions, in that they have singularities at coincident points.
For convenience we call them {\it semiclassical}. The natural way to regularize
them is provided by distribution theory. This is clear in theory, in practice it
is not so simple because, except for the simplest cases, one has to do with
formidable expressions. In the coordinate representation a rather natural
technique is provided by the so-called {\it differential regularization},
\cite{Freedman1,Freedman2,Latorre:1993xh}. However this technique does not seem
to be in general algorithmic (see below) and a good deal of guesswork is needed
in order to obtain sensible expressions.
Regularizing correlators is not simply a procedure (legitimately) required by
mathematics. Singularities in correlators usually contain useful information.
For instance in correlators of currents or energy-momentum tensors singularities
provide information about the coupling to gauge potentials and to gravity,
respectively. This is the case of anomalies, which are a typical result of
regularization processes, though independent of them. Regularized correlators
are also necessary in the Callan-Symanzik equation, \cite{Osborn91}. In summary, regularizing
conformal correlators is the next necessary step after deriving their
(unregulated or semiclassical) expressions.
As was said above, however, the process of regularizing higher order correlators in coordinate space representation with differential regularization does not seem to be algorithmic. For definiteness we concentrate here on the $2$- and $3$-point functions of the energy-momentum tensor. We show that we have a definite rule to regularize the $2$-point correlators in coordinate space by means of differential regularization, but when we come to the $3$-point function there is a discontinuity which does not allow us to extend the rule valid for the $2$-point one. To understand the origin of the problem we resort to a model, the model of a free chiral fermion, in momentum representation. Using one-loop Feynman diagrams we can determine completely the $3$-point correlator of the
e.m. tensor and regularize it with standard dimensional regularization techniques. The idea is to Fourier anti-transform it in order to shed light on the regularization in the coordinate representation. For two reasons we
concentrate on the parity-odd part, although the extension to the parity-even part is straightforward. The first reason is the presence of the Levi-Civita tensor which limits the number of terms to a more manageable amount, while preserving all the general features of the problem.
The second reason is more important: the appearance of the Pontryagin density in
the trace anomaly of this model. This parity-odd anomaly has been recalculated
explicitly in \cite{BGL} after the first appearance in \cite{ChD1,ChD2}, with
different methods. If one uses Feynman diagram techniques the basic evaluation
is that of the triangle diagram. Now, it has been proved recently (this is one
of the general results mentioned above) that the parity-odd part of the
$3$-point function of the energy-momentum tensor in the coordinate
representation
vanishes identically, \citep{Zhiboedov,Stanev1}. Therefore it would seem that there is a contradiction with
the existence of a parity-odd part in the trace of the e.m. tensor. Although
this argument is rather naive and forgetful of the subtleties of quantum field
theory, it seems to be widespread. Therefore we think it is worth clarifying it.
We show below that in fact there is no contradiction: a vanishing parity-odd
semiclassical $3$-point function of the energy-momentum tensor must in fact
coexist with a nonvanishing parity-odd part of the trace anomaly.
The paper is organized as follows. In the next three sections we thoroughly
analyse the $2d$ case. The reason is that, although the results are known, in
$2d$ many problems that will appear in higher dimensions are already present and
can be fully solved. So $2d$ is a useful playground for the rest of the paper.
In section \ref{sec:2ptFunctionIn2d} and \ref{sec:ParityOddIn2d} we consider the
problem of regularizing the $2$-point function of e.m. tensors in $2d$ using the
techniques of differential regularization (for the various techniques used, see \cite{bert,fuji,BvN}). In section \ref{sec:FeynmanDiagrams2d} we analyze the $2$-point function of the
e.m. tensor using Feynman diagrams techniques. In section \ref{sec:2ptFunction4d}
we compute the $2$-point function of e.m. tensors in $4d$ both using
differential regularization and Feynman diagrams. In section
\ref{sec:3ptCorrelator} we review a general {\it no-go} argument concerning
parity-odd contributions in the $3$-point function of e.m. tensors, we
explicitly compute the parity-odd part of the correlator of three e.m. tensors
in the chiral fermion model in $4d$ in coordinate representation and show that
it identically vanishes. We repeat the last computation using Feynman diagrams
and regularize it, and show how it gives rise to the parity-odd trace anomaly.
We show that irreducible Lorentz components of the correlators, in particular
those containing the trace and the traceless part of the e.m. tensor, must be
regularized separately. We also discuss the connection of the anomaly with the
e.m. conservation. We show that in general regularization breaks covariance and
counterterms must be subtracted in order to recover it. In section
\ref{sec:UglyDuckling} we discuss the prejudices on the existence of the
Pontryagin anomaly.
To complete this introduction we present general formulas for the trace and
divergence of the e.m. tensor. The problem of regularizing the e.m. correlators
is strictly connected with (and clarified by) coupling the system to gravity.
\subsection{General formulas for the trace and divergence of the e.m. tensor}
\label{ssec:genform}
In general let us couple the energy-momentum tensor of a theory to a classical
external source
$j_{\mu\nu}$. The partition function in terms of $j$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
Z[j^{\mu\nu}]&=& \langle 0|\mathcal{T}\{\,e^{\frac{i}{2}\int dx
T_{\mu\nu}(x)j^{\mu\nu}(x)}\}|0\rangle=
e^{-iW[j_{\mu\nu}]}\label{Zg}\\
&=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac {i^n}{2^n n!} \int \prod_{i=1}^n dx_i \, \,
j^{\mu_i\nu_i}(x_i)\,
\langle 0|\mathcal{T}\{T_{\mu_1\nu_1}(x_1)\ldots
T_{\mu_n\nu_n}(x_n)\}|0\rangle,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where the symbol $\mathcal{T}$ denotes a time-ordered product. The generating functional of connected Green functions is
\begin{eqnarray}
W[j^{\mu\nu}]= \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac {i^{n+1}}{2^n n!} \int \prod_{i=1}^n
dx_i\,
j^{\mu_i\nu_i}(x_i)\, \langle 0|\mathcal{T}\{T_{\mu_1\nu_1}(x_1)\cdots
T_{\mu_n\nu_n}(x_n)\}|0\rangle_c .\label{Wg}
\end{eqnarray}
We will denote the full one-loop e.m. tensor by
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle\!\langle T_{\mu\nu}(x)\rangle\!\rangle =
\left. 2\frac {\delta W[j]}{\delta
j^{\mu\nu}(x)}\right|_{j^{\mu\nu}=h^{\mu\nu}}, \label{qem}
\end{eqnarray}
where $h_{\mu\nu}$ is the fluctuation, $g_{\mu\nu}=
\eta_{\mu\nu}+h_{\mu\nu}+\dots$ and $g^{\mu\nu}= \eta^{\mu\nu}-
h^{\mu\nu}+\dots$, with respect to the flat metric $\eta_{\mu\nu}$ \footnote{The factor
$\frac 1{2^n}$ in (\ref{Zg}) is motivated by the fact that when we expand the action
$$S[\eta+h]= S[\eta] + \int d^dx \frac {\delta S}{\delta g^{\mu\nu}}\Big{\vert}_{g=\eta} h^{\mu\nu}+\cdots,$$
the factor $ \frac {\delta S}{\delta g^{\mu\nu}}\Big{\vert}_{g=\eta}= \frac 12 T_{\mu\nu}$.
Another consequence of this fact will be that the presence of vertices with one graviton in
Feynman diagrams will correspond to insertions of the operator $\frac{1}{2}T_{\mu\nu}$
in correlation functions.}. The fluctuation $h_{\mu\nu}$ is the field attached
to the external legs in the Feynman diagrams approach. We can reconstruct the
full one-loop e.m. tensor as a function of $h_{\mu\nu}$ by means of the formula
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{aligned}\label{reconstruction}
\langle\!\langle T_{\mu\nu}(x)\rangle\!\rangle=\frac 1{n!} \sum_{n=1}^\infty
\int dx_1\ldots & \int dx_n h^{\mu_1\nu_1}(x_1) \ldots h^{\mu_n\nu_n}(x_n)\\
& \times \left. \frac{\delta}{\delta h^{\mu_1\nu_1}(x_1)}\ldots
\frac{\delta}{\delta h^{\mu_n\nu_n}(x_n)}\langle\!\langle
T_{\mu\nu}(x)\rangle\!\rangle\right|_{h=0}.
\end{aligned}\end{eqnarray}
For instance, to first and second order in $h$ the trace is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\left. \frac{\delta}{\delta h^{\lambda\rho}(y)} \langle\!\langle
T_\mu^\mu(x)\rangle\!\rangle\right|_{h=0} =2i\,\langle 0|\mathcal{T}\{
T_\mu^\mu(x)
T_{\lambda\rho}(y)\} |0\rangle \label{1sttrace}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\left. \frac {\delta}{\delta h^{\lambda\rho}(y)}\frac{\delta}{\delta
h^{\alpha\beta}(z)}\langle\!\langle
T_\mu^\mu(x)\rangle\!\rangle\right|_{h=0}&=&-2i
\left(\delta^{(4)}(x-y)+\delta^{(4)}(x-z)\right)\langle
0|\mathcal{T}\{T_{\lambda\rho}(y)T_{\alpha\beta}(z)\}|0\rangle \nonumber \\
&&+ 2\langle
0|\mathcal{T}\{T_\mu^\mu(x)T_{\lambda\rho}(y)T_{\alpha\beta}(z)\}|0\rangle ,
\label{2ndtrace}
\end{eqnarray}
and the divergence by
\begin{eqnarray}
\left.\frac {\delta}{\delta h^{\lambda\rho}(y)} \langle\!\langle\nabla^\mu
T_{\mu\nu}(x)\rangle\!\rangle\right|_{h=0} =-2i\,\langle 0|\mathcal{T}\{\partial^\mu
T_{\mu\nu} (x)T_{\lambda\rho}(y)\}|0\rangle\label{1stdivergence}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray} \label{2nddivergence}
&&\left. \frac {\delta}{\delta h^{\lambda\rho}(y)}\frac {\delta}{\delta
h^{\alpha\beta}(z)}\langle\!\langle \nabla^\mu
T_{\mu\nu}(x)\rangle\!\rangle\right|_{h=0}= \nonumber\\
&& i\left\{ \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{(\alpha}}\left[ \delta(x-z)\langle
0|\mathcal{T}\{T_{\beta)\nu}(x) T_{\lambda\rho}(y)\}|0\rangle\right] +
\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{(\lambda}} \left[ \delta(x-y)\langle
0|\mathcal{T}\{T_{\rho)\nu}(x) T_{\alpha\beta}(z)\}|0\rangle\right] \right.\nonumber\\
&&+2\,\frac{\partial}{\partial x_\tau}\delta(x-z)\eta_{\alpha\beta} \langle
0|\mathcal{T}\{T_{\tau\nu}(x)T_{\lambda\rho}(y)\}|0\rangle + 2\,\frac
{\partial}{\partial x_\tau}\delta(x-y)\eta_{\lambda\rho} \langle
0|\mathcal{T}\{T_{\tau\nu}(x)T_{\alpha\beta}(z)\}|0\rangle\nonumber\\
&&+ \left. 2\,\frac{\partial}{\partial{x^\nu}}
\delta(x-z)\langle 0|\mathcal{T}\{T_{\lambda\rho}(y)T_{\alpha\beta}(x)\}|0\rangle + 2\,\frac{\partial}{\partial{x^\nu}}
\delta(x-y)\langle 0|\mathcal{T}\{T_{\lambda\rho}(x)T_{\alpha\beta}(z)\}|0\rangle\right\}\nonumber\\
&&+ 2\,\langle 0|\mathcal{T}\{\partial^\mu T_{\mu\nu}
(x)T_{\lambda\rho}(y)T_{\alpha\beta}(z)\}|0\rangle,
\end{eqnarray}
respectively,
where the delta functions are $4$-dimensional and the round brackets indicate
symmetrization. These formulas are obtained understanding that gravity is
minimally coupled and that the background is flat. If there is a nontrivial
background metric, say $g^{(0)}_{\mu\nu}$, then we must insert $\sqrt{g^{(0)}}$
in the integral in the exponent of (\ref{Zg}) and, for instance,
(\ref{2ndtrace}) would be replaced by
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\left. \frac 1{\sqrt{g^{(0)}(y)}}\frac {\delta}{\delta h^{\lambda\rho}(y)}\,
\frac 1{\sqrt{g^{(0)}(z)} } \frac {\delta}{\delta
h^{\alpha\beta}(z)}\langle\!\langle
T_\mu^\mu(x)\rangle\!\rangle\right|_{h=0}\label{2ndtraceg0}\\
&&=-2i \left(\frac {\delta^{(4)}(x-y)}{\sqrt{g^{(0)}(y)}}+\frac
{\delta^{(4)}(x-z)}{\sqrt{g^{(0)}(z)}}\right)\langle
0|\mathcal{T}\{T_{\lambda\rho}(y)T_{\alpha\beta}(z)\}|0\rangle + \langle
0|\mathcal{T}\{T_\mu^\mu(x)T_{\lambda\rho}(y)T_{\alpha\beta}(z)\}|0\rangle \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and (\ref{2nddivergence}) by a much more complicated formula.
\section{$2$-point function of e.m. tensors in $2d$ and trace anomaly}
\label{sec:2ptFunctionIn2d}
In this section we regularize the $2$-point function of energy-momentum tensors
in $2d$ using the techniques
of differential regularization and we derive the very well-known $2d$ trace
anomaly. The ambiguities implicit in the regularization procedure allow us to
make manifest the interplay between diffeomorphism and trace anomalies.
Let us consider the $2$-point function $\left\langle
T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle $.
This $2$-point function in $2d$ (i.e. the semiclassical $2$-point function) is
very well-known and is given by\footnote{One way of deriving this expression is by using the embedding formalism, see \cite{Weinberg:2010fx}, for example.}
\begin{equation}
\left\langle T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle
=\frac{c/2}{x^{4}}\left(I_{\mu\rho}\left(x\right)I_{\nu\sigma}\left(x\right)+I_{
\nu\rho}\left(x\right)I_{\mu\sigma}\left(x\right)-\eta_{\mu\nu}\eta_{\rho\sigma}
\right)\label{eq:Goal}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
I_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)=\eta_{\mu\nu}-2\frac{x_{\mu}x_{\nu}}{x^{2}}\label{
eq:Imunu}
\end{equation}
and $c$ is the central charge of the theory. For $x\neq0$ this $2$-point
function satisfies the Ward identities
\begin{align}
\partial^{\mu}\left\langle
T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle &
=0,\label{eq:Conservation}\\
\left\langle
T_{\mu}^{\mu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle &
=0.\label{eq:Tracelessness}
\end{align}
The result (\ref{eq:Goal}) is obtained using the symmetry properties of the indices,
dimensional analysis and eqs. (\ref{eq:Conservation}) and (\ref{eq:Tracelessness}).
The $2$-point function written above are UV singular for $x\rightarrow0$, hence
this divergence has to be dealt with
for the correlator to be well-defined everywhere. In this context the most
convenient way to regularize this object is
with the technique of \emph{differential regularization.} The recipe of
differential regularization is: given a
function $f\left(x\right)$ that needs to be regularized, find the most general
function $F\left(x\right)$ such
that $\mathcal{D}F\left(x\right)=f\left(x\right)$, where $\mathcal{D}$ is some
differential operator, and such that
the Fourier transform of $\mathcal{D}F\left(x\right)$ is well-defined
(alternatively $\mathcal{D}F\left(x\right)$ has
integrable singularities).
In our case we have two guiding principles: the Ward identities and dimensional analysis.
Differential regularization tells that our $2$-point function should be some differential
operator applied to a function, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\left\langle T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle
=\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\left(f\left(x\right)\right),\label{eq:Ansatz2ptsFct2d}
\end{equation}
while conservation requires that the differential operator
$\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}$
be transverse, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\partial^{\mu}\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}=\dots=\partial^{\sigma}\mathcal{D}_
{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}=0.
\end{equation}
The most general transverse operator with four derivatives, symmetric in
$\mu$,$\nu$ and in $\rho$,$\sigma$ that one can write is
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}=\alpha\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{
\left(1\right)}+\beta\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(2\right)},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align}
\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(1\right)} &=
\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}-\left(\eta_{\mu\nu
}\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}+\eta_{\rho\sigma}\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}
\right)\Box+\eta_{\mu\nu}\eta_{\rho\sigma}\Box\Box,\\ \nonumber
\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(2\right)}&=
\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}-\frac{1}{2}
\left(\eta_{\mu\rho}\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\sigma}+\eta_{\nu\rho}\partial_{\mu}
\partial_{\sigma}+\eta_{\mu\sigma}\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\rho}+\eta_{\nu\sigma}
\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\rho}\right)\Box\\
&\quad+\frac{1}{2}\left(\eta_{\mu\rho}\eta_{
\nu\sigma}+\eta_{\nu\rho}\eta_{\mu\sigma}\right)\Box\Box.
\end{align}
One important fact about these differential operators is that they may not be
traceless. Indeed, by taking the trace we find
\begin{equation}
\eta^{\mu\nu}\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(1\right)}=\eta^{\mu\nu}
\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(2\right)}=-\left(\partial_{\rho}\partial_{
\sigma}-\eta_{\rho\sigma}\Box\right)\Box.
\end{equation}
Dimensional analysis tells us that the function $f\left(x\right)$ in
\eqref{eq:Ansatz2ptsFct2d} can be at most a function of
$\log\mu^{2}x^{2}$ since the lhs of \eqref{eq:Ansatz2ptsFct2d} scales like
$1/x^{4}$ and this scaling is already saturated by
the differential operator with four derivatives. Notice that we have introduced
an arbitrary mass scale $\mu$ to make
the argument of the $\log$ dimensionless. Let us write the most general ansatz
for \eqref{eq:Ansatz2ptsFct2d}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\langle T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle
& = &
\phantom{+}\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(1\right)}\left[\alpha_{1}
\log\mu^{2}x^{2}+\alpha_{2}
\left(\log\mu^{2}x^{2}\right)^{2}+\cdots\right]\nonumber \\
&&+\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(2\right)}\left[\beta_{1}\log\mu^{2}x^{2
}+\beta_{2}
\left(\log\mu^{2}x^{2}\right)^{2}+\cdots\right].\label{eq:GeneralAnsatz}
\end{eqnarray}
Now our task is to fix the coefficients $\alpha_{i}$ and $\beta_{j}$ for
\eqref{eq:GeneralAnsatz} to match
\eqref{eq:Goal} for $x\neq 0$. As it turns out we only need terms up to
$\log^{2}$ (otherwise one cannot avoid
logarithmic terms for $x\neq 0$) The matching gives us
\[
\alpha_{1}=-\frac{c}{24}-\beta_{1},\quad\alpha_{2}=-\beta_{2}=-\frac{c}{96},
\]
thus
\begin{equation}
\left\langle T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle
=-\frac{c}{24}\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(1\right)}
\left(\log\mu^{2}x^{2}\right)-\frac{c}{96}\left(\mathcal{D}_{
\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(1\right)}-\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{
\left(2\right)}\right)\left(\log\mu^{2}x^{2}\right)^{2}.
\label{eq:Solution}
\end{equation}
Notice that $\beta_{1}$ is absent in the final result. Indeed, the term with
coefficient $\beta_{1}$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
-\left(\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(1\right)}-\mathcal{D}_{
\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(2\right)}\right)\left(\log\mu^{2}x^{2}\right)\label{
CZterm}
\end{eqnarray}
and this term identically vanishes in $2d$. If we take the trace of
\eqref{eq:Solution} we find that
\[
\left\langle
T_{\mu}^{\mu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle
=-\frac{c}{48}\eta^{\mu\nu}\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(1\right)}
\left(\log\mu^{2}x^{2}\right)=\frac{c}{48}\left(\partial_{\rho}
\partial_{\sigma}-\eta_{\rho\sigma}\Box\right)\Box\log\mu^{2}x^{2}.
\]
These terms have support only at $x=0$, for in $2d$ the d'Alembertian of a
$\log$ is a delta function, more precisely
\begin{equation}
\Box\log\mu^{2}x^{2}=4\pi\delta^{2}\left(x\right).
\end{equation}
Therefore we find the anomalous Ward identity
\begin{equation}\label{2ptTrace2d}
\left\langle
T_{\mu}^{\mu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(y\right)\right\rangle
=c\frac{\pi}{12}\left(\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}-\eta_{\rho\sigma}
\Box\right)\delta^{2}\left(x-y\right),
\end{equation}
If we consider our theory in the presence of a background metric $g$ which is a
perturbation of flat spacetime,
i.e. $g_{\rho\sigma}(y)=\eta_{\rho\sigma}+h_{\rho\sigma}(y)+\cdots$, eq.
(\ref{2ptTrace2d}) gives rise
to the lowest contribution to the `full one-loop' trace of the e.m. tensor,
namely
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle\!\langle
T_{\mu}^{\mu}\rangle\!\rangle=c\frac{\pi}{12}(\partial_\mu\partial_\nu-\eta_{\mu\nu}
\Box)h^{\mu\nu},
\end{eqnarray}
which coincides with the lowest contribution of the expansion in $h$ of the
Ricci scalar, i.e.
\begin{eqnarray}
R=(\partial_\mu\partial_\nu-\eta_{\mu\nu}\Box)h^{\mu\nu}+\mathcal{O}(h^2).
\end{eqnarray}
Covariance requires that the higher order corrections in $h$ to the `full
one-loop' trace of the e.m. tensor in the presence
of a background metric $g$ to be such that we recover the covariant expression
\begin{equation}
\langle\!\langle T_{\mu}^{\mu}\rangle\!\rangle
=c\frac{\pi}{12}R.\label{2dtraceanomalt}
\end{equation}
For a free chiral fermion $c=1/4\pi^2$, vide section \ref{sec:FeynmanDiagrams2d}
or appendix \ref{sec:2dchiralmodel}. We are authorized to use the covariant
expression (\ref{2dtraceanomalt}) because the energy-momentum tensor is
conserved
(there are no diffemorphism anomalies).
Using the above results it is easy to verify the Callan-Symanzik equation for
the $2$-point function (\ref{eq:Solution}).
The Callan-Symanzik differential operator reduces to the logarithmic derivative
with respect to $\mu$, because both beta functions
and anomalous dimensions vanish in the case we are considering. We get
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu \frac {\partial}{\partial \mu} \left\langle
T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle \sim
\left(\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(1\right)}-\mathcal{D}_{
\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(2\right)}\right)\left(\log\mu^{2}x^{2}\right)=0.\label{
CZ}
\end{eqnarray}
We see that requiring that the regularized correlator satisfies conservation at
$x=0$ implies the appearance of a trace anomaly.
However this is not the end of the story, since there are ambiguities in the
regularization process we have so far disregarded.
\subsection{Ambiguities}
The ambiguity arises from the fact that we can add to (\ref{eq:Solution}) terms
that have support only in $x=0$.
The most general modification of the parity-even part that would affect only its
expression for $x=0$ is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
A_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma} & = &
\phantom{+}A\left(\eta_{\mu\nu}\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}+\eta_{\rho\sigma
}\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}\right)\Box\log\mu^{2}x^{2}\nonumber \\
& &
+B\left(\eta_{\mu\rho}\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\sigma}+\eta_{\nu\rho}\partial_{
\mu}\partial_{\sigma}+\eta_{\mu\sigma}\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\rho}+\eta_{
\nu\sigma}\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\rho}\right)\Box\log\mu^{2}x^{2}\nonumber \\
& &
+C\left(\eta_{\mu\rho}\eta_{\nu\sigma}+\eta_{\nu\rho}\eta_{\mu\sigma}
\right)\Box\Box\log\mu^{2}x^{2}\nonumber \\
& &
+D\eta_{\mu\nu}\eta_{\rho\sigma}\Box\Box\log\mu^{2}x^{2}.\label{eq:EvenAmbig}
\end{eqnarray}
We remark that this term is in general neither conserved nor traceless
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial^\mu A_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}&=& 4 \pi\left((A+2B)\partial_\nu\partial_\rho\partial_\sigma
+(A+D) \eta_{\rho\sigma} \partial_\nu\Box \right.\nonumber\\
&&+\left. (B+C) \left(\eta_{\rho\nu}\partial_\sigma
\Box+\eta_{\sigma\nu} \partial_{\rho}
\Box\right)\right)\delta^{(2)}(x)\label{ambdiff}\\
A^{\mu}_{\mu\rho\sigma}&=&4\pi \left((2A+4B)\partial_\rho\partial_\sigma+
(A+2C+2D)\eta_{\rho\sigma} \Box\right) \delta^{(2)}(x)\label{ambtrace}
\end{eqnarray}
We notice that by imposing (\ref{ambdiff}) to vanish imply that also
(\ref{ambtrace}) will vanish. We may wonder whether using this ambiguity we can
cancel the trace anomaly. This can certainly be done by choosing
$2A+4B=-A-2C-2D$ and adjusting the overall coefficient. But this operation
gives rise to a diffeomorphism anomaly. Its form is far from appealing and not
particularly illuminating, so we do not write it down (see however
\cite{BBP1,BBP2}). In other words the anomaly (\ref{2dtraceanomalt}) is a
non-trivial cocycle of the overall
symmetry diffeomorphisms plus Weyl transformations. As was discussed in
\cite{BBP1,BBP2} it may take different forms, either as a pure diffeomorphism
anomaly or a pure trace anomaly. In general both components may be nonvanishing.
It is obvious that, in practice, it is more useful to preserve diffeomorphism
invariance, so that the cocycle takes the form (\ref{2dtraceanomalt}).
\section{Parity-odd terms in $2d$}
\label{sec:ParityOddIn2d}
In this section we compute all possible semiclassical parity-odd terms in the
$2$-point function of the energy-momentum tensor in $2d$.
We follow three methods, the first two are general while the third is based on a
specific model. Needless to say all methods give the
same results up to ambiguities.
\subsection{Using symmetries}
The first method is very simple-minded, it consists in writing the most general
expression $ {\cal T}^{\rm odd}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}(x)$ linear
in the antisymmetric tensor $\epsilon_{\alpha\beta}$ with the right dimensions
which is symmetric and traceless in $\mu,\nu$ and
$\rho,\sigma$ separately, is symmetric in the exchange $(\mu,\nu)\leftrightarrow
(\rho,\sigma)$, and is conserved. The calculation
is tedious but straightforward. The result is as follows. Let us define
\begin{eqnarray}
T_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}= \frac 1{x^4}\left(I_{\mu\rho}(x)I_{\nu\sigma}(x)+
I_{\mu\sigma}(x)I_{\nu\rho}(x)-\eta_{\mu\nu}\eta_{\rho\sigma}\right),\label{Smnrs}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal T}^{\rm odd}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}(x)=\frac {\mathfrak e}4
\left(\epsilon_{\mu\lambda} T^\lambda{}_{\nu\rho\sigma}\left(x\right)+
\epsilon_{\nu\lambda}T_\mu{}^\lambda{}_{\rho\sigma}\left(x\right)+
\epsilon_{\rho\lambda}T_{\mu\nu}{}^\lambda{}_{\sigma}\left(x\right) +
\epsilon_{\sigma\lambda}T_{\mu\nu\rho}{}^\lambda\left(x\right)\right).\label{Todd}
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\mathfrak e}$ is an undetermined constant. We assume (\ref{Todd}) to
represent
$\langle T_{\mu\nu}(x) T_{\rho\sigma}(0)\rangle_{\rm odd}$. It satisfies all the
desired properties (it is traceless and conserved).
In order to make sure that it is conformal covariant, we have to check that it
is chirally split. To this end we introduce the
light-cone coordinates $x_\pm= x^0\pm x^1$. It is not hard to verify that
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle T_{++}(x) T_{--}(0)\rangle _{\rm odd}=0.\label{chirality}
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{The embedding formalism}
The second method is the embedding formalism
\cite{Weinberg:2010fx,Costa:2011mg}, which consists in using the fact that
conformal covariance in $d$
dimensions can be linearly realized in $d+2$. After constructing a covariant
expression in $d+2$ one projects to $d$ dimensional
Minkowski space. In particular for $d=2$ the method works as follows. We write
the most general parity-odd contribution to the
$2$-point function of a symmetric $2$-tensor in $4d$ which, in addition, is
transverse:
\begin{equation}
\left\langle T_{AB}\left(X\right)T_{CD}\left(Y\right)\right\rangle
_{\text{odd}}=\frac{1}{\left(X\cdot
Y\right)^{2}}\left[\epsilon_{AICJ}\frac{X^{I}Y^{J}}{X\cdot
Y}\left(\eta_{BD}-\frac{X_{D}Y_{B}}{X\cdot Y}\right)+A\leftrightarrow
B\right]+C\leftrightarrow D.\label{eq:POddNullCone}
\end{equation}
This term is symmetric on $A$, $B$ and $C$, $D$ and is transverse with respect
to $X_{A}$, $X_{B}$, $Y_{C}$ and $Y_{D}$. Our next step is to project this
quantity to $2d$. The projected correlator is given by
\begin{equation}
\left\langle T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(y\right)\right\rangle
_{\text{odd}}=\frac{\partial X^{A}}{\partial x^{\mu}}\frac{\partial
X^{B}}{\partial x^{\nu}}\frac{\partial Y^{C}}{\partial y^{\rho}}\frac{\partial
Y^{D}}{\partial y^{\sigma}}\left\langle
T_{AB}\left(X\right)T_{CD}\left(Y\right)\right\rangle
_{\text{odd}}.\label{eq:Projection}
\end{equation}
We recall that
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial X^{A}}{\partial
x^{\mu}}=\delta_{-}^{A}2x_{\mu}+\delta_{\mu}^{A}\equiv\left(0,2x_{\mu},\delta_{
\mu}^{a}\right),\quad A=+,-,a.
\end{equation}
The contractions with the $\epsilon$-tensor give rise to a determinant, namely
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_{AICJ}\frac{\partial X^{A}}{\partial x^{\mu}}X^{I}\frac{\partial
Y^{C}}{\partial y^{\rho}}Y^{J}\equiv\left|\begin{array}{cccc}
0 & 1 & 0 & 1\\
2x_{\mu} & x^{2} & 2y_{\rho} & y^{2}\\
\delta_{\mu}^{a} & x^{i} & \delta_{\rho}^{c} & y^{j}
\end{array}\right|.\label{eq:Determinant}
\end{equation}
The translational invariance of the problem allows us to rewrite it in the form
\begin{equation}
\left|\begin{array}{cccc}
0 & 1 & 0 & 1\\
2\left(x-y\right)_{\mu} & \left(x-y\right)^{2} & 0 & 0\\
\delta_{\mu}^{a} & \left(x-y\right)^{i} & \delta_{\rho}^{c} & 0
\end{array}\right|=-\left|\begin{array}{ccc}
2\left(x-y\right)_{\mu} & \left(x-y\right)^{2} & 0\\
\delta_{\mu}^{a} & \left(x-y\right)^{i} & \delta_{\rho}^{c}
\end{array}\right|.\label{eq:TransInvAssump}
\end{equation}
For convenience, let us relabel $x-y\rightarrow x$. This determinant is
straightforward to compute and it gives us
\begin{equation}
-\left|\begin{array}{ccc}
2x_{\mu} & x^{2} & 0\\
\delta_{\mu}^{a} & x^{i} & \delta_{\rho}^{c}
\end{array}\right|=-\left(2x_{\mu}\left|\begin{array}{cc}
x^{i} & \delta_{\rho}^{c}\end{array}\right|-x^{2}\left|\begin{array}{cc}
\delta_{\mu}^{a} &
\delta_{\rho}^{c}\end{array}\right|\right)=-\left(2x_{\mu}\epsilon_{\alpha\rho}
x^{\alpha}-x^{2}\epsilon_{\mu\rho}\right).
\end{equation}
Thus, the projected correlator is given by
\begin{equation}
\left\langle T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle
_{\text{odd}}=\frac{e}{x^{4}}\left[\epsilon_{\alpha\rho}\left(\delta_{\mu}^{
\alpha}-2\frac{x_{\mu}x^{\alpha}}{x^{2}}\right)\left(\eta_{\nu\sigma}-2\frac{x_{
\nu}x_{\sigma}}{x^{2}}\right)+\mu\leftrightarrow\nu\right]
+\rho\leftrightarrow\sigma.
\end{equation}
In terms of $I_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)$ we have
\begin{eqnarray}\begin{aligned}
\left\langle
T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle_{\text{odd}}
&=\frac{e}{x^{4}}\left[\epsilon_{\alpha\rho}\left(I_{\mu}^{\alpha}\left(x\right)
I_{\nu\sigma}\left(x\right)+I_{\nu}^{\alpha}\left(x\right)I_{\mu\sigma}
\left(x\right)\right)\right.\\
&\phantom{=\;}\left. \quad + \epsilon_{\alpha\sigma} \left(
I_{\mu}^{\alpha}\left(x\right) I_{\nu\rho}\left(x\right) +
I_{\nu}^{\alpha}\left(x\right) I_{\mu\rho}\left(x\right) \right) \right].
\label{eq:WithTransInv}
\end{aligned}\end{eqnarray}
This correlator satisfies both tracelessness and conservation, as it can be
verified by a direct computation, but it is not symmetric under the exchange of
$\mu,\nu$ with $\rho,\sigma$. Thus, our final expression is
\eqref{eq:WithTransInv} symmetrized in
$\left(\mu,\nu\right)\leftrightarrow\left(\rho,\sigma\right)$:
\begin{eqnarray}\begin{aligned}
\left\langle
T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle_{\text{odd}} &
= \frac{e}{x^{4}} \left[ \epsilon_{\alpha\mu}
\left(I_{\rho}^{\alpha}\left(x\right) I_{\nu\sigma}\left(x\right) +
I_{\sigma}^{\alpha}\left(x\right) I_{\nu\rho}\left(x\right)\right)\right. \\
&\phantom{=\quad\;} + \epsilon_{\alpha\nu}
\left(I_{\rho}^{\alpha}\left(x\right) I_{\mu\sigma}\left(x\right) +
I_{\sigma}^{\alpha}\left(x\right) I_{\mu\rho}\left(x\right) \right)\\
&\phantom{=\quad\;} + \epsilon_{\alpha\rho} \left(
I_{\mu}^{\alpha}\left(x\right) I_{\nu\sigma}\left(x\right) +
I_{\nu}^{\alpha}\left(x\right) I_{\mu\sigma}\left(x\right) \right)\\
&\phantom{=\quad\;}\left. + \epsilon_{\alpha\sigma}
\left(I_{\mu}^{\alpha}\left(x\right) I_{\nu\rho}\left(x\right) +
I_{\nu}^{\alpha}\left(x\right) I_{\mu\rho}\left(x\right) \right)
\right].\label{eq:WithTransInvSym}
\end{aligned}\end{eqnarray}
From \eqref{eq:WithTransInvSym} we notice a tensorial structure very similar to
the parity-even part of the $2$-point function of $T_{\mu\nu}$, namely
\begin{equation}
T_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\left(x\right)=\frac{1}{x^{4}}\left(I_{\mu\rho}
\left(x\right)I_{\nu\sigma}\left(x\right)+I_{\nu\rho}\left(x\right)I_
{\mu\sigma}\left(x\right)-\eta_{\mu\nu}\eta_{\rho\sigma}\right)\label{
eq:EvenConstructor}
\end{equation}
and it turns out that we may write \eqref{eq:WithTransInvSym} in terms of the
partity-even part, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\left\langle T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle
_{\text{odd}}=\frac{e}{2}\left(\epsilon_{\alpha\mu}T_{\phantom{\alpha}
\nu\rho\sigma}^{\alpha}\left(x\right)+\epsilon_{\alpha\nu}T_{\mu\phantom{\alpha}
\rho\sigma}^{
\phantom{\mu}\alpha}\left(x\right)+\epsilon_{\alpha\rho}T_{\mu\nu\phantom{\alpha
}\sigma}^{
\phantom{\mu\nu}\alpha}\left(x\right)+\epsilon_{\alpha\rho}T_{\mu\nu\rho\phantom
{\alpha}}^{
\phantom{\mu\nu\rho}\alpha}\left(x\right)\right).\label{eq:NullConeExpression}
\end{equation}
This result looks different from (\ref{Todd}) but it is not hard to show that,
for $x\neq 0$, they are proportional: ${\mathfrak e}= \frac 34 e$
Still another method to derive the same result is to use a free fermion model.
This is deferred to appendix \ref{sec:2dchiralmodel}.
\subsection{Differential regularization of the parity-odd part}
The task of regularizing the parity-odd terms is very much simplified by the
fact that we are able to write them in terms of the parity-even part, see
(\ref{eq:NullConeExpression}). We can therefore use the same regularization as
in section \ref{sec:2ptFunctionIn2d}. Let us start by the regularization that
preserves diffeomorphisms for the parity-even part, eq. (\ref{eq:Solution}):
\begin{equation}
T_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\left(x\right)=-\frac{1}{12}\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{
\left(1\right)
}\left(\log\mu^{2}x^{2}\right)-\frac{1}{48}\left(\mathcal{D}_{
\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(1\right)}-\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{
\left(2\right)}\right)\left(\log\mu^{2}x^{2}\right)^{2}.\label{eq:ConservedReg}
\end{equation}
Regularizing \eqref{eq:NullConeExpression} with \eqref{eq:ConservedReg} leads to
a trace anomaly
\begin{equation}
\left\langle
T_{\mu}^{\mu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle
_{\textrm{odd}}=\frac{\pi
e}{24}\left(\epsilon_{\rho\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\partial_{\sigma}+\epsilon_{
\sigma\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\partial_{\rho}\right)\delta^{2}\left(x\right),
\label{eq:TraceOdd1}
\end{equation}
and a diffeomorphism anomaly
\begin{equation}
\partial^{\mu}\left\langle
T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle
_{\textrm{odd}}=\frac{\pi
e}{24}\epsilon_{\nu\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\left(\eta_{\rho\sigma}\Box-\partial_
{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}\right)\delta^{2}\left(x\right).\label{eq:DivOdd1}
\end{equation}
In the presence of a background metric $g$ the anomalous Ward-Identities
(\ref{eq:TraceOdd1}) and (\ref{eq:DivOdd1})
give rise to the following `full one-loop' functions
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle\!\langle T_\mu^\mu(x)\rangle\!\rangle & = & \frac{\pi e}{24}
\epsilon^{\lambda\alpha}\partial_\alpha \left(g^{\rho\sigma}\partial_\lambda
g_{\rho\sigma} + g^{\rho\sigma}\partial_\rho g_{\lambda\sigma}\right),
\label{traceanom}\\
\langle\!\langle \nabla^\mu T_{\mu\nu}(x)\rangle\!\rangle &=& \frac{\pi e}{24}
\epsilon_{\nu\alpha} \partial^\alpha R.
\label{diffanomcov}
\end{eqnarray}
The second is the well-known covariant form of the diffeomorphism anomaly. The
consistent form of the same anomaly is
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle\!\langle\nabla^\mu T_{\mu\nu}(x)\rangle\!\rangle \sim
\epsilon^{\mu\rho} \partial_\mu\partial_\alpha \Gamma_{\rho\nu}^\alpha.
\label{diffanomconsist}
\end{eqnarray}
We remark however that in $2d$ the two forms (\ref{diffanomcov}) and
(\ref{diffanomconsist}) collapse to the same form to the lowest order,
since
\begin{eqnarray}
2 \epsilon_{\mu\nu} \partial^\mu\left( \partial_\alpha\partial_\beta- \eta_{\alpha\beta}
\Box\right)=
\epsilon_{\mu\alpha}\left(\partial^\mu\partial_\nu \partial_\beta -\eta_{\nu\beta}
\partial^\mu\Box + (\alpha \leftrightarrow \beta)\right)\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
We see that, in any case, the diffeomorphism anomaly is accompanied by the a
trace anomaly.
\subsection{Ambiguities in the parity-odd part}
We know that the regularization used above is not the ultimate one, because
there are ambiguities. They entail a modification of the parity-odd part given
by
\begin{equation}
A_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\text{odd}}=\epsilon_{\alpha\mu}A_{\phantom{\alpha}
\nu\rho\sigma}^{\alpha}+\epsilon_{\alpha\nu}A_{\mu\phantom{\alpha}\rho\sigma}^{
\phantom{\mu}\alpha}+\epsilon_{\alpha\rho}A_{\mu\nu\phantom{\alpha}\sigma}^{
\phantom{\mu\nu}\alpha}+\epsilon_{\alpha\rho}A_{\mu\nu\rho\phantom{\alpha}}^{
\phantom{\mu\nu\rho}\alpha},
\end{equation}
where the RHS is written in terms of \eqref{eq:EvenAmbig}, which explicitly is
\begin{eqnarray}\begin{aligned}
A_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\text{odd}} & = \phantom{+} A \left[ \eta_{\mu\nu} \left(
\epsilon_{\rho\alpha} \partial^{\alpha} \partial_{\sigma} +
\epsilon_{\sigma\alpha} \partial^{\alpha} \partial_{\rho}\right)
+\eta_{\rho\sigma} \left( \epsilon_{\mu\alpha} \partial^{\alpha} \partial_{\nu}
+ \epsilon_{\nu\alpha} \partial^{\alpha} \partial_{\mu} \right) \right] \Box
\log\mu^{2}x^{2}\\
&\phantom{=} + B \left[ \epsilon_{\mu\alpha} \left( \eta_{\nu\rho}
\partial^{\alpha} \partial_{\sigma} + \eta_{\nu\sigma} \partial^{\alpha}
\partial_{\rho} \right) + \epsilon_{\nu\alpha} \left( \eta_{\mu\rho}
\partial^{\alpha} \partial_{\sigma} + \eta_{\mu\sigma} \partial^{\alpha}
\partial_{\rho} \right) \right. \\
&\phantom{= B +} \left. + \epsilon_{\rho\alpha} \left( \eta_{\sigma\mu}
\partial^{\alpha} \partial_{\nu} + \eta_{\sigma\nu} \partial^{\alpha}
\partial_{\mu} \right) + \epsilon_{\sigma\alpha} \left( \eta_{\rho\mu}
\partial^{\alpha} \partial_{\nu} + \eta_{\rho\nu} \partial^{\alpha}
\partial_{\mu} \right) \right] \Box\log\mu^{2}x^{2}.\label{eq:OddAmbig}
\end{aligned}\end{eqnarray}
The trace and the divergence of \eqref{eq:OddAmbig} are given by:
\begin{equation}
\eta^{\mu\nu}A_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}=8\pi\left(A+2B\right)\left(\epsilon_{
\rho\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\partial_{\sigma}+\epsilon_{\sigma\alpha}\partial^{
\alpha}\partial_{\rho}\right)\delta^{2}\left(x\right),\label{eq:OddAmbigTrace}
\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray} \begin{aligned}
\partial^{\mu}A_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma} & =
\phantom{+}4\pi\left(B\eta_{\nu\rho}\Box+\left(A+B\right)\partial_{\nu}\partial_
{\rho}\right)\epsilon_{\sigma\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\delta^{2}
\left(x\right) \\
&\phantom{=}
+4\pi\left(B\eta_{\nu\sigma}\Box+\left(A+B\right)\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\sigma}
\right)\epsilon_{\rho\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\delta^{2}\left(x\right)
\\
&\phantom{=}
+4\pi\left(A\eta_{\rho\sigma}\Box+2B\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}
\right)\epsilon_{\nu\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\delta^{2}\left(x\right).\label{
eq:OddAmbigDiv}
\end{aligned}\end{eqnarray}
Using these ambiguities we can recast the expressions \eqref{eq:TraceOdd1} and
\eqref{eq:DivOdd1} in the form
\begin{equation}
\left\langle
T_{\mu}^{\mu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle
_{\textrm{odd}}=\left(8\pi\left(A+2B\right)+\frac{\pi
e}{24}\right)\left(\epsilon_{\rho\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\partial_{\sigma}
+\epsilon_{\sigma\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\partial_{\rho}\right)\delta^{2}
\left(x\right),\label{eq:TraceOdd1+Amb}
\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray} \begin{aligned}
\partial^{\mu}\left\langle
T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle
_{\textrm{odd}} & =
4\pi\left(B\eta_{\nu\rho}\Box+\left(A+B\right)\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\rho}
\right)\epsilon_{\sigma\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\delta^{2}\left(x\right)
\\
&\phantom{=}
+4\pi\left(B\eta_{\nu\sigma}\Box+\left(A+B\right)\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\sigma}
\right)\epsilon_{\rho\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\delta^{2}\left(x\right)
\\
&\phantom{=} +\epsilon_{\nu\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\left(\left(4\pi A+\frac{\pi
e}{24}\right)\eta_{\rho\sigma}\Box+\left(8\pi B-\frac{\pi
e}{24}\right)\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}\right)\delta^{2}
\left(x\right).\label{eq:DivOdd1+Amb}
\end{aligned}\end{eqnarray}
If we impose that \eqref{eq:TraceOdd1+Amb} is zero we find
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:TracelessRegOption}
A=-\frac{e}{192}-2B,
\end{eqnarray}
which implies that \eqref{eq:DivOdd1+Amb} takes the form
\begin{eqnarray} \begin{aligned} \label{eq:FinalTracelessOption}
\partial^{\mu}\left\langle
T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle
_{\textrm{odd}} & =
4\pi\left[B\eta_{\nu\rho}\Box-\left(\frac{e}{192}+B\right)\partial_{\nu}
\partial_{\rho}\right]\epsilon_{\sigma\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\delta^{2}
\left(x\right)\\
&\phantom{=}
+4\pi\left[B\eta_{\nu\sigma}\Box-\left(\frac{e}{192}+B\right)\partial_{\nu}
\partial_{\sigma}\right]\epsilon_{\rho\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\delta^{2}
\left(x\right)\\
&\phantom{=} -\epsilon_{\nu\alpha}\partial^{\alpha}\left[\left(\frac{\pi
e}{48}+8\pi B \right) \eta_{\rho\sigma} \Box - \left(8\pi B-\frac{\pi
e}{24}\right)\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}\right]\delta^{2}\left(x\right).
\end{aligned}\end{eqnarray}
The choice (\ref{eq:TracelessRegOption}) allows us to eliminate the trace
anomaly (\ref{traceanom}) but by doing so the diffeo anomaly becomes
(\ref{eq:FinalTracelessOption}), which will not imply a covariant expression for
$\langle\!\langle T_{\mu\nu} \rangle\!\rangle$ for any choice of $B$. Thus, the
most general regularization that one can write is given by the equations
\eqref{eq:TraceOdd1+Amb} and \eqref{eq:DivOdd1+Amb}. An important point of
\eqref{eq:DivOdd1+Amb} is that there is no choice of $A$ and $B$ for which it is
zero, hence inevitably we will have a diffeomorphism anomaly, unless the overall
factor $e=0$, which depends of course on the specific model.
\section{The Feynman diagrams method in $2d$}
\label{sec:FeynmanDiagrams2d}
It is interesting and instructive to derive the results above using Feynman
diagrams.
There is only one non-trivial contribution that comes from the bubble diagram
with one incoming and one outgoing line with momentum $k$ and an internal
momentum $p$ (see figure \ref{img:BubbleD}). The pertinent Feynman rule is
\begin{equation}
\parbox{20mm}{\begin{fmffile}{Vffg}
\begin{fmfgraph*}(40,40)
\fmfleft{i}\fmfright{f1,f2}
\fmflabel{$\mu,\nu$}{i}
\fmf{photon}{i,v}
\fmf{fermion,label=$p'$,l.side=right}{v,f1}\
\fmf{fermion,label=$p$,l.side=right}{f2,v}
\end{fmfgraph*}
\end{fmffile}} \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! =
\dfrac{i}{8}\left[
\left(p+p'\right)_\mu\gamma_\nu+\left(p+p'\right)_\nu\gamma_\mu\right]\frac{
1+\gamma_*}{2}.
\label{FRule1}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{fmffile}{BubbleDiagram}
\begin{fmfgraph*}(100,60)
\fmfleft{i} \fmflabel{$\mu,\nu$}{i}
\fmfright{f} \fmflabel{$\lambda,\rho$}{f}
\fmf{photon,label=$k$}{i,v1}
\fmf{photon,label=$k$}{v2,f}
\fmf{fermion,left,tension=.4,label=$p$}{v1,v2}
\fmf{fermion,left,tension=.4,label=$p-k$}{v2,v1}
\fmfdot{v1,v2}
\end{fmfgraph*}
\end{fmffile}
\caption{The relevant Feynman diagram for the computation.}
\label{img:BubbleD}
\end{figure}
The relevant $2$-point function is\footnote{The factor of 4 in (\ref{TmnTlr2d}) is
produced by the fact that the vertex (\ref{FRule1}) corresponds to the insertion
of $\frac 12 T_{\mu\nu}$, not simply $T_{\mu\nu}$,
in the correlator, as explained in the footnote in (\ref{ssec:genform}).}
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle T_{\mu\nu}(x) T_{\lambda\rho}(y)\rangle =4 \int
\frac{d^2k}{(2\pi)^2}e^{-ik(x-y)} \ET_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}(k)\label{TmnTlr2d}
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
\ET_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}(k)=-\frac 1{64} \int \frac{d^2k}{(2\pi)^2} {\rm tr}
\left(\frac 1 {\slashed{p}} (2p-k)_\mu\gamma_\nu \frac
1{\slashed{p}-\slashed{k}} (2p-k)_\lambda \gamma_\rho \frac {1+\gamma_\ast}2\right)+
\left\{ \begin{array}{c}\mu\leftrightarrow \nu \\ \lambda \leftrightarrow
\rho\end{array} \right\}\label{T(k)2d}
\end{eqnarray}
Taking the trace and regularizing by introducing extra components of the
momentum running around the loop, $p\to p+\ell$
($\ell=\ell_2,\ldots,\ell_{\delta+2}$), we get
\begin{eqnarray} \begin{aligned}
{\ET}^\mu_{\phantom{\mu}\mu \lambda\rho }(k) & = -\frac 1 {32} \int \frac
{d^2p}{(2\pi)^2} \int \frac {d^{\delta}\ell}{(2\pi)^{\delta}} \,{\rm tr}\left(
\frac{\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}}{p^2-\ell^2} \, \left(2\slashed{p}+2
\slashed{\ell} -\slashed{q}\right) \right.\\
&\phantom{=-\frac{1}{8}\hspace{3.7cm}}\left.
\frac {\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}-\slashed{k}}{(p-k)^2-\ell^2}(2p-k)_\lambda
\gamma_\rho
\frac {1+\gamma_\ast}2 \right)\label{T42d}
\end{aligned}\end{eqnarray}
and the symmetrization $\lambda\leftrightarrow \rho$ is understood from now on.
Introducing, as usual, a Feynman parametrization of the integral in (\ref{T42d})
and
using the results in appendix (\ref{sec:regformulas}) one finally gets for the
even part
\begin{eqnarray}
\left({\ET}_{\rm{even}}\right)^\mu_{\phantom{\mu}\mu \lambda\rho }(k )=\frac
1{192\pi} \left(\eta_{\lambda\rho}k^2 +k_\lambda k_\rho\right),\label{ETmumueven}
\end{eqnarray}
which corresponds to the trace anomaly
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle\!\langle T_{\mu}^\mu\rangle\!\rangle = -\frac{1}{48\pi} \left(\Box
h+\partial_\lambda \partial_\rho h^{\lambda\rho}\right) +
\mathcal{O}\left(h^2\right).\label{Aeomega2d}
\end{eqnarray}
For the odd part we get instead
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(\ET_{\rm{odd}}\right)^\mu_{\phantom{\mu}\mu \lambda\rho }(k )=-\frac
1{192\pi} \left(\epsilon ^\sigma{}_\rho k_\sigma k_\lambda+
(\epsilon ^\sigma{}_\lambda k_\sigma k_\rho\right),\label{ETmumuodd}
\end{eqnarray}
which corresponds to the trace anomaly
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle\!\langle T_{\mu}^\mu\rangle\!\rangle = \frac 1{24\pi}\epsilon
^\sigma{}_\rho\, \partial_\sigma \partial_\lambda h^{\lambda\rho}+
\mathcal{O}\left(h^2\right).\label{Aoomega2d}
\end{eqnarray}
The trace anomaly (\ref{Aeomega2d}) is not the expected covariant one. The only
possible explanation is that our regularization has broken
diffeomorphism invariance. In order to check that we have to compute the
divergence of the energy-momentum tensor with the same method.
The relevant Feynman diagram contribution is (after regularization)
\begin{eqnarray} \begin{aligned}
\ED_{\nu\lambda\rho}(k) &= - \frac 1{64} \int \frac {d^2p}{(2\pi)^2}\int \frac
{d^{\delta}\ell}{(2\pi)^{\delta}} \\
&\phantom{=-\frac{1}{16}}{\rm tr}\left( \frac
{\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}}{p^2-\ell^2}(2p-k)_\mu k^\mu\; \gamma_\nu
\frac {\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}-\slashed{k}}{(p-k)^2-\ell^2}(2p-k)_\lambda
\gamma_\rho\,\frac {1+\gamma_\ast}2 \right.\\
&\phantom{=-\frac{1}{16}\;} + \left.\frac
{\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}}{p^2-\ell^2}(2p-k)_\nu\, \slashed{k}\,
\frac {\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}-\slashed{k}}{(p-k)^2-\ell^2}(2p-k)_\lambda
\gamma_\rho\,\frac {1+\gamma_\ast}2 \right).\label{EDnlr}
\end{aligned}\end{eqnarray}
Explicit evaluation gives for the even part
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(\ED_{\rm{even}}\right)_{\nu\lambda\rho}(k)= - \frac 1{96\pi} \eta_{\lambda\rho}
k_\nu k^2,\label{EDenlr}
\end{eqnarray}
which corresponds to the diffeomorphism anomaly
\begin{eqnarray}
\nabla^{\mu}\langle\!\langle T_{\mu\nu}\rangle\!\rangle = \frac 1{12\pi} \xi^\nu
\partial_\nu \square h +\mathcal{O}\left(h^2\right).
\label{Aexi2d}
\end{eqnarray}
For the odd part we get instead
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(\ED_{\rm{odd}}\right)_{\nu\lambda\rho}(k)= - \frac
1{192\pi}\,k^\sigma\left(\epsilon_{\sigma\rho}\eta_{\nu\lambda} -
\epsilon_{\nu\rho} k_\lambda \right)k^2 +\{\lambda \leftrightarrow
\rho\},\label{EDonlr}
\end{eqnarray}
which corresponds to the anomaly
\begin{eqnarray}
\nabla^{\mu}\langle\!\langle T_{\mu\nu}\rangle\!\rangle = -\frac
1{96\pi}\epsilon^{\sigma\rho} \left(\partial_\sigma \partial_\lambda\partial_\nu
h^\lambda_\rho-\partial_\sigma \square h_{\rho\nu} \right).\label{Aoxi2d}
\end{eqnarray}
Using the lowest order Weyl transformation
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta_\omega h_{\mu\nu}= 2\omega\, \eta_{\mu\nu},\label{BRSTWeyl}
\end{eqnarray}
and diffeo transformation
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta_\xi h_{\mu\nu}= \partial_\mu\xi_\nu+\partial_\nu\xi_\mu, \label{BRSTDiffeo}
\end{eqnarray}
it is easy to prove that the consistency relations
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta_\omega \EA_\omega = 0, \quad\quad \delta_\xi \EA_\omega+\delta_\xi
\EA_\omega = 0,\quad\quad \delta_\xi \EA_\xi = 0, \label{CCeven}
\end{eqnarray}
hold, where
\begin{eqnarray}
{\EA}_\omega =- \int d^2 x \; \omega \langle\!\langle
T_{\mu}^{\mu}\rangle\!\rangle,\quad\text{and}\quad{\EA}_\xi = \int d^2 x \; \xi^\nu
\nabla^{\mu}\langle\!\langle T_{\mu\nu}\rangle\!\rangle.
\end{eqnarray}
For the even part ${\EA}^{(e)}$ it is possible to add a counterterm to the
action and restore covariance. The couterterm is
\begin{eqnarray}
\EC =-\frac 1{96\pi}\! \int d^2x\,h \square h.\label{evencount2d}
\end{eqnarray}
After this operation the divergence of the e.m. tensor vanishes and the trace
anomaly becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
{\EA}^{(e)}_\omega \rightarrow {\EA}^{(e)}_\omega +\delta_\omega \EC= \frac
1{48\pi} \int\! d^2x\, \omega \left( \partial_\lambda \partial_\rho h^{\lambda\rho} -\square
h\right),
\label{Atrace2d}
\end{eqnarray}
which is the expected one (see above).
Similarly the parity-odd anomalies (\ref{ETmumuodd}) and (\ref{Aoxi2d}) satisfy the
consistency relations (\ref{CCeven}). One can add an odd counterterm to
eliminate
the odd trace anomaly but this is definitely a less interesting operation.
The results obtained in this section are well-known. The methods we have used to
derive them teach us important
lessons. The first concerns dimensional regularization. If not explicitly stated
it is often understood in the literature that
dimensional regularization of Feynman diagrams leads to covariant results. We
have seen explicitly that this is not true, and
a reconstruction of covariance with counterterms is inevitable.
In view of the discussion on $3$-points correlator of the e.m. tensor in section
\ref{ssec:3ptsodd} we notice that
the piece of (\ref{T42d})
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta{\ET}^\mu_{\mu \lambda\rho }(k)\!
=\! -\frac 1 {8} \int\! \frac {d^2p}{(2\pi)^2}
\int\! \frac {d^{\delta}\ell}{(2\pi)^{\delta}} \,{\rm tr}\left( \frac
{\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}}{p^2-\ell^2} \, 2 \slashed{\ell}
\frac {\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}-\slashed{k}}{(p-k)^2-\ell^2}(2p-k)_\lambda
\gamma_\rho
\frac {1+\gamma_\ast}2 \right)\label{DeltaT42d}
\end{eqnarray}
contributes in an essential way to both even and odd anomalies. Without this
piece the result of the calculation would be inconsistent.
It marks the difference between first regularizing and then taking the trace of
the e.m. tensor or first taking the trace and then
regularizing.
From the above it is obvious that the second procedure is the correct one. In
other words every irreducible Lorentz component of tensors must
be regularized separately.
This is the second important lesson. We will return to this point also in the
final section.
\section{$2$-point correlator of e.m. tensors in $4d$}
\label{sec:2ptFunction4d}
In this section we are going to discuss the $2$-point correlator of the e.m.
tensors in $4d$. The expression in coordinate representation is well-known. We
would like here to regularize it with the differential regularization method,
and, later on, compare it with the expression obtained in momentum space with
Feynman diagram techniques.
\subsection{Differential regularization of the correlator}
The unregulated $2$-point function of e.m. tensors in arbitrary dimension $d$ in
coordinate representation is given by
\begin{equation}
\left\langle T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle
=\frac{c/2}{x^{2d}}\left(I_{\mu\rho}\left(x\right)I_{\nu\sigma}\left(0\right)
+I_{\nu\rho}\left(x\right)I_{\mu\sigma}\left(0\right)-\frac{2}{d}\eta_{\mu\nu}
\eta_{\rho\sigma}\right)\label{eq:2ptArbD}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
I_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)=\eta_{\mu\nu}-2\frac{x_{\mu}x_{\nu}}{x^{2}}.
\end{equation}
As before, it can be regularized by writing down a differential operator which,
acting on an integrable function, generates it for $x\neq0$. One possibility for
$d\geq3$ is the following\footnote{Notice that for $d>4$, the function
$1/x^{2d-4}$ is indeed integrable, while we have a function which is $\log$
divergent for $d=4$ and
linearly divergent for $d=3$ and in both cases we need a regularization. In the
spirit of differential regularization, we may use the following identities
\begin{align*}
d=3:\quad & \frac{1}{x^{2}}=\frac{1}{2}\Box\log\mu^{2}x^{2},\\
d=4:\quad & \frac{1}{x^{4}}=-\frac{1}{4}\Box\frac{\log\mu^{2}x^{2}}{x^{2}},
\end{align*}
where $\log\mu^{2}x^{2}$ and $\left(\log\mu^{2}x^{2}\right)/x^{2}$
are integrable functions in the respective dimension.}
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\langle T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(0\right)\right\rangle
& = &
-\frac{c/2}{2\left(d-2\right)^{2}d\left(d^{2}-1\right)}\mathcal{D}_{
\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(1\right)}\left(\frac{1}{x^{2d-4}}\right)\nonumber \\
& &
+\frac{c/2}{2\left(d-2\right)^{2}d\left(d+1\right)}\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma
}^{\left(2\right)}\left(\frac{1}{x^{2d-4}}\right),\label{eq:2ptArbitraryDReg}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{align}
\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(1\right)} &
=\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}-\left(\eta_{\mu\nu
}\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}+\eta_{\rho\sigma}\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}
\right)\Box+\eta_{\mu\nu}\eta_{\rho\sigma}\Box\Box,\label{eq:op1}\\
\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(2\right)} &
=\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}-\frac{1}{2}
\left(\eta_{\mu\rho}\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\sigma}+\eta_{\nu\rho}\partial_{\mu}
\partial_{\sigma}+\eta_{\mu\sigma}\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\rho}+\eta_{\nu\sigma}
\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\rho}\right)\Box\nonumber \\
&
\phantom{=}+\frac{1}{2}\left(\eta_{\mu\rho}\eta_{\nu\sigma}+\eta_{\nu\rho}\eta_{
\mu\sigma}\right)\Box\Box.\label{eq:op2}
\end{align}
Both these operators are conserved but not traceless:
\begin{align}
\eta^{\mu\nu}\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(1\right)} &
=-\left(d-1\right)\left(\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}-\eta_{\rho\sigma}
\Box\right)\Box,\\
\eta^{\mu\nu}\mathcal{D}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{\left(2\right)} &
=-\left(\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}-\eta_{\rho\sigma}\Box\right)\Box,
\end{align}
nonetheless \eqref{eq:2ptArbitraryDReg} is both conserved and traceless. The
expression \eqref{eq:2ptArbitraryDReg} coincides with \eqref{eq:2ptArbD} for
$x\neq0$, it is conserved and traceless.
There are, as usual, ambiguities in the definitions of the operators
\eqref{eq:op1} and \eqref{eq:op2} for $x=0$. Particularly, in $d=4$ we may
consider the most general modification that one could add to
the expression \eqref{eq:2ptArbitraryDReg}, namely
\begin{align}
\mathcal{A}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma} & =
\left[A\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}\Box+
B\left(\eta_{\mu\rho}\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\sigma}+\eta_{\nu\rho}\partial_{\mu
}\partial_{\sigma} + \eta_{\mu\sigma}\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\rho}+
\eta_{\nu\sigma}\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\rho}\right)\Box^{2}\right.\nonumber \\
&
\phantom{=}\left.+C\left(\eta_{\mu\nu}\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}+\eta_{
\rho\sigma}\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}\right)\Box^{2}
+D\left(\eta_{\mu\rho}\eta_{\nu\sigma}+\eta_{\nu\rho}\eta_{\mu\sigma}
\right)\Box^{3} + E\eta_{\mu\nu}\eta_{\rho\sigma}\Box^3\right]\frac{1}{x^{2}}.
\label{eq:ambi}
\end{align}
Conservation of $\mathcal{A}$ requires
\begin{eqnarray}
C=-A+2D,\quad D=-B,\quad E=A+2B.
\end{eqnarray}
With these conditions the trace of $\mathcal{A}$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{A_{\phantom{\mu}\mu\rho\sigma}^{\mu}}=-4\pi^{2}
\left(3A+4B\right)\left(\eta_{\rho\sigma}\Box-\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\sigma}
\right)\Box\delta\left(x\right).
\end{eqnarray}
This corresponds to the trivial anomaly $\Box R$, which can be subtracted away
by adding a local Weyl invariant counterterm to the action. The existence of a
definition of our differential operators which do not imply in the existence of
this anomaly reflects the fact that it is a trivial anomaly.
\subsection{$2$-point correlator with Feynman diagrams}
The computation is very similar to the one in $2d$. Again, the only diagram that
contributes is the one of figure \ref{img:BubbleD} and we have\footnote{For the factor of $4$ in (\ref{TmnTlr}),
see the footnote in section \ref{sec:FeynmanDiagrams2d}.}
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle T_{\mu\nu}(x) T_{\lambda\rho}(y)\rangle = 4 \int
\frac{d^4k}{(2\pi)^4}e^{-ik(x-y)} \tilde
\ET_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}(k)\label{TmnTlr}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde\ET_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}(k)=\! -\frac 1{64} \int\!\! \frac{d^4p}{(2\pi)^4}
{\rm tr}
\left(\frac 1 {\slashed{p}} (2p-k)_\mu\gamma_\nu \frac
1{\slashed{p}-\slashed{k}} (2p-k)_\lambda \gamma_\rho \frac {1+\gamma_5}2\right)+
\left\{ \begin{array}{c}\mu\leftrightarrow \nu \\ \lambda \leftrightarrow
\rho\end{array} \right\}\label{T(k)}
\end{eqnarray}
To evaluate it we use dimensional regularization. After introducing the Feynman
parameter $x$ and shifting $p$ as follows:
$p\to p-(1-x)k$, (\ref{T(k)}) writes\footnote{We use the mostly minus signature
for the metric.}
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde \ET_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}(k)&=&-\frac 1{32} \int_0^1dx \int
\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi)^4} \int \frac{d^\delta \ell}{(2\pi)^\delta}
\frac{(2p+(1-2x)k)_\mu
(2p+(1-2x)k)_\lambda}{(p^2+x(1-x)k^2-\ell^2)^2}\label{T(k)1}\\
&&\times\left[(p+(1-x)k)^\sigma(p-xk)^\tau
\left(\eta_{\sigma\nu}\eta_{\tau\rho}-\eta_{\sigma\tau}\eta_{\nu\rho}+\eta_{\sigma\rho}
\eta_{\nu\tau}-i\epsilon_{\sigma\nu\tau\rho}\right)-\ell^2 \eta_{\nu\rho}\right]
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
After the integrations (first $\ell$, then $p$, then $x$) one finds\footnote{To
do integration properly we have to
Wick rotate the momenta and, after integration rotate them back to the
Lorentzian signature. We understand this here.}
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde \ET_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}(k)=\tilde \ED_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}(k)+\tilde
\EF_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}(k)+\tilde \EL_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}(k)\label{T(k)2}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray} \begin{aligned}
\tilde \ED_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}(k)=& -\frac i{32(4\pi)^2} \frac 1 {15\delta}\left[
8k_\mu k_\nu k_\lambda k_\rho+4k^2 \left(k_\mu k_\nu \eta_{\lambda\rho}+k_\lambda k_\rho
\eta_{\mu\nu}\right)\right.\\
&-6 k^2 \left(k_\mu k_\lambda \eta_{\nu\rho} +k_\nu k_\lambda \eta_{\mu\rho}+ k_\mu
k_\rho \eta_{\nu\lambda}+k_\nu k_\rho \eta_{\mu\lambda}\right)\\
&-\left. 4k^4 \eta_{\mu\nu}\eta_{\lambda\rho}+6k^4\left(\eta_{\mu\lambda}\eta_{\nu\rho}
+\eta_{\mu\rho}\eta_{\nu\lambda}\right) \right]
\label{D(k)}
\end{aligned}\end{eqnarray}
which is divergent for $\delta\to 0$, but conserved and traceless,
\begin{eqnarray} \begin{aligned}
\tilde \EL_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}(k)=& -\frac i{32(4\pi)^2} \frac {\log k^2} {30}\left[
8k_\mu k_\nu k_\lambda k_\rho+4k^2 \left(k_\mu k_\nu \eta_{\lambda\rho}+k_\lambda k_\rho
\eta_{\mu\nu}\right)\right.\\
&-6 k^2 \left(k_\mu k_\lambda \eta_{\nu\rho} +k_\nu k_\lambda \eta_{\mu\rho}+ k_\mu
k_\rho \eta_{\nu\lambda}+k_\nu k_\rho \eta_{\mu\lambda}\right)\\
&-\left. 4k^4 \eta_{\mu\nu}\eta_{\lambda\rho}+6k^4\left(\eta_{\mu\lambda}\eta_{\nu\rho}
+\eta_{\mu\rho}\eta_{\nu\lambda}\right)\right]
\label{L(k)}
\end{aligned}\end{eqnarray}
which is also conserved and traceless, and
\begin{eqnarray} \begin{aligned}
\tilde \EF_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}(k)=& -\frac i{32(4\pi)^2} \frac 1 {30}\left[
8\left(\gamma -\log 4\pi +\frac {31}{450} \right) k_\mu k_\nu k_\lambda
k_\rho\right.\\
&+2\left( 1- \gamma + \log 4\pi+\frac{31}{150}\right) k^2 \left(k_\mu k_\lambda
\eta_{\nu\rho}
+k_\nu k_\lambda \eta_{\mu\rho}+ k_\mu k_\rho \eta_{\nu\lambda}+k_\nu k_\rho
\eta_{\mu\lambda}\right)\\
&+ k^4 \left( \frac {10}3- 4\gamma+ 4\, \log 4\pi-
\frac{47}{225}\right)\eta_{\mu\nu}\eta_{\lambda\rho}\\
&- k^4\left( \frac {17}3- 6\gamma + 6\, \log
4\pi\right)\left(\eta_{\mu\lambda}\eta_{\nu\rho}
+\eta_{\mu\rho}\eta_{\nu\lambda}\right)\\
&\left.-k^2 \left( 4- 4\gamma+ 4 \,\log 4\pi+ \frac{47}{450}\right)
\left(k_\mu k_\nu \eta_{\lambda\rho}+k_\lambda k_\rho \eta_{\mu\nu}\right)\right]
\label{F(k)}
\end{aligned}\end{eqnarray}
which is neither conserved nor traceless.
Let us consider first $\tilde \EL$. We recall the Fourier transform
\begin{eqnarray}
\int\! d^4x\, e^{ikx} \frac {1}{x^2} \log \mu^2 x^2 = \frac {4\pi^2 i}{k^2}
\left( \log 2-\gamma - \log \frac{k^2}{\mu^2}\right).
\label{Fxlogx}
\end{eqnarray}
Therefore, up to the term proportional to $(\log 2-\gamma)$, by Fourier
transforming (\ref{eq:2ptArbitraryDReg}) we obtain
precisely (\ref{L(k)}) with $c= 1/\pi^4$, in agreement with the results of
\cite{Osborn93,Osborn96}. The term proportional
to $(\log 2-\gamma)$ is to be added to (\ref{F(k)}). Now the divergence of
$\tilde \ET$ contains three independent terms
proportional to $k^2 k_\nu k_\lambda k_\rho,\,\, k^4 k_\nu \eta_{\lambda\rho}$ and $k^4(
k_\lambda \eta_{\nu\rho}+ k_\rho \eta_{\nu\lambda})$,
respectively, while the trace contains two independent terms proportional to
$k^2 k_\lambda k_\rho$ and $k^4 \eta_{\lambda\rho}$.
On the other hand the ambiguity (\ref{eq:ambi}) contains the same 5 independent
terms with arbitrary coefficients.
Therefore it is always possible to set to zero both the divergence and the trace
of $\tilde \ET$ by subtracting suitable counterterms.
In the same way one can argue with the divergent term $\tilde \ED$. This term
deserves a comment: it is traceless and
divergenceless, but it is infinite, so it must be subtracted away along with the
$\tilde \EF$ term. Both $\EF$ and $\ED$,
the Fourier anti-transforms of $\tilde{\EF}$ and $\tilde{\ED}$, are contact
terms and they can be written in a compact form as
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle\!\langle T_{\mu\nu}(x)\rangle\!\rangle &=& A'
\partial_\mu\partial_\nu\partial_\lambda\partial_\rho h^{\lambda\rho}(x)+
B'\left(\square \partial_\mu \partial_\lambda h^{\lambda}_\nu(x)+\square \partial_\nu
\partial_\lambda h^{\lambda}_\mu(x)\right)
+ C' \eta_{\mu\nu} \square^2 h(x)\nonumber\\&&+D' \,\square^2 h_{\mu\nu}(x)
+E'\left(\square \partial_\mu\partial_\nu h (x)
+\eta_{\mu\nu} \square\partial_\lambda\partial_\rho
h^{\lambda\rho}(x)\right)\label{Tmunu}
\end{eqnarray}
where $h= h_\lambda^\lambda$ and $A',B',C',D',E'$ are numerical coefficients
that contain also a part $\sim \frac 1{\delta}$.
The local term to be subtracted from the action is proportional to
\begin{eqnarray}
\int d^4x \left( \frac {A'}2 h^{\mu\nu} \partial_ \mu\partial_\nu\partial_\lambda\partial_\rho
h^{\lambda\rho}\right.
\!&+& \! B' h^{\mu\nu} \square \partial_\mu \partial_\lambda h^{\lambda}_\nu\nonumber\\
&+&\left. \frac {C'}2 h \square^2 h +\frac {D'}2 h^{\mu\nu} \square^2
h_{\mu\nu}+E' h^{\mu\nu} \square \partial_\mu\partial_\nu h\right) \label{counter}
\end{eqnarray}
We can conclude that the (regularized) Feynman diagram approach to the
$2$-point correlator is equivalent to regularizing the $2$-point function
calculated with the Wick
theorem approach. But we can draw also another, less pleasant, conclusion. Like
in $2d$, the Feynman diagrams
coupled to dimensional regularization may also produce unwelcome terms, such as
the $\ED$ and $\EF$ terms above,
which must be subtracted away by hand.
Finally we notice that, once (\ref{counter}) has been subtracted away, not only
the nonvanishing trace and divergence of the em tensor disappear,
but the full contact term (\ref{Tmunu}) gets canceled. Thus the regularized
$2$-point correlator of the e.m. tensor coincides with the
semiclassical expression.
\section{The $3$-point correlator}
\label{sec:3ptCorrelator}
The calculation of the $3$-point correlator brings new elements into the game.
First and foremost new (nontrivial) anomalies,
but also an enormous complexity as compared to the $2$-point correlator.
In this section we first show that generically the $3$-point function of e.m.
tensors in $4d$ does not possess a parity-odd
contribution due to the permutation symmetry of the correlator. Then we compute
the ``semiclassical'' $3$-point correlator by means
of the Wick theorem in the same specific chiral
fermionic model considered above, disregarding regularization. We find that, as
expected, the parity-odd part identically vanishes.
Subsequently we compute the same amplitude using Feynman diagrams and regularize
it. It turns out that not only the parity-even but also
the parity-odd trace of the e.m. tensor is nonvanishing. We will explain this
apparent paradox in section \ref{sec:UglyDuckling}.
\subsection{No-go for parity-odd contributions}
\label{ssec:no-go}
In this subsection we will review the fact that in four dimensions there
are no parity-odd semiclassical contributions to the $3$-point function of
energy-momentum
tensors, which has already been emphasized in \citep{Zhiboedov,Stanev1}.
A very powerful tool to analyse which tensorial structures can exist
in a given correlation function in a CFT is the embedding formalism
as it was formulated in \citep{Costa:2011mg}. In their language,
to construct conformally covariant tensorial structures becomes a
game of putting together building blocks respecting the tensorial
requirements of your correlator. Particularly for the $3$-point function
of e.m. tensors we have seven building blocks. These building blocks
are written in terms of points $P_{i}$ of the six-dimensional embedding
space and lightlike polarization vectors $Z_{i}$. Three of them depend
on two points, namely
\begin{eqnarray}
H_{12} & = & -2\left[\left(Z_{1}\cdot Z_{2}\right)\left(P_{1}\cdot
P_{2}\right)-\left(Z_{1}\cdot P_{2}\right)\left(Z_{2}\cdot
P_{1}\right)\right],\label{eq:h12}\\
H_{23} & = & -2\left[\left(Z_{2}\cdot Z_{3}\right)\left(P_{2}\cdot
P_{3}\right)-\left(Z_{2}\cdot P_{3}\right)\left(Z_{3}\cdot
P_{2}\right)\right],\label{eq:h23}\\
H_{13} & = & -2\left[\left(Z_{1}\cdot Z_{3}\right)\left(P_{1}\cdot
P_{3}\right)-\left(Z_{1}\cdot P_{3}\right)\left(Z_{3}\cdot
P_{1}\right)\right].\label{eq:h13}
\end{eqnarray}
Four of them depend on three points, three being parity-even, namely
\begin{eqnarray}
V_{1} & = & \frac{\left(Z_{1}\cdot P_{2}\right)\left(P_{1}\cdot
P_{3}\right)-\left(Z_{1}\cdot P_{3}\right)\left(P_{1}\cdot
P_{2}\right)}{P_{2}\cdot P_{3}},\label{eq:v1}\\
V_{2} & = & \frac{\left(Z_{2}\cdot P_{3}\right)\left(P_{2}\cdot
P_{1}\right)-\left(Z_{2}\cdot P_{1}\right)\left(P_{2}\cdot
P_{3}\right)}{P_{3}\cdot P_{1}},\label{eq:v2}\\
V_{3} & = & \frac{\left(Z_{3}\cdot P_{1}\right)\left(P_{3}\cdot
P_{2}\right)-\left(Z_{3}\cdot P_{2}\right)\left(P_{3}\cdot
P_{1}\right)}{P_{1}\cdot P_{2}},\label{eq:v3}
\end{eqnarray}
while the last one is parity-odd, being the only object that one may
construct with an epsilon tensor, i.e.
\begin{equation}
O_{123}=\epsilon\left(Z_{1},Z_{2},Z_{3},P_{1},P_{2},P_{3}\right).\label{eq:o123}
\end{equation}
Our job now is to put together these objects to form a conformally
covariant object with the tensorial structure of the $3$-point function of
e.m. tensors. Particularly, the objects that we will construct must
present twice each polarization vector $Z_{i}$, since each $Z_{i}$
is associated with one index of the $i$-th e.m. tensor. Since we
are interested on parity-odd terms we will necessarily have the building
block $O_{123}$ which already takes care of one factor of each $Z_{i}$,
thus it is clear that our only options are
\begin{eqnarray}
T_{1} & = & O_{123}V_{1}V_{2}V_{3},\label{eq:T1}\\
T_{2} & = &
O_{123}\left(V_{1}H_{23}+V_{2}H_{13}+V_{3}H_{12}\right).\label{eq:T2}
\end{eqnarray}
In the following we will show that both $T_{1}$ and $T_{2}$ are
antisymmetric under the permutation of $1$ and $2$ for example,
which forbids them to be present in the $3$-point function of e.m. tensors.
By inspection of the expressions \eqref{eq:h12}-\eqref{eq:o123}
we see that under the exchange of $1$ and $2$ our building blocks
change as follows:
\begin{eqnarray*}
H_{12} & \rightarrow & H_{12},\\
H_{23} & \rightarrow & H_{13},\\
H_{13} & \rightarrow & H_{23},\\
V_{1} & \rightarrow & -V_{2},\\
V_{2} & \rightarrow & -V_{1},\\
V_{3} & \rightarrow & -V_{3},\\
O_{123} & \rightarrow & O_{123}.
\end{eqnarray*}
From these rules it is clear that both $T_{1}$ and $T_{2}$ are antisymmetric
under the exchange of $1$ and $2$. Of course the same result
holds for the exchanges $1\leftrightarrow3$ and $2\leftrightarrow3$.
\subsection{The semiclassical parity-odd $3$-point correlator}
\label{ssec:ParityOddWick}
Consider a free chiral fermion $\psi_{L}$ in four dimensions which has the
$2$-point function\footnote{The factor of $\frac{1}{2\pi^2}$ in the propagator
of a fermion in $4d$ is needed in order for its Fourier-transform to give the
usual propagator, namely $\frac{i}{\slashed{p}}$.}
\begin{equation}
\left\langle
\psi_{L}\left(x\right)\overline{\psi_{L}}\left(y\right)\right\rangle
=\frac{i}{2\pi^2}\frac{\gamma\cdot\left(x-y\right)}{\left(x-y\right)^{4}}P_{L},
\quad P_{L}=\frac{1-\gamma_{5}}{2},\label{eq:PropagatorChiralFermion}
\end{equation}
and the e.m. tensor
\begin{equation}
T_{\mu\nu}=\frac{i}{4}\left(\overline{\psi_{L}}\gamma_{\mu}\stackrel{
\leftrightarrow}{\partial}_{\nu}\psi_{L}
+\mu\leftrightarrow\nu\right),\text{ where
}\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}_{\nu}\equiv\partial_{\nu}
-\stackrel{\leftarrow}{\partial}_{\nu}.\label{eq:EMTensorChiralFermion}
\end{equation}
Since we are dealing with a free theory we are able to compute the
$3$-point function of e.m. tensors by applying the Wick theorem. Using
the explicit form of the e.m. tensor \eqref{eq:EMTensorChiralFermion}
we write
\begin{align}
\left\langle
T_{\mu\nu}\left(x\right)T_{\rho\sigma}\left(y\right)T_{\alpha\beta}
\left(z\right)\right\rangle
&\! =\! -\frac{i}{64}\left\langle \!\!\!
\contraction{:}{\overline{\psi_{L}}}{\gamma_{\mu}\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{
\partial}_{\nu}\psi_{L}:\left(x\right):
\overline{\psi_{L}}\gamma_{\rho}\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}_{\sigma}
\psi_{L}: \left(y\right):
\overline{\psi_{L}}\gamma_{\alpha}\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}_{\beta}}{
\psi_{L}}
\bcontraction{:}{\overline{\psi_{L}}}{\gamma_{\mu}\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{
\partial}_{\nu}\psi_{L}:\left(x\right):
\overline{\psi_{L}}\gamma_{\rho}\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}_{\sigma}}{
\psi_{L}}
:\overline{\psi_{L}}\gamma_{\mu}\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}_{\nu}
\contraction{}{\psi_{L}}{:\left(x\right):}{\overline{\psi_{L}}}
\bcontraction[2ex]{}{\psi_{L}}{:\left(x\right):\overline{\psi_{L}}
\gamma_{\rho}\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}_{\sigma}\psi_{L}:
\left(y\right):}{\overline{\psi_{L}}}
\bcontraction[3ex]{\psi_{L}:\left(x\right):}{\overline{\psi_{L}}}{
\gamma_{\rho}\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}_{\sigma}\psi_{L}:
\left(y\right):
\overline{\psi_{L}}\gamma_{\alpha}\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}_{\beta}}{
\psi_{L}}
\psi_{L}:\left(x\right):
\overline{\psi_{L}}\gamma_{\rho}\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}_{\sigma}
\contraction{}{\psi_{L}}{:\left(y\right):}{\overline{\psi_{L}}}
\psi_{L}: \left(y\right):
\overline{\psi_{L}}\gamma_{\alpha}\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}_{\beta}
\psi_{L}:\left(z\right)\!\right\rangle \nonumber \\
& \phantom{=}+\text{symmetrization}.\label{eq:ToWickContract}
\end{align}
There are two ways to fully contract these fields, as shown in equation
(\ref{eq:ToWickContract}). Each of the contractions is composed by a certain
tensor with six indices $f_{\nu a\sigma b\beta c}^{\left(i\right)}$ contracted
with a trace of six gamma matrices and a projector $P_{L}$, namely
\begin{equation}
f_{\nu a\sigma b\beta
c}^{\left(1\right)}\trace{\left(\gamma_{\mu}\gamma^{a}\gamma_{\rho}\gamma^{b}
\gamma_{\alpha}\gamma^{c}P_{L}\right)}
\text{ and }f_{\nu a\sigma b\beta c}^{\left(2\right)}
\trace{\left(\gamma_{\mu}\gamma^{a}\gamma_{\alpha}\gamma^{b}\gamma_{\rho}\gamma^
{c}P_{L}\right)},
\end{equation}
where the upper index of $f$ is $1$ for the first way of contracting and $2$ for
the second way.
The ordering of the free indices in the trace are given by the two
ways of performing the full contraction. The functions $f_{\nu a\sigma b\beta
c}^{\left(i\right)}$
are composed by eight terms which are the eight forms of distributing
the derivatives in the right hand side of \eqref{eq:ToWickContract}.
We will show that in reality $f^{\left(1\right)}$ and $f^{\left(2\right)}$
are the same object. To see this we will only need to exchange $a$
with $c$ in the expression for the second way of contracting, i.e.
\begin{equation}
f_{\nu a\sigma b\beta
c}^{\left(2\right)}\trace{\left(\gamma_{\mu}\gamma^{a}\gamma_{\alpha}\gamma^{b}
\gamma_{\rho}\gamma^{c}P_{L}\right)}
=f_{\nu a\sigma b\beta
c}^{\left(1\right)}\trace{\left(\gamma_{\mu}\gamma^{c}\gamma_{\alpha}\gamma^{b}
\gamma_{\rho}\gamma^{a}P_{L}\right)}.
\end{equation}
Hence, the sum of the two ways of contracting will simplify to
\begin{equation}
f_{\nu a\sigma b\beta
c}^{\left(1\right)}\left[\trace{\left(\gamma_{\mu}\gamma^{a}\gamma_{\rho}\gamma^
{b}\gamma_{\alpha}\gamma^{c}P_{L}\right)}
+\trace{\left(\gamma_{\mu}\gamma^{c}\gamma_{\alpha}\gamma^{b}\gamma_{\rho}
\gamma^{a}P_{L}\right)}\right].
\end{equation}
It is possible to put the second trace in the form
$\trace{\left(\gamma_{\rho}\gamma^{a}\gamma_{\mu}\gamma^{c}\gamma_{\alpha}
\gamma^{b}P_{L}\right)}$, which reduces our final expression to
\begin{equation}
f_{\nu a\sigma b\beta
c}^{\left(1\right)}\left[\trace{\left(\gamma_{\mu}\gamma^{a}\gamma_{\rho}\gamma^
{b}\gamma_{\alpha}\gamma^{c}P_{L}\right)}
+\trace{\left(\gamma_{\rho}\gamma^{a}\gamma_{\mu}\gamma^{c}\gamma_{\alpha}
\gamma^{b}P_{L}\right)}\right].
\end{equation}
The trace of six gamma matrices and a gamma five is given by
\begin{eqnarray}\begin{aligned}
\trace{\left(\gamma_{\mu}\gamma_{a}\gamma_{\rho}\gamma_{b}\gamma_{\alpha}\gamma_
{c}\gamma_{5}\right)}= & \;
4i\left(\eta_{\mu a}\epsilon_{\rho b\alpha c}-\eta_{\mu\rho}\epsilon_{ab\alpha
c}+\eta_{\rho a}\epsilon_{\mu b\alpha c}\right.\\
& \left. \;\; +\eta_{\alpha c}\epsilon_{\mu a\rho b}-\eta_{bc}\epsilon_{\mu
a\rho\alpha}+\eta_{\alpha b}\epsilon_{\mu a\rho c}\right).
\label{eq:Trace6gammas5}
\end{aligned}\end{eqnarray}
As one can easily check, the trace \eqref{eq:Trace6gammas5} is antisymmetric
under the exchange $\left(\mu\leftrightarrow\rho,b\leftrightarrow c\right)$,
thus the odd part of the correlation function is zero.
Now we will work out what are the functions $f^{\left(i\right)}$
and show the relation between $f^{\left(1\right)}$ and $f^{\left(2\right)}$
mentioned above. From the first way of contracting we derive the expression
\begin{equation}
\trace{\left[\gamma_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}\left(\gamma^{a}\partial_{a}\frac{1}{
\left(x-y\right)^{2}}P_{L}\right)\gamma_{\rho}
\partial_{\sigma}\left(\gamma^{b}\partial_{b}\frac{1}{\left(y-z\right)^{2}}P_{L}
\right)\gamma_{\alpha}\partial_{\beta}
\left(\gamma^{c}\partial_{c}\frac{1}{\left(z-x\right)^{2}}P_{L}\right)\right]}
+\cdots,\label{eq:FirstFullContraction}
\end{equation}
where the ellipsis stand for the seven other ways of organizing the
derivatives $\partial_{\nu}$, $\partial_{\sigma}$ and $\partial_{\beta}$.
From \eqref{eq:FirstFullContraction} we see that we will have some
expression that we call $f^{\left(1\right)}$ contracted with
$\trace{\left(\gamma_{\mu}\gamma^{a}\gamma_{\rho}\gamma^{b}\gamma_{\alpha}
\gamma^{c}P_{L}\right)}$.
The expression for $f^{\left(1\right)}$ can be read off from
\eqref{eq:FirstFullContraction}:
\small
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\nu a\sigma b\beta c}^{\left(1\right)} & = &
\partial_{\nu}^{x}\partial_{a}^{x}\frac{1}{\left(x-y\right)^{2}}\partial_{\sigma
}^{y}\partial_{b}^{y}\frac{1}{\left(y-z\right)^{2}}\partial_{\beta}^{z}\partial_
{c}^{z}\frac{1}{\left(z-x\right)^{2}}-\partial_{\sigma}^{y}\partial_{a}^{x}\frac
{1}{\left(x-y\right)^{2}}\partial_{\beta}^{z}\partial_{b}^{y}\frac{1}{
\left(y-z\right)^{2}}\partial_{\nu}^{x}\partial_{c}^{z}\frac{1}{
\left(z-x\right)^{2}}\nonumber \\
& &
-\partial_{\sigma}^{y}\partial_{\nu}^{x}\partial_{a}^{x}\frac{1}{
\left(x-y\right)^{2}}
\left[\partial_{b}^{y}\frac{1}{\left(y-z\right)^{2}}\partial_{\beta}^{z}
\partial_{c}^{z}\frac{1}{\left(z-x\right)^{2}}-
\partial_{\beta}^{z}\partial_{b}^{y}\frac{1}{\left(y-z\right)^{2}}\partial_{c}^{
z}\frac{1}{\left(z-x\right)^{2}}\right]\nonumber \\
& &
-\partial_{\beta}^{z}\partial_{\sigma}^{y}\partial_{b}^{y}\frac{1}{
\left(y-z\right)^{2}}
\left[\partial_{\nu}^{x}\partial_{a}^{x}\frac{1}{\left(x-y\right)^{2}}\partial_{
c}^{z}\frac{1}{\left(z-x\right)^{2}}
-\partial_{a}^{x}\frac{1}{\left(x-y\right)^{2}}\partial_{\nu}^{x}\partial_{c}^{z
}\frac{1}{\left(z-x\right)^{2}}\right]\nonumber \\
& &
-\partial_{\nu}^{x}\partial_{\beta}^{z}\partial_{c}^{z}\frac{1}{
\left(z-x\right)^{2}}
\left[\partial_{a}^{x}\frac{1}{\left(x-y\right)^{2}}\partial_{\sigma}^{y}
\partial_{b}^{y}\frac{1}{\left(y-z\right)^{2}}
-\partial_{\sigma}^{y}\partial_{a}^{x}\frac{1}{\left(x-y\right)^{2}}\partial_{b}
^{y}\frac{1}{\left(y-z\right)^{2}}\right].
\end{eqnarray}
\normalsize
The second way of contracting give us the expression
\begin{equation}
\trace{\left[\gamma_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}\left(\gamma^{a}\partial_{a}\frac{1}{
\left(x-z\right)^{2}}P_{L}\right)
\gamma_{\alpha}\partial_{\beta}\left(\gamma^{b}\partial_{b}\frac{1}{
\left(z-y\right)^{2}}P_{L}\right)\gamma_{\alpha}\partial_{\beta}
\left(\gamma^{c}\partial_{c}\frac{1}{\left(y-x\right)^{2}}P_{L}\right)\right]}
+\cdots,\label{eq:SecondtFullContraction}
\end{equation}
from where we may read off the expression for $f^{\left(2\right)}$:
\small
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\nu a\sigma b\beta c}^{\left(2\right)} & = &
\partial_{\nu}^{x}\partial_{a}^{x}
\frac{1}{\left(x-z\right)^{2}}\partial_{\beta}^{z}\partial_{b}^{z}\frac{1}{
\left(z-y\right)^{2}}\partial_{\sigma}^{y}\partial_{c}^{y}
\frac{1}{\left(y-x\right)^{2}}-\partial_{\beta}^{z}\partial_{a}^{x}\frac{1}{
\left(x-z\right)^{2}}\partial_{\sigma}^{y}\partial_{b}^{z}
\frac{1}{\left(z-y\right)^{2}}\partial_{\nu}^{x}\partial_{c}^{y}\frac{1}{
\left(y-x\right)^{2}}\nonumber \\
& &
-\partial_{\nu}^{x}\partial_{\sigma}^{y}\partial_{c}^{y}\frac{1}{
\left(y-x\right)^{2}}\left[\partial_{a}^{x}\frac{1}{\left(x-z\right)^{2}}
\partial_{\beta}^{z}\partial_{b}^{z}\frac{1}{\left(z-y\right)^{2}}-\partial_{
\beta}^{z}\partial_{a}^{x}\frac{1}{\left(x-z\right)^{2}}
\partial_{b}^{z}\frac{1}{\left(z-y\right)^{2}}\right]\nonumber \\
& &
-\partial_{\sigma}^{y}\partial_{\beta}^{z}\partial_{b}^{z}\frac{1}{
\left(z-y\right)^{2}}\left[\partial_{\nu}^{x}\partial_{a}^{x}
\frac{1}{\left(x-z\right)^{2}}\partial_{c}^{y}\frac{1}{\left(y-x\right)^{2}}
-\partial_{a}^{x}\frac{1}{\left(x-z\right)^{2}}\partial_{\nu}^{x}
\partial_{c}^{y}\frac{1}{\left(y-x\right)^{2}}\right]\nonumber \\
& &
-\partial_{\beta}^{z}\partial_{\nu}^{x}\partial_{a}^{x}\frac{1}{
\left(x-z\right)^{2}}\left[\partial_{b}^{z}\frac{1}{\left(z-y\right)^{2}}
\partial_{\sigma}^{y}\partial_{c}^{y}\frac{1}{\left(y-x\right)^{2}}-\partial_{
\sigma}^{y}\partial_{b}^{z}\frac{1}{\left(z-y\right)^{2}}
\partial_{c}^{y}\frac{1}{\left(y-x\right)^{2}}\right].
\end{eqnarray}
\normalsize
It is now a straightforward exercise to check that if one exchanges
$a$ with $c$ in the expression of $f_{\nu a\sigma b\beta c}^{\left(2\right)}$
one gets $f_{\nu a\sigma b\beta c}^{\left(1\right)}$, i.e.
\begin{equation}
f_{\nu c\sigma b\beta a}^{\left(2\right)}=f_{\nu a\sigma b\beta
c}^{\left(1\right)}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Relevant Fourier transforms}
\label{ssec:Fourier}
In the next subsection, in order to compute the $3$-point amplitude of the e.m.
tensor, with the Feynman diagram technique we will use (momentum space) Feynman
diagrams. Although essentially equivalent to the Wick theorem they lend
themselves more naturally to regularization. The two techniques are related by
Fourier transform. Hereby we collect a series of Fourier transforms of
distributions that are used in our calculations. The source is \cite{Gelfand}.
The notation is as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal F}[\phi(x)](k)\equiv \tilde\phi(k) = \int d^4x \, e^{ikx}
\phi(x),\quad\quad \phi(x) = \int\frac {d^4k}{(2\pi)^4}
e^{-ikx}\tilde \phi(k)\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
In particular
\begin{eqnarray}
\int d^4 x \, e^{ikx}\,\frac{1}{x^2} &=& \frac{4\pi^2 i}{k^2},\\
\int d^4 x \, e^{ikx}\,\frac{\log x^2\mu^2}{x^2} &=& -\frac{4\pi^2
i}{k^2}\log\left(\frac{-k^2}{\bar{\mu}^2}\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\bar{\mu}^2\equiv 2\mu^2 e^{-\gamma}$, $\gamma=0.57721\dots$ being the
Euler constant. As we have seen this is essentially what one needs to compute
the Fourier transform of the $2$-point correlator. The novel feature in the
calculation of the $3$-point correlator is the appearance of products of similar
expressions in different points, a prototype being
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{(x-y)^2 (x-z)^2 (y-z)^2}.\label{basic}
\end{eqnarray}
This is singular at coincident points and has a non-integrable singularity at
$x=y=z=0$.
Ignoring this let us proceed to Fourier-transforming it
\begin{align}
&\int d^4x\, d^4y\, d^4z\, \frac{e^{i(k_1 x+k_2 y-qz)} }{(x-y)^2 (x-z)^2
(y-z)^2}=
\int d^4x \, d^4y\, d^4z\, \frac{e^{i(k_1 x+k_2 y+(k_1+k_2-q)z)}}{(x-y)^2 x^2
y^2}\nonumber\\
&=(2\pi)^4 \delta(q-k_1-k_2)\int d^4x \, d^4y\, \frac{e^{i(k_1 x+k_2y)}
}{(x-y)^2 x^2 y^2}.\label{B1}
\end{align}
Let us set $f(x,y) = \frac 1 {(x-y)^2 x^2 y^2}$. Then, using the convolution
theorem, the Fourier transform of $f$ with respect to $x$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal F}_x[f(x,y)](k_1)&=& \int d^4x\, e^{ik_1x}f(x,y) =\frac 1{y^2} \int d^4x\,
\frac {e^{ik_1x}}{x^2(x-y)^2}\nonumber\\
&=& \frac 1{y^2} \int \frac{d^4p}{(2\pi)^4} \, {\cal F}_x\left[\frac
1{x^2}\right]\!(k_1-p)\,
{\cal F}_x\left[\frac 1{(x-y)^2}\right]\!(p)\nonumber\\
&=& -\frac 1{y^2} \int \! d^4p \,\frac {e^{ipy}}{p^2(p-k_1)^2}.\label{B2}
\end{eqnarray}
Therefore
\begin{eqnarray}
\int\! d^4x \, d^4y\, \frac{e^{i(k_1 x+k_2y)} }{(x-y)^2 x^2 y^2}
&=&\! \int d^4y \,e^{ik_2y}\, {\cal F}_x[f(x,y)](k_1)\nonumber\\
&=&-i(2\pi)^6\int\!\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi)^4}\, \frac
1{p^2(p-k_1)^2(p+k_2)^2}.\label{B3}
\end{eqnarray}
We can now compute the RHS of (\ref{B3}) in the usual way by introducing a Feynman
parametrization in terms of two parameters $u,v$:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\int\!\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi)^4}\, \frac 1{p^2(p-k_1)^2(p+k_2)^2} =\int_0^1\! du\int_0^{1-u} \! dv
\int\!\frac{d^4p'}{(2\pi)^4} \,\frac
1{({p'}^2-\ell^2+\Delta)^3}
\label{B4}
\end{eqnarray}
where $p'=p-u k_1+v k_2$ and $\Delta = u(1-u) k_1^2+v(1-v) k_2^2 + 2 uv
\,k_1k_2$. Performing the $p'$ integral one gets
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_0^1\! du\int_0^{1-u} \! dv\int\!\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi)^4}\int\!\frac{d^\delta
\ell}{(2\pi)^\delta}\frac 1{({p}^2-\ell^2+\Delta)^3} = \frac i{2(4\pi)^2 }
\int_0^1\! du\int_0^{1-u} \! dv\frac 1{\Delta}\label{basicreg}
\end{eqnarray}
Our attitude will be to define the regularization of (\ref{basic}) as the Fourier
anti-transform of the (\ref{basicreg}).
In general, however, the expressions we have to do with are not as simple as
(\ref{basicreg}) and the integrals as simple as (\ref{B3}). The typical integral
of the type (\ref{B3}) contains a polynomial of $p, k_1,k_2$ in the numerator
of the integrand. In this case we have two ways to proceed: either we extend the
running momentum $p$ to extra dimensions (dimensional regularization), as we have done in 2d,
carry out the integration and Fourier-anti-transform the final result,
or we reduce the calculations to a differential operator applied to the Fourier-anti-transform
of (\ref{basicreg}) (differential regularization). Usually the former procedure is more convenient,
while in many cases the latter is problematic.
Other analogous expressions are obtained in appendix \ref{sec:Fourier}.
\subsection{The parity-odd $3$-point correlator with Feynman diagrams}
\label{ssec:3ptsodd}
This section is devoted to the same calculation as in subsection
(\ref{ssec:ParityOddWick}), but with Feynman diagram techniques. In order to
compute the $3$-point function of the energy-momentum tensor for a chiral
fermion, it is very convenient to couple it minimally to gravity and extract
from the corresponding action the Feynman rules, as in \cite{DS,BGL}. The relevant
formalism and notation is reviewed in appendix \ref{sec:chiralm}. Due to the
non polynomial character of the action the diagrams contributing to the trace
anomaly are infinitely many. Fortunately, using diffeomorphism invariance, it is
enough to determine the lowest order contributions and consistency takes care of
the rest.
There are two potential lowest order diagrams that may contribute. The first
contribution, the bubble graph, turns out to give a vanishing contribution. The
important term comes from the triangle graph. This has an incoming line with
momentum $q=k_1+k_2$ with Lorentz indices $\mu,\nu$. The two outgoing lines have
momenta $k_1,k_2$ with Lorentz labels $\lambda,\rho$ and $\alpha,\beta$,
respectively. The contribution is formally written as
\begin{align}
&\ET^{(1)}_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta\lambda\rho}(k_1,k_2) =-\frac 1 {512}\int \frac
{d^4p}{(2\pi)^4}\, {\rm tr} \left[\left(\frac
1{\slashed{p}}\bigl((2p-k_1)_\lambda
\gamma_\rho+(\lambda\leftrightarrow \rho)\bigr)\right.\right.\frac
1{\slashed{p}-\slashed{k}_1}\label{T1}\\
& \times \bigl((2p-2 k_1 -
k_2)_{\alpha}\gamma_{\beta}+(\alpha\leftrightarrow \beta)\bigr)
\left.\left.\frac 1{\slashed{p} - \slashed{q}}\bigl( (2{p}
-{q})_\mu\gamma_\nu+(\mu\leftrightarrow \nu)\bigr)\right) \frac
{1+\gamma_5}2\right] \nonumber
\end{align}
to which the cross graph contribution
$\ET^{(2)}_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta\lambda\rho}(k_1,k_2)=\ET^{(1)}_{
\mu\nu\lambda\rho\alpha\beta}(k_2,k_1)$ has to be added. We regularize
(\ref{T1}) as usual by introducing extra component of the
momentum running around the loop $p\to p+\ell$,
$\ell=\ell_4,\ldots,\ell_{\delta+4}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\ET^{(1)}_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta\lambda\rho }(k_1,k_2)
= -\frac 1 {512} \int \frac {d^4p}{(2\pi)^4}
\int \frac {d^{\delta}\ell}{(2\pi)^{\delta}} \,{\rm tr}\left( \frac
{\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}}{p^2-\ell^2} (2p-k_1)_\lambda\gamma_\rho
\,\right.\nonumber\\
&&\times \,\frac {\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}-\slashed{k}_1}{(p-k_1)^2-\ell^2}
\,(2p-2k_1-k_2)_{\alpha}\gamma_{\beta} \left.\frac
{\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}-\slashed{q}}{(p-q)^2-\ell^2}\, (2{p}
-{q})_\mu\gamma_\nu
\frac {1+\gamma_5}2 \right)\label{T2}
\end{eqnarray}
where the symmetrization with respect to $\alpha\leftrightarrow \beta$, $\lambda
\leftrightarrow \rho$ and $\mu\leftrightarrow \nu$ is understood.
We should now proceed to the explicit calculation. However one quickly realizes
that
this involves a huge number of terms. To find an orientation among the latter it
is very
useful to first compute the trace and the divergence of the e.m. tensor in the
above formulas.
They are connected to the trace and divergence of the full one-loop e.m. tensor
by the
general formulas of section \ref{ssec:genform}.
\subsubsection{The trace}
The trace of (\ref{T2}) is
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\ET^{(1a)}}^\mu_{\mu\alpha\beta\lambda\rho }(k_1,k_2)
= -\frac 1 {256} \int \frac {d^4p}{(2\pi)^4}
\int \frac {d^{\delta}\ell}{(2\pi)^{\delta}} \,{\rm tr}\left( \frac
{\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}}{p^2-\ell^2} (2p-k_1)_\lambda\gamma_\rho
\,\right.\nonumber\\
&&\times\left. \,\frac
{\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}-\slashed{k}_1}{(p-k_1)^2-\ell^2}
\,(2p-2k_1-k_2)_{\alpha}\gamma_{\beta} \frac
{\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}-\slashed{q}}{(p-q)^2-\ell^2}\, (2\slashed{p}
-\slashed{q})
\frac {1+\gamma_5}2 \right).\label{T3}
\end{eqnarray}
On the other hand if we first take the trace of (\ref{T1}) and then regularize
it, we get
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\ET^{(1b)}}^\mu_{\mu\alpha\beta\lambda\rho }(k_1,k_2)
= -\frac 1 {256} \int \frac {d^4p}{(2\pi)^4}
\int \frac {d^{\delta}\ell}{(2\pi)^{\delta}} \,{\rm tr}\left( \frac
{\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}}{p^2-\ell^2} (2p-k_1)_\lambda\gamma_\rho
\,\right.\nonumber\\
&&\times \left. \frac
{\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}-\slashed{k}_1}{(p-k_1)^2-\ell^2}
\,(2p-2k_1-k_2)_{\alpha}\gamma_{\beta}\frac{\slashed{p}
+\slashed{\ell}-\slashed{q}}{(p-q)^2-\ell^2}\, \left(2\slashed{p}+2
\slashed{\ell} -\slashed{q}\right)
\frac {1+\gamma_5}2 \right).\label{T4}
\end{eqnarray}
The difference between the two is\footnote{Eqs.(\ref{reconstruction}) and
(\ref{2ndtrace}) suggest that the right prescription is (\ref{T4}), not
(\ref{T3}). This has been fully confirmed by the calculations in $2d$. The
anomaly is determined by the $n$-point functions
where the entries are one trace of the e.m. tensor
and $n-1$ e.m. tensors. We have quoted the `wrong' formula (\ref{T3}) on purpose
in order to stress this point.}
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\Delta {\ET^{(1)}}^\mu_{\mu\alpha\beta\lambda\rho }(k_1,k_2)
= -\frac 1 {128} \int \frac {d^4p}{(2\pi)^4}
\int \frac {d^{\delta}\ell}{(2\pi)^{\delta}} \,{\rm tr}\left( \frac
{\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}}{p^2-\ell^2} (2p-k_1)_\lambda\gamma_\rho
\,\right.\nonumber\\
&&\times \left.\,\frac
{\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}-\slashed{k}_1}{(p-k_1)^2-\ell^2}
\,(2p-2k_1-k_2)_{\alpha}\gamma_{\beta} \frac
{\slashed{p}+\slashed{\ell}-\slashed{q}}{(p-q)^2-\ell^2}\, \slashed{\ell} \,
\frac {1+\gamma_5}2 \right).\label{DeltaT}
\end{eqnarray}
Similar expressions hold for $\ET^{(2)}$. Now it is easy to show that (\ref{T3})
vanishes along with the analogous expression for $\ET^{(2)}$, while (\ref{T4})
does not, and in fact the odd-parity part of (\ref{DeltaT}) is precisely the
anomalous term computed in \cite{BGL}, which, together
with the cross term coming form $\ET^{(2)}$, gives rise to the Pontryagin
anomaly. More precisely, the two terms yield
\begin{eqnarray}
\ET^{\mu}_{\mu\alpha\beta\lambda\rho }(k_1,k_2)=\frac 1{192(4\pi)^2} k_1^\sigma
k_2^\tau\left(t^{(21)}_{\lambda\rho\alpha\beta\sigma\tau}-
t_{\lambda\rho\alpha\beta\sigma\tau} (k_1^2+k_2^2+k_1k_2)\right)\label{Tmumu}
\end{eqnarray}
The tensors $t$ and $t^{(21)}$ were defined in \cite{BGL}.
In \cite{BGL} the external lines were put on shell (in the de Donder gauge):
$k_1^2=k_2^2=0$. This is the right thing to do, as we shall see, but it is
important to clarify the role of the off-shell terms too. Therefore let us
consider nonvanishing external square momenta. While the remaining terms,
when inserted into the reconstruction formula (\ref{reconstruction}), reproduce
the Pontryagin density to order $h^2$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\sim\epsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda \rho} \left(\partial_\mu\partial_\sigma h^\tau_\nu \,
\partial_\lambda\partial_\tau h_{\rho}^\sigma-
\partial_\mu\partial_\sigma h^\tau_\nu \, \partial_\lambda\partial^\sigma h_{\tau\rho}\right)+
{\cal O}(h^3),\label{Pont2ndorder}
\end{eqnarray}
the term proportional to $k_1^2+k_2^2$ in (\ref{Tmumu}) leads to a term
proportional to
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda \rho} \partial_\mu \square h_\nu^{\alpha}\partial_\lambda
h_{\rho\alpha}.\label{noncovariant}
\end{eqnarray}
They are both invariant under the Weyl rescaling $\delta h_{\mu\nu}= 2\omega
\,\eta_{\mu\nu}$. Thus the corresponding anomalous terms
obtained by integrating (\ref{Pont2ndorder}) and (\ref{noncovariant}) multiplied
by the Weyl parameter $\omega$ are consistent. But while
the first gives rise to a true anomaly, the second one must be trivial because
there is no covariant cocycle containing the
$\epsilon$ tensor beside the Pontryagin one. In fact it is easy to guess the
counterterm that cancels it: it is proportional to
\begin{eqnarray}
\int d^4x\, h\, \epsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda \rho} \partial_\mu \square
h_\nu^{\alpha}\partial_\lambda h_{\rho\alpha}\label{counterterm}
\end{eqnarray}
where $h=h_\mu^\mu$.
But this counterterm breaks invariance under general coordinate transformations,
which to lowest order take the form
$\delta_\xi h_{\mu\nu}=\partial_\mu \xi_\nu+\partial_\nu\xi_\mu$ (with $\delta_\xi
\omega=0$). Thus we must expect that off-shell terms
break the e.m. tensor conservation. This does not mean that there are true diff
anomalies, but simply that we have to subtract
counterterms (actually, a lot of them, see below) in order to recover a
covariant regularization.
In other words taking into account off-shell terms is a very effective way to
complicate one's own life, while disregarding them
does not spoil the result if our aim is to find a covariant expression of the
anomaly. The reason for this is that the
equation of motion of gravity in vacuum
\begin{eqnarray}
\square h_{\mu\nu}-\partial_{\mu} \partial_{\lambda}h^\lambda _\nu -
\partial_\nu \partial_{\lambda} h^\lambda _\mu +\partial_\mu\partial_\nu
h^\lambda_\lambda=0\label{linrmunu}
\end{eqnarray}
is covariant. If we impose the De Donder gauge
\begin{eqnarray}
2\partial_\mu h^{\mu}_\lambda -\partial_\lambda h^\mu_\mu=0\label{lindedonder}
\end{eqnarray}
the last three terms in the RHS of (\ref{linrmunu}) vanish and the latter
reduces to $\square h_{\mu\nu}= 0$. Therefore choosing this gauge and
putting the external legs on shell (as we have just done) does not break
covariance and considerably simplifies the calculations\footnote{Sometimes it
oversimplifies them, for instance in $2d$ or in $4d$ for the $2$-point
correlator. In such cases there is no way but doing the calculations in full, as
we have done above.}.
\subsubsection{The divergence}
\label{ssec:divergence}
The discussion in the previous subsection raises a problem. For not only can we
subtract (\ref{noncovariant}) via the counterterm (\ref{counterterm}), but also
(\ref{Pont2ndorder}) can be subtracted away by means of the counterterm
\begin{eqnarray}
\sim \int d^4x\, h\,\epsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda \rho} \left(\partial_\mu\partial_\sigma
h^\tau_\nu \, \partial_\lambda\partial_\tau h_{\rho}^\sigma-
\partial_\mu\partial_\sigma h^\tau_\nu \, \partial_\lambda\partial^\sigma h_{\tau\rho}\right)+
{\cal O}(h^3),\label{Pont2ndordercount}
\end{eqnarray}
as it is easy to verify. This of course generates new terms in the divergence of
the e.m. tensor. Choosing the on-shell option to simplify the problem, they
corresponds, in the momentum notation, to the terms
\begin{eqnarray}
\sim \epsilon_{\beta\rho\sigma\tau}\, k_{1\nu} k_1^\sigma k_2^\tau
\left(k_{1\lambda} k_{2\alpha}- \eta_{\alpha\lambda} k_1\cdot k_2\right)+
\{\lambda\leftrightarrow \rho\}+ \{\alpha \leftrightarrow \beta\} +\{ 1
\leftrightarrow 2\}\label{deltadiff}
\end{eqnarray}
where the subscript $\nu$, in coordinate representation, is saturated with the
diffeomorphism parameter $\xi^\nu$.
Let us remark that, when we refer to the lowest order in $h$, any anomaly
appears to be trivial and can be subtracted (see what we have done above in
$2d$). This is true also for the even parity anomalies, but it is an accident of
the approximation.
What is decisive about triviality or not of the anomalies is their diff partner.
We must arrive at a configuration in which the diff partner of the trace anomaly
vanishes. In this case we can conclude that a nonvanishing trace anomaly is
nontrivial even if it is expressed at the lowest order in $h$. This expression
will be the lowest order expansion of a covariant expression (much as
(\ref{Pont2ndorder}) is). In conclusion we expect that subtracting away
(\ref{Pont2ndorder}) by means of (\ref{Pont2ndordercount}) is a forbidden
operation (it breaks covariance). But it is important to verify it by a direct
calculation. This is what we intend to do in the sequel.
The relevant lowest order contribution to $\langle\!\langle \nabla^\mu
T_{\mu\nu}\rangle\!\rangle$, see (\ref{2nddivergence}), comes from the $3$-point
function $\langle 0|\mathcal{T}\{\partial^\mu T_{\mu\nu}
(x)T_{\lambda\rho}(y)T_{\alpha\beta}(z)\}|0\rangle$. The latter
corresponds to two graphs, the bubble and the triangle ones (see \cite{BGL}).
The bubble graph contribution vanishes.
The triangle contribution is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
&& q^\mu \ET^{(1)}_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho\alpha\beta}(k_1,k_2) =-\frac 1 {512}\int
\frac
{d^4p}{(2\pi)^4}\, {\rm tr} \left[\left(\frac
1{\slashed{p}}\bigl((2p-k_1)_\lambda
\gamma_\rho+(\lambda\leftrightarrow \rho)\bigr)\right.\right.\frac
1{\slashed{p}-\slashed{k}_1}\label{Div1}\\
&& \times \bigl((2p-2 k_1 -
k_2)_{\alpha}\gamma_{\beta}+(\alpha\leftrightarrow \beta)\bigr)
\left.\left.\frac 1{\slashed{p} - \slashed{q}}\bigl( (2{p}
-{q})\cdot q\,\gamma_\nu+ (2{p}-{q})_\nu \slashed{q}\bigr)\right) \frac
{1+\gamma_5}2\right] \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
to which the cross contribution $q^\mu
\ET^{(1)}_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta\lambda\rho}(k_2,k_1)$ has to be added. We regulate
the integral as usual
with an extra dimensional momentum $\ell$ and introduce Feynman parameters as
needed. After a rather lengthy algebra, in particular
with explicit use of the identity
\begin{eqnarray}
\eta_{\mu\nu} \epsilon_{\lambda\rho\sigma\tau}
-\eta_{\mu\lambda}\epsilon_{\nu\rho\sigma\tau}+\eta_{\mu\rho}\epsilon_{
\nu\lambda\sigma\tau}-
\eta_{\mu\sigma}\epsilon_{\nu\lambda\rho \tau} +\eta_{\mu\tau} \epsilon_{\nu\lambda\rho
\sigma}=0,\label{idgamma}
\end{eqnarray}
the regularized (\ref{Div1}) can be recast into the form
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\ED^{(1)}_{\nu\lambda\rho\alpha\beta} (k_1,k_2)\equiv q^\mu
\left(\ET^{(1)}_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho\alpha\beta}(k_1,k_2)+\ET^{(1)}_{
\mu\nu\alpha\beta\lambda\rho}(k_2,k_1)\right) \nonumber\\
&&=\frac i {256} \int_0^1\!dx \int_0^{1-x}\!dy\, \int \frac
{d^4p}{(2\pi)^4}\int \frac
{d^\delta \ell}{(2\pi)^\delta} \biggl[- \epsilon_{\nu\beta\sigma\tau}\left(p_\rho
k_1^\sigma k_2^\tau +(k_{1\rho} k_2^\tau + k_{2\rho}k_1^\tau+2k_{2}^\tau p_\rho)
p^\sigma\right)\nonumber\\
&&\quad + \epsilon_{\nu\beta\rho\tau}\left(p^2(k_1+k_2 -p)^\tau+ p\!\cdot\! k_1
\,k_2^\tau - p\!\cdot\! k_2 \,k_1^\tau+
(k_2 -2p)\!\cdot \!k_1 p^\tau\right)+\epsilon_{\nu\sigma\tau\kappa}
\eta_{\beta\rho}\,p^\sigma k_1^\tau k_2^\kappa\nonumber\\
&&\quad +\epsilon_{\nu\rho\sigma\tau} \left(p_\beta k_1^\tau k_2^\sigma
+p^\sigma(k_{1\beta} k_2^\tau + k_{2\beta}k_1^\tau-2p_\beta k_1^\tau) \right)
+ \ell^2 \epsilon_{\nu\beta\rho\tau} (p+k_1-k_2)^\tau\biggr]\nonumber\\
&&\quad \times \,\frac {2 p\cdot\! (k_1+k_2) (2p+k_1)_\lambda (2p-k_2)_\alpha}{\left[
(p+xk_1-yk_2)^2+2xy
\, k_1\!\cdot\! k_2-\ell^2\right]^3}.\label{Div2}
\end{eqnarray}
This expression does not contain any of the terms (\ref{deltadiff}), but of
course this is not enough. We have to prove that all the terms in (\ref{Div2})
either vanish or are trivial in the sense that they can be canceled by
counterterms that are Weyl invariant.
This analysis is carried out in appendix \ref{sec:divergence}, where
counterterms are constructed which cancel all the
nonvanishing terms in (\ref{Div2}) without altering the result of the trace
anomaly calculation. Thus the lowest order expression
(\ref{Pont2ndorder}) cannot be canceled (except at the price of breaking
diffeomorphism invariance) and is a genuine covariant expression.
It represents the lowest order approximation of the Pontryagin density.
\subsubsection{(Partial) conclusion}
The results obtained in this section fully confirm those of
\cite{ChD1,ChD2,BGL}. The apparent contradiction inherent in the fact that the
semiclassical parity-odd correlator of three energy-momentum tensors vanishes
will be explained in the next section. Here we would like to
draw some conclusion on the regularized e.m. tensor $3$-point function. We have
seen that the trace and the traceless part of the correlator
must be regularized separately.
The traceless part of the correlator can be regularized starting from
(\ref{T2}). We would like to be able to conclude that the regularized
traceless part coincides with the semiclassical part, i.e. it vanishes, but in
order to justify this conclusion the calculations are very
challenging, because it is not enough to regularize and compute (\ref{T2}), but
we must also take into account all the counterterms (with
the exact coefficients) that we have subtracted in order to guarantee
covariance, see appendix \ref{sec:divergence}. This can realistically
be done only with a computer algebra program. For the time being, although we
believe the regularized traceless part of the correlator
vanishes, we leave its proof as an open problem.
Finally a comment on the parity-even part of the $3$-point e.m. tensor
correlator. The calculation of the trace and divergence involves
many more terms than in the parity-odd part, but it does not differ in any
essential way from it. Also in the parity-even part it is
necessary to introduce counterterms in order to guarantee covariance and the
correct final expression for the trace anomaly. On the
other hand this is pretty clear already in the $2d$ case, as we have shown
above. Since the results for the parity-even part of the
$3$-point function, both semiclassical and regularized, \cite{Osborn93,Osborn96},
and relevant even-parity anomalies are well-known, see \cite{Duff},
we dispense with an explicit calculation.
\section{The ugly duckling anomaly}
\label{sec:UglyDuckling}
The title is due to the non-overwhelming consideration met so far by the
Pontryagin trace anomaly.
Needless to say its presence in the free chiral fermion model is at first sight
surprising. The basic ingredient to evaluate this
anomaly in the Feynman diagram approach is traditionally the triangle diagram,
which can be seen as the lowest order approximation of
the $3$-point correlator, whose entries are one e.m. trace and two e.m.
tensors.
On the other hand, since the semiclassical parity-odd part of the $3$-point
correlator of the e.m. tensor vanishes on the basis of
very general considerations of symmetry, it would seem that even the triangle
diagram contributions should vanish, because the
regularization of zero should be zero.
The remark made in connection with formulas (\ref{T3}), (\ref{T4}) and
(\ref{DeltaT}) may seem to add strength
to this argument because it leaves the impression that the Pontryagin anomaly is
something we can do without. After all its existence in the $3$-point
correlators is related to the order in which we regularize. One might argue that
if we regularize in a specific order the anomaly disappears, but this is not the
case. First of all we remark that what one does in all kind of anomalies is to
regularize the divergence of a current or of the e.m. tensor, or the trace of
the latter, rather than regularizing the current or the e.m. tensor and then
taking the divergence or the trace thereof. In other words the regularization
should be done independently for each irreducible component that enters into
play. But, even forgetting this, in order to make a decision about such an
ambiguous occurrence one must resort to some consistency argument, and this is
what we will do below.
In fact the apparent contradiction is based on a misunderstanding, which
consists in assuming that the (unregulated) $3$-point correlator in the
coordinate representation is the sole ingredient of the anomaly. This is not
true\footnote{We remark that the parity-even $3$-point correlator of the e.m.
trace and two e.m. tensors also vanishes semiclassically, but this does not
prevent the even parity anomaly from being nonvanishing.}. The
$3$-point correlator of the energy-momentum tensor is one of the possible
markers of the trace anomaly, but, as we shall see, there are infinite many of
them and consistency demands that they all agree (the more so if the correlator
is unregulated). Let us start with by clarifying this point.
In subsection \ref{ssec:genform} we have shown how to reconstruct the full
one-loop e.m. tensor starting from the one-loop correlators of the e.m. tensors,
see (\ref{reconstruction}). What matters here is that the full one-loop e.m.
tensor contains the information about the e.m. tensor correlators with any
number of entries. The first non-trivial one corresponds of course to $n=2$.
Now let us apply the reconstruction formula (\ref{reconstruction}) to a single
chiral fermion theory. Classically
the energy-momentum tensor for a left-handed fermion is
\begin{eqnarray}
T^{(L)}_{\mu\nu}= \frac i4 \overline {\psi_L} \gamma_\mu
{\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}}_\nu\psi_L+ \{\mu\leftrightarrow \nu\}
\label{emt}
\end{eqnarray}
which is both conserved and traceless on shell. An analogous expression holds
for a right-handed fermion. It has been proved in general (and we have shown it
above) that the (unregulated) parity-odd $3$-point function in the coordinate
representation vanishes. Thus let us ask ourselves what would happen if
parity-odd amplitudes $$\langle 0|\mathcal{T}\{T^{(L)}_{\mu_1\nu_1}(x_1)\ldots
T^{(L)}_{\mu_n\nu_n}(x_n)\}|0\rangle_{\rm{odd}}$$ to all orders were to vanish.
We would have the same also for the right handed counterpart, while the
even-parity amplitudes are equal. Therefore the difference
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle\!\langle T^{(L)}_{\mu\nu}(x)\rangle\!\rangle- \langle\!\langle
T^{(R)}_{\mu\nu}(x)\rangle\!\rangle=0\label{TL-TR}
\end{eqnarray}
This would imply that the quantum analog of $\overline {\psi}
\gamma_\mu\gamma_5{\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}}_\nu\psi+
\{\mu\leftrightarrow \nu\}$ would vanish identically. This is nonsense, and
means that the vanishing of the parity-odd $3$-point function is an accidental
occurrence and that the (semiclassical) parity-odd amplitudes will generically
be non-vanishing \footnote{The analogue of the parity-odd $3$-point correlator
vanishing theorem does not exist for generic amplitudes.}. Inserting now these
results in the reconstruction formula (\ref{reconstruction}) and resuming the
series we would reconstruct the parity-odd anomaly. Let us apply this to the
trace of the quantum energy-momentum tensor. Since the parity-odd amplitudes are
generically nonvanishing we would obtain a nonvanishing trace anomaly. Now the
only possible covariant parity-odd anomaly is the Pontryagin density
\begin{eqnarray}
P=\frac
12\left(\epsilon^{nmlk}\ER_{nmpq}\ER_{lk}{}^{pq}\right)\label{pontryagin}
\end{eqnarray}
whose first nonvanishing contribution is quadratic in $h_{\mu\nu}$
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda \rho}R_{\mu\nu}{}^{\sigma\tau}R_{\lambda\rho\sigma\tau}=
2 \epsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda \rho} \left(\partial_\mu\partial_\sigma h^\tau_\nu \,
\partial_\lambda\partial_\tau h_{\rho}^\sigma-\partial_\mu\partial_\sigma h^\tau_\nu \,
\partial_\lambda\partial^\sigma h_{\tau\rho}\right)+\dots,\label{epsRR}
\end{eqnarray}
and can come only from the parity-odd $3$-point correlator. But, if the latter
vanishes, we would get an incomplete, and therefore non-covariant, expression
for this anomaly.
The conclusion of this argument is: covariance (and consistency) requires that,
even if the (unregulated) parity-odd $3$-point function in the coordinate
representation vanishes, the corresponding regularized counterpart must be
non-vanishing. This is precisely what was found in \cite{BGL} with (regularized)
Feynman diagram techniques.
The existence of the Pontryagin anomaly is confirmed also by other methods of calculation: the heat kernel method, see \cite{ChD2,BGL} and references therein, and the mass regularization of \cite{DS}, although the latter method have not been applied with the same accuracy as the dimensional regularization in the present paper. We should mention also the dispersive method which uses unitarity as an input. Of course we do not expect this method to reproduce this anomaly, which violates unitarity, \cite{BGL}. In fact using such a method would be a reversal of the burden of proof. The dispersive argument is very elegant and powerful, \cite{Cappelli:2001pz,Dolgov:1971ri,bert}, but it assume unitarity. Unitarity is normally given for granted and assumed by default. But the case presented in this paper is precisely an example in which this cannot be done.
Finally we would like to notice that the so-called Delbourgo-Salam anomaly, \cite{DS}, i.e. the
anomaly in the divergence of the chiral current $j_{\mu 5}= i\bar \psi \gamma_\mu \gamma_5\psi$,
is determined by a term (\ref{T3}) in which the factor $(2\slashed{p}-\slashed{q})$ is
replaced by $\slashed{q}$. If, in such a term, we rewrite $ \slashed{q}$ as $2\slashed{p}-(2\slashed{p}-\slashed{q})$,
we see that the second part reproduces the Pontryagin anomaly we have computed, while the term
containing $2\slashed{p}$, once regularized, is easily seen to vanish. In other words
the Pontryagin trace anomaly and the Delbourgo-Salam chiral anomaly come from the same term.
\section{Conclusions}
In conclusion, let us summarize what was reviewed and what was shown in this paper. Our paradigm
is always the theory of a free chiral fermion, thus every time that we refer to Feynman diagram
techniques or Wick theorem, we are making reference to these techniques applied to this specific model.
We started in sections \ref{sec:2ptFunctionIn2d}, \ref{sec:ParityOddIn2d} and \ref{sec:FeynmanDiagrams2d}
by reviewing the regularization of the $2$-point function of e.m. tensors in $2d$, using both
differential regularization and dimensional regularization of the expression obtained with
Feynman diagrams. Demanding the correlator to satisfy the Ward identity for diffeomorphism
invariance we obtain a violation of the Ward identity for conformal invariance and we recover
the known result of the $2d$ trace anomaly. In section \ref{sec:2ptFunction4d} the analogous
result was shown also in $4d$ where the situation is different because we are able to regularize
the correlator in such a way that both Ward identities are satisfied.
In section \ref{sec:3ptCorrelator}, moving to the $3$-point function of e.m. tensors in
$4d$, we first noted a discrepancy between the computations in momentum space through
Feynman diagrams and the computation in coordinate space using the Wick theorem. The direct c
omputation through Wick theorem tells us that there is no (unregulated) parity-odd
contribution in the $3$-point correlator of e.m. tensors for the free chiral fermion.
This result is indeed in agreement with the general fact that in $4d$ there are no
parity-odd contribution in the correlation function of three e.m. tensors which was
reviewed in section \ref{ssec:no-go}. With this fact in hand one could try to regularize
this correlator with the techniques of differential regularization and would be obliged
to conclude that there is no parity-odd trace anomaly simply because there is no
parity-odd contribution to be regularized. On the other hand, by doing the
computation in momentum space with Feynman diagram techniques we do find a
parity-odd trace anomaly. Is this result forced to be wrong?
We argued in section \ref{sec:UglyDuckling} that these results can perfectly coexist and
the result in coordinate space by no means is a no-go for the existence of the Pontryagin anomaly.
\acknowledgments
BLS would like to thank Alexander Zhiboedov for useful discussion. LB would like to thank Roberto Auzzi,
Carl Bender, Maro Cvitan, Holger Nielsen, Silvio Pallua, Predrag Dominis-Prester, Ivica Smoli\'c,
Alexander Sorin and in particular Adam Schwimmer
for very interesting discussions. ADP acknowledges CNPq and CAPES for financial support and, in particular,
CAPES for supporting his stay at SISSA and the Theoretical Particle Physics division of SISSA for
supporting and hospitality. This work has been supported in part by
the Croatian Science Foundation under the project 8946.
\section*{Appendices}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
For the next generation of wireless technology collectively termed as Beyond-4G and 5G (hereafter referred to as 5G), peak data rates of upto ten Gb/s with overall latency less than $1$ms \cite{5g_nsn_cudak} are envisioned. However, due to the proposed operation in the 30-300GHz range with challenges such as short range of communication, increasing shadowing and rapid fading in time, the processing complexity of the system is expected to be high. In an effort to design and develop a channel coding solution suitable to such systems, in this paper, we present a high-throughput, scalable and reconfigurable FPGA decoder architecture. \\
\indent It is well known that the structure offered by QC-LDPC codes \cite{ecc_shulin} makes them amenable to time and space efficient decoder implementations relative to random LDPC codes. We believe that, given the primary requirements of high decoding throughput, QC-LDPC codes or their variants (such as accumulator-based codes \cite{cc_ryan}) that can be decoded using belief propagation (BP) methods are highly likely candidates for 5G systems. Thus, for the sole purpose of validating the proposed architecture, we chose a standard compliant code, with a throughput performance that well surpasses the requirement of the chosen standard.\\
\indent Insightful work on high-throughput (order of Gb/s) BP-based QC-LDPC decoders is available, however, most of such works focus on an ASIC design \cite{laydecarch_sun}, \cite{htqcldpcdec_zhang} which usually requires intricate customizations at the RTL level and expert knowledge of VLSI design. A sizeable subset of which caters to fully-parallel \cite{fpar_onizawa} or code-specific \cite{lcmpdec_mohsenin} architectures. From the point of view of an evolving research solution this is not an attractive option for rapid-prototyping. In the relatively less explored area of FPGA-based implementation, impressive results have recently been presented in works such as \cite{htfpga_balatsoukas},\cite{2bitmsa_chandrasetty} and \cite{mgbpsfpga_wilson}. However, these are based on fully-parallel architectures which lack flexibility (code specific) and are limited to small block sizes (primarily due to the inhibiting routing congestion) as discussed in the informative overview in \cite{gbpsdecovw_schlafer}. Since our case study is based on fully-automated generation of the HDL, a fair comparison is done with another state-of-the-art implementation \cite{vivadoldpc} in Section \ref{sec:casestudy}. Moreover, in this paper, we provide without loss of generality, strategies to achieve a high-throughput FPGA-based architecture for a QC-LDPC code based on a circulant-1 identity matrix construction. \\
\indent The main contribution of this brief is a compact representation (matrix form) of the PCM of the QC-LDPC code which provides a multi-fold increase in throughput. In spite of the resulting reduction in the degrees of freedom for pipelined processing, we achieve efficient pipelining of two-layers and also provide without loss of generality an upper bound on the pipelining depth that can be achieved in this manner. The splitting of the node processing allows us to achieve the said degree of pipelining without utilizing additional hardware resources. The algorithmic strategies were realized in hardware for our case study by the \emph{FPGA IP} \cite{algcmp} compiler in \emph{LabVIEW\texttrademark \,CSDS\texttrademark} which translated the entire software-pieplined high-level language description into VHDL in approximately 3 minutes enabling state-of-the-art rapid-prototyping. We have also demonstrated the scalability of the proposed architecture in an application that achieves over 2Gb/s of throughput \cite{ht_impl}. \\
\indent The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{sec:qcldpc} describes the QC-LDPC codes and the decoding algorithm chosen for this implementation. The strategies for achieving high throughput are explained in Section \ref{sec:techforht}. The case study is discussed in Section \ref{sec:casestudy}, and we conclude with Section \ref{sec:conc}.
\section{Quasi-Cyclic LDPC Codes and Decoding}
\label{sec:qcldpc}
LDPC codes (due to R. Gallager \cite{ldpc_gallager}) are a class of linear block codes that have been shown to achieve near-capacity performance on a broad range of channels and are characterized by a low-density (sparse) PCM representation.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.75]{tanner_fig.png}
\caption{A Tanner graph where VNs (representing the code bits) are shown as circles and CNs (representing the parity-check equations) are shown as squares. Each edge in the graph corresponds to a non-zero entry ($1$ for binary LDPC codes) in the PCM $\mathbf{H}$.}
\label{fig:tanner}
\end{figure}
Mathematically, an LDPC code is a null-space of its $m \times n$ PCM $\mathbf{H}$, where $m$ denotes the number of parity-check equations or parity-bits and $n$ denotes the number of variable nodes or code bits \cite{ecc_shulin}. In other words, for a rank $m$ PCM $\mathbf{H}$, $m$ is the number of redundant bits added to the $k$ information bits, which together form the codeword of length $n=k+m$. In the Tanner graph representation (due to Tanner \cite{ldpc_tanner}), $\mathbf{H}$ is the incidence matrix of a bipartite graph comprising of two sets: the check node (CN) set of $m$ parity-check equations and the variable node (VN) set of $n$ variable or bit nodes; the $i^{th}$ CN is connected to the $j^{th}$ VN if $\mathbf{H}(i,j)=1$, $1 \leq i \leq m$ and $1 \leq j \leq n$. A toy example of a Tanner graph is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:tanner}. The degree $d_{c_i}$ ($d_{v_j}$) of a CN $i$ (VN $j$) is equal to the number of $1$s along the $i^{th}$ row ($j^{th}$ column) of $\mathbf{H}$. For constants $c_c, c_v \in \mathbb{Z}_{>0}$ and $c_c<<m, c_v<<n$, if $\forall i,j$, $d_{c_i}=c_c$ and $d_{v_j}=c_v$, then the LDPC code is called as a regular code and is called an irregular code otherwise.
\subsection{Quasi-Cyclic LDPC Codes}
\label{subsec:qcldpc}
The first LDPC codes by Gallager are random, which complicate the decoder implementation, mainly because a random interconnect pattern between the VNs and CNs directly translates to a complex wire routing circuit on hardware. QC-LDPC codes belong to the class of structured codes that are relatively easier to implement without significantly compromising performance. \\
The construction of identity matrix based QC-LDPC codes relies on an $m_b \times n_b$ matrix $\mathbf{H}_b$ sometimes called as the \emph{base matrix} which comprises of cyclically right-shifted identity and zero submatrices both of size $z \times z$ where, $z \in \mathbb{Z^+}, 1 \leq i_b \leq (m_b)$ and $1 \leq j_b \leq (n_b)$, the shift value,
\begin{align*}
s = \mathbf{H}_b(i_b,j_b) \in \mathcal{S} = \{-1\} \cup \{0, \ldots z-1\}
\end{align*}
The PCM matrix $\mathbf{H}$ is obtained by \emph{expanding} $\mathbf{H}_b$ using the mapping,
\begin{align*}
s \longrightarrow \left\{
\begin{array}{lr}
\mathbf{I}_s, &s \in \mathcal{S} \backslash \{-1\}\\
\mathbf{0}, &s \in \{-1\}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{align*}
where, $\mathbf{I}_s$ is an identity matrix of size $z$ which is cyclically right-shifted by $s=\mathbf{H}_b(i_b,j_b)$ and $\mathbf{0}$ is the all-zero matrix of size $z \times z$. As $\mathbf{H}$ is composed of the submatrices $\mathbf{I}_s$ and $\mathbf{0}$, it has $m=m_b.z$ rows and $n=n_b.z$ columns.
$\mathbf{H}$ for the \emph{IEEE 802.11n (2012)} standard \cite{std80211n2012} (used for our case study) with $z=81$ is shown in Table \ref{tab:hb}.
\begin{table*}[htp]
\centering
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0.5pt}
\begin{tabular}{l@{\hspace{0pt}}*{24}{c}}
\bfseries \bf{Layers} $\downarrow$ \quad & \multicolumn{24}{c}{\bfseries Blocks $\longrightarrow$} \\
\cmidrule(l){2-25}
&$\mathbf{B_{1}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{2}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{3}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{4}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{5}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{6}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{7}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{8}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{9}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{10}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{11}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{12}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{13}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{14}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{15}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{16}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{17}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{18}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{19}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{20}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{21}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{22}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{23}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{24}}$ \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{1}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{57} &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{50} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{11} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{50} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{79} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{1} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1\\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{2}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{3} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{28} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{55} &\colorbox{light-gray}{7} &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1\\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{3}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{30} &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{24} &\colorbox{light-gray}{37} &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{56} &\colorbox{light-gray}{14} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{4}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{62} &\colorbox{light-gray}{53} &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{53} &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{3} &\colorbox{light-gray}{35} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{5}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{40} &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{20} &\colorbox{light-gray}{66} &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{22} &\colorbox{light-gray}{28} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1\\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{6}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{42} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{50} &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1\\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{7}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{69} &\colorbox{light-gray}{79} &\colorbox{light-gray}{79} &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{56} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{52} &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1\\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{8}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{65} &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{38} &\colorbox{light-gray}{57} &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{72} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{27} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 &-1 &-1\\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{9}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{64} &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{14} &\colorbox{light-gray}{52} &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{30} &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{32} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 &-1\\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{10}}$
&-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{45} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{70} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{77} &\colorbox{light-gray}{9} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1\\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{11}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{2} &\colorbox{light-gray}{56} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{57} &\colorbox{light-gray}{35} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{12} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0}\\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{12}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{24} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{61} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{60} &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{27} &\colorbox{light-gray}{51} &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{16} &\colorbox{light-gray}{1} &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} \\
\bottomrule
\addlinespace
\end{tabular}
\caption{Base matrix $\mathbf{H}_b$ for $z=81$ specified in IEEE 802.11n (2012) standard used in the case study. $L_1-L_{12}$ are the layers and $B_1-B_{24}$ are the block columns (see Section \ref{subsec:layered}). Valid blocks (see section \ref{subsec:beta}) are highlighted.}
\label{tab:hb}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Scaled Min-Sum Algorithm for Decoding QC-LDPC Codes}
\label{subsec:msa}
LDPC codes can be decoded using message passing (MP) or belief propagation (BP) \cite{ldpc_gallager,spa_factorgraphs} on the bipartite Tanner graph where, the CNs and VNs communicate with each other, successively passing revised estimates of the log-likelihood ratio (LLR) associated, in every decoding iteration. In this work we have employed the efficient decoding algorithm presented in \cite{serialmp_litsyn}, with pipelined processing of layers based on the row-layered decoding technique \cite{laydec}, detailed in Section \ref{subsec:layered}.
\begin{defin}
For $1 \leq i \leq m$ and $1 \leq j \leq n$, let $v_j$ denote the $j^{th}$ bit in the length $n$ codeword and $y_j=v_j+n_j$ denote the corresponding received value from the channel corrupted by the noise sample $n_j$. Let the variable-to-check (VTC) message from VN $j$ to CN $i$ be $q_{ij}$ and, let the check-to-variable (CTV) message from CN $i$ to VN $j$ be $r_{ij}$. Let the a posteriori probability (APP) ratio for VN $j$ be denoted as $p_j$.
\end{defin}
\noindent The steps of the scaled-MSA \cite{ecc_shulin},\cite{smsa_chen} are given below.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Initialize the APP ratio and the CTV messages as,
\begin{align} \label{eq:initllr}
p_j^{(0)} &= ln \left\lbrace \frac{P(v_j=0|y_j)}{P(v_j=1|y_j)} \right\rbrace, \quad 1 \leq j \leq n \\
r_{ij}^{(0)} &= 0, \quad 1 \leq i \leq m, 1 \leq j \leq n \nonumber
\end{align}
\item Iteratively compute at the $t^{th}$ decoding iteration,
\begin{align} \label{eq:vnmsg}
q_{ij}^{(t)} &= p_{j}^{(t-1)}-r_{ij}^{(t-1)}
\end{align}
\begin{align} \label{eq:cnmsg}
r_{ij}^{(t)} &= a \cdot \prod_{k \in \mathcal{N}(i)\backslash\{j\}} sign \left(q_{ik}^{(t)} \right) \cdot \min_{k \in \mathcal{N}(i)\backslash\{j\}} \left\lbrace |q_{ik}^{(t)}| \right\rbrace
\end{align}
\begin{align} \label{eq:app}
p_j^{(t)} &= q_{ij}^{(t)} + r_{ij}^{(t)}
\end{align}
where, $1 \leq i \leq m$, and $k \in \mathcal{N}(i)\backslash\{j\}$ represents the set of the VN neighbors of CN $i$ excluding VN $j$. Let $t_{max}$ be the maximum number of decoding iterations.
\item Decision on the code bit $v_j$, $1 \leq j \leq n$ as,
\begin{align}
\hat{v}_j = \left\{
\begin{array}{lr}
0, &p_j < 0 \\
1, &otherwise
\end{array}
\right.
\end{align}
\item If $\hat{\mathbf{v}}\mathbf{H}^{T}=0$, where $\hat{\mathbf{v}}=(\hat{v}_1,\hat{v}_2,\ldots,\hat{v}_n)$, or $t=t_{max}$, declare $\hat{\mathbf{v}}$ as the decoded codeword.
\end{enumerate}
It is well known that since the MSA is an approximation of the SPA, the performance of the MSA is relatively worse than the SPA \cite{ecc_shulin}. However, in \cite{smsa_chen} it has been shown that scaling the CTV messages $r_{ij}$ can improve the performance of the MSA. Hence, we scale the CTV messages by a factor $a$ (=$0.75$).
\begin{remark} \label{rem:algoadv}
\indent The standard MP algorithm is based on the so-called \emph{flooding} or \emph{two-phase} schedule where, each decoding iteration comprises of two phases. In the first phase, VTC messages for all the VNs are computed and, in the second phase the CTV messages for all the CNs are computed, strictly in that order. Thus, message updates from one side of the graph propagate to the other side only in the next decoding iteration. In the algorithm given in \cite{serialmp_litsyn} however, message updates can propagate across the graph in the same decoding iteration. This provides advantages \cite{serialmp_litsyn} such as, a single processing unit is required for both CN and VN message updates, memory storage is reduced on account of the on-the-fly computation of the VTC messages $q_{ij}$ and the algorithm converges faster than the standard MP flooding schedule requiring fewer decoding iterations.
\end{remark}
\section{Techniques for High-throughput}
\label{sec:techforht}
To understand the high-throughput requirements for LDPC decoding, let us first define the decoding throughput $T$ of an iterative LDPC decoder.
\begin{defin} \label{def:thruput}
Let $F_{c}$ be the clock frequency, $n$ be the code length, $N_{i}$ be the number of decoding iterations and $N_{c}$ be the number of clock cycles per decoding iteration, then the throughput of the decoder is given by, $T=\frac{F_{c} \cdot n}{N_{i} \cdot N_{c}} \quad \text{b/s}$
\end{defin}
Even though, $n$ and $N_i$ are functions of the code and the decoding algorithm used, $F_c$ and $N_c$ are determined by the hardware architecture. Architectural optimization such as the ability to operate the decoder at higher clock rates with minimal latency between decoding iterations can help achieve higher throughput. We have employed the following techniques to increase the throughput given by Definition \ref{def:thruput}.
\subsection{Linear Complexity Node Processing}
\label{subsec:npu}
As noted in Section \ref{subsec:msa}, separate processing units for CNs and VNs are not required unlike that for the flooding schedule. The hardware elements that process equations (\ref{eq:vnmsg})-(\ref{eq:app}) are collectively referred to as the Node Processing Unit (NPU). \\
\indent Careful observation reveals that, among equations (\ref{eq:vnmsg})-(\ref{eq:app}), processing the CTV messages $r_{ij}$, $1 \leq i \leq m$ and $1 \leq j \leq n$ is the most computationally intensive due to the calculation of the sign, and the minimum value operations. The complexity of processing the minimum value is $\mathcal{O}(d_{c_i}^2)$.
In software, this translates to two nested for-loops, an outer loop that executes $d_{c_i}$ times and an inner loop that executes $(d_{c_i}-1)$ times. \\
\indent To achieve linear complexity $\mathcal{O}(d_{c_i})$ for the minimum value computation, we split the process into two phases or passes: the \emph{global} pass where the first and the second minimum (the smallest value in the set excluding the minimum value of the set) for all the neighboring VNs of a CN are computed and the \emph{local} pass where the first and second minimum from the global pass are used to compute the minimum value for each neighboring VN. Based on the functionality of the two passes, the NPU is divided into the Global NPU (GNPU) and the Local NPU (LNPU). The algorithm is given below.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Global Pass}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[i.] \emph{Initialization}: Let $\ell$ denote the discrete time-steps such that, $\ell \in \{0\}\cup \{1,2,\ldots,|\mathcal{N}(i)|\}$ and let $f^{(\ell)}$ and $s^{(\ell)}$ denote the value of the first and the second minimum at time $\ell$ respectively. The initial value at time $\ell=0$ is,
\begin{align}
f^{(0)}=s^{(0)}=\infty.
\end{align}
\item[ii.] \emph{Comparison}: Let $k_i(\ell) \in \mathcal{N}(i)$, $\ell = \{1,2,\ldots,|\mathcal{N}(i)|\}$, denote the index of the $\ell^{th}$ neighboring VN of CN $i$. Note that, $k_i(\ell)$ depends on $i$ and $\ell$, specifically, for a given CN $i$ it is a bijective function of $\ell$. An increment from $(\ell-1)$ to $\ell$ corresponds to moving from the edge CN $i$ $\leftrightarrow$ VN $k_i(\ell-1)$ to the edge CN $i$ $\leftrightarrow$ VN $k_i(\ell)$. \\
\begin{align}
f^{(\ell)} &= \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
|q_{ik_i(\ell)}|, & |q_{ik_i(\ell)}| \leq f^{(\ell-1)} \\
f^{(\ell-1)}, & otherwise. \\
\end{array}
\right. \\
s^{(\ell)} &= \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
|q_{ik_i(\ell)}|, & f^{(\ell-1)} < |q_{ik_i(\ell)}| < s^{(\ell-1)} \\
f^{(\ell-1)}, & |q_{ik_i(\ell)}| \leq f^{(\ell-1)} \\
s^{(\ell-1)}, & otherwise.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
Thus, $f^{(\ell_{max})}$ and $s^{(\ell_{max})}$ are the first and second minimum values for the set of VN neighbors of CN $i$, where, $\ell_{max}=|\mathcal{N}(i)|$.
\item \emph{Local Pass}: Let the minimum value as per equation (\ref{eq:cnmsg}) for VN $k_i(\ell)$ be denoted as $q^{min}_{i k_i(\ell)}$, $\ell \in \{1,2,\ldots,|\mathcal{N}(i)|\}$ then,
\begin{align}
q^{min}_{i k_i(\ell)} = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
f^{(\ell_{max})}, & |q_{ik_i(\ell)}| \neq f^{(\ell_{max})} \\
s^{(\ell_{max})}, & otherwise. \\
\end{array}
\right.
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
In software, this translates to two consecutive for-loops, each executing $(d_{c_i}-1)$ times. Consequently, this reduces the complexity from $\mathcal{O}(d_{c_i}^2)$ to $\mathcal{O}(d_{c_i})$. A similar approach is also found in \cite{valreuse_gunnam}, \cite{laydecarch_sun}. The sign computation is processed in a similar manner.
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0pt}
\scalebox{0.88}{
\begin{tabular}{l@{\hspace{2pt}}*{8}{c}}
\bfseries
&$\mathbf{VN_{z\mathbf{J}}}$ &\ldots &$\textcolor{white}{\mathbf{VN_{z(\mathbf{J}-1)}}}$ &$\mathbf{VN_{z\mathbf{J}+l}}$ &$\textcolor{white}{\mathbf{VN_{z(\mathbf{J}+1)-1}}}$ &\ldots &$\mathbf{VN_{z(\mathbf{J}+1)-1}}$ \\
\cmidrule(r){2-8}
\bfseries $\mathbf{NPU_{0}}$
&0 &\ldots &0 &1 &0 &\ldots &0 \\
\cmidrule(r){2-8}
\bfseries $\mathbf{NPU_{1}}$
&0 &\ldots &0 &0 &1 &\ldots &0 \\
\cmidrule(r){2-8}
\bfseries \quad \quad \vdots
&\vdots & & & & & &\vdots \\
\cmidrule(r){2-8}
\bfseries $\mathbf{NPU_{z-2}}$
&0 &\ldots &0 &0 &0 &\ldots &0 \\
\cmidrule(r){2-8}
\bfseries $\mathbf{NPU_{z-1}}$
&0 &\ldots &1 &0 &0 &\ldots &0 \\
\cmidrule(r){2-8}
\addlinespace \addlinespace
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Arbitrary submatrix $\mathbf{I}_s$ in $\mathbf{H}$, $0 \leq J \leq n_b-1$, illustrating the opportunity to parallelize $z$ NPUs.}
\label{tab:zunroll}
\end{table}
\subsection{$z$-fold Parallelization of NPUs}
\label{subsec:degzpar}
The CN message computation given by equation (\ref{eq:cnmsg}) is repeated $m$ times in a decoding iteration i.e. once for each CN. A straightforward serial implementation of this kind is slow and undesirable. Instead, we apply a strategy based on the following understanding.
\begin{fact} \label{fac:znpu}
An arbitrary submatrix $\mathbf{I}_s$ in the PCM $\mathbf{H}$ corresponds to $z$ CNs connected to $z$ VNs on the bipartite graph, with strictly $1$ edge between each CN and VN.
\end{fact}
This implies that no CN in this set of $z$ CNs given by $\mathbf{I}_s$ shares a VN with another CN in the same set. Table \ref{tab:zunroll} illustrates such an arbitrary submatrix in $\mathbf{H}$. This presents us with an opportunity to operate $z$ NPUs in parallel (hereafter referred to as an \emph{NPU array}), resulting in a $z$-fold increase in throughput.
\subsection{Layered Decoding}
\label{subsec:layered}
From Remark \ref{rem:algoadv} it is clear that, in the flooding schedule \emph{all} nodes on one side of the bipartite graph can be processed in parallel. Although, such a \emph{fully parallel} implementation may seem as an attractive option for achieving high-throughput performance, it has its own drawbacks. Firstly, it becomes quickly intractable in hardware due to the complex interconnect pattern. Secondly, such an implementation usually restricts itself to a specific code structure. In spite of the
serial nature of the algorithm in \ref{subsec:msa}, one can process multiple nodes at the same time if the following condition is satisfied.
\begin{fact} \label{fac:depcond}
From the perspective of CN processing, two or more CNs can be processed at the same time (i.e. they are independent of each other) if they do not have one or more VNs (code bits) in common.
\end{fact}
The row-layering technique used in this work essentially relies on the above condition being satisfied. In terms of $\mathbf{H}$, an arbitrary subset of rows can be processed at the same time provided that, no two or more rows have a $1$ in the same column of $\mathbf{H}$. This subset of rows is termed as a \emph{row-layer} (hereafter referred to as a \emph{layer}). In other words, given a set $\mathcal{L}=\{L_1, L_2, \ldots,L_I\}$ of $I$ layers in $\mathbf{H}$, $\forall u \in \{1,2,\ldots,I\}$ and $\forall i, i^\prime \in L_u$, then, $\mathcal{N}(i) \cap \mathcal{N}(i^\prime)=\phi.$ \\
\indent Observing that, $\sum_{u=1}^{I}|L_u|=m$, in general, $L_u$ can be any subset of rows as long as the rows within each subset satisfy the condition in Fact \ref{fac:depcond}; implying that, $|L_u| \neq |L_{u^\prime}|$, $\forall u, u^\prime \in \{1,2,\ldots,I\}$ is possible.
Owing to the structure of QC-LDPC codes, the choice of $|L_u|$ (and hence $I$) becomes much obvious. Submatrices $\mathbf{I}_s$ in $\mathbf{H}_b$ (with row and column weight of $1$) guarantee that, for the $z$ CNs corresponding to the rows of $\mathbf{I}_s$), always satisfy the condition in Fact \ref{fac:depcond}. Hence, $|L_u|=|L_{u^\prime}|=z$ is chosen. \\
\indent From the VN or column perspective, $|L_u|=z$, $\forall u = \{1,2,\ldots,I\}$ implies that, the columns of $\mathbf{H}$ are also divided into subsets of size $z$ (hereafter referred to as \emph{block columns}) given by the set $\mathcal{B}=\{B_1,B_2,\ldots,B_J\}$, $J=\frac{n}{z}=n_b$.
Observing that VNs belonging to a block column may participate in CN equations across several layers, we further divide the block columns into \emph{blocks}, where a block is the intersection of a layer and a block column. Two or more layers $L_u,L_{u^\prime}$ are said to be \emph{dependent} with respect to the block column $B_w$ if, $\mathbf{H}_b(u,w) \neq -1$ and, $\mathbf{H}_b(u^\prime,w) \neq -1$ and are said to be \emph{independent} otherwise.
\begin{table}[htp]
\centering
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{6pt}
\begin{tabular}{l@{\hspace{4pt}}*{5}{c}}
\bfseries \bf{Layers} $\downarrow$ & \multicolumn{5}{c}{\bfseries Blocks $\longrightarrow$} \\
\cmidrule(l){1-6}
&\ldots &$\mathbf{B_{2}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{3}}$ &$\mathbf{B_{4}}$ &\ldots \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{1}}$
&\ldots &$\downarrow$ &$\downarrow$ &$\downarrow$ &\ldots \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{2}}$
&\ldots &$\downarrow$ &\colorbox{light-gray}{28} &$\downarrow$ &\ldots \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{3}}$
&\ldots &$\downarrow$ &$\downarrow$ &$\downarrow$ &\ldots \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{4}}$
&\ldots &\colorbox{light-gray}{53} &$\downarrow$ &$\downarrow$ &\ldots \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{5}}$
&\ldots &$\downarrow$ &$\downarrow$ &\colorbox{light-gray}{20} &\ldots \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{6}}$
&\ldots &$\downarrow$ &$\downarrow$ &$\downarrow$ &\ldots \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{7}}$
&\ldots &\colorbox{light-gray}{79} &\colorbox{light-gray}{79} &$\downarrow$ &\ldots \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{8}}$
&\ldots &$\downarrow$ &$\downarrow$ &$\downarrow$ &\ldots \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{9}}$
&\ldots &$\downarrow$ &$\downarrow$ &$\downarrow$ &\ldots \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{10}}$
&\ldots &\colorbox{light-gray}{45} &$\downarrow$ &\colorbox{light-gray}{70} &\ldots \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{11}}$
&\ldots &\colorbox{light-gray}{56} &$\downarrow$ &\colorbox{light-gray}{57} &\ldots \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{12}}$
&\ldots &$\downarrow$ &\colorbox{light-gray}{61} &$\downarrow$ &\ldots \\
\midrule
\bfseries
& &to $L_4$ &to $L_2$ &to $L_5$ & \\
\addlinespace \addlinespace
\end{tabular}
\caption{Illustration of Message Passing in row-layered decoding in a Section of the PCM $\mathbf{H}_b$.}
\label{tab:betadep}
\end{table}
For example, in Table \ref{tab:betadep} we can see that layers $L_4,L_7,L_{10}$ and $L_{11}$ are dependent with respect to block column $B_2$. Assuming that the message update begins with layer $L_1$ and proceeds downward, the arrows represent the directional flow of message updates from one layer to another. Thus, layer $L_7$ cannot begin updating the VNs associated with block column $B_2$ before layer $L_4$ has finished updating messages for the same set of VNs and so on. The idea of parallelizing z NPUs seen in Section \ref{subsec:degzpar} can be extended to layers, NPU arrays can process message updates for multiple independent layers. It is clear that, dependent layers limit the degree of parallelization available to achieve high-throughput. In Section \ref{subsec:ppldecarch}, we discuss pipelining methods that allow us to overcome layer-to-layer dependency and improve throughput.
\subsection{Compact Representation of $\mathbf{H}_b$}
\label{subsec:beta}
Before we discuss the pipelined processing of layers, we present a novel compact (thus efficient) matrix representation leading to a significant improvement in throughput. To understand this, let us call $\mathbf{0}$ submatrices in $\mathbf{H}$ as \emph{invalid} blocks, where there are no edges between the corresponding CNs and VNs, and the submatrices $\mathbf{I}_s$ as \emph{valid} blocks. In a conventional approach to scheduling (for example in \cite{htqcldpcdec_zhang}), message computation is done for all the valid and invalid blocks. To avoid processing invalid blocks, we propose an alternate representation of $\mathbf{H}_b$ in the form of two matrices: $\boldsymbol\beta_I$ (Table \ref{tab:betai}), the block index matrix and $\boldsymbol\beta_S$ (Table \ref{tab:betas}), the block shift matrix.
\begin{table}[htp]
\centering
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2.5pt}
\scalebox{1}{
\begin{tabular}{l@{\hspace{4pt}}*{8}{c}}
\bfseries \bf{Layers} $\downarrow$ \quad & \multicolumn{8}{c}{\bfseries Blocks $\longrightarrow$} \\
\cmidrule(l){2-9}
&$\mathbf{b_{1}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{2}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{3}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{4}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{5}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{6}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{7}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{8}}$ \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{1}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{4} &\colorbox{light-gray}{6} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{10} &\colorbox{light-gray}{12} &\colorbox{light-gray}{13} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{2}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{2} &\colorbox{light-gray}{4} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{9} &\colorbox{light-gray}{13} &\colorbox{light-gray}{14} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{3}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{4} &\colorbox{light-gray}{5} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{9} &\colorbox{light-gray}{14} &\colorbox{light-gray}{15} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{4}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{1} &\colorbox{light-gray}{4} &\colorbox{light-gray}{7} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{15} &\colorbox{light-gray}{16} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{5}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{3} &\colorbox{light-gray}{4} &\colorbox{light-gray}{7} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{16} &\colorbox{light-gray}{17} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{6}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{4} &\colorbox{light-gray}{6} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{11} &\colorbox{light-gray}{17} &\colorbox{light-gray}{18} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{7}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{1} &\colorbox{light-gray}{2} &\colorbox{light-gray}{6} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{12} &\colorbox{light-gray}{18} &\colorbox{light-gray}{19} \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{8}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{4} &\colorbox{light-gray}{5} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{10} &\colorbox{light-gray}{19} &\colorbox{light-gray}{20} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{9}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{4} &\colorbox{light-gray}{5} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{11} &\colorbox{light-gray}{20} &\colorbox{light-gray}{21} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{10}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{1} &\colorbox{light-gray}{3} &\colorbox{light-gray}{4} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{9} &\colorbox{light-gray}{21} &\colorbox{light-gray}{22} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{11}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{1} &\colorbox{light-gray}{3} &\colorbox{light-gray}{4} &\colorbox{light-gray}{10} &\colorbox{light-gray}{22} &\colorbox{light-gray}{23} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{12}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{2} &\colorbox{light-gray}{4} &\colorbox{light-gray}{7} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{11} &\colorbox{light-gray}{12} &\colorbox{light-gray}{23} \\
\bottomrule
\addlinespace
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Block index matrix $\boldsymbol{\beta_{I}}$ showing the valid blocks (highlighted) to be processed.}
\label{tab:betai}
\end{table}
$\boldsymbol\beta_I$ and $\boldsymbol\beta_S$ hold the index locations and the shift values (and hence the connections between the CNs and VNs) corresponding to \emph{only} the valid blocks in $\mathbf{H}_b$, respectively. Construction of $\boldsymbol\beta_I$ is based on the following definition,
\begin{defin} \label{def:betai}
Construction of $\boldsymbol\beta_I$ is as follows. \\
for $u = \{1,2,\ldots,I\}$ \\
\indent set $w=0$, $j_b=0$ \\
\indent for $j_b=\{1,2,\ldots,n_b\}$ \\
\indent \indent $j_b = j_b+1$ \\
\indent \indent if $\mathbf{H}_b(u,j_b) \neq -1$ \\
\indent \indent \indent $w=w+1; \boldsymbol\beta_I(u,w)=j_b; \boldsymbol\beta_S(u,w)=\mathbf{H}_b(u,j_b).$
\end{defin}
To observe the benefit of this alternate representation, let us define the following ratio.
\begin{defin}
Let $\lambda$ denote the compaction ratio, which is the ratio of the number of columns of $\boldsymbol{\beta}_I$ (which is the same for $\boldsymbol{\beta}_S$) to the number of columns of $\mathbf{H}_b$. Hence, $\lambda = \frac{J}{n_b}$.
\end{defin}
The compaction ratio $\lambda$ is a measure of the compaction achieved by the alternate representation of $H_b$.
Compared to the conventional approach, scheduling as per the $\boldsymbol\beta_I$ and $\boldsymbol\beta_S$ matrices improves throughput by $\frac{1}{\lambda}$ times. In our case study, $\lambda = \frac{8}{24} = \frac{1}{3}$, thus providing a throughput gain of $\frac{1}{\lambda}=3$.
\begin{table}[htp]
\centering
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2.5pt}
\begin{tabular}{l@{\hspace{4pt}}*{8}{c}}
\bfseries \bf{Layers} $\downarrow$ \quad & \multicolumn{8}{c}{\bfseries Blocks $\longrightarrow$} \\
\cmidrule(l){2-9}
&$\mathbf{b_{1}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{2}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{3}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{4}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{5}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{6}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{7}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{8}}$ \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{1}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{57} &\colorbox{light-gray}{50} &\colorbox{light-gray}{11} &\colorbox{light-gray}{50} &\colorbox{light-gray}{79} &\colorbox{light-gray}{1} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{2}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{3} &\colorbox{light-gray}{28} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{55} &\colorbox{light-gray}{7} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{3}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{30} &\colorbox{light-gray}{24} &\colorbox{light-gray}{37} &\colorbox{light-gray}{56} &\colorbox{light-gray}{14} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{4}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{62} &\colorbox{light-gray}{53} &\colorbox{light-gray}{53} &\colorbox{light-gray}{3} &\colorbox{light-gray}{35} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{5}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{40} &\colorbox{light-gray}{20} &\colorbox{light-gray}{66} &\colorbox{light-gray}{22} &\colorbox{light-gray}{28} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{6}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{42} &\colorbox{light-gray}{50} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{7}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{69} &\colorbox{light-gray}{79} &\colorbox{light-gray}{79} &\colorbox{light-gray}{56} &\colorbox{light-gray}{52} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{8}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{65} &\colorbox{light-gray}{38} &\colorbox{light-gray}{57} &\colorbox{light-gray}{72} &\colorbox{light-gray}{27} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{9}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{64} &\colorbox{light-gray}{14} &\colorbox{light-gray}{52} &\colorbox{light-gray}{30} &\colorbox{light-gray}{32} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{10}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{45} &\colorbox{light-gray}{70} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{77} &\colorbox{light-gray}{9} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{11}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{2} &\colorbox{light-gray}{56} &\colorbox{light-gray}{57} &\colorbox{light-gray}{35} &\colorbox{light-gray}{12} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{12}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{24} &\colorbox{light-gray}{61} &\colorbox{light-gray}{60} &\colorbox{light-gray}{27} &\colorbox{light-gray}{51} &\colorbox{light-gray}{16} &\colorbox{light-gray}{1} &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} \\
\bottomrule
\addlinespace
\end{tabular}
\caption{Block shift matrix $\boldsymbol{\beta_{S}}$ showing the right-shift values for the valid blocks to be processed.}
\label{tab:betas}
\end{table}
\begin{remark}
In the irregular QC-LDPC code in our case study, all layers comprise of $7$ blocks each, except layer $L_7$ and $L_{12}$ which have $8$. With the aim of minimizing hardware complexity by maintaining a static memory-address generation pattern (does not change from layer-to-layer), our implementation assumes regularity in the code. The decoder processes $8$ blocks for each layer of the $\boldsymbol\beta_I$ matrix resulting in some throughput penalty. The results from processing the invalid blocks in $L_7$ and $L_{12}$ are not stored in the memory.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Layer-Pipelined Decoder Architecture}
\label{subsec:ppldecarch}
In Section \ref{subsec:layered} we saw how dependent layers for a block column cannot be processed in parallel. For instance, in $\mathbf{H}_b$ in Table \ref{tab:hb}, VNs associated with the block column $B_1$ participate in CN equations associated with all the layers except layer $L_{10}$, suggesting that there is no scope of parallelization of layer processing at all. This situation is better observed in $\boldsymbol{\beta_I}$ shown in Table \ref{tab:betai}.
\begin{fact} \label{fac:betadep}
\emph{If a block column of $\boldsymbol{\beta_I}$ has a particular index value appearing in more than one layer, then the layers corresponding to that value are dependent with respect to that block column}.
\end{fact}
\begin{proof}
Follows directly by applying Fact \ref{fac:depcond} to Definition \ref{def:betai}.
\end{proof}
In other words, $\forall u,u^\prime \in \{1,2,\ldots,I\}$, $\forall w \in \{1,2,\ldots,J\}$, if,
$\boldsymbol{\beta_I}(u,w) = \boldsymbol{\beta_I}(u^\prime,w)$
then, the layers $L_u$ and $L_{u^\prime}$ are dependent.
It is obvious that, to process all layers in parallel ($L_{1}$ to $L_{12}$ in \ref{tab:hb}), the condition,
\begin{align} \label{eq:indlaycond}
\boldsymbol{\beta_I}(u,w) \neq \boldsymbol{\beta_I}(u^\prime,w)
\end{align}
must hold for $\forall u,u^\prime \in \{1,2,\ldots,I\}$.
We call the set of layers $\mathcal{L}$ satisfying Fact \ref{fac:betadep} as a \emph{superlayer}. As will be seen later, the formation of superlayers of suitable size is crucial to achieve parallelism in the architecture.
\begin{table}[htp]
\centering
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2.5pt}
\scalebox{1}{
\begin{tabular}{l@{\hspace{4pt}}*{8}{c}}
\bfseries \bf{Layers} $\downarrow$ \quad & \multicolumn{8}{c}{\bfseries Blocks $\longrightarrow$} \\
\cmidrule(l){2-9}
&$\mathbf{b_{1}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{2}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{3}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{4}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{5}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{6}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{7}}$ &$\mathbf{b_{8}}$ \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{1}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{0}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{4}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{13} &\colorbox{light-gray}{6} &\colorbox{light-gray}{10} &\colorbox{light-gray}{12} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{2}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{9} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{0}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{4}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{8}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{13} &\colorbox{light-gray}{14} &\colorbox{light-gray}{2} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{3}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{15} &\colorbox{light-gray}{9} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{0}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{4}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{8}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{5} &\colorbox{light-gray}{14} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{4}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{7} &\colorbox{light-gray}{15} &\colorbox{light-gray}{16} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{0}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{4}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{8}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{1} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{5}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{17} &\colorbox{light-gray}{7} &\colorbox{light-gray}{3} &\colorbox{light-gray}{16} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{0}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{4} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{8}} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{6}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{6} &\colorbox{light-gray}{17} &\colorbox{light-gray}{18} &\colorbox{light-gray}{11} &-1 &\colorbox{light-gray}{0} &\colorbox{light-gray}{4} &\colorbox{light-gray}{8} \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{7}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{19} &\colorbox{light-gray}{6} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{0}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{8}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{1} &\colorbox{light-gray}{2} &\colorbox{light-gray}{18} &\colorbox{light-gray}{12} \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{8}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{4} &\colorbox{light-gray}{19} &\colorbox{light-gray}{5} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{\textcolor{blue}{0}}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{8}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{20} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{10}} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{9}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{21} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{4}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{11} &\colorbox{light-gray}{5} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{0}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{8}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{20} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{10}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{1} &\colorbox{light-gray}{21} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{4}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{3} &\colorbox{light-gray}{22} &\colorbox{light-gray}{9} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{8}} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{11}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{0}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{1} &\colorbox{light-gray}{23} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{4}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{3} &\colorbox{light-gray}{22} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{10}} &-1 \\
\midrule
\bfseries $\mathbf{L_{12}}$
&\colorbox{light-gray}{8} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{0}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{2} &\colorbox{light-gray}{23} &\colorbox{light-gray}{\textcolor{blue}{4}} &\colorbox{light-gray}{12} &\colorbox{light-gray}{7} &\colorbox{light-gray}{11} \\
\bottomrule
\addlinespace
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Rearranged Block Index Matrix $\boldsymbol\beta_I^\prime$ used for our work, showing the valid blocks (highlighted) to be processed.}
\label{tab:rebeta}
\end{table}
The idea is to rearrange the $\boldsymbol{\beta_I}$ matrix elements from their original order. If $\boldsymbol{\beta_I}(u,w) = \boldsymbol{\beta_I}(u^\prime,w)$, $u < u^\prime$ then \emph{stagger} the execution of $\boldsymbol{\beta_I}(u^\prime,w)$ with respect to $\boldsymbol{\beta_I}(u,w)$ by placing $\boldsymbol{\beta_I}(u^\prime,w)$ in $\boldsymbol{\beta_I^\prime}(u^\prime,w^\prime)$ such that, $w < w^\prime$. To understand how layers are pipelined, let us first look at the non-pipelined case. \\
\indent Without loss of generality, Fig. \ref{fig:pplblk}(a) shows the block-level view of the NPU timing diagram without the pipelining of layers. As seen in Section \ref{subsec:npu}, the GNPU and LNPU operate in tandem and in that order, implying that the LNPU has to wait for the GNPU updates to finish.
The layer-level picture is depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:ppllay}(a). We call this version as the $1x$ version. This idling of the GNPU and LNPU can be avoided by introducing pipelined processing of blocks given by the following Lemma.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:ppl}
Within a superlayer, while the LNPU processes messages for the blocks $\boldsymbol{\beta^\prime}(u,w)$, the GNPU can process messages for the blocks $\boldsymbol{\beta^\prime}(u+1,w)$, $u=\{1,2,\ldots,|\mathcal{L}|-1\}$ and $w=\{1,2,\ldots,J\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Follows directly from the layer independence condition in Fact \ref{fac:depcond}.
\end{proof}
\noindent Fig. \ref{fig:pplblk}(c) illustrates the block-level view of this 2-layer pipelining scheme. It is important to note that, the splitting of the NPU process into two parts, namely, the GNPU and the LNPU (that work in tandem) is a necessary condition for Fact \ref{fac:betadep} (and hence Lemma \ref{lem:ppl}) to hold. However, at the boundary of the superlayer the Lemma \ref{lem:ppl} does not hold and pipelining has to be restarted for the next layer as seen in the layer-level view shown in Fig. \ref{fig:ppllay}(c). We call this version as the $2x$ version. This is the classical pipelining overhead. In the following, we impose certain constraints on the size of the superlayers in $\mathbf{H}$.
\begin{defin}
Without loss of generality, the pipelining efficiency $\eta_p$ is the number of layers processed per unit time per NPU array.
\end{defin}
\noindent For the case of pipelining two layers shown in Fig. \ref{fig:ppllay}(c),
\begin{align}
\eta_p^{(2)} = \frac{|\mathcal{L}|}{|\mathcal{L}|+1}
\end{align}
Thus, we impose the following conditions on $|\mathcal{L}|$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Since, two layers are processed in the pipeline at any given time, provided that $I$ is even,
\begin{align*}
|\mathcal{L}| \in \mathcal{F}=\{x: x \text{\, is an even factor of \,} I \}.
\end{align*}
It is important to note that, for any value of $|\mathcal{L}| \in \mathcal{F}$, $\mathcal{L}$ must be a superlayer.
\item Given a QC-LDPC code, $|\mathcal{L}|$ is a constant. This is to facilitate a symmetric pipelining architecture which is a scalable solution.
\item Choice of $|\mathcal{L}|$ should maximize pipelining efficiency $\eta_p$,
\begin{align*}
l^* = \argmax_{|\mathcal{L}| \in \mathcal{F}} \eta_p
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
\emph{Case Study}: Table \ref{tab:rebeta} shows one such rearrangement of $\boldsymbol{\beta_I}$ for the QC-LDPC code for our case study in Table \ref{tab:betai}. Unresolved dependencies are shown in blue in Table \ref{tab:rebeta}. $I=m_b=12$, $\mathcal{F}=\{2,4,6\}$ and, $l^* = \argmax_{|\mathcal{L}| \in \mathcal{F}} \eta_p = 6.$
The rearranged block index matrix $\boldsymbol{\beta_I^\prime}$ is shown in Table \ref{tab:rebeta} and the layer-level view of the pipeline timing diagram for the same is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:ppllay}(d). \\
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{pplblk.png}
\caption{Block-level view of the pipeline timing diagram. (a) General case for a circulant-$1$ identity submatrix construction based QC-LDPC code (see Section \ref{sec:qcldpc}) without pipelining. (b) Special case of the IEEE 802.11n QC-LDPC code used in this work without pipelining (c) Pipelined processing of two layers for the general QC-LDPC code case in (a). (d) Pipelined processing of two layers for the IEEE802.11n QC-LDPC code case in (b).}
\label{fig:pplblk}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{ppllay.png}
\caption{Layer-level view of the pipeline timing diagram. (a) General case for a circulant-$1$ identity submatrix construction based QC-LDPC code (see Section \ref{sec:qcldpc}) without pipelining. (b) Special case of the IEEE 802.11n QC-LDPC code used in this work without pipelining (c) Pipelined processing of two layers for the general QC-LDPC code case in (a). (d) Pipelined processing of two layers for the IEEE802.11n QC-LDPC code case in (b).}
\label{fig:ppllay}
\end{figure*}
\noindent \emph{High-level FPGA-based Decoder Architecture}: The high-level decoder architecture is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:decarch}. The ROM holds the LDPC code parameters specified by the $\boldsymbol\beta_I^\prime$ and the $\boldsymbol\beta_s^\prime$ along with other code parameters such as the block length and the maximum number of decoding iterations. The APP memory is initialized with the channel LLR values corresponding to all the VNs as per equation (\ref{eq:initllr}). The barrel shifter operates on blocks of VNs (APP values in equation (\ref{eq:app})) of size $z \times f$, where $f$ is the fixed-point word length used in the implementation for APP values. It circularly rotates the values to the right by using the shift values from the $\boldsymbol\beta_s^\prime$ matrix in the ROM, effectively implementing the connections between the CNs and VNs. The cyclically shifted APP memory values and the corresponding CN message values for the block in question are fed to the NPU arrays. Here, the GNPUs compute VN messages as per equation (\ref{eq:vnmsg}) and the LNPUs compute CN messages as per equation (\ref{eq:cnmsg}). These messages are then stored back at their respective locations in the RAMs for processing the next block.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{dec_arch.png}
\caption{High-level decoder architecture.\ showing the z-fold parallelization of the NPUs with an emphasis on the splitting of the sign and the minimum computation given in equation (\ref{eq:cnmsg}). Note that, other computations in equations (\ref{eq:initllr})-(\ref{eq:app}) are not shown for simplicity here. For both the pipelined and the non-pipelined versions, processing schedule for the inner Block Processing loop is as per Fig. \ref{fig:pplblk} and that for the outer Layer Processing loop is as per Fig. \ref{fig:ppllay}.}
\label{fig:decarch}
\end{figure*}
\section{Case Study}
\label{sec:casestudy}
To evaluate the proposed strategies for achieving high-throughput, we have implemented the scaled-MSA based decoder for the QC-LDPC code in the IEEE 802.11n (2012). For this code, $m_b \times n_b = 12 \times 24$, $z=27$, $54$ and $81$ resulting in code lengths of $n=24 \times z=648$, $1296$ and $1944$ bits respectively. Our implementation supports the submatrix size of $z=81$ and hence is capable of supporting all the block lengths for the rate $R=\frac{1}{2}$ code. At the time of writing this paper, we have successfully implemented the two aforementioned versions.
\subsubsection{1x}
\label{subsubsec:1x}
The block-level and the layer-level view of the pipelining is illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:pplblk}(b) and \ref{fig:ppllay}(b) respectively.
\subsubsection{2x}
\label{subsubsec:2x}
Pipelining is done in software at the algorithmic description level. The block and layer level views of the pipelined processing are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:pplblk}(d) and \ref{fig:ppllay}(d) respectively. With an efficiency $\eta_p^{(2)}=0.86$, the \emph{2x} version is $1.7$ times faster than the \emph{1x} version.
\indent We represent the input LLRs from the channel and the CTV and VTC messages with 6 signed bits and 4 fractional bits. Fig. \ref{fig:ber} shows the bit-error rate (BER) performance for the floating-point and the fixed-point data representation with 8 decoding iterations. As expected, the fixed-point implementation suffers by about 0.5dB compared to the floating point version. The decoder algorithm was described using the \emph{LabVIEW CSDS} software. The \emph{FPGA IP} compiler was then used to generate the VHDL code from the graphical dataflow description. The VHDL code was synthesized, placed and routed using the \emph{Xilinx Vivado} compiler on the \emph{Xilinx Kintex-7} FPGA available on the \emph{NI PXIe-7975R} FPGA board. The decoder core achieves an overall throughput of 608Mb/s at an operating frequency of 200MHz and a latency of 5.7\textmu s. Table \ref{tab:results} shows that the resource usage for the \emph{2x} version (almost twice as fast due to pipelining) is close to that of the \emph{1x} version. The FPGA IP compiler chooses to use more FF for data storage in the \emph{1x} version, while it uses more BRAM in \emph{2x} version.
Compared to a contemporary FPGA-based implementation in \cite{vivadoldpc} using high-level algorithmic description compiled to an HDL, our implementation achieves a higher throughput with relatively lesser resource utilization. Authors of \cite{vivadoldpc} have implemented a decoder for a $R=\frac{1}{2}$, $n=648$, IEEE 802.11n (2012) code that achieves a throughput of $13.4$Mb/s at $122$MHz, utilizes $2\%$ of slice registers, $3\%$ of slice LUTs and $20.9\%$ of Block RAMs on the \emph{Spartan-6 LX150T} FPGA with a comparable BER performance.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{ber_plot.png}
\caption{Bit Error Rate (BER) performance comparison between uncoded BPSK (rightmost), rate=1/2 LDPC with 4 iterations using fixed-point data representation (second from right), rate=1/2 LDPC with 8 iterations using fixed-point data representation (third from right), rate=1/2 LDPC with 8 iterations using floating-point data representation (leftmost).}
\label{fig:ber}
\end{figure}
\noindent \emph{2.06 Gb/s LDPC Decoder}\cite{globecomm}: An application of this work has been demonstrated in \emph{IEEE GLOBECOM'14} where the QC-LDPC code for our case study was decoded with a throughput of $2.06$ Gb/s. This throughput was achieved by using five decoder cores in parallel on the \emph{Xilinx K7 (410t)} FPGA in the NI USRP-2953R.
\begin{table}[htp]
\centering
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{3.5pt}
\scalebox{1}{
\begin{tabular}{l@{\hspace{4pt}}*{3}{c}}
\midrule
&$\mathbf{1x}$ &$\mathbf{2x}$ \\
\midrule
\bfseries Device
& \emph{Kintex-7k410t} &\emph{Kintex-7k410t} \\
\midrule
\bfseries Throughput(Mb/s)
&337 &608 \\
\midrule
\bfseries FF(\%)
&9.1 &5.3 \\
\midrule
\bfseries BRAM(\%)
&4.7 &6.4 \\
\midrule
\bfseries DSP48(\%)
&5.2 &5.2 \\
\midrule
\bfseries LUT(\%)
&8.7 &8.2 \\
\bottomrule
\addlinespace \addlinespace
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{LDPC Decoder IP FPGA Resource Utilization \& Throughput on the Xilinx \emph{Kintex-7 FPGA}.}
\label{tab:results}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conc}
In this brief we have proposed techniques to achieve high-throughput performance for a MSA based decoder for QC-LDPC codes. The proposed compact representation of the PCM provides significant improvement in throughput. An IEEE 802.11n (2012) decoder is implemented which attains a throughput of 608Mb/s (at 260MHz) and a latency of 5.7\textmu s on the \emph{Xilinx Kintex-7} FPGA. The \emph{FPGA IP} compiler greatly reduces prototyping time and is capable of implementing complex signal processing algorithms. There is undoubtedly more scope for improvement, nevertheless, our current results are promising.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The authors would like to thank the Department of Electrical \& Computer Engineering, Rutgers University for their continual support for this research work and the LabVIEW FPGA R\&D and the Advanced Wireless Research team in National Instruments for their valuable feedback and support.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{introduction}
Quantum information transfer (QIT) has many applications in communication
science \cite{a0}. There exist physical systems for realizing QIT, such as,
cavity quantum electrodynamics (QED) \cite{a01, a02, a021, a022}, linear
optics devices \cite{a03}, and superconducting qubits \cite{a04, a05, a06,
a07, a08}, \emph{etc}. In addition, a nitrogen-vacancy center in diamond has
been recently considered as one of the most promising candidates for quantum
information processing, due to its relatively long coherence time and the
possibility of coherent manipulation at room temperature \cite{b}. For
instances, the electron spin relaxation time $T_{1}=6$ms \cite{c} and
isotopically pure diamond sample dephasing time $T_{2}=2$ms \cite{d} have
been reported, coherent oscillations in a single electron spin have been
observed \cite{d1}, and coherent time of a nitrogen-vacancy center has been
improved very much in the recent years and could reach $1$ second \cite{d11
. On the other hand, hybrid solid-state devices have attracted tremendous
attentions (see \cite{a} and references therein). Theoretically, the
physical systems, composed of spin ensembles and superconducting qubits
fabricated in a TLR (transmission line resonator), have been proposed \cit
{a1, a2, a3, a33}. Experimentally, a quantum circuit consisting of a
superconducting qubit and a nitrogen-vacancy center ensemble (NVCE) has been
implemented in Ref. \cite{a4}; and a quantum SWAP gate has been realized in
this circuit, by employing the strong coupling between a superconducting
qubit and a NVCE \cite{a4}. In addition, Marcos \emph{et al.} \cite{a5} have
proposed a hybrid system, in which the direct coupling between a
superconducting flux qubit and a NVCE is much stronger than that between a
NVCE and a TLR. For the work on the coupling between a NVCE and a TLR, see
Refs. \cite{d3, d4}. Experimentally, the strong coupling between a
superconducting flux qubit and a NVCE has been demonstrated \cite{a6}.
Moreover, by using the strong coupling, the QIT between a flux qubit and a
NVCE has been performed in experiment \cite{a7}. Then, the strong coupling between
a NVCE and a TLR via a flux qubit used as a data bus was proposed in Ref. \cite{a8}. These results provide a
platform for using NVCEs as quantum memories, which are essential in quantum
information processing.
Motivated by the recent works on the coupling between \emph{LC} circuits and
flux qubits \cite{a9, a10, a11, a12}, and the strong coupling hybrid solid quantum system \cite{a5, a6, a7, a8}, as well as the QIT
with the solid quantum system \cite{a80, a81, a82}, we
will propose an architecture for scalable QIT among NVCEs. In this
architecture, a \emph{LC} circuit is used to induce the necessary
interaction between flux qubits, each magnetically coupling to a NVCE. We
explicitly show that for resonant interaction and large detuning cases,
high-fidelity QIT between the two spatially-separated NVCEs can be
implemented by solving Schr\"{o}dinger equations. Moreover, this
architecture can be extended to scale up multiple flux qubits and NVCEs by
using a single \emph{LC} circuit, and the QIT between any two selected NVCEs
can be achieved in this large hybrid system. To the best of our knowledge,
how to realize QIT between NVCEs in this architecture has not been proposed
yet. Note that, Refs. \cite{a13, a14} reported the QIT between two ensembles
which are trapped in spatially separated cavities, respectively. But, the
fidelity of the QIT was not calculated and the dissipation of the system was
not considered in Refs. \cite{a13, a14}.
\section{Model}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig2.eps}\\
\caption{(Color online) Quantum information transfer circuit. Two flux qubits are coupled to a \emph{LC} circuit by their mutual inductances $M_{j}$ (j=1,2). Each flux qubit consists of three Josephson junctions, i.e., two large junctions with the same coupling energy $E_{J}$ and a small
junction with the coupling energy $\alpha E_{J} ~(0.5<\alpha<1)$.
The separation between the two qubits is assumed to be much larger than the linear dimension of
each qubit, such that the direct interaction between the two flux qubits is negligible. Here, the NVCEs play a role of memory units, which are used to store quantum information for a long time.}\label{1}
\end{figure}
We propose a QIT hybrid circuit, as shown in Fig. (\ref{1}), which consists of a \emph{LC} circuit acting as a
data bus to induce coupling between two flux qubits. Each flux qubit couples to a NVCE by a magnetic field. Each NVCE is an information memory unit.
The electronic ground state of a single nitrogen-vacancy center (NVC) has a spin $\mathbb{S}=1$, with the levels $m_{s}=0$ and $m_{s}=\pm1$ separated by zero-field splitting $D$. For a NVC, the Hamiltonian can be described by (assuming $\hbar=1$) \cite{e0, e}
\begin{eqnarray}
H_{NVC}=D\mathbb{S}^{2}_{z}+E(\mathbb{S}^{2}_{x}-\mathbb{S}^{2}_{y})+g_{e}\mu_{B}\vec{B}\cdot\vec{\mathbb{S}},
\end{eqnarray}
where zero field splitting $D=2.88$ GHz, $\vec{\mathbb{S}}=\{\mathbb{S}_{x}, \mathbb{S}_{y}, \mathbb{S}_{z}\}$ is a usual Pauli spin-1 operator, $E$ is the strain-induced splitting coefficient, $B$ is the applied magnetic field, $g_{e}$ is the Lande factor, and $\mu_{B}$ is the Bohr magneton. When the static magnetic field $\vec{B}$ is applied along the crystalline axis of the diamond, the degeneracy of levels $|m_{s}=\pm1\rangle$ can be removed. The quantum information is encoded in sublevels $|m_{s}=0\rangle\equiv|0\rangle$ and $|m_{s}=-1\rangle\equiv|1\rangle$ serving as two logic states of a
qubit. For a NVCE with NVCs ($1,2,\ldots N$), the ground state is defined as $|g\rangle=|0_{1}\cdots0_{k}\cdots0_{N}\rangle$ while the excited state is defined as $|e\rangle=S^{+}|g\rangle=(1/\sqrt{N})\sum_{k=1}^{N}|0_{1}\cdots1_{k}\cdots0_{N}\rangle$ with operator $S^{+}=(S^{-})^{\dag}=(1/\sqrt{N})\sum_{k}^{N}|1\rangle_{k}\langle0|$, where the subscript \emph{k} represents the \emph{k}-th NVC. Thus, the Hamiltonian of a NVCE is written as \cite{a3} $H_{NVCE}=\frac{1}{2}\Omega S_{z}$, where $\Omega=D-g_{e}\mu_{B}B_{z}$ is the energy gap between the
ground state $|g\rangle$ and the excited state $|e\rangle$, with the operator $S_{z}=|e\rangle\langle e|-|g\rangle\langle g|$.
The Hamiltonian of a flux qubit is described as a two-level system \cite{f0, f}
\begin{eqnarray}
H_{q}=\frac{1}{2}(\varepsilon\sigma_{z}+\Delta\sigma_{x}),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\varepsilon(\Phi)=2I_{p}[\Phi-(1/2+n)\Phi_{0}]$ is the energy spacing of the two classical current
states, $I_{p}$ is persistent current of the
flux qubit, $\Phi_{0}=h/2e$ is the magnetic-flux
quantum, $\Phi$ is the external magnetic flux applied to the qubit loop, $\Delta$ is the energy gap between the two energy levels of the qubit at the degeneracy
point, and Pauli matrices $\sigma_{z}=|b\rangle\langle b|-|a\rangle\langle a|$ and $\sigma_{x}=|b\rangle\langle a|+|a\rangle\langle b|$ are defined in terms of the classical current,
with $|a\rangle=|\circlearrowright\rangle$ and $|b\rangle=|\circlearrowleft\rangle$ denoting the states with clockwise and counterclockwise
currents in the qubit loop. In terms of the eigenbasis of the flux qubit, the Hamiltonian (2) can be rewritten as $H_{q}=\frac{1}{2}\omega_{q}\sigma_{z}$, with
$\hbar\omega_{q}=\sqrt{\varepsilon^{2}+\Delta^{2}}$ being the energy level separation of the flux qubit.
As long as the distance between the two flux qubits is large, the direct interaction between the
two flux qubits is negligible. For a system in Fig. 1, the total Hamiltonian is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
H&=&\omega a^{\dag}a+\sum_{j=1}^{2}[\frac{1}{2}\omega^{j}_{q}\sigma^{j}_{z}+g_{j}(a\sigma_{j}^{+}+a^{\dag}\sigma_{j}^{-})\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{1}{2}\Omega_{j} S^{j}_{z}+J_{j}(S_{j}^{+}\sigma_{j}^{-}+S_{j}^{-}\sigma_{j}^{+})],
\end{eqnarray}
where the first term is the free Hamiltonian of the \emph{LC} circuit with the resonance frequency $\omega=1/\sqrt{LC}$ and the plasmon annihilation (creation) operator $a~(a^{\dag})$ \cite{a11}, the third term represents the interaction between the \emph{LC} circuit and the flux qubits with the coupling constant $g_{j}=M_{j}I_{p}\sqrt{\omega/2L}$ \cite{a11} and the operator $\sigma^{\dag}_{j}=(\sigma^{-}_{j})^{\dag}=|1\rangle_{j}\langle0|$,
the last term indicates the coupling between NVCEs and flux qubits with the coupling strength $J_{j}$ \cite{a5}.
\section{Quantum information transfer}
In this section, we discuss how to realize QIT between spatially-separated two NVCEs for both resonant interaction and large detuning cases. By solving Schr\"{o}dinger equations, we find that high-fidelity QIT can be implemented at some moment, as shown below.
For simplicity, we use \emph{NE} to represent NVCE in each equation below, but still use NVCE in the word text.
\subsection{Resonant interaction case}
In the interaction picture, the Hamiltonian of the total system for the resonant interaction case (i.e. $\omega=\omega_{q}^{j}=\Omega_{j}$) can be written as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
H_{I}=\sum_{j=1}^{2}[g_{j}(a\sigma_{j}^{+}+a^{\dag}\sigma_{j}^{-})+J_{j}(S_{j}^{+}\sigma_{j}^{-}+S_{j}^{-}\sigma_{j}^{+})]. \label{a}
\end{eqnarray}
The QIT from the left NVCE (i.e., $NE_{1}$) to the right one (i.e., $NE_{2}$) is described by the formula $(\alpha|g\rangle+\beta|e\rangle)_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{1}|0\rangle_{2}|0\rangle_{L}|g\rangle_{NE_{2}}\rightarrow
|g\rangle_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{1}|0\rangle_{2}|0\rangle_{L}(\alpha|g\rangle+\beta|e\rangle)_{NE_{2}}$, where the subscripts $1,~ 2$, and $L$ represent the left flux qubit, the right flux qubit, and \emph{LC} circuit, respectively; $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are the normalized complex numbers.
When the initial state of the system is $|\Psi(0)\rangle=|e\rangle_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{1}|0\rangle_{2}|0\rangle_{L}|g\rangle_{NE_{2}}$, the system state evolves in the subspace $\{|\varphi_{1}\rangle, |\varphi_{2}\rangle, |\varphi_{3}\rangle, |\varphi_{4}\rangle, |\varphi_{5}\rangle\}$ with
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
|\varphi_{1}\rangle&=|e\rangle_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{1}|0\rangle_{2}|0\rangle_{L}|g\rangle_{NE_{2}}, \\
|\varphi_{2}\rangle&=|g\rangle_{NE_{1}}|1\rangle_{1}|0\rangle_{2}|0\rangle_{L}|g\rangle_{NE_{2}}, \\
|\varphi_{3}\rangle&=|g\rangle_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{1}|1\rangle_{2}|0\rangle_{L}|g\rangle_{NE_{2}}, \\
|\varphi_{4}\rangle&=|g\rangle_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{1}|0\rangle_{2}|1\rangle_{L}|g\rangle_{NE_{2}}, \\
|\varphi_{5}\rangle&=|g\rangle_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{1}|0\rangle_{2}|0\rangle_{L}|e\rangle_{NE_{2}},
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $|g\rangle_{NE_{j}}$ and $|e\rangle_{NE_{j}} ~(j=1,2)$ are, respectively, the ground state and the symmetric Dicke excitation state of the \emph{j}-th NVCE, $|0\rangle_{j}$ ($|1\rangle_{j}$) is the ground (excited) state of the \emph{j}-th flux qubit; $|0\rangle_{L}$ ($|1\rangle_{L}$) is the ground (single-excited) state of the \emph{LC} circuit. At any instant, the quantum state of the system is described by
\begin{eqnarray}
|\Psi(t)\rangle=\sum_{i=1}^{5}C_{i}(t)|\varphi_{i}\rangle,
\end{eqnarray}
where the normalized coefficients satisfy $\sum_{i=1}^{5}|C_{i}(t)|^{2}=1$. Suppose the two flux qubits equally couple to the \emph{LC} circuit ($g_{1}=g_{2}=g$) and equally couple with their NVCEs ($J_{1}=J_{2}=J$). In this case, for the initial conditions $C_{1}(0)=1$ and $C_{2}(0)=C_{3}(0)=C_{4}(0)=C_{5}(0)=0$, we can easily get the expression of the time-dependent coefficients,
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
C_{1}(t)&=\frac{g^{2}}{J^{2}+2g^{2}}+\frac{1}{2}\cos Jt+\frac{J^{2}}{2(J^{2}+2g^{2})}\cos\sqrt{J^{2}+2g^{2}}t, \\
C_{2}(t)&=-i\frac{1}{2}\sin Jt-i\frac{J}{2\sqrt{J^{2}+2g^{2}}}\sin\sqrt{J^{2}+2g^{2}}t, \\
C_{3}(t)&=i\frac{1}{2}\sin Jt-i\frac{J}{2\sqrt{J^{2}+2g^{2}}}\sin\sqrt{J^{2}+2g^{2}}t, \\
C_{4}(t)&=-\frac{Jg}{J^{2}+2g^{2}}+\frac{Jg}{J^{2}+2g^{2}}\cos\sqrt{J^{2}+2g^{2}}t, \\
C_{5}(t)&=\frac{g^{2}}{J^{2}+2g^{2}}-\frac{1}{2}\cos Jt+\frac{J^{2}}{2(J^{2}+2g^{2})}\cos\sqrt{J^{2}+2g^{2}}t.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The quantum state $|g\rangle_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{c1}|0\rangle_{c2}|0\rangle_{L}|g\rangle_{NE_{2}}$ remains unchanged under the Hamiltonian (\ref{a}). Thus, when the quantum state $|\Psi(t)\rangle$ collapses into $|\varphi_{5}\rangle$, the quantum information is transferred from the left NVCE (i.e., $NE_{1}$) to the right one (i.e., $NE_{2}$). Hence, the populations of quantum states $|\varphi_{1}\rangle$ and $|\varphi_{5}\rangle$ are important measure for the QIT. Our proposal includes two coupling mechanisms: the magnetical coupling $J$ between the flux qubits and the NVCEs, the mutual-inductance coupling $g$ between the flux qubits and the \emph{LC} circuit. Next, according to the relation between coupling strengths $g$ and $J$, we will analyze the populations of quantum states $|\varphi_{1}\rangle$ and $|\varphi_{5}\rangle$.
Case (i) (the case for the equilibrium coupling $g=J$): the coefficients of quantum state $|\varphi_{1}\rangle$ and $|\varphi_{5}\rangle$ can be written as $C_{1}(t)=1/3+1/2\cos Jt+1/6\cos\sqrt{3}Jt$ and $C_{5}(t)=1/3-1/2\cos Jt+1/6\cos\sqrt{3}Jt$, respectively. In Fig. 2(a), we plot the population change with $Jt$. Obviously, $|C_{5}(t)|^{2}$ can reach the maximum at some moment. This means that QIT between spatially-separated two NVCEs can be perfectly realized.
Case (ii) (the case for the strong
magnetic coupling $J\gg g$): if $J\gg g$, $C_{5}(t)$ tends to zero. This result shows that the QIT can not be realized in our system. We plot $|C_{1}(t)|^{2}$ and $|C_{5}(t)|^{2}$ for a coupling strength $J=10g$ in Fig. 2(b), which shows that the QIT between spatially-separated two NVCEs can be realized, but it takes a longer time.
Case (iii) (the case for the strong mutual inductance
coupling $J\ll g$): if $J\ll g$, the expressions of $C_{1}(t)$ and $C_{5}(t)$ are reduced to $C_{1}(t)=1/2+1/2\cos Jt$ and $C_{5}(t)=1/2-1/2\cos Jt$, respectively. When $Jt=(2k+1)\pi ~(k=0,1,2\ldots)$, one has $C_{1}(t)=0$, but $C_{5}(t)=1$, which means that the information has been transferred from the left NVCE to the right one. We have plotted Fig. 2(c) to show how $|C_{1}(t)|^{2}$ and $|C_{5}(t)|^{2}$ change with time $t$ for a coupling strength $J=0.1g$. Fig. 2(c) shows that the QIT between spatially-separated two NVCEs can be implemented.
The recent experiments have reported that the effective coupling strength between a flux qubit and a NVCE (containing $N\sim3.1\times10^{7}$ NVCs) can reach $J\sim70$MHz \cite{a6}, and the coupling strength between a flux qubit and a \emph{LC} circuit can reach $g=220$MHz \cite{a9}. Hence, the condition $J\ll g$ for Case (iii) can be well satisfied.
However, in real physical systems the coupling strengths between flux qubits and LC circuit (or NVCEs) are not the same. The expressions of the time-dependent coefficients given in Eqs. (7) become rather long and complicated for the unbalanced coupling case. Here, we only numerically simulate the population change of quantum states with time, as shown in Fig. \ref{22}. It can be seen from Fig. \ref{22} that the perfect QIT between spatially-separated two NVCEs can also be realized except for the unbalanced strong magnetic coupling case.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{figa.eps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{figb.eps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{figc.eps}\\
\caption{(Color online) Solid-blue lines represent the population $|C_{1}|^2$ of the state $|\varphi_{1}\rangle$, while solid-dot-red lines indicate the population $|C_{5}|^{2}$ of the state $|\varphi_{5}\rangle$, (a) the equilibrium coupling $J=g$, (b) the strong magnetic coupling $J=10g$, (c) the strong mutual inductance coupling $J=0.1g$.}\label{2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fph1.eps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fph2.eps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fph3.eps}\\
\caption{(Color online) Solid-blue lines represent the population $|C_{1}|^2$ of the state $|\varphi_{1}\rangle$, while dash lines indicate the population $|C_{5}|^{2}$ of the state $|\varphi_{5}\rangle$, (a) the unbalanced equilibrium coupling $g_{1}=0.9J_{1},~g_{2}=0.9J_{2},~J_{2}=0.9J_{1}$, (b) the unbalanced strong magnetic coupling $J_{1}=10g_{1},~J_{2}=10g_{2},~g_{1}=0.9g_{2}$, (c) the unbalanced strong mutual inductance coupling $J_{1}=0.1g_{1},~J_{2}=0.1g_{2}, g_{1}=0.9g_{2}$.}\label{22}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Large detuning case}
In this section, we will show how to realize QIT between two NVCEs within a large detuning regime. We will only consider the large detuning between the \emph{LC} circuit and the flux qubits, but still apply the resonance interaction between the flux qubits and the NVCEs. In the interaction picture, the Hamiltonian for the system (shown in Fig. \ref{1}) is
\begin{eqnarray}
H_{I}=\sum_{j=1}^{2}[g_{j}(a\sigma_{j}^{+}e^{i\delta_{j} t}+a^{\dag}\sigma_{j}^{-}e^{-i\delta_{j} t})+J_{j}(S_{j}^{+}\sigma_{j}^{-}+S_{j}^{-}\sigma_{j}^{+})],
\end{eqnarray}
where $\delta_{j}=\omega_{q}^{j}-\omega$ is the detuning between the transition frequency of the \emph{j}-th flux qubit and the frequency of the \emph{LC} circuit. In the large detuning case $\delta_{j}\gg g_{j}$, there is no energy exchange between the flux qubits and the \emph{LC} circuit. Accordingly, there is no energy exchange between each NVCE and the \emph{LC} circuit. We consider that two identical flux qubits simultaneously
interact with the \emph{LC} circuit and assume that the
\emph{LC} circuit is initially in the vacuum state. Then, the effective
Hamiltonian is given by \cite{a01}
\begin{eqnarray}
H_{eff}&=&\sum_{j=1}^{2}\lambda_{j}[(|1\rangle_{j}\langle1|+\sigma_{1}^{\dag}\sigma_{2}^{-}+\sigma_{1}^{-}\sigma_{2}^{\dag})\nonumber\\
&&+J_{j}(S_{j}^{+}\sigma_{j}^{-}+S_{j}^{-}\sigma_{j}^{+})], \label{b}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda_{j}=g_{j}^{2}/\delta_{j}$. The first term describes the \emph{LC}-induced energy stark shift; the second and third terms represent the dipole coupling between the
two flux qubits, induced by the \emph{LC} circuit; and the last two terms represent the interaction between the NVCEs and the flux qubits. The virtual excitation
of the \emph{LC} circuit avoids the population loss of the data bus.
We assume that quantum information is initially encoded in the left NVCE (i.e., $NE_{1}$). Because the state $|g\rangle_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{1}|0\rangle_{2}|g\rangle_{NE_{2}}$ remains unchanged under the Hamiltonian (\ref{b}), we only need to care about the evolution of the state $|\Psi(0)\rangle=|e\rangle_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{1}|0\rangle_{2}|g\rangle_{NE_{2}}$. The system state evolves within
the subspace, formed by the following states
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
|\phi_{1}\rangle&=|e\rangle_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{1}|0\rangle_{2}|g\rangle_{NE_{2}}, \\
|\phi_{2}\rangle&=|g\rangle_{NE_{1}}|1\rangle_{1}|0\rangle_{2}|g\rangle_{NE_{2}}, \\
|\phi_{3}\rangle&=|g\rangle_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{1}|1\rangle_{2}|g\rangle_{NE_{2}}, \\
|\phi_{4}\rangle&=|g\rangle_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{1}|0\rangle_{2}|e\rangle_{NE_{2}}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The quantum state of the system at any time is expressed as
\begin{eqnarray}
|\Psi(t)\rangle=\sum_{i=1}^{4}D_{i}(t)|\phi_{i}\rangle,
\end{eqnarray}
where the normalized coefficients satisfy $\sum_{i=1}^{4}|D_{i}(t)|^{2}=1$. For the initial condition $D_{1}(0)=1$ and $D_{2}(0)=D_{3}(0)=D_{4}(0)=0$, and for the identical coupling strengths between the flux qubits and the NVCEs (i.e. $J_{1}=J_{2}=J$), and the two flux qubits equally to the \emph{LC} circuit ($\lambda_{1}=\lambda_{2}=\lambda$), we can easily obtain the following time-dependent coefficients
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
D_{1}(t)&=\frac{J^{2}}{4(\kappa^{2}+\lambda\kappa)}e^{-i(\lambda+\kappa)t}
+\frac{J^2}{4(\kappa^{2}-\lambda\kappa)}e^{-i(\lambda-\kappa)t}+\frac{1}{2}\cos Jt, \\
D_{2}(t)&=\frac{J(\lambda+\kappa)}{4(\kappa^{2}+\lambda\kappa)}e^{-i(\lambda+\kappa)t}
+\frac{J(\lambda-\kappa)}{4(\kappa^{2}-\lambda\kappa)}e^{-i(\lambda-\kappa)t}
-i\frac{1}{2}\sin Jt, \\
D_{3}(t)&=\frac{J(\lambda+\kappa)}{4(\kappa^{2}+\lambda\kappa)}e^{-i(\lambda+\kappa)t}
+\frac{J(\lambda-\kappa)}{4(\kappa^{2}-\lambda\kappa)}e^{-i(\lambda-\kappa)t}
+i\frac{1}{2}\sin Jt, \\
D_{4}(t)&=\frac{J^{2}}{4(\kappa^{2}+\lambda\kappa)}e^{-i(\lambda+\kappa)t}
+\frac{J^2}{4(\kappa^{2}-\lambda\kappa)}e^{-i(\lambda-\kappa)t}-\frac{1}{2}\cos Jt,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
with the parameter $\kappa=\sqrt{\lambda^2+J^2}$. The information exchange between the two NVCEs can be characterized by the population change of the quantum states $|\phi_{1}\rangle$ and $|\phi_{4}\rangle$. Following the resonant interaction case, we now discuss the relation between the $|D_{1}(t)|^{2}$ and $|D_{4}(t)|^{2}$ for different dipole-dipole coupling strength $\lambda$ and magnetical coupling strength $J$. For the equilibrium coupling $\lambda=J$, we plot the population evolution in Fig. 4(a). The perfect QIT can be achieved at some moment. Comparing Fig. 4(a) with Fig. 2(a), one can see that the time required for QIT is shorter than that for the resonant interaction case. Fig. 4(b) shows that for the strong magnetic coupling $J=10\lambda$, the QIT can be realized and the required time is reduced by one order of magnitude, compared with Fig. 2(b). For the stronge dipole-dipole coupling $J=0.1\lambda$, the QIT can also be realized, as shown in Fig. 4(c). But the successful probability of the QIT decreases as the time increases. For the unbalanced coupling case, we only numerically simulate the changing of the $|D_{1}(t)|^{2}$ and $|D_{4}(t)|^{2}$ with $J_{1}t$ as shown in Fig. \ref{33}, which shows that the QIT between two NVCEs can also be implemented.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{figaa.eps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{figbb.eps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{figcc.eps}\\
\caption{(Color online) The time evolution of the populations of the states $|\phi_{1}\rangle$ and $|\phi_{4}\rangle$ for the different coupling mechanisms (a) $J=\lambda$, (b) $J=10\lambda$, and (c) $J=0.1\lambda$. Solid-blue lines represent the population $|D_{1}(t)|^{2}$ of the state $|\phi_{1}\rangle$, while solid-dot-red lines indicate the the population $|D_{4}(t)|^{2}$ of the state $|\phi_{4}\rangle$.}\label{3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{fph4.eps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{fph5.eps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{fph6.eps}\\
\caption{(Color online) The time evolution of the populations of the states $|\phi_{1}\rangle$ and $|\phi_{4}\rangle$ for the unbalanced coupling: (a) $\lambda_{1}=0.9J_{1},~\lambda_{2}=0.9J_{2},~J_{2}=0.9J_{1}$; (b) $J_{1}=10\lambda_{1},~J_{2}=10\lambda_{2},~\lambda_{1}=0.9\lambda_{2}$; (c) $J_{1}=0.1\lambda_{1}, J_{2}=0.1\lambda_{2}, \lambda_{1}=0.9\lambda_{2}$. Solid-blue lines represent the population $|D_{1}(t)|^{2}$ of the state $|\phi_{1}\rangle$, while red-dash lines indicate the the population $|D_{4}(t)|^{2}$ of the state $|\phi_{4}\rangle$.}\label{33}
\end{figure}
Fidelity is a direct measure to characterize how accurate the QIT is achieved. Here, the fidelity is defined as $F=|\langle\Psi_{T}|\Psi(t)\rangle|^{2}$, where $|\Psi_{T}\rangle$ is the ideal target state of the transfer. The expression of the ideal target state is $|\Psi_{T}\rangle=|g\rangle_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{1}|0\rangle_{2}|0\rangle_{L}(\alpha|g\rangle+\beta|e\rangle)_{NE_{2}}$ for the resonant interaction, while $|\Psi_{T}\rangle=|g\rangle_{NE_{1}}|0\rangle_{1}|0\rangle_{2}(\alpha|g\rangle+\beta|e\rangle)_{NE_{2}}$ for the large detuning case. We obtain the expression of the fidelity $F=|\alpha|^{2}+|\beta C_{5}(t)|^{2}$ for the resonant interaction, while $F=|\alpha|^{2}+|\beta D_{4}(t)|^{2}$ for the large detuning case. As an example, let's consider $\alpha=1/\sqrt{3}$ and $\beta=\sqrt{2/3}$. We have $F=(1+2|C_{5}(t)|^{2})/3$ for the resonant interaction case, while $F=(1+2|D_{4}(t)|^{2})/3$ for the large detuning case. The fidelities for the two cases are plotted in Fig. \ref{4}, which shows that high-fidelity QIT between the two NVCEs can be achieved at some moment.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fid00.eps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fid000.eps}\\
\caption{(Color online) Fidelity $F$ versus $Jt$, without considering the dissipation of the system. (a) Resonant interaction case. Dashed-blue, solid-dot-black, and solid-red curves correspond to $J=g$, $J=0.1g$, and $J=10g$, respectively. (b) Large detuning case. Dashed-blue, solid-black, and solid-red lines correspond to $J=\lambda$, $J=0.1\lambda$, and $J=10\lambda$, respectively.}\label{4}
\end{figure}
It is meaning to investigating the influence of decoherence of the system on the QIT. When the dissipation of the system is considered, the
dynamics of the lossy system is governed by the following master equation
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{\rho}&=&-i[H_{I}, \rho]+\frac{\kappa}{2}(2a\rho a^{\dag}-a^{\dag}a\rho-\rho a^{\dag}a)\nonumber\\
&&+\sum_{j}[\frac{\gamma'_{qj}}{2}(\sigma_{z}^{j}\rho\sigma_{z}^{j}-\rho)+\frac{\gamma'_{Nj}}{2}(S_{z}^{j}\rho S_{z}^{j}-\rho)\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\gamma_{qj}}{2}(2\sigma_{j}^{-}\rho\sigma_{j}^{+}-\rho\sigma_{j}^{+}\sigma_{j}^{-}-\sigma_{j}^{+}\sigma_{j}^{-}\rho)\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\gamma_{Nj}}{2}(2S_{j}^{-}\rho S_{j}^{+}-\rho S_{j}^{+}S_{j}^{-}-S_{j}^{+}S_{j}^{-}\rho)],
\end{eqnarray}
for the resonant interaction. Here, $\kappa$ is the decay rate of the \emph{LC} circuit, $\gamma'_{qj}$ ($\gamma'_{Nj}$) is the dephasing rate of the \emph{j}-th flux qubit (NVCE), and $\gamma_{qj}$ ($\gamma_{Nj}$) is the relaxation rate of the \emph{j}-th flux qubit (NVCE). For the large detuning case, the \emph{LC} circuit has been adiabatic eliminated in Hamiltonian (\ref{b}). Thus, the master equation is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{\rho}&=&-i[H_{eff}, \rho]+\sum_{j}[\frac{\gamma'_{qj}}{2}(\sigma_{z}^{j}\rho\sigma_{z}^{j}-\rho)+\frac{\gamma'_{Nj}}{2}(S_{z}^{j}\rho S_{z}^{j}-\rho)\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\gamma_{qj}}{2}(2\sigma_{j}^{-}\rho\sigma_{j}^{+}-
\rho\sigma_{j}^{+}\sigma_{j}^{-}-\sigma_{j}^{+}\sigma_{j}^{-}\rho)\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\gamma_{Nj}}{2}(2S_{j}^{-}\rho S_{j}^{+}-\rho S_{j}^{+}S_{j}^{-}-S_{j}^{+}S_{j}^{-}\rho)].
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fid10.eps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fid21.eps}\\
\caption{(Color online) Fidelity $F$ versus $Jt$, after taking the system dissipation into account. (a) Resonant interaction case. Dashed-blue, solid-dot-black, and solid-red curves correspond to $J=g$, $J=0.1g$, and $J=10g$, respectively. The plot was drawn by setting $\kappa=\gamma'_{qj}=\gamma'_{Nj}=\gamma_{qj}=\gamma_{Nj}=0.001J$. (b) Large detuning case. Dashed-blue, solid-black, and solid-red lines correspond to $J=\lambda$, $J=0.1\lambda$, and $J=10\lambda$, respectively. The plot was drawn by setting $\gamma'_{qj}=\gamma'_{Nj}=\gamma_{qj}=\gamma_{Nj}=0.001J$.}\label{44}
\end{figure}
The Fig. \ref{44} shows fidelity of the QIT versus $Jt$, after taking the dissipation of the system into account. Comparing Fig. \ref{44} with Fig. \ref{4}, one can see that the influence of the dissipation of the system on the fidelity is negligible at small $Jt$.
Let us briefly discuss the experimental feasibility of our proposal. During the annealing process, a NVCE is created by ion implantation into a diamond. A diamond crystal is bonded on top of the flux qubit chip with its surface facing the chip \cite{a6, a7}. The size of a flux qubit is $1 \mu$m order \cite{a5}. A physical system with multiple flux qubits coupled to a \emph{LC} circuit has been proposed \cite{a11}. The time $t$ of the QIT is inverse ratio to the coupling strength $J$. For the coupling strength $J\approx70$MHz, we have $t\sim 1/J\sim14$ ns, which is much shorter than the flux qubit's coherence time $T_{2}\simeq20 \mu$s \cite{h} and the NVCE's coherence time approaching $1$ second \cite{h1}. Also, decoherence of the flux qubits and the NVCEs can be effectively suppressed by periodic dynamical decoupling \cite{j}.
\section{Extending to the scalable quantum circuit}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{fig4.eps}\\
\caption{(Color online) Scalable quantum information transfer circuit. Multiple flux qubits are coupled to a \emph{LC} circuit by their mutual inductances $M_{j}(j=1,2,...n)$. Each flux qubit couples to a NVCE acting as an information memory unit.}\label{5}
\end{figure}
Our proposal can be extended to the scalable quantum circuit, which is constructed by $n$ flux qubits, NVCEs and a \emph{LC} circuit acting as a data bus, shown in Fig. \ref{5}. All flux qubits can be made to be coupled (or decoupled) with the \emph{LC} circuit by varying the external flux applied to each qubit loop. Alternatively, one can replace the small junction of each flux qubit with a SQUID and change external magnetic field threading the SQUID loop \cite{f0, f, k}, such that each flux qubit is coupled or decoupled to the \emph{LC} circuit. In this way, the information can be transferred between any two selected NVCEs. Furthermore, the architecture provides the possibility for creating entanglement among NVCEs and performing quantum logic operations on NVCEs, which are important in quantum information processing.
\section{Conclusion}
A hybrid architecture has been proposed for realizing QIT between NVCEs. For both resonant interaction and large detuning cases, it has been explicitly shown that high-fidelity QIT can be achieved between two spatially-separated NVCEs, and is robust against decoherence of the hybrid architecture. Also, a discussion has been given for the influence of the different coupling mechanisms on the QIT. According to the current experimental conditions, the feasibility of this proposed has been analyzed. The proposed architecture opens a way for scalable QIT among NVCEs, which is important in large scale quantum information processing. Finally, the method presented here is applicable to a wide range of
physical implementation with different types of data buses such as nanomechanical
resonators and TLRs.
\begin{acknowledgments}
FYZ thanks Prof. Chong Li and Dr. Bao Liu for valuable discussions. FYZ and HSS were supported by the
National Science Foundation of China under Grants No. 11175033. ZFY was supported by the National Science Foundation of China under Grants Nos. 11447135 and 11447134, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities No. DC201502080407. CPY was supported in part
by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos. 11074062 and 11374083, the Zhejiang Natural Science Foundation under Grant No. LZ13A040002, and the funds from Hangzhou Normal University under Grant Nos. HSQK0081 and PD13002004. This work was also supported by the funds from Hangzhou City for the Hangzhou-City Quantum information and Quantum Optics Innovation Research Team.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
Stern's diatomic sequence $a_1=1, a_{2n}=a_n, a_{2n+1}=a_n+a_{n+1}$
is a particularly well studied sequence (see, e.g., \cite{B1}, \cite{L}, \cite{N} and references therein, as well as \cite{SW}).
The first section is devoted to showing that this sequence is \textit{interesting}. In particular, we shall look at the following properties.
\begin{itemize}
\item $n\mapsto a_{n+1}/a_n$ is a bijection between the positive natural numbers and the positive rational numbers,
\item $n/2^k\mapsto a_n/a_{n+2^k}$ extends to a continuous strictly increasing function on $[0,1]$ known as ``Conway's box function'' (it's inverse is $?(x)$, Minkowski's question-mark function),
\item It shares a number of similarities to the Fibonacci sequence; in particular, it has a Binet type formula.
\end{itemize}
\vskip .1 in
The remaining three sections are devoted to three analogues of Stern's sequence:
\begin{itemize}
\item We replace addition by another binary operation; in particular, we define $b_1=0, b_{2n}=b_n, b_{2n+1}=b_n\oplus b_{n+1}$ where $x\oplus y=x+y+\sqrt{4xy+1}$. This sequence is related to Stern's sequence and arises from certain sphere packings. It has apparently not appeared before in the literature.
\item We replace the complementary indexing sequences $\{2n\}$ and $\{2n+1\}$ by another pair of complementary sequences; in particular, let $R_1=1, R_{\alpha(n)}=R_n, R_{\beta(n)}=R_n+R_{n+1}$ where $\alpha(n)=\lfloor n\phi-1/\phi^2\rfloor$, $\beta(n)=\lfloor n\phi^2+\phi\rfloor$ form a specific pair of complementary Beatty sequences. This sequence has been extensively studied as $R_n$ is the number of ways $n$ can be represented as a sum of distinct Fibonacci numbers.
\item The known Binet type formula for Stern's sequence \cite{N} is written in terms of the sequence $s_2(n)$ (:= the number of terms in the binary expansion of $n$). We replace $s_2(n)$by $s_F(n)$(:= the number of terms in the Zeckendorf representation of $n$). This new sequence, apparently not studied before, is an integer sequence with several interesting (and several conjectural) properties.
\end{itemize}
\vskip .4 in
\section{Stern's Diatomic Sequence}
Consider the following ``diatomic array" \cite{B1} formed as a variant of Pascal's triangle; each entry is either the value directly above or else the sum of the two above it.
$$\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccc}1&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&1\\1&&&&&&&&2&&&&&&&&1\\1&&&&3&&&&2&&&&3&&&&1
\\1&&4&&3&&5&&2&&5&&3&&4&&1\\1&5&4&7&3&8&5&7&2&7&5&8&3&7&4&5&1\\.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.
\end{array}$$
The word ``diatomic" is used here since every entry of the diatomic array gets its value from either one or two entries above and gives that value to three entries below, hence has ``valence" 4 or 5 (hence the diatomic array models a kind of crystalline alloy of two elements).
Ignoring the right most column and reading the numbers as in a book, we get Stern's diatomic sequence:
$$1,1,2,1,3,2,3,1,4,3,5,2,5,3,4,1,5,...$$
The sequence is thus defined by the recurrence
$$a_1=1, a_{2n}=a_n, a_{2n+1}=a_n+a_{n+1}. \eqno{(1)}$$
We define $a_0$ to be 0 (the value consistent with $a_{2\cdot 0+1}=a_0+a_1$).
Perhaps the most celebrated property of this sequence is that
every positive rational number is represented exactly once as $a_{n+1}/a_n$. See, for example, \cite{CW} or \cite{N}. We rephrase this fact as a theorem.
\begin{theorem} Every ordered pair of relatively prime positive integers appears exactly once in the sequence $\{(a_n,a_{n+1})\}$. \end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
For an ordered pair, consider the process of subtracting the smallest from largest (stop if equal). For example,
$(4,5)\mapsto (4,1)$ and $(7,3)\mapsto (4,3)$. By the definition of Stern's sequence,
$$(a_{2n},a_{2n+1}), (a_{2n+1},a_{2n+2})\longmapsto (a_n, a_{n+1}).$$
Every relatively prime pair appears (if not, then there is an ordered pair not on the list with lowest sum. Apply the process; the result has lower sum and so is $(a_n, a_{n+1})$ for some $n$ and so the original pair is either $(a_{2n},a_{2n+1})$ or $(a_{2n+1},a_{2n+2})$). Every relatively prime pair appears
\textit{exactly} once since, if not, then there exist $m<n$ with $(a_m,a_{m+1})=(a_n,a_{n+1})$ and such that $m$ is as small as possible. Applying the process to both implies $\lfloor m/2\rfloor=\lfloor n/2\rfloor$ and thus $a_m=a_{m+1}=a_{m+2}$ which is impossible. \end{proof}
One can then rewrite any sum over relatively prime pairs in terms of Stern's sequence. As an example, we rephrase the Riemann hypothesis. First note that $n\longmapsto {a_{2n}/a_{2n+1}}$ is an explicit bijection from ${\Bbb Z}^+$ to ${\Bbb Q}\cap (0,1)$.
Then the Riemann hypothesis is equivalent to $$\displaystyle\sum_{a_{2n+1}<x} e^{2\pi i a_{2n}/a_{2n+1}}=O(x^{1/2+\epsilon}).$$
Briefly why this is so: the M\"obius function can be written as $\mu(n):=\sum_{1\le k\le n, \gcd(n,k)=1} e^{2\pi i k/n}$ and so the left hand side is really just Merten's function $M(x):=\sum_{n<x} \mu(n)$. The connection between Merten's function and the Riemann hypothesis is well-known; see for example \cite{E}.
Minkowski's question mark function was introduced in 1904 as an example of a ``singular function" (it is strictly increasing yet its derivative exists and equals 0 almost everywhere). It is defined in terms of continued fractions:
$$?(x)=2\displaystyle\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\dfrac{(-1)^{n+1}}{2^{a_1+a_2+...+a_n}}$$
where $x=1/(a_1+1/(a_2+1/(a_3+... )))$. By Lagrange's theorem that states that the continued fraction representation of a quadratic surd must eventually repeat, it is clear that $?(x)$ takes quadratic surds to rational numbers.
The function $$f:\dfrac k{2^n}\longmapsto \dfrac{a_k}{a_{2^n+k}}$$
extends to a continuous strictly increasing function on $[0,1]$.
This function is known as ``Conway's box function" and its inverse is Minkowski's question mark function $?(x)$.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.5in]{MinkowskiGraphplot2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=1.5in]{MinkowskiGraphplot1.eps}
\caption{The graphs of $y=f(x)$ and its inverse $y=?(x)$.}
\label{fig. 1}
\end{figure}
See \cite{N} for a proof.
The functions $f(x)$ and $?(x)$ extends to homeomorphisms (or, equivalently, are restrictions of homeomorphisms) between two fractals.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4in]{testfig02.eps}
\caption{Sierpinski gasket and an Apollonian circle packing}
\label{fig. 2}
\end{figure}
Stern's sequence is related to the Fibonacci sequence in a number of ways. For example, the Fibonacci sequence is a subsequence:
$$\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccc} \framebox 1&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&1\\1&&&&&&&&\framebox 2&&&&&&&&1\\1&&&&\framebox 3&&&&2&&&&3&&&&1
\\1&&4&&3&&\framebox 5&&2&&5&&3&&4&&1\\1&5&4&7&3&\framebox 8&5&7&2&7&5&8&3&7&4&5&1\\.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.
\end{array}$$
It is easy to see that
$$a_{J(n)}=F_n \eqno{(2)}$$
where $J(n):=(2^n-(-1)^n)/3$ is the Jacobsthal sequence \cite[A001405]{S}.
A new result by Coons and Tyler \cite{CT} identifies and proves the asymptotic upper bound:
$$\limsup_{n\rightarrow\infty}\dfrac{a_n}{(3n)^{\log_2\phi}}=\dfrac1{\sqrt 5}.$$
The constants involved in this formula are perhaps not so surprising since, by formula (2), it is clear that
$$\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}{a_{J(n)}}/({(3{J(n)})^{\log_2\phi}})=1/{\sqrt 5}.$$
Stern's sequence has a few remarkable similarities to the Fibonacci sequence (see \cite{N} and \cite{Nmod2}).
For example, Stern's sequence satisfies a modified Fibonacci recurrence:
$$a_{n+1}=a_n+a_{n-1}-2(a_{n-1}\mod {a_n}).$$
Next, certain diagonal sums across Pascal's triangle yield the Fibonacci sequence while the corresponding sums across Pascal's triangle modulo 2 yield Stern's sequence:
$$\begin{matrix}&&&&1&&&&\\&&&1&&1&&&\\&&1&&2&&\framebox 1&&\\&1&&\framebox3&&3&&1&\\ \framebox1&& 4&&6&&4&&1\\
&\cdot&\cdot&\cdot&\cdot&\cdot&\cdot\\ \end{matrix},\begin{matrix}&&&&1&&&&\\&&&1&&1&&&\\&&1&&0&&\framebox 1&&\\&1&&\framebox1&&1&&1&\\ \framebox1&& 0&&0&&0&&1\\
&\cdot&\cdot&\cdot&\cdot&\cdot&\cdot\\ \end{matrix}$$
$$F_{n+1}=\sum_{2i+j=n}{{i+j}\choose i}, \hskip .2 in a_{n+1}=\sum_{2i+j=n} \left[{{i+j}\choose i}\bmod 2\right]$$
Recall
Binet's formula
$$F_{n+1}=\dfrac{\phi^{n+1}-\overline\phi^{n+1}}{\phi-\overline\phi}=\displaystyle\sum_{k=0}^n \phi^k\overline\phi^{n-k}.\eqno{(3)}$$
Stern's sequence satisfies a similar formula:
$$a_{n+1}=\displaystyle\sum_{k=0}^n \sigma^{s_2(k)}\overline\sigma^{s_2(n-k)}$$
where $\sigma:=(1+\sqrt{-3})/2$ is a sixth root of unity and $s_2(n)$ is the number of ones in the binary expansion of $n$
\cite[A000120]{S}:
$$\begin{matrix}n&0&1&2&3&4&5&6&7&8...\\
s_2(n)&0&1&1&2&1&2&2&3&1...\end{matrix}$$
Why this is true: If
$G(x):=\sum \sigma^{s_2(n)}x^n$ and $F(x)$ is the generating function for $\{a_{n+1}\}$, then $G(x)=(1+\sigma x)G(x^2)$
and $F(x)=(1+x+x^2)F(x^2)$. For real $x$, since $(1+\sigma x)(1+\overline\sigma x)=1+x+x^2$, $|G(x)|^2=F(x)$ and the result follows by equating coefficients.
\vskip .4 in
\section{Replacing addition by another operation}
\begin{definition} For non-negative real numbers $a,b$, let
$$\begin{aligned} a\oplus b&=a+b+\sqrt{4ab+1}\\
a\ominus b&=a+b-\sqrt{4ab+1}\end{aligned}.$$\end{definition}
\begin{proposition} If $a,b,c,d>0$ and $|ad-bc|=1$ then $(ac)\oplus(bd)=(a+b)(c+d)$. \end{proposition}
\begin{proof} If $(ad-bc)^2=1$, then $$(ad+bc)^2=1+4abcd$$
and thus
$$(ac)\oplus (bd)=ac+bd+\sqrt{4abcd+1}=ac+bd+ad+bc.$$
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \rm{By the Fibonacci identity
$$F_{n-1}F_{n+1}=F_n^2+(-1)^n,$$
it follows that
$$(F_{n-1}F_n)\oplus(F_nF_{n+1})=(F_{n-1}+F_n)(F_{n}+F_{n+1})=F_{n+1}F_{n+2}.$$
and so the sequence $x_n:=F_nF_{n+1}$ satisfies the modified Fibonacci recurrence
$$x_{n+1}=x_n\oplus x_{n-1}.$$}
\end{remark}
\vskip .2 in
Here we define the first new sequence.
\begin{definition} Let $b_1=0$, and for $n\ge 1$,
$$\begin{aligned} &b_{2n}=b_n\\ &b_{2n+1}=b_n\oplus b_{n+1}.\end{aligned}$$\end{definition}
The sequence begins $$0,0,1,0,2,1,2,0,3,2,6,1,6,2,3,0,4,3,10,2,15,6,12,1,12,6,15,...$$
It is
not immediately clear that this sequence must always be integral. One way to show this is to express each $b_k$ as a product of elements of Stern's sequence (Theorem 3.6, below). First we must prove a lemma.
\begin{lemma} For $m,n\ge 0$, if $m+n=2^j-1$ then $a_{m+1}a_{n+1}-a_ma_n=1$. \end{lemma}
\begin{proof} We prove this by induction on $j$. If $m+n=1$, then $a_{m+1}a_{n+1}-a_ma_n=a_1a_2-a_0a_1=1$ and the result holds for $j=1$. Suppose now that the result holds for a fixed $j$ and that $m+n=2^{j+1}-1$. Without loss of generality, $m=2k+1$ and $n=2l$ for some $k,l\ge 0$ (and so $k+l=2^j-1$). Then
$$\begin{aligned} a_{m+1}a_{n+1}-a_ma_n&=a_{2k+2}a_{2l+1}-a_{2k+1}a_{2l}\\&=a_{k+1}(a_l+a_{2l+1})-(a_k+a_{k+1})a_{l}=a_{k+1}a_{l+1}-a_ka_l=1\end{aligned}$$ and the result follows. \end{proof}
\begin{theorem} If $2^j\le k\le 2^{j+1}$, then
$$b_k=a_{2^{j+1}-k}a_{k-2^j}.$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} If $k=2^j$ then, because $a_0=0$, $b_k=0=a_{2^{j+1}-k}a_{k-2^j}=a_{2^{j}-k}a_{k-2^{j-1}}$.
Let $x_k:=a_{2^{j+1}-k}a_{k-2^j}$ where $k\in(2^j, 2^{j+1}).$ Then $2k,2k+1\in(2^{j+1},2^{j+2})$ and thus
$$x_{2k}=a_{2^{j+1}-2k}a_{2k-2^j}=a_{2^j-k}a_{k-2^{j-1}}=x_k$$
and, by lemma 3.5 and proposition 3.2,
$$\begin{aligned} x_{2k+1}&=a_{2^{j+1}-(2k+1)}a_{2k+1-2^j}\\
&=a_{2(2^j-k-1)+1}a_{2(k-2^{j-1})+1}\\
&=(a_{2^j-k-1}+a_{2^j-k})\cdot(a_{k-2^{j-1}}+a_{k+1-2^{j-1}})\\
&=(a_{2^j-k-1}a_{k+1-2^{j-1}})\oplus(a_{2^j-k}a_{k-2^{j-1}})=x_{k+1}\oplus x_k\end{aligned}.$$
Hence $b_k=x_k$ for all $k$, and the result follows.\end{proof}
\begin{corollary} $b_n\in {\Bbb N}$. \end{corollary}
As seen in section 2, Stern's diatomic sequence leads to a construction of Conway's box function $f(x)$, the inverse of Minkowski's question-mark function.
The sequence $\{b_k\}$ gives rise to a similar function that turns out to be closely related to $f(x)$.
\begin{definition} For $k,n\in {\Bbb N}$, $k\le 2^n$, let
$$g\left(\frac k{2^n}\right):=\dfrac{b_k}{b_{2^n+k}}.$$ \end{definition}
\begin{theorem} The function $g(x)$ extends to a continuous function on $[0,1]$ that satisfies, for $x\in (2^{-j-1}, 2^{-j})$,
$$g(x)=f(2^{j+1}x-1)[1-jf(2x)]$$
where $f(x)$ is Conway's box function. \end{theorem}
\begin{proof} Let $x=k/2^n$. Then $2^{n-j-1}\le k \le 2^{n-j}$ for some $j\ge 0$.
Since $2^n\le 2^n+k\le 2^{n+1},$ it follows from Theorem 3.6 that
$$b_k=a_{2^{n-j}-k}a_{k-2^{n-j-1}}\text{ and } b_{2^n+k}=a_{2^n-k}a_k.$$
By \cite[formulas (2) and (3)]{N},
$$a_{2^n-k}=ja_k+a_{2^{n-j}-k}$$
and thus
$$\begin{aligned} g(x)&=g\left(\frac k{2^n}\right)=\dfrac{b_k}{b_{2^n+k}}=\dfrac{a_{2^{n-j}-k}a_{k-2^{n-j-1}}}{a_{2^n-k}a_k}\\
&=\dfrac{(a_{2^n-k}-ja_k)a_{k-2^{n-j-1}}}{a_{2^n-k}a_k}=\dfrac{a_{k-2^{n-j-1}}}{a_k}\left(1-\dfrac{ja_k}{a_{2^n-k}}\right)\\
&=f\left(\dfrac k{2^{n-j-1}}-1\right)\left[1-jf\left(\dfrac k{2^{n-1}}\right)\right]=f(2^{j+1}x-1)[1-jf(2x)].\end{aligned}$$
The extension of $g(x)$ to a continuous function on $[0,1]$ follows from the facts that $f$ extends to a continuous function on $[0,1]$ and
$f(2^{-j})= 1/(j+1).$
\end{proof}
A scaled version of the graph of $y=f(x)$ appears in the graph of $y=g(x)$.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.5in]{MinkowskiGraphplot2d4.eps}
\caption{Singular function associated with $\{b_n\}$}
\label{fig. 3}
\end{figure}
The restriction of $g(x)$ to $[1/2,1]$ is just a scaled version of $f(x)$:
\begin{corollary} $g(x)=f(2x-1)$ for $x\in [1/2,1]$. \end{corollary}
Recall that every positive rational number appears exactly once in the set $\{a_{k+1}/a_k: k\in{\Bbb N}\}$. We prove an analogue for the sequence $\{b_k\}$.
We use the expression ``$A=\square$" to mean that $A=n^2$ for some integer $n$.
\begin{theorem} Every element of $\{(a,b)\in{\Bbb N}^2: 4ab+1=\square\}$ appears exactly once in the sequence $\{(b_k,b_{k+1}): k\in{\Bbb N}\}$. \end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Consider the following analogue of the (slow) Euclidean algorithm.
$$M_{\oplus}: (a,b)\longmapsto\begin{cases} (a,a\ominus b) &\text{if $a<b$, }\\
(a\ominus b, b) &\text{if $b<a$, }\\
\text{stop }&\text{if $a=b$. }\end{cases}$$
Suppose $(a,b)\in{\Bbb N}^2$, with $4ab+1=\square$.
If $a\ominus b<0$ then it is easy to see that $(a-b)^2<1$ and thus $a=b$. In this case, since $4a^2+1\neq\square$ unless $a=0$, the only possibility is $a=b=0$.
Hence, $M_{\oplus}((a,b))\in {\Bbb N}^2$ and, if this algorithm terminates at all, it must terminate at $(0,0)$.
With $(a,b)\in{\Bbb N}^2$, with $4ab+1=\square$, let $k:=\sqrt{4ab+1}$. If $0<a<b$, then $a^2<ak$ and thus
$$a(a\ominus b)=a(a+b-k)=a^2+ab-ak<ab.$$
In general, the product of numbers in $M_{\oplus}((a,b))$ is strictly less than the product $ab$ and thus the algorithm will eventually reach, without loss of generality, $(0,b)$. If $b=0$ then the algorithm stops. On the other hand, if $b>0$, it is easy to see that $M_{\oplus}((0,b))=(0,b-1)$, and thus the algorithm will terminate at $(0,0)$.
Let $B_n:=(b_n,b_{n+1})$. By the definition of the sequence $\{b_k\}$, it's easy to see that for $n>1$,
$$M_{\oplus}: B_{2n}, B_{2n+1}\longmapsto B_n$$
and, moreover, if $M_{\oplus}: (a,b)\mapsto B_n$, then either $(a,b)=B_{2n}$ or $(a,b)=B_{2n+1}$.
If $(a,b)\in{\Bbb N}^2$, with $4ab+1=\square$ is not of the form $B_n$ for some $n$, then all of its successors under $M_{\oplus}$, including $(0,0)$, are not either -- a contradiction. Hence every $(a,b)\in{\Bbb N}^2$, with $4ab+1=\square$
is of the form $B_n$ for some $n$.
The pair $(0,0)$ appears only once and, in general, no pair appears more than once in $\{ B_n\}$ for, otherwise, there exists a smallest $n>1$ such that $B_n=B_m$ for some $m>n$. Applying $M_{\oplus}$ to both $B_m$ and $B_n$ forces
$\lfloor n/2\rfloor=\lfloor m/2\rfloor$ and therefore $m=n+1$. Thus $b_n=b_{n+1}=b_{n+2}$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
A generalization of $\oplus$ is as follows: For a given number $N$, define
$$x\underset{N}{\oplus} y:=x+y+\sqrt{4xy+N}.$$
\begin{remark} $a,b,a\underset{N}{\oplus}b$ solve
$$2(x^2+y^2+z^2)-(x+y+z)^2=N.$$
Defining $\underset{N}{\ominus}$ in the obvious manner,
$$(a\underset{N}{\oplus}b)\underset{N}{\ominus}b=a.$$
Every non-zero complex number $z$ can be represented uniquely as $re^{i\theta}$ for some positive $r$ and some $\theta\in[0,2\pi)$ and so we define $\sqrt z:= \sqrt r e^{i\theta/2}$. Hence $\underset{N}{\oplus}$ and $\underset{N}{\ominus}$
are well defined for complex $N$.
\end{remark}
We may then generalize $\{b_k\}$.
\begin{definition} Given a (complex) number $A$, let $c_1=c_2=A$ and, for $n\ge 1$,
$$\begin{aligned} &c_{2n}=c_n\\ &c_{2n+1}=c_n\underset{N}{\oplus} c_{n+1}.\end{aligned}$$\end{definition}
It turns out that such a sequence can be expressed as a linear combination of the sequences $\{a_k^2\}$ and $\{b_k\}$.
We first need a lemma.
\begin{lemma} For $k\ge 1$,
$$a_k^2b_{k+1}+a_{k+1}^2b_k+1=a_ka_{k+1}\sqrt{4b_kb_{k+1}+1}.$$\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Let $s_k:=\sqrt{4b_kb_{k+1}+1}$. Note that
$$b_{2k+1}=b_k+b_{k+1}+s_k.$$
Then
$$\begin{aligned}s_{2k}^2&=4b_{2k}b_{2k+1}+1=4b_k(b_k+b_{k+1}+s_k)+1\\
&=4b_k^2+s_k^2+4b_ks_k=(2b_k+s_k)^2\end{aligned}$$ and so
$$s_{2k}=2b_k+s_k.$$ Similarly,
$$\begin{aligned}s_{2k+1}^2&=4b_{2k+1}b_{2k+2}+1=4b_{k+1}(b_k+b_{k+1}+s_k)+1\\
&=4b_{k+1}^2+s_k^2+4b_{k+1}s_k=(2b_{k+1}+s_k)^2\end{aligned}$$
and so $$s_{2k+1}=2b_{k+1}+s_k.$$
Note that
$$a_1^2b_2+a_2^2b_1+1=1=a_1a_2\sqrt{4b_1b_2+1}$$
and so the lemma holds for $k=1$.
Suppose the lemma holds for a particular $k$.
We show it works for $2k$ and $2k+1$ and thus, by induction, the lemma will be shown.
$$\begin{aligned} a_{2k}^2b_{2k+1}&a_{2k+1}^2b_{2k}+1=a_k^2(b_k+b_{k+1}+s_k)+(a_k+a_{k+1})^2b_k+1\\
&=a_{k}^2b_{k}+a_{k}^2b_{k+1}+a_k^2s_k+a_k^2b_k+2a_ka_{k+1}b_k+a_{k+1}^2b_{k}+1\\
&=a_k^2(2b_k+s_k)+2a_ka_{k+1}b_k+a_k^2b_{k+1}+a_{k+1}^2b_{k}+1\\
&=a_k^2(2b_k+s_k)+2a_ka_{k+1}b_k+a_ka+{k+1}s_k\\
&=a_k(a_k+a_{k+1})(2b_k+s_k)=a_{2k}a_{2k+1}s_{2k}\end{aligned}$$
and thus the lemma works for $2k$.
$$\begin{aligned} a_{2k+1}^2b_{2k+2}&a_{2k+2}^2b_{2k+1}+1=(a_k+a_{k+1})^2b_{k+1}+a_{k+1}^2(b_k+b_{k+1}+s_k)+1\\
&=a_{k}^2b_{k+1}+2a_ka_{k+1}b_{k+1}+a_{k+1}^2b_{k+1}+a_{k+1}^2b_{k}+a_{k+1}^2b_{k+1}+a_{k+1}^2s_{k}+1\\
&=a_k^2(2b_{k+1}+s_k)+a_k^2b_{k+1}+a_{k+1}^2b_{k}+1+2a_ka_{k+1}b_{k+1}\\
&=a_k^2(2b_{k+1}+s_k)+a_ka_{k+1}s_k+2a_ka_{k+1}b_{k+1}\\
&=a_{k+1}(a_k+a_{k+1})(2b_{k+1}+s_k)=a_{2k+2}a_{2k+1}s_{2k+1}\end{aligned}$$
and thus the lemma works for $2k+1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem} Given $A,B$, let $c_k:=Aa_k^2+Bb_k.$
Then $\{c_k\}$ has $c_1=c_2=A$ and, for $N=4AB+B^2$,
$$\begin{aligned} &c_{2n}=c_n\\ &c_{2n+1}=c_n\underset{N}{\oplus} c_{n+1}.\end{aligned}$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
$$\begin{aligned} c_kc_{k+1}+AB&=(Aa_k^2+Bb_k)(Aa_{k+1}^2+Bb_{k+1})+AB\\
&=A^2a_k^2a_{k+1}^2+B^2b_kb_{k+1}+AB(a_{k+1}^2b_k+a_k^2b_{k+1}+1)\\
&=A^2a_k^2a_{k+1}^2+B^2b_kb_{k+1}+ABa_ka_{k+1}\sqrt{4b_kb_{k+1}+1}\end{aligned}$$
and so
$$\begin{aligned}4c_kc_{k+1}+N&=4A^2a_k^2a_{k+1}^2+4B^2b_kb_{k+1}+B^2+4ABa_ka_{k+1}\sqrt{4b_kb_{k+1}+1}\\
&=(2Aa_ka_{k+1}+B\sqrt{4b_kb_{k+1}+1})^2\end{aligned}$$
and thus
$$\begin{aligned} c_k\underset{N}{\oplus} c_{k+1}&=(Aa_k^2+Bb_k)+(Aa_{k+1}^2+Bb_{k+1})+\sqrt{4c_kc_{k+1}+N}\\
&=Aa_k^2+Bb_k+Aa_{k+1}^2+Bb_{k+1}+2Aa_ka_{k+1}+B\sqrt{4b_kb_{k+1}+1}\\
&=A(a_k+a_{k+1})^2+B(b_k+b_{k+1}+\sqrt{4b_kb_{k+1}+1}\\
&=Aa_{2k+1}^2+Bb_{2k+1}=c_{2k+1}.\end{aligned}$$
Since $$c_{2k}=Aa_{2k}^2+Bb_{2k}=Aa_k^2+Bb_k=c_k,$$
the theorem is shown. \end{proof}
\begin{example} Let $N=-3$, $c_1=c_2=1$, we see that $A=1$, $B=-1$, and thus $c_k=a_k^2-b_k$. \end{example}
If to every local cut point $P$ in the fractal CP appearing in figure 2 one attaches a sphere above but tangent to the plane at that point with curvature (1/radius) equal to the sum of the curvatures of the two circles meeting there, then one gets a 3-dimensional generalization of Ford circles. The curvatures (similarly, the product of local cut points and corresponding curvatures) along any circular arc are from a sequence $\{c_n\}$ for appropriately chosen $N$ (see \cite{N2} and references therein for a discussion of various types of ``Ford spheres").
Consider the sequence $\{b_k\}$ written in tabular form:
$$\begin{matrix} 0&&&&&&&&\\0&1&&&&&&&\\0&2&1&2&&&&&\\0&3&2&6&1&6&2&3&\\0&4&3&10&2&15&6&12&...\\
.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.\end{matrix}$$
It is apparent that every column is an arithmetic sequence and, moreover, the defining differences are respectively
$$0,1,1,4,1,9,4,9,...,$$
the squares of Stern's diatomic sequence $\{a_k^2\}$.
This is, in fact, true. We shall express this result as a formula.
\begin{theorem} For $0\le k<2^j$,
$$b_{2^{j+1}+k}=a_k^2+b_{2^j+k}.$$\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} Assume $0\le k<2^j$.
Since $2^j\le 2^j+k<2^{j+1}$, Theorem 3.6 implies
$$b_{2^{j+1}+k}=b_{2^{j}+2^j+k}=a_{2^{j+1}-(2^j+k)}a_{2^j+k-2^j}=a_{2^j-k}a_k.$$
By \cite[formulas (2) and (3)]{N} ,
$$a_{2^{j+1}-k}=a_k+a_{2^{j}-k}$$
and thus
$$b_{2^{j+2}+k}=a_{2^{j+1}-k}a_k=(a_k+a^{2^j-k})a_k=a_k^2+a_{2^j-k}a_k=a_k^2+b_{2^{j+1}+k}.$$
The result follows by induction.\end{proof}
\begin{remark}$\{b_{2k-1}\}$ appears as \cite[A119272]{S}, the product of numerators and denominators in the Stern-Brocot tree. \end{remark}
\begin{remark} For a fixed $(x,y)$,
$z=x\oplus y$ and $z=x\ominus y$ are the two solutions of
$$2(x^2+y^2+z^2)-(x+y+z)^2=1.$$ \end{remark}
\vskip .4 in
\section{Fibonacci representations}
A \textit{Fibonacci representation} of a number $n$ is a way of writing that number as a sum of distinct Fibonacci numbers.
One such representation is, of course, the Zeckendorf representation which is gotten by the greedy algorithm and which is characterized by having no two consecutive Fibonacci numbers. In general, a given $n$ has several Fibonacci representations, the number of such we call $R_n$. The sequence $\{R_n\}$ is extremely well studied; see papers by Klarner \cite{K}, Bicknell-Johnson \cite{B1,B2}, and Stockmeyer \cite{St}, for example.
A string of 0s and 1s is a finite word with alphabet $\{0,1\}$ (equivalently, an element of $\{0,1\}^*$). Often we denote such a word by $\omega$.
We shall think of such strings as Fibonacci representations: we shall assign a numerical value $[\omega]$ to a string $\omega$ by the formula
$$[i_1i_2...i_k ]= \sum i_j F_{k+2-j}.$$
For example, $[0100]=[0011]=3$ and $[01010011]=21+8+2+1=32$.
The generating function for $\{R_n\}$ has an obvious product formulation.
\begin{proposition} The sequence $(R_n)$ satisfies
$$\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} R_nx^n= \prod_{i=2}^{\infty}\left(1+x^{F_i}\right)$$
where $F_n$ denotes the $n$th Fibonacci number. \end{proposition}
Next, we define the \textit{Fibonacci shift}: $$\rho(n):=\lfloor n\phi +1/\phi\rfloor$$
that satisfies $\rho([\omega])=[\omega 0]$ for every string $\omega$. This shift has been studied before; for example, it appears in \cite[graffiti, p. 301]{GKP}.
\begin{theorem} For $c_i\in\{0,1\}$, $i=2,...,N$,
$$\rho\left(\sum_{i=2}^N c_iF_i\right) =\sum_{i=2}^N c_iF_{i+1}.$$\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} By Binet's formula (3),
$$\phi F_n=F_{n+1}-\overline\phi^n.$$
For any choice $c_i\in\{0,1\}$ for $i=2,...,N$, note that
$$-1/\phi^2=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\overline\phi^{2n+1}<\sum_{i=2}^Nc_i\overline\phi^i<\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\overline\phi^{2n}=1/\phi$$
and therefore
$$0<-\sum_{i=2}^Nc_i\overline\phi^i-\overline\phi<1.$$
Hence,
$$\begin{aligned} \rho\left(\sum_{i=2}^Nc_iF_i\right)&=\left\lfloor\phi\sum_{i=2}^Nc_iF_i-\overline\phi\right\rfloor\\
&=\sum_{i=2}^N c_iF_{i+1}+\left\lfloor -\sum_{i=2}^Nc_i\overline\phi^i-\overline\phi\right\rfloor=\sum_{i=2}^N c_iF_{i+1}. \end{aligned}$$
\end{proof}
In terms of $\rho(n)$, we may define $\{R_n\}$ recursively.
Clearly, $R_0=R_1=1$. A representation of $n$ either ends in $0$ in which case $n=[\omega 0]$ where $\rho([\omega])=n$ or else it ends in $1$ in which case $n=[\omega 1]$ and so $n-1=[\omega 0]=\rho([\omega])$. Hence, for all $n\ge 1$,
$$R_n:=\sum_{\rho(i)\in\{n,n-1\}} R_i.$$
Note that the function $\rho_2(n):=\rho(\rho(n))=\lfloor n\phi^2+1/\phi\rfloor$ is an example of a Beatty sequence (i.e., of the form $\lfloor an+b\rfloor$) and so has a complementary Beatty sequence, namely $T(n):=\lfloor n\phi+2/\phi\rfloor$.
For example, $$\rho_2(n)=0, 3, 5, 8, 11, 13, 16, 18, 21, 24,...$$ and $$T(n)=1,2, 4,6,7, 9,10,12,14,15,...$$
The following characterization could be used as a new definition of $\{R_n\}$.
\begin{theorem} For $n\ge 1$, and $T(n):=\lfloor n\phi+2/\phi\rfloor$,
$$R_{\rho_2(n)}=R_n+R_{n-1}$$
and
$$R_{T(n)}=R_n.$$\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Since $\phi\in(1,2)$,
$\rho(n)\in\{\rho(n+1)-1,\rho(n+1)-2\}.$
Since $2\phi>3$, $(n-1)\phi+1/\phi\le (n+1)\phi+1/\phi-3$
and so $\rho(n-1)<\rho(n+1)-2.$
Note that $$T(n)=\lfloor n\phi+2/\phi\rfloor=\lfloor(n+1)\phi+1/\phi\rfloor-1=\rho(n+1)-1$$
and therefore
$$R_{T(n)}=\sum_{\rho(i)\in\{\rho(n+1)-1,\rho(n+1)-2\}} R_i=R_n.$$
We show the first equation in the theorem by a counting argument.
By the definition of $\rho(n)$, $\rho_2(n)=\rho(n)+n$ and so
$$\rho_2(n+1)-\rho_2(n)=\rho(n+1)-\rho(n)+1\in\{2,3\}.$$
For a given $n$, if $n=[\omega]$ then
$\rho(\rho(n))=[\omega00]$ and
$\rho(\rho(n+1))$ equals either $[\omega10]$ or $[\omega11]$.
Suppose $\rho_2(n+1)-\rho_2(n)=2$.
The map $\omega\mapsto \omega00$ is a bijection from representations of $n$ to the representations of $\rho_2(n)$ ending in 00 while the
map $\omega\mapsto\omega10$ is a bijection from representations of $n-1$ to the representations of $\rho_2(n)$ not ending in 00. Hence the first equation holds.
A similar argument holds when $\rho_2(n+1)-\rho_2(n)=3$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} The sequence $\{R_n\}$ is thus analogous to the alternative form of Stern's sequence:
$$a_{2n}=a_n, a_{2n-1}=a_n+a_{n-1}.$$\end{remark}
For every word $\omega:=\omega_0\omega_1...\omega_n\in\{0,1\}^*$, we let $|\omega|:=n+1$ denote the length of $\omega$ and define a point in the complex plane
$$P(\omega):=\sum_{k=0}^n \phi^{-k}(2\omega_k-1-i).$$
We form a graph ${\bf G}$ by putting an edge between $P(\omega)$ and $P(\omega j)$ for $j=0,1$, $\omega\in\{0,1\}^*$. This graph is illustrated in Figure 4 below.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0, width=4 in]{gph3.eps}
\caption{Fibonacci Representation Graph with words in $\{0,1\}^*$.}
\label{fig. 4}
\end{figure}
Note further that $P(\omega)=P(\omega')$ iff $|\omega|=|\omega'|$ and $[\omega]=[\omega']$. Hence, we may consistently assign the integer $[\omega]$ to each vertex $P(\omega)$ of the graph. This shows that $R_{[\omega]}$ is the number of downward paths from $P(*)$ to $P(\omega)$ and the graph can be thought of as a kind of hyperbolic Pascal's triangle. In fact, the portion between 0,01,010,0101,... and 1,10,101,1010,... is really just the ``Fibonacci diatomic array'' appearing in \cite{B2}.
For $v$ a vertex of the Fibonacci representation graph, let $[v]$ be the number of downward paths from the top vertex to $v$.
\begin{lemma} Along the $n$th row of the graph ${\bf G}$, the function $[v]$ forms an increasing sequence of consecutive integers $0,\dots, F_{n+2}-2$. \end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Iterates of $\rho(n)+1$ starting at 0 yields the sequence $0,1,3,6,11,..., F_{n+2}-2,...$ (provable by induction). Hence the last value of $[v]$ in the $n$th row is $F_{n+2}-2$. Since $\rho(n+1)-\rho(n)\in\{1,2\}$, the lemma follows. \end{proof}
A consequence is the following surprising formula:
$$\rho(\rho(\rho(n)+1)))=\rho(\rho(\rho(n))+1)+1.$$
This graph has numerous interesting properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item Every quadrilateral in the closure of the graph is either a square or a golden rectangle.
\item All the squares (actually hexagons) are congruent in hyperbolic space with area $\ln\phi$ (and, as hexagons, each edge has length $\ln\phi$). The figure is thus an aperiodic tiling of part of the upper half-plane ${\bf H}$ (and can be extended to all of ${\bf H}$ ) where all the tiles are congruent!
\item The points along any row, when embedded in ${\Bbb R}$ form part of a one-dimensional quasicrystal. The lengths of the segments, appropriately scaled, form a word: $\phi, 1, \phi, \phi, 1, \phi, ...$, the ``Fibonacci word''.
\item The vertices form a quasicrystal in ${\bf H}$ .
\item The graph is the Cayley graph of the ``Fibonacci monoid" $\langle a,b| abb=baa\rangle$.
\item The graph can be constructed by the following recursive procedure starting with a single vertex; from each of the latest generation of vertices, draw two edges going southeast and southwest respectively, connect if a hexagon can be formed. Repeat.
\end{itemize}
Something new with respect to the study of $\{R_n\}$ is the development of an analog of Conway's box function.
For $k<F_{n-1}$, define
$$q(k,F_n):=R_k/R_{F_n+k}.$$
\begin{lemma} For $k=0,..., F_{n-1}-1$,
$$q(T(k),F_{n+1})=q(k,F_n)$$
and
$$q(\rho_2(k),F_{n+2})=q(k,F_n)*q(k-1,F_n)$$
where $*$ denotes ``mediant addition". \end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Note that
$$T(n)=\rho(n+1)-1$$
and so, if $k\le F_{n-1}-1$,
$$T(F_n+k)=F_{n+1}+T(k).$$
Then $$\begin{aligned} q(k, F_n)&=\dfrac{R_k}{R_{F_n+k}}=\dfrac{R_{T(k)}}{R_{T(F_n+k)}}\\&=\dfrac{R_{T(k)}}{R_{F_{n+1}+T(k)}}=q(T(k),F_{n+1})\end{aligned}$$ and the first equation follows.
Similarly,
$$\begin{aligned} q(k, F_n)*q(k-1,F_n)&=\dfrac{R_k}{R_{F_n+k}}*\dfrac{R_{k-1}}{R_{F_n+k-1}}=\dfrac{R_k+R_{k-1}}{R_{F_n+k}+R_{F_n+k-1}}\\&=\dfrac{R_{\rho_2(k)}}{R_{\rho_2(F_n+k)}}=\dfrac{R_{\rho_2(k)}}{R_{F_{n+2}+\rho_2(k)}}\\&=q(\rho_2(k), F_{n+2})\end{aligned}$$
and the second equation follows.
\end{proof}
As a consequence, if, as $n\rightarrow\infty$, $k/F_n$ converges to $x\in[0,1/\phi]$, then $q(k,F_n)$ converges to some value, say $Q(x)$. The function $Q: [0,1/\phi]\rightarrow[0,1]$ is increasing and continuous.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0, width=3 in]{image004.eps}
\caption{Analogue of Conway's box function}
\label{fig. 5}
\end{figure}
Note, however, it is not strictly increasing.
\begin{lemma}
For $j=0,..., F_{n-1}-1$,
$$R_{F_{n+2}+j}=R_{F_n+j}+R_j.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{theorem}
The inverse of $Q$ satisfies, on its irrational points of continuity,
$$Q^{-1}(x)=\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\dfrac{(-1)^{k+1}}{\phi^{2(c_1+c_2+...+c_k)-1}}$$
where $x$ has continued fraction decomposition $x=1/(c_1+1/(c_2+1/(c_3+...)))$. \end{theorem}
\begin{proof} Recall that $R_{F_m+k}=R_{F_{m+1}-k}$ and so
$$\dfrac1{n+q(k,F_m)}=\dfrac{R_{F_{m+1}-k}}{R_k+nR_{F_{m+1}-k}}=q(F_{m+1}-k,F_{m+2n}).$$
Letting $k/F_m\rightarrow x$ where $x$ is a point of continuity of $B$, we see that
$$\dfrac1{n+Q(x)}=Q\left(\dfrac{\phi-x}{\phi^{2n}}\right).$$
We may then rewrite:
$$\dfrac{\phi-Q^{-1}(x)}{\phi^{2n}}=Q^{-1}\left(\dfrac1{n+x}\right)$$
and the theorem follows. \end{proof}
The function $Q(x)$ extends past $1/\phi$ but is no longer monotonic.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0, width=3 in]{B-long.eps}
\caption{Analogue of Conway's box function; larger domain}
\label{fig. 6}
\end{figure}
Patterns can be found by looking at the ``crushed array'' which is found by stacking rows of terms $R_{F_{n}-1},..., R_{F_{n+1}-2}$ sliding terms to the left on rows:
$$\begin{array}{ccccccccccccccccc} 1&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\1&2&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\1&2&2&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
\\1&3&2&2&3&&&&&&&&&&&&\\1&3&3&2&4&2&3&3&&&&&&&&\\1&4&3&3&5&2&4&4&2&5&3&3&4&&&&\\.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.
\end{array}$$
The $k$th column satisfies: $x_{n+2}=x_n+c$ with common difference $c=R_k$ ($R_0=0$).
Alternatively, $x_{n+1}=x_n+x_{n-1}-x_{n-2}$ (a ``dying rabbit" sequence).
$$x_{n+1}=x_n+x_{n-1}-x_{n-2}$$
Characteristic polynomial factors $x^3-x^2-x+1=(x-1)^2(x+1)$
so every example is of the form $x_n=a+bn+c(-1)^n$. Hence, $\{x_{2n}\}$ and $\{x_{2n+1}\}$ are arithmetic sequences.
$$x_{n+1}=x_n+x_{n-1}-x_{n-3}$$ e.g., \cite[A023434]{S}
$x^4-x^3-x^2+1=(x-1)(x^3-x-1),$
so every example is of the form $a+br_1^n+cr_2^n+dr_3^n$ where
$r_1$ is the ``plastic constant", 1.32471795..., the smallest Pisot number, and $r_2, r_3$ are its algebraic conjugates.
Such examples are always a constant plus a Padovan sequence $y_{n+1}=y_{n-1}+y_{n-2}$. E.g., \cite[A000931]{S}
$$x_{n+1}=x_n+x_{n-1}-x_{n-1},$$
is always a constant sequence.
\vskip .4 in
\section{Extending Binet's formula}
Let $s_F(n)$ be the number of terms in the Zeckendorf representation of $n$ (e.g., $s_F(27)=3$). Equivalently, $s_F(n)$ is the least number of Fibonacci numbers that sum to $n$. This sequence, for $n=0,1,...$, is
[A007895] and starts
$$0,1,1,1,2,1,2,2,1,2,2,2,3,1,2,2,2,3,2,3,3,...$$
Using notation of the previous section, we see that $s_F(n)$ satisfies the recursion:
$$s_F([\omega 0])=s_F([\omega]), s_F([\omega 01])=s_F([\omega])+1$$
which translates to
$$s_F(\rho(n))=s_F(n), s_F(\rho_2(n)+1)=s_F(n)+1$$
where $\rho(n)$ is the ``Fibonacci shift" defined in Section 4 (just after Proposition 4.1).
The crushed array for this sequence is
$$\begin{array}{ccccccccccccccccc} 1&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\1&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\1&2&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\1&2&2&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
\\1&2&2&2&3&&&&&&&&&&&&\\1&2&2&2&3&2&3&3&&&&&&&&\\1&2&2&2&3&2&3&3&2&3&3&3&4&&&\\.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.&.
\end{array}$$
Note that columns are constant and that the limiting row is $s_F(n)+1$.
Replacing $s_2(n)$ by $s_F(n)$ in Binet's formula for Stern's sequence yields our third variant of Stern's sequence:
$$c_{n+1}=\displaystyle\sum_{k=0}^n \sigma^{s_F(k)}\overline\sigma^{s_F(n-k)}.$$
The sequence starts, for $n=1,2,...$,
$$1,1,2,3,2,4,3,3,6,4,6,6,4,8,6,7,10,6,9,7,5,11,8,....$$
It is always integral since $c_{n+1}$ is an algebraic integer in ${\Bbb Z}[\sigma]$ invariant under complex conjugation.
A crushed array for this sequence is:
$$\begin{array}{ccccccccccccccccc} 1&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\1&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\2&3&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\2&4&3&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\\3&6&4&6&6&&&&&&&&&&&&
\\4&8&6&7&10&6&9&7&&&&&&&&&\\5&11&8&11&13&8&14&10&9&15&9&13&11&&&&\\7&15&11&15&19&12&19&14&11&21&14&19&19&&&&\end{array}$$
The first column, $x_n:=\{c_{F_n}\}$ apparently satisfies the Padovan recurrence: $x_{n+2}=x_n+x_{n-1}$. Moreover, every column is apparently a ``dying rabbit" sequence: $x_{n+1}=x_n+x_{n-1}-x_{n-3}$ or, more precisely,
if $x_n:=c_{F_n+k}+c_k$, then $x_{n+2}=x_n+x_{n-1}$. This is indeed the case which we now prove.
\begin{theorem} For $k\le F_{n-2}$, $c_{F_{n+2}+k}=c_{F_{n}+k}+c_k+c_{F_{n-1}+k}$. \end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Given a string $X$ of integers, let $\overline X$ denote the reverse of string $X$, let $X^+$ denote the string $X$ with 1 added to every integer, and let $X^-$ denote the string $X$ with 1 subtracted from every integer (e.g., if $X=1223$, then $\overline X=3221$, $X^+= 2334$, and $\overline X^-=2110$). If $X:=t_0...t_{k-1}$, let $G(X):=\sum_{j=0}^{k-1} \sigma^{t_j}.$ Finally, given strings $X$, $Y$, we let $XY$ denote the concatenation of the two strings and $X-Y$ denote the pointwise difference (e.g., if $X=457$ and $Y=123$ then $XY=457123$ and $X-Y=334$).
Let $s_n:=s_F(n)$ be the number of terms in the Zeckendorf representation of $n$. For any interval $I$, let $s_I$ denote the \textit{string} $s_{i_1}s_{i_2}...s_{i_k}$ where $i_1<i_2<...<i_k$ and $\{i_1, i_2, ... , i_k\}=I\cap {\Bbb N}$.
Then $c_{n}=G((s_{[0,n)}-\overline s_{[0,n)}))$ where the difference of two strings is the string of differences. Since we will use this formula, we let $\Delta_I=s_I-\overline s_I$ so that $c_n=G(\Delta_{[0,n)})$.
By the definition of $s$, it's clear that $s_{[F_n, F_n+k)}=s_{[0,k)}^+$ if $k\le F_{n-1}$. Since
$$s_{[0,F_{n}+k)}=s_{[0,k)}s_{[k,F_{n})}s_{[F_n,F_n+k)}=s_{[0,k)}s_{[k,F_{n})}s_{[0,k)}^+,$$
it follows that
$$\overline s_{[0,F_n+k)}=\overline s_{[0,k)}^+ \overline s_{[k,F_{n})}\overline s_{[0,k)},$$
and thus
$$\Delta_{[0,F_n+k)}=\Delta_{[0,k)}^- \Delta_{[k,F_{n})}\Delta_{[0,k)}^+.$$
Hence, because $\sigma^{-1}+\sigma=1$,
$$c_{F_n+k}=\sigma^{-1} c_k +G(\Delta_{[k,F_{n})}) +\sigma c_k = c_k+ G(\Delta_{[k,F_{n})}).\eqno{(*)}$$
Assuming $k\le F_{n-2}$, we see that
$$\begin{aligned} s_{[0,F_{n+2}+k)}&=s_{[0,k)}s_{[k,F_{n})}s_{[F_n,F_{n}+k)}s_{[F_n+k,F_{n+1})}s_{[F_{n+1},F_{n+1}+k)}s_{[F_{n+1}+k,F_{n+2})}s_{[F_{n+2},F_{n+2}+k)}\\
&=s_{[0,k)}s_{[k,F_{n})}s_{[0,k)}^+s_{[k,F_{n-1})}^+s_{[0,k)}^+s_{[k,F_{n})}^+s_{[0,k)}^+\end{aligned}$$
and thus
$$\overline s_{[0,F_{n+2}+k)}=\overline s_{[0,k)}^+\overline s_{[k,F_{n})}^+\overline s_{[0,k)}^+\overline s_{[k,F_{n-1})}^+\overline s_{[0,k)}^+\overline s_{[k,F_{n})}\overline s_{[0,k)}.$$
Hence,
$$\Delta_{[0,F_{n+2}+k)}=\Delta_{[0,k)}^-\Delta_{[k,F_{n})}^-\Delta_{[0,k)}\Delta_{[k,F_{n-1})}\Delta_{[0,k)}\Delta_{[k,F_{n}+k)}^+\Delta_{[0,k)}^+.$$
Applying $G$:
$$c_{F_{n+2}+k}=\sigma^{-1} c_k + \sigma^{-1} G(\Delta_{[k,F_{n})}) +c_k + G(\Delta_{[k,F_{n-1})}) +c_k+\sigma G(\Delta_{[k,F_{n})}) +\sigma c_k.$$
Again, since $\sigma^{-1}+\sigma=1$, and by (*), we have
$$c_{F_{n+2}+k}=3c_k +G(\Delta_{[k,F_{n})}) + G(\Delta_{[k,F_{n-1})})=c_k+c_{F_{n}+k}+c_{F_{n-1}+k}.$$
\end{proof}
There are many patterns in the crushed array. Two such patterns can be proven by induction based on the previous theorem.
\begin{corollary}$c_{F_n}+c_{F_{n-1}+2}=c_{F_n+1}$ and
$c_{F_n+1}=c_{F_{n+1}+2}$ for all $n$. \end{corollary}
We have many other questions or \textit{ apparent } properties, all waiting for a proof (though, of course, of varying difficulty).
\begin{itemize}
\item Five inequalities: $c_{\sigma_2(n)+1}\ge c_{\lfloor n\phi^2\rfloor}\ge c_{\lfloor n\phi\rfloor}\ge c_{\sigma(n)}\ge c_n\ge 0.$
\item The minimum of each row in the crushed array is the leftmost element. (If true, then the last inequality above, $c_n\ge 0$, is true).
\item If $c_n\ge 0$ for all $n$, then what do these numbers count?
\item The following sequences have crushed arrays with columns satisfying $x_{n+1}=x_{n}+x_{n-1}-x_{n-j}$ for given $j$:
$$\begin{aligned} & \{s_F(n)\} \text{ has } j=1,\\
& \{R_n\} \text{ has } j=2,\\
& \{c_n\} \text{ has } j=3.
\end{aligned}$$
Is there a general principle at work in this progression? Is there a similarly defined sequence with $j=4$ for example?
\end{itemize}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
High-dimensional prediction problems are more and more common in many application domains such as computational biology, signal processing, computer vision or natural language processing. To handle this high-dimensionality, one usually resorts to linear modeling and regularization with sparsity-inducing norms, such as the $\ell_1$ norm. This type of regularization results in \emph{sparse} models, meaning that the model is described by relatively few parameters. Besides making parameter learning consistent in high-dimensional settings, the sparsity assumption has the appealing property of yielding more interpretable models. As an example, consider the problem of explaining a particular phenotype of patients, e.g., the disease state, based on the genome sequence of each patient. Sparse linear approaches try to find a handful of genetic loci that govern the disease state, rather than a model involving the whole sequence. The $\ell_1$-regularized sparse linear models, such as the LASSO \citep{Tibshirani94} or basis pursuit \citep{chen}, are well studied by now, with a solid body of theoretical results, efficient algorithms and applications in diverse fields \citep[see, e.g.,][and references therein]{BuhGee11}. However, in practice, we often know that there is more \emph{structure} in the problem at hand, which cannot be captured by simple sparse modeling and $\ell_1$ regularization, and which, if exploited, can improve the estimation of parameters as well as the interpretability of the estimates \citep[see][and references therein]{Cevher2008,Huang2011,Bachetal12a}.
In our example, we could expect the genetic loci that influence the disease to be part of a small number of connected patterns in a known gene-gene interaction network \citep{Rapetal07,Azencottetal13}. In other words, we could be looking for a small number of possibly overlapping subsets of variables such that each subset corresponds to a connected subgraph in a given gene network, and the combination of variables in each subset influences the phenotype.
Given prior knowledge about the relevance of each considered group of variables, several methods exist for learning sparse models guided by this prior knowledge.
These methods achieve different kinds of structured sparsity by regularization (penalization, weighting) with appropriate sparsity-inducing norms, that often correspond to convex relaxations of combinatorial penalties on the support (i.e., the set of indices of non-zero components) of the parameter vector. After the group LASSO \citep{YuaLin06}, a number of convex penalties have been proposed, generalizing the group LASSO penalty to the cases of overlapping groups \citep{ZhaYu09, JacOboVer09, JenAudBac11, Chenetal12}, including tree-structured groups \citep{KimXin10,Jenattonetal11}. See \citep{Bachetal12,Bachetal12a} for a more detailed review of sparsity-inducing norms.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{w_with_legend}
\vspace{-.2cm}
\caption{The coefficient vector $w$ is covered by latent variables supported on subsets $A$, $B$ and $C$: $w = v_A+v_B+v_C$.}
\label{fig:w}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
While most of these norms induce \emph{intersection-closed} sets of non-zero patterns, \citet{JacOboVer09} and \citet{OboBac12} introduce a different, latent formulation of sparsity-inducing norms that yields \emph{union-closed} sets of non-zero patterns, meaning that the parameter vector $w$ is represented as a sum of latent vectors $v_A$, identically zero at indices not in~ $A$ for a subset $A$ of indices. If several such sets of indices are considered, then the support of $w$ (i.e., the set of indices $i$ for which $w_i$ is non-zero) is included in the union of such sets (see Figure~\ref{fig:w} for illustration with three sets $A$, $B$ and $C$).
In order to quantify the intuition above, \citet{OboBac12} consider the following function on the support ${\rm supp}(w)$ of $w$:
\begin{equation}
g({\rm supp}(w)) = \min_{\substack{\Acal' \subseteq \Acal,\\ \cup_{A\in\Acal'} A ={\rm supp}(w)}} \sum_{A\in\Acal'} f(A),
\end{equation}
that is, $g({\rm supp}(w))$ is the minimum-weight \emph{cover} of ${\rm supp}(w)$ with the subsets $A$ in the family $\Acal$. The weights $f(A)$ express our prior belief in the subset~$A$ being relevant: If a group $A$ is irrelevant, then $f(A)=\infty$. Using the function $g$ as a regularizer (essentially the approach of~\citet{Huang2011}) will encourage the support of the parameter vector $w$ to be a union of subsets $A \in \Acal$ with finite $f(A)$.
Moreover, \citet{OboBac12} computed a convex relaxation of the function $g$ defined above, leading to the following norm~$\Omega(w)$ equal to:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:norm_guillaume}
\min_{v_A\in\RR^P} \!\sum_{A\in\Acal} \!\|v_A\|_2 f(A)^{1/2} {\rm \quad s.t.} \sum_{A\in\Acal} v_A\!=\!w.
\end{equation}
However, generally we do not have this prior knowledge about the relevance of individual groups: The problem of automatically choosing appropriate weights for groups of variables, $f(A)$, is an important open research problem in structured sparsity. Assuming that we have several learning problems with similar structure (the relevance of a given group is largely shared across individual problems), in this paper we propose a framework for learning group relevances from data. Note that learning the structure is naturally a multi-task problem, as it is impossible to estimate the prior on a vector of parameters if we only observe one particular instance of it.
To come back to our example, we could assume that we have several phenotypes that can be explained by groups of loci whose relevance is largely shared across phenotypes.
A recent approach to learning group relevances from data has been proposed by \citet{HerHer13}. However, this work only considers learning relevances of pairs of variables and does not make the link with sparsity-inducing norms. Let us also mention that probabilistic modeling for structured sparsity has also been explored by \citet{MarMur09} and \citet{MarSchMur09} in the context of learning Gaussian graphical models, and by \citet{Hanetal14} for multi-task learning with structure on tasks.
We approach the problem using probabilistic modeling with a broad family of heavy-tailed priors and derive a variational inference scheme to learn the parameters of these priors. Our model follows the pattern of \emph{sparse Bayesian} models \citep[][among others]{Palmeretal06,SeeNic11}, that we take two steps further: First, we propose a more general formulation, suitable for structured sparsity with any family of groups; Second, we learn the prior parameters from data.
We show that prior parameter estimation with classical variational inference does not always lead to reasonable estimates in these models, and find a way of regularizing that works well in practice. Moreover, we propose a greedy algorithm that makes this inference scalable to settings in which the number of groups to consider is large. In our experiments, we show that we are able to recover the model parameters when the data are generated from the model, and we demonstrate the utility of learning penalties in image denoising.
\section{A Probabilistic Model for Structured Sparse Linear Regression}
\label{sec:model}
In this section, we formally describe our model and a suitable approximate inference scheme.
\subsection{Model definition}
We consider $K$ linear regression problems with design matrices $X^k \in \RR^{N^k\times P}$ and response vectors $y^k \in \RR^{N^k}$ for $k\in\{1,\ldots, K\}$. For each~$X^k$ and $y^k$, we assume the classical Gaussian linear model with i.i.d.~noise with variance~$\sigma^2$, that is,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:distr_y}
y^k \sim \Ncal(X^kw^k, \sigma^2 I).
\end{equation}
Let $V$ be the set of indices of variables $\{1,\ldots,P\}$. For a family $\Acal$ of subsets of $V$, we assume
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:w}
\displaystyle w^k = \sum_{A\in \Acal} v_A^k,
\end{equation}
where, for each $k$,
\begin{itemize}
\item $\forall A\in\Acal, v_A^k$ is a vector in $\RR^P$ such that all its components with indices in $V\setminus A$ are zero (in other words, it is supported on $A$),
\item $\{v_A^k\}_{ A \in \Acal}$ are jointly independent, and
\item $\forall A\in\Acal, v_A^k$ has an isotropic density with inverse scale parameter~$f(A)$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:prior_v_A}
p(v_A^k|f(A))=q_A(\|v_A^k\|_2 f(A)^{1/2})f(A)^{|A|/2},
\end{equation}
where $q_A$ is a heavy-tailed distribution that only depends on $A$ through its cardinality, $|A|$. We specify~$q_A$ in Section \ref{sec:super-Gaussian}.
\end{itemize}
We regard the inverse scale parameter~$f(A)$ as a measure of relevance of the group of variables~$A$\footnote{Abusing notation, we will call ``group $A$'' the subset of variables indexed by elements of $A$ throughout the paper.}: If a group of variables is irrelevant, then~$f(A)$ should equal infinity.
We are interested in priors~$q_A$ such that for each task indexed by~$k$ only a handful of~$v_A^k$ can be significantly away from~zero.
Here it is important to stress the link between the expression of our isotropic prior \eqref{eq:prior_v_A} and the norm~$\Omega(w)$ \eqref{eq:norm_guillaume} from \citet{OboBac12}, introduced above:
The log-likelihood of parameter vectors $\{w^k\}_{k=1,\ldots,K}$ with respect to $f$ will (up to a constant) be equal to the term $\sum_{A\in\Acal} \log q_A(\|v_A^k\|_2 f(A)^{1/2})$, which very closely resembles the norm \eqref{eq:norm_guillaume}. If~$q_A$ is the generalized Gaussian distribution (cf. Section \ref{sec:specialcases}), the two expressions match exactly. Thus, learning with our prior is a natural probabilistic counterpart of learning with the sparsity-inducing norm~\eqref{eq:norm_guillaume}.
Given data $\{X^k, y^k\}_{k=1,\ldots,K}$ and such a model for the prior, our goal will be to infer the parameters~$f(A)$ by maximizing the likelihood with respect to~$f$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ML_brute}
\begin{aligned}
\ p(y^1,\ldots,y^K |f) = \prod_{k=1}^K \int p(y^k|X^kw^k,\sigma^2I) \prod_{A\in \Acal}p(v_A^k|f(A)) dv_A^k,\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where the parameters~$v_A^k$ are marginalized.
\subsection{Super-Gaussian priors}
\label{sec:super-Gaussian}
We assume that $q_A$ is a \emph{scale mixture of Gaussians}, i.e.,
\begin{equation*}
q_A(u) = \int_0^{\infty} \Ncal(u|0,s) r_A(s) ds
\end{equation*}
for some mixing density $r_A(s)$.
The main reason why we choose to work with the family of scale mixtures of zero-mean Gaussians is that it contains distributions that are heavy-tailed and therefore suitable for modeling sparsity; One such distribution is Student's $t$ which we use in our experiments.
The inverse scale parameter of the distribution on $v_A^k$, $f(A)$, captures the relevance of the group~$A$: the smaller $f(A)$, the more relevant the group, that is, the larger the values $v_A^k$ is likely to take. Note that even if the group $A$ is relevant, not all $v_A^k, k=1,\ldots,K$ have to be large. In fact, if the parameters $v_A^k, k=1,\ldots,K$ are drawn from a heavy-tailed distribution with small $f(A)$, then only a fraction of them will be significantly away from zero. Moreover, as we show in Section \ref{sec:variational}, learning in such models is amenable to variational optimization with closed-form updates and leads to an approximate Gaussian posterior on~$v_A^k$.
In general, the integral in~\eqref{eq:ML_brute} is intractable for Gaussian scale mixtures, therefore one has to resort to sampling or approximate inference to learn parameters in such models.
The fact that $q_A$ is a Gaussian scale mixture implies that it is also \emph{super-Gaussian}, that is, the logarithm of $q_A(u)$ is convex in $u^2$ and non-increasing \citep{Palmeretal06}\footnote{Note that the converse is not true: complete monotonicity of the log-density is a necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of a Gaussian scale mixture representation~\cite[Section 3]{Palmeretal06}.}. It therefore admits a representation of the following form by convex conjugacy
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:q_superG}
\log q_A(u) = \sup_{s \geq 0} -\frac{u^2}{2s} - \phi_A(s),
\end{equation}
where $\phi_A(s)$ is convex in $1/s$. Note that the expression inside the supremum in \eqref{eq:q_superG} has a unique maximizer.
In this work we only consider~$q_A$ for which this maximizer has an analytical simple form. From~\eqref{eq:prior_v_A} and~\eqref{eq:q_superG}, we get the following variational representation for $p(v_A^k|f(A))$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:var_repr_p_v_A}
\begin{aligned}
p(v_A^k|f(A))& = f(A)^{\frac{|A|}{2}} \!\! \sup_{\zeta_A^k \geq 0} \exp{\Big( -\frac{\|v_A^k\|_2^2f(A)}{2\zeta_A^k} - \phi_A(\zeta_A^k) \Big)}\\
& = f(A)^{\frac{|A|}{2}} \!\! \sup_{\zeta_A^k \geq 0} \! \Big[ \! \Ncal \! \Big(v_A^k \Big| 0,\frac{\zeta_A^k I}{f(A)} \Big) \!\Big(2\pi\frac{\zeta_A^k}{f(A)}\Big)^{\!\!\!\frac{|A|}{2}} \! \! \! e^{-\phi_A(\zeta_A^k)} \Big].
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
For a particular choice of the prior $q_A$, we measure the relevance of the group of variables $A$ by the expectation of $\|v_A^k\|_2^2$ (which amounts to the sum of the variances of the individual components of~$v_A^k$),
\begin{equation*}
\EE\big[\|v_A^k\|_2^2\big] = \frac{\EE_{\|z\|_2\sim q_A} \big[\|z\|_2^2\big]}{f(A)},
\end{equation*}
where $\EE_{\|z\|_2\sim q_A} \big[\|z\|_2^2\big]$ is the expectation of $\|z\|_2^2$ under the standardized distribution $q_A$ on $\|z\|_2$. In fact, as we have
\begin{equation*}
\EE\big[\|w^k\|_2^2 \big] = \sum_{A\in\Acal} \EE\big[\|v_A^k\|_2^2 \big]
\end{equation*}
given our independence assumption, the expected value of $\|v_A^k\|_2^2$ allows us to measure the contribution of the group $A$ with respect to $\EE\big[\|w^k\|_2^2 \big]$. We somewhat abusively call $\EE\big[\|w^k\|_2^2 \big]$ the \emph{signal variance} in our experiments, as opposed to $P\sigma^2$, the \emph{noise variance}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.47\textwidth]{graphical_model}
\caption{The graphical representation of our model.}
\label{fig:graphical_model}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:graphical_model} represents the graphical model corresponding to our assumptions.
Note that we have explicitly incorporated the variational parameter $\zeta_A^k$ into the graphical model: In fact, the same parameter can also be interpreted as the scale parameter of the Gaussian in the Gaussian scale mixture representation of $p(v_A^k|f(A))$ \citep{Palmeretal06}.
\subsection{Inference}
\label{sec:variational}
Our model described above, namely the combination of the density of $y^k$ \eqref{eq:distr_y} and the variational representation of the prior density on~$v_A^k$~\eqref{eq:var_repr_p_v_A}, leads to the following variational bound on the marginal distribution of~$y^k$:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\log &\,p(y^k|f)\\
& =\log \int p(y^k|X^kw^k,\sigma^2I) \prod_{A\in \Acal}p(v_A^k|f(A)) dv_A^k\\
&\geq \sup_{\substack{{\zeta_A^k \geq 0}\\{ A \in \Acal}}} \Big\{\log \Ncal(y^k|0, X^kM Z^kF^{-1} M^{\top}{X^k}^{\top} + \sigma^2I) \\[-.1cm]
& + \sum_{A\in\Acal} \Big[ \frac{|A|}{2}\log f(A) \! + \! \frac{|A|}{2}\log\Big(2\pi\frac{\zeta_A^k}{f(A)}\Big) \!-\! \phi_A(\zeta_A^k) \Big]\Big\},\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
where $M$ is a matrix of dimension $P\times\sum_{A \in \Acal} |A|$ that ensures $w^k = Mv^k$ where $v^k$ is the concatenation of all elements indexed by elements of $A$ in $v_A^k, A \in \Acal$, and $F$ and $Z^k$ are square diagonal matrices of size $\sum_{A \in \Acal} |A|$ whose diagonals consist of $f(A)$ and $\zeta_A^k$ respectively, replicated $|A|$ times, for each $A\in \Acal$.
Thus, as an approximation to minimizing the negative log-likelihood,
we would like to minimize the following overall bound with respect to $f$ and~$\zeta_A^k$ for all $A \in \Acal$ and $k\in\{1,\ldots,K\}$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:LBgeneral_sum}
\begin{aligned}
-\sum_{k=1}^K \Big\{ &\!- \frac{1}{2} {y^k}^{\top} \!\Big(X^kM Z^kF^{-1} M^{\top}{X^k}^{\top}\!\! + \sigma^2I\Big)^{-1} \! y^k \! - \!\frac{1}{2} \log\det\Big(X^kM Z^kF^{-1} M^{\top}{X^k}^{\top}\!\! + \sigma^2I\Big) \\[-.1cm]
& + \sum_{A\in\Acal}\frac{|A|}{2}\log f(A) + \frac{\sum_{A\in\Acal}|A|\!-\! N^k}{2}\log(2\pi) + \frac{1}{2}\log\det (Z^kF^{-1} ) -\sum_{A\in\Acal}\phi_A(\zeta_A^k) \Big\}.\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
In its form given by \eqref{eq:LBgeneral_sum}, the bound is difficult to optimize. However, we recognize parts of it as minima of convex functions, which allows us to design an iterative algorithm with analytic updates, finding a local minimum (see the appendix for details). Our optimization problem becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:obj}
\begin{aligned}
\inf_{\zeta^k\geq 0} \inf_{v^k} \inf_{\Sigma^k\succcurlyeq 0} \sum_{k=1}^K\Big\{ &\frac{1}{2\sigma^2} \|y^k-X^kMv^k\|^2_2 + \frac{1}{2} \sum_{A\in\Acal} \frac{f(A)}{\zeta_A^k} (\|v_A^k\|^2_2 + \tr \Sigma_{AA}^k) - \frac{1}{2} \log\det \Sigma^k\\[-.1cm]
& + \frac{N^k}{2}\log(\sigma^2) + \frac{N^k}{2} \log (2\pi) + \frac{1}{2\sigma^2} \tr{M^{\top}{X^k}^{\top}X^kM\Sigma^k} -\frac{1}{2} \sum_{A\in\Acal}|A|\\
&+ \sum_{A\in\Acal} \Big[ - \frac{1}{2}|A|\log f(A) -\frac{|A|}{2} \log 2\pi + \phi_A(\zeta_A^k) \Big]\Big\},\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
and the closed-form updates are
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:updates}
\begin{aligned}
\Sigma^k & = \sigma^2(M^{\top}{X^k}^{\top}X^kM + \sigma^2 F{Z^k}^{-1} )^{-1}\\
v^k & = (M^{\top}{X^k}^{\top}X^kM + \sigma^2 F{Z^k}^{-1})^{-1}M^{\top}{X^k}^{\top}y^k\\
\zeta_A^k & = \argmin_{z \geq 0} \phi_A(z) + \frac{1}{2} \frac{f(A)}{z} (\|v_A^k\|^2_2 + \tr \Sigma_{AA}^k)\\
\sigma^2& = \frac{\sum_{k=1}^K \!\! \big\{ \|y^k \!\!-\!\! X^kMv^k\|^2_2 \!+\! \tr M^{\top}{X^k}^{\top}X^kM\Sigma^k \big\}} {\sum_{k=1}^{K}N^k} \\
f(A) & = \frac{K|A|}{\sum_{k=1}^K \frac{1}{\zeta_A^k} (\|v_A^k\|^2_2 + \tr \Sigma_{AA}^k)},\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
iterated until convergence.
\begin{remark}
Note that the only update that depends on the specific prior distribution is that for the variational parameter $\zeta_A^k$, all others apply to all super-Gaussian priors.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
It can be shown that the updates \eqref{eq:updates} exactly correspond to the updates yielded by mean-field variational inference in the special case of Gaussian scale mixtures \citep{Palmeretal06}. However, the approach presented here is more general, as it also applies to super-Gaussian priors that are not Gaussian scale mixtures.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
Using the matrix inversion lemma, the update for $\Sigma^k$ can be rewritten in such a way that we avoid the expensive inversion of a $\sum_{A\in\Acal}|A|\times \sum_{A\in\Acal}|A|$ matrix and we only have to invert a $P\times P$ or $N^k\times N^k$ matrix instead, which can even be diagonal in certain cases (see the appendix for details).
When it is not diagonal, matrix inversions can be avoided by making an extra diagonal assumption on the covariance matrix of the Gaussian posteriors of all $v_A^k$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
While we do provide an update equation for $\sigma^2$ for completeness, in general it is customary to assume the noise level known, which we also do in all our experiments.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Special cases}
\label{sec:specialcases}
The family of super-Gaussian distributions includes Student's $t$ and generalized Gaussian distributions among many others. We here give the densities of these distributions, as well as the expressions for the quantities in our model and inference that depend on the particular prior on~$v_A^k$.
\paragraph{Student's $t$:} The density of this distribution is given by
\begin{equation}
p(v_A^k|a, f(A)) =f(A)^{\frac{|A|}{2}} \frac{\Gamma( a + |A|/2)}{\Gamma(a)} \Big(\frac{1}{2\pi}\Big)^{\frac{|A|}{2}}\Big(1 + \frac{{\|v_A^k\|_2}^2f(A)}{2} \Big)^{-a-\frac{|A|}{2}},
\end{equation}
where $a$ is a parameter governing the shape of the distribution. The smaller $a$, the heavier-tailed the distribution (for $a\le 1$, there is no finite variance).
For this distribution,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\phi_A(\zeta_A^k) = & \frac{1}{\zeta_A^k}+ (a+1/2)\log(\zeta_A^k) + \frac{|A|}{2}\log(2\pi) - (a + |A|/2)+(a+|A|/2)\log(a+|A|/2) \\
& - \log(\Gamma(a+|A|/2))+ \log(\Gamma(a)),\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
and, therefore, the update for $\zeta_A^k$ is written as
\begin{equation}
\zeta_A^k = \frac{1+\frac{1}{2} f(A) (\|v_A^k\|^2_2 + \tr \Sigma_{AA}^k)}{a+\frac{|A|}{2}} .
\end{equation}
The variance of a Student's $t$-distributed random variable, if $a>1$, is
$\EE(v_A^k {v_A^k}^{\top})=\frac{1}{f(A)(a-1)}I,
$
and therefore
$\EE(\| v_A^k\|_2^2)=\frac{|A|}{f(A)(a-1)}.
$
Student's $t$ has a natural representation as a Gaussian scale mixture with the inverse Gamma as the mixing distribution.
All our experiments are carried out using Student's~$t$.
\paragraph{Generalized Gaussian:} The density is given by
\begin{equation}
p(v_A^k|\gamma, f(A)) = f(A)^{\frac{|A|}{2}}\frac{\frac{\gamma}{2}\Gamma(\frac{|A|}{2})} {\pi^{\frac{|A|}{2}} \Gamma(\frac{|A|}{2} )} e^{-\|v_A^k f(A)^{\frac{1}{2}}\|_2^\gamma }
\end{equation}
\citep{Pascaletal13}. Consequently, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\phi_A(\zeta_A^k) = & -\log \frac{\frac{\gamma}{2}\Gamma(\frac{|A|}{2})} {\pi^{\frac{|A|}{2}} \Gamma(\frac{|A|}{2} )} + \frac{{\zeta_A^k}^\frac{\gamma}{2-\gamma}( \frac{1}{\gamma} - \frac{1}{2}) }{\gamma^{\frac{2}{\gamma-2}} },\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\zeta_A^k = \Big(-\frac{\frac{1}{2} f(A) (\|v_A^k\|^2_2 + \tr \Sigma_{AA}^k)}{(1/\gamma -1/2)\gamma^{\frac {\gamma-2}{2}} } \frac{\gamma-2}{\gamma} \Big)^{\frac{2-\gamma}{2}},
\end{equation}
and $\EE(\| v_A^k\|_2^2)=\frac{\Gamma(|A|/\gamma + 2/\gamma)}{f(A)\Gamma(|A|/\gamma)}$.
\subsection{Learning with all groups}
\label{sec:allgroups}
While our model and the associated inference algorithm described earlier are valid for any set of groups~$\Acal$, including $\Acal=2^V$, the algorithm is impractical when $\Acal$ is large: Indeed, even if we only have 20 variables and 1000 tasks, learning with $\Acal = 2^{\{1,\ldots,20\}}$ implies that the number of variational parameters~$\zeta_A^k$ will exceed a billion. To avoid working with a prohibitively large number of groups at once, one can leverage an \textit{active set}-type heuristic that maintains a list of relevant groups and iteratively updates it. Algorithm~\ref{alg:greedy}, which we discuss in detail in the following, describes one way to do this. It requires setting the maximal allowed cardinality $T$ of $\Acal$, and the number $D$ of groups to be discarded in each active set update. We start by learning with singletons only (steps 1 and 2); After ranking the groups in $\Acal$ according to their relevance measured by $\frac{f(A)}{|A|}$ into the sequence $(A_1,\ldots,A_{|\Acal|})$ (step 3), we determine the additional groups to be considered, $\Acal'$, by taking the first $T$ sets from the sequence $(A_1\cup A_2 ,\ldots, A_1 \cup A_{|\Acal|}, A_2\cup A_3,\ldots, A_2\cup A_{|\Acal|}, \ldots)$, ignoring groups that have been considered in the past and making sure we do not add the same group more than once; In steps 5-11 we repeatedly (a) learn with $\Acal\cup\Acal'$, (b) rank the groups, (c) update $\Acal$ and $\Acal'$. In step 8 we choose not to discard the singletons just to make sure that $\Acal$ always covers $\{1,\ldots,P\}$. The stopping criterion (step 5) may be that we have no more groups to consider (if $P$ is small enough), or that we have reached a predefined maximal number of iterations.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Active set procedure for the discovery of relevant groups}\label{alg:greedy}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE $T\in\NN$, $D\in\NN$
\STATE Let $\Acal =\{1,\ldots,P\}$ and $\Dcal=\emptyset$
\STATE $f \gets \text{variational}(\Acal)$
\STATE Rank all $A\in\Acal$ according to their relevance
\STATE Determine $\Acal'$ \\
(make sure $\left\vert\Acal\cup\Acal'\right\vert\!\le\! T, \Acal'\cap(\Acal\cup\Dcal)\!=\!\emptyset$)
\WHILE {stopping condition not met}
\STATE $f \gets \text{variational}(\Acal \cup \Acal')$
\STATE Rank $A\!\in\Acal\! \cup \!\Acal'$ according to their relevance
\STATE Add to $\Dcal$ the $D$ least relevant non-singletons in $\Acal\cup\Acal'$
\STATE $\Acal \gets \Acal\cup\Acal' \setminus\Dcal$
\STATE Determine $\Acal'$\\
(make sure $\left\vert\Acal\cup\Acal'\right\vert\!\le\! T, \Acal'\cap(\Acal\cup\Dcal)\!=\!\emptyset$)
\ENDWHILE
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Approximation Quality and Regularization}
\label{sec:reg}
The goal of this section is to experimentally study the behavior of our approximate inference scheme in terms of estimation quality and to clarify how we can control it.
As we empirically show below, the variational approximation scheme from Section \ref{sec:variational} tends to overestimate the variance of the prior distribution (i.e., underestimate the inverse scale parameter $f(A)$) when this variance is smaller than~$\sigma^2$, the noise variance. This is undesirable, as we would like $f(A)$ to tend to infinity for irrelevant groups of variables.
To circumvent this problem, we use an improper hyperprior of the form $p(f(A)) \propto f(A)^\beta$ to encourage $f(A)$ to go to infinity when the variance of $p(v_A)$ is smaller than $\sigma^2$.
Consequently, the regularization term $-K\beta\sum_{A\in\Acal}\log f(A)$ with $\beta>0$ is added to the objective function \eqref{eq:obj}, and the only update that changes is that for $f(A)$:
\begin{equation}
f(A) = \frac{K(\beta + \frac{|A|}{2})}{\frac{1}{2}\sum_{k=1}^K \frac{1}{\zeta_A^k} (\|v_A^k\|^2_2 + \tr \Sigma_{AA}^k)}.
\end{equation}
Thus, we substitute the approximate type-II maximum likelihood estimation of $f(A)$ by approximate (also ``type-II'') maximum a posteriori estimation. In Sections \ref{sec:exp_p_1} and \ref{sec:exp_p_2} we empirically study the effect of the parameter $\beta$ on the approximation quality.
\subsection{Scale parameter inference with only one variable}
\label{sec:exp_p_1}
In this experiment, we evaluate the performance of the variational method described in Section \ref{sec:variational} in recovering the unknown scale parameter $f$ of the prior in the simplest, 1-dimensional case (note that in this subsection we omit the subscripts $A$ as $\Acal =\{\{1\}\}$). More specifically, our goal here is to answer the following questions: Given an i.i.d. sample drawn from a univariate Student's $t$ with shape and inverse scale parameters $a$ and $f$, corrupted by Gaussian noise, and supposing we know both the noise variance $\sigma^2$ and the shape parameter $a$, can we precisely estimate the inverse scale parameter $f$ using the variational method from Section \ref{sec:variational}? In the settings where we cannot, does regularization improve our estimates?
\paragraph{Experimental setup.} We consider 10,000 tasks with one variable and one observation each ($P$, $N^k$ for all $k$, and $X^k$ for all $k$ equal to 1). Data are generated from the model with Student's $t$ prior on $v^k$ with parameters $a$ set to 1.5 and $f$ varying in the set $\mathcal{F}$ of 14 values between $0.02$ and $50$ taken roughly uniformly on the logarithmic scale, and Gaussian noise with variance $\sigma^2$ set to $1$.
We compare the performance of the variational method with that of a grid search over $\mathcal{F}\cup\{10^5\}$, where we use the trapezoidal rule to numerically solve the intractable integral in \eqref{eq:ML_brute}. The grid search, feasible in this basic setting, provides the best available approximation to the regularized maximum likelihood solution.
To reduce the effect of random fluctuations, we repeat all experiments 5 times with different random seeds and report averaged results.
\paragraph{Results.} Figure~\ref{fig:reg_scale_p1} summarizes the results. For three values of the parameter $\beta$, we plot (on the logarithmic scale) the estimated against the true variance for the considered range of the parameter $f$ (recall that the variance of a Student's $t$-distributed random variable with parameters $a$ and $f$ equals $\frac{1}{(a-1)f}$). In all figures, we also plot the variance of the Gaussian noise $\sigma^2$. We observe that in the absence of regularization ($\beta=0$) and when the signal is not much stronger than noise, the variational method overestimates the signal variance while the grid search does not. As we add regularization, this effect gradually goes away and the signal variance estimate is set to 0 (i.e., the estimate of $f$, $\widehat{f}$, goes to infinity) if the true signal variance is smaller than a certain threshold. When the regularization is too strong ($\beta=0.25$), the estimated signal variance drops to 0 even when the signal is stronger than the noise, and the variance of the signal is heavily underestimated. With the right amount of regularization ($\beta=0.05$ in this case) we observe the desired behavior: The variational method recovers the signal when it is stronger than noise, and sets $\widehat{f}$ to infinity otherwise. In all cases, variational estimates are close to the maximum likelihood estimates obtained by the grid search when the signal is much stronger than the noise.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.95\textwidth]{reg_scale_p1}
\end{center}
\caption{Recovery of the variance of the univariate Student's $t$ distribution with added Gaussian noise of known variance with grid search and the variational method, with different levels of regularization. The x and y axes represent the variance based on the true and on the estimated $f$ parameter values, respectively.}
\label{fig:reg_scale_p1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Structured sparsity with two variables}
\label{sec:exp_p_2}
In this section, we empirically study the most basic case of the group relevance learning problem. Suppose that in each task we only have 2 variables, and therefore 3 possible groups, $\Acal =\{\{1\},\{2\},\{1,2\}\}$. Let $X^k$ be the identity matrix in each task. In this basic setting, and supposing that the data come from the model, can our inference algorithm distinguish the case where the data $\{y^k\}_{k=1,\ldots,K}$ are generated by the group of variables $\{1,2\}$ from the opposite case, where the relevant groups are the two singletons $\{1\}$ and~$\{2\}$?
These two settings differ in fact significantly in the case of a heavy-tailed prior on $v_A^k$: We have $w^k = v_{ \{1\} }^k + v_{ \{2\} }^k + v_{ \{1,2\} }^k$;
If $\{1, 2\}$ is relevant and $\{1\}$ and $\{2\}$ are not,
then $v_{ \{1\} }^k$ and $v_{ \{2\} }^k$ will have to be close to zero for all $k$, however, $v_{ \{1,2\} }^k$ will be significantly far from zero for some $k$. As the prior on $v_A^k$ only depends on $v_A$ through its norm, these $v_{ \{1,2\} }^k$ can be anywhere on the circle with radius $\|v_{ \{1,2\} }^k\|_2$ with the same probability and therefore $y^k$ can also be anywhere on the circle with radius $\|y^k\|_2$.
In contrast,
when $\{1, 2\}$ is irrelevant and $\{1\}$ and $\{2\}$ are relevant,
the rare events of $v_{ \{1\} }$ and $v_{ \{2\} }$ both being significantly away from zero will not occur at the same time for most $k$, and therefore the $y^k$ with a large norm will tend to be concentrated along the axes. This behavior (using Student's $t$ prior with parameter $a=1.5$ on $v_A^k$) is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:singleton_pair_data}, where we have plotted the data $\{y^k\}_{k=1,\ldots,K}$ for $K=5,000$ in both settings.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{singleton_pair_data_a15}
\end{center}
\caption{On the left, the singletons are the relevant groups. On the right, the pair is the relevant group.}
\label{fig:singleton_pair_data}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Experimental setup.} We consider 5,000 tasks with $P$ and $N^k$ for all $k$ equal to 2, with the set of groups $\Acal =\{\{1\},\{2\},\{1,2\}\}$.
The data are generated from the model with Student's $t$ prior on $v^k$ with parameters $a$ set to 1.5 and each $f(A)$ varying in a set of 14 values between $0.01$ and $25$ taken roughly uniformly on the logarithmic scale ($f(\{1\})$ and $f(\{2\})$ always equal each other), and Gaussian noise with variance $\sigma^2$ set to $1$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.92\textwidth]{singleton_pair_res_a15.png}
\caption{A red (blue) square means that the estimate of the singleton (group) variance is larger than the estimate of the group (singleton) variance for the corresponding true singleton and pair variances indicated by the axes. A black square means that both singleton and pair variances are under $2\sigma^2$, the noise variance. Best seen in color.}
\label{fig:singleton_pair_results}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Results.} Figure~\ref{fig:singleton_pair_results} summarizes the results for three values of the regularization parameter $\beta$ ($\beta=0$ corresponds to the absence of regularization). We report when the estimated pair variance $\frac{2}{(a-1)\widehat{f}(\{1,2\})}$ dominates (blue) or is dominated (red) by the estimated singleton variance $\frac{1}{(a-1)\widehat{f}(\{1\})}+\frac{1}{(a-1)\widehat{f}(\{2\})}$, provided that one of them is larger than the noise variance, $2\sigma^2$. We see that when we do not regularize, the variational method explains everything with the singletons. As we add regularization, the pair explains more and more variance, however in such a way that the pair also explains the signal coming from singletons. Nonetheless, there is a regime ($\beta=0.03$) where a strong signal coming from both the singletons and the pair is identified correctly. If we regularize too strongly ($\beta=0.15$), the entire signal is explained by the pair, regardless of its source.
\section{Experiments}
\label{sec:exp}
In our experiments we consider two different instances of the denoising problem and we empirically evaluate the performance of our approach in recovering both the signal and the structure.
\subsection{Structured sparsity in the context of denoising}
In this section, we study toy multi-task structured sparse denoising problems. Our goal is to answer the following questions: Given data $\{y^k\}_{k=1,\ldots,K}$, generated from the model, and assuming that we know the true shape parameter $a$ of the Student's $t$ and the noise variance~$\sigma^2$, (a) can we recover the structure (i.e., the relevant groups and their weights), and (b) if we use the correct structure, is our denoising more accurate than when using a different structure?
\paragraph{Experimental setup.} To this end, we consider 10,000 tasks with $P$ and $N^k$ for all $k$ equal to 10, with the set of groups $\Acal =\{\{Q\}_{Q=1,\ldots,P}, \{1,\ldots,Q\}_{Q=2,\ldots,P}\}$.
Each signal $w^k$ is generated using Student's $t$ with parameters $a$ set to $1.5$ and $f(A)$ set to 0.2 or to 200, depending on whether $A$ is considered relevant or irrelevant: In this fashion, the variance of the signal coming from relevant $A$ is $\frac{|A|}{(a-1)f(A)}=10\times|A|$ (respectively, $0.01\times|A|$ for irrelevant $A$). For each task~$k$, $y^k$ is a perturbed version of the signal $w^k$ with additive Gaussian noise of variance $\sigma^2I$.
We consider three different ways of generating data:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Singletons}: Here, only $\{1\},\ldots,\{5\}$ are relevant, all other groups in $\Acal$ are irrelevant.
\item {\bf One group}: Only $\{1,2,3,4,5\}$ is relevant.
\item {\bf Overlapping groups}: The groups $\{1\}$, $\{1,2\}$,$\ \ldots\ $, $\{1,2,3,4,5\}$ are relevant.
\end{itemize}
For the three cases, we choose $\sigma^2$
so that the total noise variance $P\sigma^2$ equals the total signal variance in each case.
We consider four models of increasing complexity for inference:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf LASSO-like}: In this simplest model, we only use the singletons, $\Acal = \{\{1\},\ldots,\{P\}\}$, and moreover, we force $f(A)$ to be constant across $\Acal$; In order to do so, we change the update for $f(A)$ to
$f(A) = \frac{K\sum_{A\in\Acal}(\beta + \frac{|A|}{2})}{\frac{1}{2}\sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{A\in \Acal} \frac{1}{\zeta_A^k} (\|v_A^k\|^2_2 + \tr \Sigma_{AA}^k)}.$
This mimics the behavior of the LASSO, as the prior (that we are learning here) is the same for each coefficient.
\item {\bf Weighted LASSO-like}: The usual model with
$\Acal \!=\! \{\{1\},\ldots,\{P\}\}$.
\item {\bf Structured}: The usual model with $\Acal \!=\!\{\{Q\}_{Q=1,\ldots,P},\{1,\!\ldots,\! Q\}_{Q=2,\ldots,P}\}$.
\item {\bf Structured (active set)}: The model where we also learn $\Acal$ using Algorithm~\ref{alg:greedy} (with parameters $T=4P$, $D=2P$, and 5 active set updates).
\end{itemize}
We examine each of the 12 combinations of data generation and learning models. In each case, we use half of the tasks to find the optimal $\beta$ in terms of the mean squared prediction error (i.e., the mean squared difference between the true and the learned signals $w^k$) from a predefined range of 7 values, and the other half to learn with this $\beta$ and evaluate the test error.
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|r|c| c |c|}
\hline
& Singletons & One group & Overlapping \\ \hline
LASSO-like & 18.5$\pm$0.3 & 18.6$\pm$0.4 & 58.4$\pm$1.1\\ \hline
W. LASSO-like & {\bf 14.5}$\pm$0.3 & 14.5$\pm$0.3 & {\bf 42.8}$\pm$0.9\\ \hline
Structured & 14.8$\pm$0.3 & {\bf 13.8}$\pm$0.3 & 43.0$\pm$0.9 \\ \hline
Structured(AS) & 14.6$\pm$0.3 & 14.0$\pm$0.3 & {\bf 42.8}$\pm$0.9 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Squared error averaged over the tasks with $95\%$-confidence error bars for each combination of data generation and learning models. The usage of boldface indicates that the corresponding method significantly outperforms the others, as measured using a $t$-test at the level $0.05$.\label{tab:12comb}}
\end{table}
\paragraph{Results.} We begin by examining the performance of each of the four models in \emph{signal recovery}: In Table \ref{tab:12comb} we report the mean squared error on the 5,000 test tasks with $95\%$-confidence error bars. For all three regimes for data generation, the LASSO-like model performs far worse than the three others in recovery. This is due to the fact that this model learns the same prior for all variables, although not all variables have the same marginal variance. In the first and third data generation regimes W.LASSO performs slightly better than Structured in signal recovery, while Structured has an advantage when a single group is relevant. The performance of Structured(AS) is systematically close to, or on a par with that of the best-performing model.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.8\textwidth]{p10_exp_variance_23_3.png}
\caption{For each group of variables on the y axis, the intensity of gray indicates the percentage of total explained variance per $\beta$. \label{fig:p10_exp_variance_23_3}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In terms of \emph{structure recovery}, for all three data generation regimes, we find one or more values of $\beta$ that lead to the recovery of the relevant groups by Structured and Structured(AS), with either the same or a slightly different $\beta$ value leading to the smallest error in signal recovery. Figure~\ref{fig:p10_exp_variance_23_3} illustrates the percentage of total explained signal variance by each group for the One group and Overlapping regimes and for the Structured model, for all considered regularization parameters: With no regularization, the model explains the signal with both the relevant group(s) and the singletons included in the relevant group(s), however with more and more regularization, the signal variance explained by smaller groups is taken over by larger ones. The groups containing elements from $\{6,\ldots,10\}$, not shown in the plot, explain no variance in no regularization regime, with the exception of the largest group $\{1,\ldots,10\}$ that explains the weak signal coming from the irrelevant groups (recall that we have non-zero signal variance $0.01\times|A|$ for the irrelevant groups $A$) in weak and moderate regularization regimes and takes over the whole signal variance when the regularization is too strong.
In summary, the performance in denoising does not change drastically depending on the amount of regularization, unless it is too strong; However, a small amount of regularization is likely to better capture the structure than no regularization; If there is a strong group structure among the variables, regularization may also lead to better recovery.
A formal criterion to set the value of the hyperparameter $\beta$ would be to maximize its likelihood, as is customary in Bayesian methods.
\subsection{Image denoising with wavelets}
In this section, we consider the image denoising problem using wavelets. The Haar wavelet basis for 2-dimensional images~\citep{mallat} can naturally be arranged in three rooted directed quad-trees, which can be connected to form one tree by attaching the three roots to an artificial parent node; The structured sparsity-inducing norms with non-zero groups that are paths from the root in this tree have shown improvements over the $\ell_1$ norm~\citep{Jenattonetal11}. Our goal is to find out whether, in this task, (a) a value of $\beta$ that leads to good recovery for a set of images is also close to optimal for another set of images of roughly the same size, at least when the noise level is unchanged (stability of the hyperparameter); (b) learning a non-uniform prior on singletons improves recovery with respect to using a uniform prior (importance of learning a non-uniform prior); (c) learning the group structure helps beyond learning a non-uniform prior on singletons (importance of learning group relevances).
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{barbara.png} \quad \includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{fingerprint.png} \quad \includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{lena.png} \quad \includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{house.png}
\end{center}
\caption{The images used in our experiments (Barbara, Fingerprint, Lena, House).\label{fig:images}}
\vspace{.3cm}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Experimental setup.} In order to denoise a large grayscale image, we cut it into possibly overlapping patches of $32\times 32$ pixels, which compose the multiple 1024-dimensional signals that we denoise simultaneously by learning the appropriate (structured) prior. We use four well-known images (see Figure~\ref{fig:images}), Barbara, Fingerprint, Lena ($512\times 512$ pixels each), and House ($256\times 256$ pixels). Each signal $w_k$ is formed by the wavelet coefficients of one $32\times 32$ patch. For each of the $K=961$ tasks ($841$ for House) we form $y^k$ by adding Gaussian noise of variance $\sigma^2=400$ along each dimension.
As in the previous section, we examine the performance of three instances of our model: the model with a uniform factorized sparse prior (LASSO-like), a non-uniform factorized sparse prior (W.LASSO-like), the structured norms on all descending (equivalently, ascending) paths in the rooted tree (Structured), and the structured norms on groups that we discover in the process of learning, with~2 active set updates (Structured(AS)).
We consider a predefined range of 6 values for the regularization hyperparameter $\beta$, and 3 values ($0.5, 1.1, 1.5$) for the shape parameter~$a$ of Student's~$t$.
We compare the behavior of our methods with that of existing algorithms based on sparsity-inducing norms, which are not designed to learn group weights from data. From the family of such approaches, we choose the ``Tree-$\ell_2$'' structured norm proposed by \citet{Jenattonetal11}, and the classical LASSO \citep{Tibshirani94} on the wavelet coefficients. (We would like to stress here that ``Tree-$\ell_2$'' does need group weights to be specified, but does not provide a systematic way to learn them. They are usually set by introducing a group-weighting parameter $\alpha$ so that $\alpha^d$ is the weight of all groups at depth $d$ in the tree, and then optimizing $\alpha$ over a predefined range of values using cross-validation.)
We run these methods on each set of small images with the regularization parameter $\lambda$ and the group-weighting parameter $\alpha$ (only for Tree-$\ell_2$) varying over
predefined ranges of 75 and 7 values
respectively, and report the smallest error.
To train the LASSO and learn with the Tree-$\ell_2$ norm, we use the ``proximal'' toolbox of the software package SPAMS~\citep{Jenattonetal11}.
\paragraph{Results.} Table \ref{tab:mse_images_32} shows the best performance in terms of the mean squared error of each method on each image (which corresponds to a set of $K$ small images). The values in the parentheses for our proposed methods indicate the value of $\beta$ corresponding to the minimal error. The performance of our proposed methods with respect to the shape parameter $a$ is systematically slightly better for larger $a$, and all reported results correspond to $a=1.5$.
According to these results, (a)~the performance of a given value of $\beta$ in signal recovery indeed seems to be stable across images (note that we have also observed that the performance on a given image is robust to small changes of the value of the hyperparameter); (b)~the fact that the LASSO and our LASSO-like model are systematically outperformed by models that weight each variable confirms the intuition that learning how to weight individual variables should boost the estimation quality; (c)~it seems that learning a prior on joint relevances of variables can lead to improved performance, as shown in the column corresponding to Fingerprint, although this is not always the case: on House and Lena, the performance of methods that learn group relevances is not significantly different from that of Tree-$\ell_2$, and in the case of Barbara they perform worse. Inspecting the relevances of different groups (paths in the wavelet tree) learned by Structured, we see that the groups explaining the bulk of the variance are overlapping groups of 2, 3, or 4 elements, mostly descending from the roots of the three quad-trees. In contrast, the relevant groups selected by Structured(AS) tend to consist of one to three roots of the three wavelet quad-trees and one or two wavelets of higher frequency, suggesting that paths in the wavelet tree may not always be the most natural groups in this problem. At last, let us stress that while ``Tree-$\ell_2$'' is applicable in problems where variables can be structured in a tree given in advance, our proposed approach applies to any known or unknown group structure.
The Matlab code used in our experiments is available at \url{http://cbio.ensmp.fr/~nshervashidze/code/LLSS}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.98\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|r |c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& Barbara & House & Fingerprint & Lena \\
\hline
LASSO-like & 179.0$\pm$4.6 (0.001) & 107.5$\pm$2.6 (0.001) & 247.5$\pm$1.7 (0.005) & 110.3$\pm$2.8 (0.001) \\ \hline
W.LASSO-like & 163.3$\pm$5.1 (0) & 93.7$\pm$2.6 (0) & 195.0$\pm$1.8 (0.0001) & 89.5$\pm$3.2 (0) \\ \hline
Structured & 164.8$\pm$5.3 (0) & 95.3$\pm$2.9 (0) & {\bf 193.6}$\pm$1.8 (0.0005) & 90.3$\pm$3.5 (0) \\ \hline
Structured(AS) & 163.1$\pm$5.0 (0.0001) & 92.9$\pm$2.3 (0.0001) & 194.9$\pm$1.8 (0.001) & 89.5$\pm$2.8 (0.0001) \\ \hline
\hline
Tree-$\ell_2$&{\bf 155.3}$\pm$6.4 & 93.3$\pm$3.8 & 214.9$\pm$2.4 & 88.7$\pm$3.7 \\ \hline
LASSO &176.7$\pm$6.4 & 102.1$\pm$3.6 & 250.0$\pm$2.2 & 106.6$\pm$3.9 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\caption{Squared error averaged over the images with $95\%$-confidence error bars for each combination of data generation and learning models. The usage of boldface indicates that the corresponding method significantly outperforms the others, as measured using a $t$-test at the level $0.05$. (Each number is divided by 1000 for readability.)\label{tab:mse_images_32}}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusions and Future Work}
\label{sec:concl}
In this paper, we have proposed a flexible and general probabilistic model and an associated inference scheme for automatically learning the weights of possibly overlapping groups in the context of structured sparse multi-task linear regression. We have shown that the classical variational inference scheme is not well adapted for learning with this model, and have proposed a regularization method that closes this gap. This has allowed us to investigate the effect of learning group weights in denoising problems, leading to the conclusion that learning penalties can significantly improve prediction quality, as well as the interpretability of the models, in this context. We have furthermore devised an active-set procedure that makes the inference with our model scalable to settings with large~$P$ and a large number of potential groups in~$\Acal$.
In our future work we may consider different likelihood models to handle settings different from linear regression, such as binary classification. Learning group relevances for classification is indeed crucial, e.g., in the context of genome-wide association studies with binary phenotypes in computational biology, or for image segmentation in computer vision.
In the appendix we provide details on the derivation of the variational inference scheme for our model (briefly introduced in Section \ref{sec:variational}) and discuss efficient ways of implementing the closed-form updates~\eqref{eq:updates}.
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $\mathcal L$ be a set of $n$ lines in the plane. The \emph{arrangement} of $\mathcal L$, denoted $\mathcal A(\mathcal L)$, is the partition of the plane into vertices, edges, and cells induced by $\mathcal L$. Let $C$ be another object in the plane. The \emph{zone} of $C$ in $\mathcal L$, denoted $\mathcal Z(C,\mathcal L)$, is defined as the set of all cells in $\mathcal A(\mathcal L)$ that are intersected by $C$. The \emph{complexity} of $\mathcal Z(C,\mathcal L)$ is defined as the total number of edges, or vertices, in it.
The celebrated \emph{zone theorem} states that, if $C$ is another line, then $\mathcal Z(C,\mathcal L)$ has complexity $O(n)$ (Chazelle et al.~\cite{CGL}; see also Edelsbrunner et al.~\cite{EGPPSS}, Matou\v sek~\cite{mat_DG}).
If $C$ is a convex curve, like a circle or a parabola, then $\mathcal Z(C,\mathcal L)$ is known to have complexity $O(n \alpha(n))$, where $\alpha$ is the very-slow-growing inverse Ackermann function (Edelsbrunner et al.~\cite{EGPPSS}; see also Bern et al.~\cite{BEPY}, Sharir and Agarwal~\cite{DS_book}). More specifically, the \emph{outer zone} of $\mathcal Z(C,\mathcal L)$ (the part that lies outside the convex hull of $C$) is known to have complexity $O(n)$, whereas the complexity of the \emph{inner zone} is only known to be $O(n \alpha(n))$. Whether the complexity of the inner zone is linear as well is a longstanding open problem~\cite{BEPY, DS_book}.
The gap between the upper and the lower bound is completely negligible for all practical purposes, but the question is interesting from a purely mathematical point of view.
In this paper we make progress towards proving that the inner zone of a circle in an arrangement of lines has linear complexity. Since we find it easier to work with a parabola than with a circle, throughout this paper we will take $C$ to be the parabola $y=x^2$. The two problems are equivalent by a projective transformation, as we will explain.
\subsection{Davenport--Schinzel sequences and their generalizations}
Let $S$ be a finite sequence of symbols, and let $s\ge 1$ be a parameter. Then $S$ is called a \emph{Davenport--Schinzel sequence of order $s$} if every two adjacent symbols in $S$ are distinct, and if $S$ does not contain any alternation $a\cdots b\cdots a\cdots b\cdots$ of length $s+2$ for two distinct symbols $a\neq b$. Hence, for $s=1$ the ``forbidden pattern" is $aba$, for $s=2$ it is $abab$, for $s=3$ it is $ababa$, and so on.
The maximum length of a Davenport--Schinzel sequence of order $s$ that contains only $n$ distinct symbols is denoted $\lambda_s(n)$. For $s\le 2$ we have $\lambda_1(n) = n$ and $\lambda_2(n) = 2n-1$. However, for fixed $s\ge 3$, $\lambda_s(n)$ is slightly superlinear in $n$.
\paragraph{DS sequences of order $3$}
The case $s=3$ is the one most relevant to us. Hart and Sharir~\cite{HS} (see also~\cite{yo_DS,DS_book}) constructed a family of sequences that achieve the lower bound\footnote{The bound claimed in~\cite{DS_book} is $\lambda_3(n) \ge (1/2) n\alpha(n)-O(n)$, because a factor of $2$ is lost in interpolation; this problem is fixed in~\cite{yo_DS}.} $\lambda_3(n) \ge n\alpha(n) - O(n)$; and they also proved the asymptotically matching upper bound $\lambda_3(n) \le O(n\alpha(n))$. Klazar~\cite{klazar} subsequently improved the upper bound to $\lambda_3(n) \le 2n\alpha(n) + O(n\sqrt{\alpha(n)})$ (recently, Pettie~\cite{pettie_sharp} improved the lower-order term to $O(n)$).
Nivasch~\cite{yo_DS} showed that $\lambda_3(n) \ge 2n\alpha(n) - O(n)$. Hence, $\lambda_3(n) = 2n\alpha(n) \pm O(n)$. Nivasch's construction is an \emph{extension} of the Hart--Sharir construction, in the sense that Nivasch's sequences contain the Hart--Sharir sequences as subseqeunces.\footnote{This can be shown with an argument similar to that of Lemma~\ref{lem_structurally} below, which is beyond the scope of this paper.} Geneson~\cite{geneson} made a nice cosmetic improvement to Nivasch's construction.
\paragraph{DS sequences of higher orders}
For $s=4$ we have $\lambda_4(n) = \Theta(n\cdot 2^{\alpha(n)})$, and in general, $\lambda_s(n) = n\cdot 2^{\Theta(\mathrm{poly}(\alpha(n)))}$ for fixed $s\ge 4$, where the polynomial in the exponent is of degree roughly $s/2$. See Sharir and Agarwal~\cite{DS_book}, and subsequent improvements by Nivasch~\cite{yo_DS} and Pettie~\cite{pettie_sharp}.
\paragraph{Generalized DS sequences}
A \emph{generalized Davenport--Schinzel sequence} is one where the forbidden pattern is not restricted to be $abab\cdots$, but it can be any fixed subsequence $u$. In order for the problem to be nontrivial we must require $S$ to be \emph{$k$-sparse}---meaning, every $k$ adjacent symbols in $S$ must be pairwise distinct---where $k = \|u\|$ is the number of distinct symbols in $u$. For example, if we take $u=abcaccbc$, then $S$ must not contain any subsequence of the form $a\cdots b\cdots c\cdots a\cdots c\cdots c\cdots b\cdots c$ for $|\{a,b,c\}|=3$, and every three adjacent symbols in $S$ must be pairwise distinct.
We denote by $\Ex(u, n)$ the maximum length of a $k$-sparse, $u$-avoiding sequence $S$ on $n$ distinct symbols, where $k=\|u\|$. For every fixed forbidden pattern $u$, $\Ex(u,n)$ is at most slightly superlinear in $n$: $\Ex(u,n) = O\bigl(n\cdot 2^{\mathrm{poly}(\alpha(n))}\bigr)$, where the polynomial in the exponent depends on $u$ (Klazar~\cite{klazar_genDS}, Nivasch~\cite{yo_DS}, Pettie~\cite{pettie_3}).
Similarly, if $U = \{u_1, u_2, \ldots, u_j\}$ is a set of patterns, then $\Ex(U, n)$ denotes the maximum length of a sequence that avoids all the patterns in $U$, is $k$-sparse for $k = \min\{\|u\| : u\in U\}$, and contains only $n$ distinct symbols.
\paragraph{Some relevant results on generalized DS sequences}
Let us mention some results on generalized DS sequences that are relevant to us:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\Ex(\{ababa, ab\,cac\,cbc\}, n) = \Theta(n\alpha(n))$ (Pettie~\cite{pettie_origins}). Indeed, the $ababa$-free sequences of Hart and Sharir~\cite{HS} avoid $ab\,cac\,cbc$ as well.\footnote{Spaces are just for clarity. The Hart--Sharir construction also avoids other patterns, such as $abcbdadbcd$ (Klazar~\cite{klazar_93}; see Pettie~\cite{pettie_origins}).} See Section~\ref{sec_ababa} below.
\item $\Ex(ab\,cacbc, n) = \Theta(n\alpha(n))$ (Pettie~\cite{pettie_matrix}). The lower bound is achieved by a modification of the Hart--Sharir construction, which does not avoid $ababa$ anymore.
\item It is unknown whether $\Ex(\{ababa, ab\,cacbc\},n)$ or $\Ex(\{ababa, ab\,cac\,cbc, (ab\,cac\,cbc)^R\}, n)$ are superlinear in $n$ (where $u^R$ denotes the reversal of $u$). We conjecture that they are both $O(n)$.
\end{itemize}
\paragraph{Applications of generalized DS sequences}
Generalized Davenport--Schinzel sequences have found a few applications. Cibulka and Kyn\v cl~\cite{CK} used them to bound the size of sets of permutations with bounded VC-dimension. Valtr~\cite{valtr}, Fox et al.~\cite{FPS}, and Suk and Walczak~\cite{Suk-W} have used Generalized DS sequences to bound the number of edges in graphs with no $k$ pairwise crossing edges; the papers \cite{valtr,FPS} use the ``$N$-shaped" forbidden pattern $a_1\cdots a_\ell\cdots a_1\cdots a_\ell$, and the papers \cite{FPS,Suk-W} use the forbidden pattern $(a_1\cdots a_\ell)^m$.
Pettie considered $\Ex(\{abababa, abaabba\}, n)$ for analyzing the deque conjecture for splay trees~\cite{pettie_splay}, and $\Ex(\{ababab, abbaabba\}, n)$ for analyzing the union of fat triangles in the plane~\cite{pettie_forbid}.
\subsection{Transcribing the zone into a Davenport--Schinzel sequence}\label{subsec_Lprime}
Let $\mathcal L$ be a set of $n$ lines in the plane, and let $C$ be a convex curve in the plane. We can assume without loss of generality that $C$ is either closed (like a circle) or unbounded in both directions (like a parabola), by prolonging $C$ if necessary. Thus, $C$ divides the plane into two regions, one of which equals the convex hull of $C$.
Here we recall the argument of Edelsbrunner et al.~\cite{EGPPSS} showing that the complexity of the part of $\mathcal Z(C, \mathcal L)$ that lies inside the convex hull of $C$ is $O(n \alpha(n))$.
If $C$ is unbounded in both directions then assume without loss of generality that it is $x$-monotone and it is the graph of a convex function, by rotating the whole picture if necessary.
Also assume general position for simplicity: No line of $\mathcal L$ is vertical, no two lines are parallel, no three lines are concurrent, no line is tangent to $C$, and no two lines intersect $C$ at the same point. (Perturbing $\mathcal L$ into general position can only increase the complexity of $\mathcal Z(C, \mathcal L)$.) We can also assume that every line of $\mathcal L$ intersects $C$, since otherwise the line would not contribute to the complexity of the inner zone of $C$.
Let $\mathcal L'$ be the set of $n$ segments obtained by intersecting each line of $\mathcal L$ with the convex hull of $C$. (If $C$ is unbounded then some elements of $\mathcal L'$ may actually be rays.)
Let $G$ be the \emph{intersection graph} of $\mathcal L'$, i.e.~the graph having $\mathcal L'$ as vertex set, and having an edge connecting two elements of $\mathcal L'$ if and only if they intersect. We can assume without loss of generality that $G$ is connected: If $G$ has several connected components, then we can separately bound the complexity produced by each one and add them up; this works because our desired bound is at least linear in $n$. Since $G$ is connected, all the bounded cells of the inner zone are simple (i.e.~they touch $C$ in a single interval); and if $C$ is unbounded then there are at most two upward-unbounded cells (bounded by the two infinite extremes of $C$).
If $C$ is closed then let $c_0$ be the topmost point of $C$; we will ignore the cell that contains $c_0$, since it has at most linear complexity (as any single cell does). If $C$ is unbounded then we will similarly ignore the up-to-two unbounded cells.
To bound the complexity of the remaining cells, we will traverse their boundary and transcribe it into a sequence in a certain way.
Every segment of $\mathcal L'$ has two sides, one of which will be called \emph{positive} and the other one \emph{negative}, as follows: If $C$ is closed, then the positive side is the one facing the point $c_0$ and the negative side is the other one; if $C$ is unbounded, then the positive side is the upper one and the negative side is the lower one.
If $C$ is closed, then let $c_1$ be the first endpoint of $\mathcal L'$ counterclockwise from $c_0$ along $C$, and let $c_2$ be the last endpoint. If $C$ is unbounded, then $c_1$ is defined as the leftmost endpoint of $\mathcal L'$, and $c_2$ as the rightmost endpoint.
We traverse the boundary of the inner zone of $C$ by starting at $c_1$, and walking around the boundary of the cells, as if the segments were walls which we touch with the left hand at all times, until we reach $c_2$. See Figure~\ref{fig_zone_tour}. We transcribe this tour into a sequence containing $3n$ distinct symbols as follows:
Each segment $a\in \mathcal L'$ is partitioned by the other segments into smaller pieces. We take two directed copies of each such piece. We call each such copy a \emph{sub-segment}. The sub-segments are directed counterclockwise around $a$; i.e. those above $a$ are directed leftwards, and those below $a$ are directed rightwards. Hence, our tour visits some of these sub-segments, in the directions we have given them, in a certain order.
For each segment $a$, the sub-segments of $a$ that are visited, are visited in counterclockwise order around $a$. We first visit some sub-segments on the positive side of $a$, then we visit some sub-segments on the negative side of $a$, and then we again visit some sub-segments on the positive side of $a$.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics{fig_zone_tour.pdf}}
\caption{\label{fig_zone_tour}Traversing the boundary of the inner zone of $C$.}
\end{figure}
Sub-segments of the first type are transcribed as $a'$; sub-segments of the second type are transcribed as $a$, and sub-segments of the third type are transcribed as $a''$. See again Figure~\ref{fig_zone_tour}. Let $S'$ be the sequence resulting from the tour.
For each segment $a$, label its endpoints $L_a$ and $R_a$, such that $L_a$ is visited before $R_a$.\footnote{If $C$ is unbounded then $L_a$ is always the left endpoint of $a$.}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics{fig_tour_2segments.pdf}}
\caption{\label{fig_tour_2segments}Symbol alternations produced by two intersecting segments.}
\end{figure}
Let $a$, $b$ be two intersecting segments, such that $L_a$ is visited before $L_b$. Then the restriction of $S'$ to $\{a',a,a'',b',b,b''\}$ is of the form
\begin{equation*}
(a')^*\, a^*\, (b')^*\, b^*\, a^*\, (a'')^*\, b^*\, (b'')^*\, (a'')^* \quad \text{or}\quad (b')^*\, (a')^*\, a^*\, (b')^*\, b^*\, a^*\, (a'')^*\, b^*\, (b'')^*,
\end{equation*}
where ${}^*$ denotes zero or more repetitions. See Figure~\ref{fig_tour_2segments}.
Hence, the restriction of $S'$ to first-type symbols contains no alternation $abab$, and it contains no adjacent repetitions either, as can be easily seen. Hence, it is an order-$2$ DS-sequence and so it has linear length. The same is true for the restriction of $S'$ to third-type symbols.
Thus, the important part of the sequence $S'$ is its restriction to second-type symbols---those corresponding to the negative side of the segments. From now on we denote this subsequence $S$, and we call it the \emph{lower inner-zone sequence of $\mathcal Z(C, \mathcal L)$}.\footnote{Slight abuse of terminology. We will mainly deal with the case where $C$ is unbounded; in this case the negative side of a segment is always its lower side.} The sequence $S$ contains no alternation $ababa$, and it contains no adjacent repetitions, as can be easily seen. Hence, $S$ is an order-$3$ DS-sequence, and hence its length is at most $O(n\alpha(n))$.
\subsection{Relation to lower envelopes}
Lower envelopes are the original motivation for Davenport--Schinzel sequences. If $\mathcal F = \{f_1, \ldots,\allowbreak f_n\}$ is a collection of $n$ $x$-monotone curves in the plane (continuous functions ${\mathbb R}\to{\mathbb R}$), then the \emph{lower envelope} of $\mathcal F$ is their pointwise minimum (or the part that can be seen from the point $(0,-\infty)$), and the \emph{lower-envelope sequence} is the sequence of functions that appear in the lower envelope, from left to right. If the $f_i$'s are partially defined functions (say, each one is defined only on an interval of ${\mathbb R}$), then the definition is the same, except that the symbol ``$\infty$" might also appear in the lower-envelope sequence.
In our case, if $C$ is $x$-monotone, then the lower-envelope sequence of the set of segments $\mathcal L'$ is a subsequence of $S$: It contains only those parts that can be seen from $-\infty$. We shall denote this sequence by $N = N(\mathcal L')$.
The Hart--Sharir sequences can be realized as lower-envelope sequences of segments in the plane (Wiernik and Sharir~\cite{WS}; see also~\cite{mat_DG, DS_book}). However, it is unknown whether this is still possible if all the endpoints are required to lie on a circle/parabola (like our set $\mathcal L'$), or more generally on a convex curve. Sharir and Agarwal raise this question in~\cite[p.~112]{DS_book}. Proving a linear upper bound for the length of $N$ might be easier than for the length of $S$.
It is also not known whether the longer sequences of Nivasch~\cite{yo_DS} can be realized as lower-envelope sequences of segments. It is not even known whether there \emph{exists} an order-$3$ DS sequence that cannot be realized as a lower-envelope sequence of segments.
\subsection{From circles to conic sections}\label{subsec_conic}
Let us return to the zone problem. The special cases in which $C$ is a circle, a parabola, or a hyperbola, are all equivalent, as can be shown by suitable projective transformations: Let $\pi_1\subset {\mathbb R}^3$ be a plane that contains a set of lines $\mathcal L$ and a circle $C$. Let $K$ be a cone in ${\mathbb R}^3$ that intersects $\pi_1$ at $C$, and let $\pi_2$ be a plane that intersects $K$ at a parabola $C'$. Then, the projection through the apex of $K$ maps $\pi_1$ (with the exception of one line within $\pi_1$) into $\pi_2$, mapping lines into lines, and mapping $C$ (except for one point $p\in C$) into $C'$. We just have take care to choose $\pi_2$ so that no line of $\mathcal L$ passes through $p$.
More concretely, the projective transformation $(x,y)\mapsto\bigl(\frac{x}{1-y},\frac{1+y}{1-y}\bigr)$ maps the unit circle $x^2+y^2=1$ (except for the point $p=(0,1)$) into the parabola $y=x^2$, mapping lines into lines.
The case of a hyperbola is handled similarly. First, note that all hyperbolas are equivalent under affine transformations. Hence, choose $\pi_2$ so that it intersects the cone $K$ at a hyperbola $C'$, such that almost all of $C$ is mapped to one branch of $C'$, and only a tiny portion of $C$, which does not intersect any line of $\mathcal L$, is mapped to the other branch of $C'$.
Even though the most natural formulation of the problem involves a circle, in this paper we will work with a parabola, since we find it easier to work with.
\subsection{The case of pseudolines and the need for geometric arguments}
If we relax the problem and allow $\mathcal L$ to consist of $x$-monotone \emph{pseudolines} ($x$-monotone curves that pairwise intersect at most once and intersect $C$ at most twice), then $\mathcal Z(C,\mathcal L)$ can have complexity $\Theta(n\alpha(n))$. Indeed, in this setting \emph{every} order-$3$ DS-sequence can appear as a subsequence of a lower-envelope sequence $N(\mathcal L')$. To see this, first note that every order-$3$ DS-sequence can appear as a subsequence of a lower-envelope sequence of $x$-monotone pseudosegments~\cite{DS_book}; see Figure~\ref{fig_pseudolines} for an example. Furthermore, in this construction, all segment endpoints are visible from $-\infty$. Hence, we can enclose the construction in a circle $C$, and prolong each pseudosegment $\ell$ into an $x$-monotone pseudoline by adding two very steeply decreasing rays on the two sides of $\ell$.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics{fig_pseudolines.pdf}}
\caption{\label{fig_pseudolines}Left: Realizing the sequence $u=abacdcacbd$ as a lower-envelope sequence of pseudosegments. Note that in this case the technique produces a supersequence of $u$. Right: Adding a convex curve and prolonging the pseudosegments into pseudolines.}
\end{figure}
Therefore, if, as we conjecture, the bound for the case of straight lines is only $O(n)$, then any proof must necessarily use geometric arguments, and not merely combinatorial ones.
\subsection{Our results}\label{subsec_our_results}
In this paper we offer some evidence for the following conjecture, and make some progress towards proving it:
\begin{conjecture}\label{conj}
If $\mathcal L$ is a set of $n$ lines and $C$ is a circle, then the lower inner-zone sequence $S$ of $\mathcal Z(C, \mathcal L)$ has length $O(n)$, and hence $\mathcal Z(C, \mathcal L)$ has at most linear complexity.
\end{conjecture}
Our technique consists of first finding segment configurations that are geometrically impossible, and then finding $ababa$-free sequences that \emph{force} these configurations. We say that an $ababa$-free sequence $u$ \emph{forces} a segment configuration $T$, if, for every family of segments $\mathcal L'$ (as in Section~\ref{subsec_Lprime}) whose lower inner-zone sequence contains $u$ as a subsequence, $\mathcal L'$ contains a subfamily combinatorially equivalent to $T$.
Thus, we first show in Section~\ref{sec_useless_forbidden} that a certain, relatively simple configuration of eleven segments is impossible. Then we show that this configuration is forced by a pattern $u$ of length $33$. It follows that the lower inner-zone sequence $S$ avoids $u$. This result, however, is useless for establishing Conjecture~\ref{conj}, since $u$ contains both $ab\,cac\,cbc$ and its reversal. Therefore, by the above-mentioned result of Pettie, the Hart--Sharir construction avoids both $u$ and $u^R$ (which is actually the same as $u$), and so $\Ex(\{ababa, u, u^R\}, n) = \Theta(n\alpha(n))$.
Section~\ref{sec_useless_forbidden} is just a warmup for Sections~\ref{sec_forbidden_2} and~\ref{sec_ababa}. In Section~\ref{sec_forbidden_2} we construct another impossible segment configuration $X$, this time with $173$ segments. We could construct a pattern $u'$ that, as a consequence, cannot occur in $S$, but we abstain from doing so. Instead, we show directly in Section~\ref{sec_ababa} that the Hart--Sharir sequences eventually force the configuration $X$.
Our results in Sections~\ref{sec_forbidden_2} and~\ref{sec_ababa} were obtained as follows: Matou\v sek~\cite{mat_DG} and Sharir and Agarwal~\cite{DS_book} describe a construction by P. Shor of segments in the plane whose lower-envelope sequences are the Hart--Sharir sequences. We tried to force the segment endpoints in the construction to lie on the parabola $C$, and we reached a contradiction. The impossible configuration $X$ of Section~\ref{sec_forbidden_2} is the best way we found to isolate the contradiction. We elaborate more on this at the end of Section~\ref{sec_ababa}.
Next, in Section~\ref{sec_conj_only_DS} we present some directions for further work on the problem: We formulate a conjecture regarding generalized DS sequences which, if true, would imply Conjecture~\ref{conj}. We also explain how our conjecture relates to previous research on generalized DS sequences.
Finally, in Section~\ref{sec_discussion} we conclude by listing some related open problems.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec_preliminaries}
Throughout this and the following sections $C$ will denote the parabola $y=x^2$, $\mathcal L'$ will denote a set of $n$ segments with endpoints on $C$, and $S$ will denote the corresponding lower inner-zone sequence. As we said, we assume that no two segments have the same endpoint, and that the intersection graph of $\mathcal L'$ is connected.
Recall that the left and right endpoints of a segment $a\in\mathcal L'$ are denoted $L_a$ and $R_a$, respectively. Whenever we say that a sequence of endpoints appear in a certain order, we mean from left to right.
Let $u$ be an $ababa$-free sequence in which, for simplicity, each symbol appears at least twice. Then, we define its \emph{endpoint sequence} $E(u)$ by replacing, for each symbol $a$ in $u$, its first occurrence by $L_a$ and its last occurrence by $R_a$, and deleting all other occurrences of $a$. For example,
\begin{equation*}
E(abacadcdbd) = L_a\, L_b\, L_c\, R_a\, L_d\, R_c\, R_b\, R_d.
\end{equation*}
It is clear that, if $S$ is the lower inner-zone sequence of $\mathcal L'$, then the order of the endpoints of $\mathcal L'$ is exactly $E(S)$. However, if $u$ is a subsequence of $S$, then $E(u)$ is not necessarily a subsequence of $E(S)$; meaning, $E(S)$ does not necessarily respect the order of the symbols in $E(u)$. For example, if $u=abba$, so the order of the left endpoints in $E(u)$ is $L_a, L_b$, it is still possible for their order in $E(S)$ to be $L_b, L_a$.
Nevertheless, we now give a sufficient condition for guaranteeing that $E(u)$ is a subsequence of $E(S)$:
\begin{definition}\label{def_clamped}
A symbol $a$ in a sequence $u$ is said to be \emph{left-clamped} if $u$ contains the subsequence $baba$, where $b$ is the symbol immediately preceding the first $a$ in $u$. Similarly, the symbol $a$ is \emph{right-clamped} if $u$ contains the subsequence $abab$, where $b$ is the symbol immediately following the last $a$ in $u$.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma_clamped}
If all the symbols in $u$, except for the very first symbol, are left-clamped, and all the symbols except for the very last symbol are right-clamped, and if $S$ is an $ababa$-free supersequence of $u$, then $E(u)$ is a subsequence of $E(S)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider an adjacent pair of symbols $Q_a$, $Q'_b$ in $E(u)$, where each of $Q$, $Q'$ is either $L$ or $R$. We claim that their order in $E(S)$ is also $Q_a$, $Q'_b$.
If $Q$ is $L$ and $Q'$ is $R$, then trivially $L_a$ also precedes $R_b$ in $E(S)$.
If $Q$ is $R$, then let $c$ be the symbol immediately following the last $a$ in $u$ (note that $c$ is not necessarily $b$). Since $a$ is right-clamped, $S$ cannot contain any $a$ after the occurrence of $b$ that gives rise to $Q'_b$; otherwise, $S$ would contain the forbidden pattern $acaca$.
Similarly, if $Q'$ is $L$, let $d$ be the symbol immediately preceding the first $b$ in $u$. Since $b$ is left-clamped, $S$ cannot contain any $b$ before the occurrence of $a$ that gives rise to $Q_a$; otherwise, $S$ would contain $bdbdb$.
Hence, whether $(Q,Q')$ equals $(R,L)$, $(R,R)$, or $(L,L)$, there is no way for $Q_a$, $Q'_b$ to change order in $E(S)$.
\end{proof}
Two segments $a, b$ intersect if and only if their endpoints appear in the order $L_a\, L_b\, R_a\, R_b\,$ or $L_b\, L_a\, R_b\, R_a$.
If $a_1, \ldots, a_m$ are segments whose endpoints appear in the order $L_{a_1}\, \cdots\, L_{a_m}\,\allowbreak R_{a_1}\, \cdots\, R_{a_m}$, then they pairwise intersect. If the intersection points $a_m \cap a_{m-1}, \ldots, a_3\cap a_2, a_2 \cap a_1$ appear in this order from left to right, then we say that the segments \emph{intersect concavely}. If the intersection points appear in the reverse order, then we say that the segments \emph{intersect convexly}. See Figure~\ref{fig_concavely}.
If the segments $a_1, a_2, \ldots, a_n$ intersect concavely (or convexly), and $1\le i_1 < i_2 < \cdots < i_k \le n$ are increasing indices, then $a_{i_1}, a_{i_2}, \ldots, a_{i_k}$ also intersect concavely (or convexly).
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics{fig_concavely.pdf}}
\caption{\label{fig_concavely}Left: Segments intersecting concavely. Right: Segments intersecting convexly.}
\end{figure}
\begin{observation}\label{obs_Nshaped}
If $S$ contains the ``$N$-shaped" subsequence $12\cdots m\cdots 212\cdots m$, then the corresponding segments must have endpoints in the order $L_1\,\cdots\, L_m\,\allowbreak R_1\,\cdots\, R_m$, and must intersect concavely.
\end{observation}
\begin{proof}[Proof sketch]
The general case follows from the case $m=3$.
\end{proof}
In Sections~\ref{sec_useless_forbidden} and~\ref{sec_forbidden_2}, we will specify some \emph{segment configurations} by listing the order of their endpoints, and by specifying that some subsets of segments must intersect concavely. We will prove that some segment configurations are geometrically impossible.
\subsection{Geometric properties of the parabola}
We now present some simple geometric properties of the parabola $C$ and straight-line segments. These properties lie at the heart of the distinction between the cases of straight lines and pseudolines, as we explained in the Introduction.
\begin{observation}
Let $a, b\in {\mathbb R}$ be fixed. Then the affine transformation $m:{\mathbb R}^2\to{\mathbb R}^2$ given by $m(x, y) = (ax+b,2abx+a^2y+b^2)$ maps the parabola $C$ to itself and keeps vertical lines vertical. Therefore, we are free to horizontally translate and scale the set of $x$-coordinates of the segment endpoints $\mathcal L'$, without affecting the resulting lower inner-zone sequence $S$ or the lower-envelope sequence $N$.\footnote{This observation would be useful in \emph{lower-bound constructions}, and hence, it is not used in the paper. We include it here just for the sake of completeness.}
\end{observation}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem_parabola}
Let $a$, $b$, $c$, $d$ be four points on the parabola $C$, having increasing $x$-coordinates $a_x < b_x < c_x < d_x$. Let $z = ac \cap bd$. Define the horizontal distances $p = b_x - a_x$, $q = d_x - c_x$, $r = z_x - b_x$, $s = c_x - z_x$. Then $p/q=r/s$. See Figure~\ref{fig_lem_parabola}, left.
\end{lemma}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics{fig_lem_parabola.pdf}}
\caption{\label{fig_lem_parabola}Left: We have $p/q = r/s$. Right: Three segments intersecting concavely.}
\end{figure}
\begin{proof}
This can be shown directly by a slightly cumbersome algebraic calculation.
An alternative, more insightful proof uses elementary geometry and a limiting argument:
Let $C$ be not a parabola but a unit circle. Let $\alpha$ be a very small angle, and let $C_1$ be the arc of $C$ measuring angle $\alpha$ that is centered around the lowest point of $C$. Let $a$, $b$, $c$, $d$ be four points on $C_1$, in this order from left to right, and let $z=ac\cap bd$. Then, by the intersecting chords theorem, we have $ab/cd = bz/cz$. Since all the considered segments are almost horizontal, their length is almost equal to their $x$-projection. If we affinely stretch $C_1$ horizontally and vertically so its bounding box has width $1$ and height $1$, then it will almost match a parabola: At the limit as $\alpha\to 0$, the stretched arc pointwise converges to a parabolic segment. This affine transformation preserves the ratios between the horizontal projections, so the result follows.
\end{proof}
Lemma~\ref{lem_parabola} is actually part of a more general correspondence between circles and parabolas; see Yaglom \cite{yaglom}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem_ratios}
Let $a,b,c,d,e,f$ be six points on the parabola $C$, listed by increasing $x$-coordinate. Suppose the segments $ad$, $be$, $cf$ intersect concavely. Define $\alpha_1 = b_x - a_x$, $\alpha_2 = c_x-b_x$, $\gamma = d_x-c_x$, $\beta_1 = e_x-d_x$, $\beta_2 = f_x-e_x$. Then:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\alpha_1/\beta_1 > \alpha_2/\gamma$ and $\beta_2/\alpha_2 > \beta_1/\gamma$;
\item $\alpha_1/\beta_1 > \alpha_2/\beta_2$;
\item $\beta_1 < \beta_2$ or $\alpha_2 < \gamma+\beta_1+\beta_2$ (or both).
\end{enumerate}
See Figure~\ref{fig_lem_parabola}, right.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $g = be \cap cf$, $h = ad \cap be$. Subdivide $\gamma$ into $\gamma_1 = g_x - c_x$, $\gamma_2 = h_x - g_x$, $\gamma_3 = d_x - h_x$. By Lemma~\ref{lem_parabola} we have
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\alpha_1}{\beta_1} = \frac{\alpha_2 + \gamma_1+\gamma_2}{\gamma_3},\qquad
\frac{\alpha_2}{\beta_2} = \frac{\gamma_1}{\gamma_2 + \gamma_3 + \beta_1};
\end{equation*}
from which the first two claims follow.
By the first claim we have
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\beta_1}{\beta_2} < \frac{\gamma}{\alpha_2} < \frac{\gamma+\beta_1 + \beta_2}{\alpha_2};
\end{equation*}
hence, if $\beta_1/\beta_2$ is larger than $1$, then so is $(\gamma+\beta_1+\beta_2)/\alpha_2$, implying the third claim.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics{fig_wide_fan.pdf}}
\caption{\label{fig_wide_fan}Illustration for Lemma~\ref{lemma_wide_fan} (picture not to scale).}
\end{figure}
\begin{definition}
Let $s_1, s_2, \ldots, s_m$ be segments whose endpoints appear in the order $L_{s_1}\, \cdots\, L_{s_m}\,\allowbreak R_{s_1}\, \cdots\, R_{s_m}$. These segments are called a \emph{wide set} if their $x$-coordinates satisfy $R_{s_kx} - L_{s_1x} > 2(R_{s_{k-1}x} - L_{s_1x})$ for each $2\le k\le m$.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma_wide_fan}
Let $s_1, \ldots, s_m$ be a wide set of segments that intersect concavely, and let $\alpha_k = L_{s_{k+1}x} - L_{s_kx}$ for $1\le k \le m-1$. Then $\alpha_k > \alpha_{k+1} + \cdots + \alpha_{m-1}$ for each $1\le k \le m-2$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\gamma_k = R_{s_kx} - L_{s_1x}$ for $1\le k\le m$. See Figure~\ref{fig_wide_fan}. We are given that $\gamma_k > 2\gamma_{k-1}$ for each $2\le k\le m$. Applying the first claim of Lemma~\ref{lem_ratios} to segments $s_k$, $s_{k+1}$, $s_m$, we get
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\alpha_k}{\alpha_{k+1} + \cdots + \alpha_{m-1}} > \frac{\gamma_{k+1}-\gamma_k}{\gamma_k - \sum \alpha_i} > \frac{\gamma_{k+1} - \gamma_k}{\gamma_k} > 1.
\end{equation*}
The claim follows.
\end{proof}
\section{Warmup: A simple but useless impossible configuration}\label{sec_useless_forbidden}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm_useless_impossible}
Let $a,b,c,d,e,1,2,3,4,8,9$ be eleven segments with endpoints on the parabola $C$, in left-to-right order
\begin{equation}\label{eq_useless_LR}
L_8\, L_1\, L_a\, L_b\, L_2\, R_8\, L_c\, L_d\, R_1\, R_2\, L_e\, R_a\, L_3\, L_4\, R_b\, R_c\, L_9\, R_3\, R_d\, R_e\, R_4\, R_9.
\end{equation}
Then, it is impossible for segments $8,1,2$ to intersect concavely, segments $3,4,9$ to intersect concavely, and segments $a,b,c,d,e$ to intersect concavely, all at the same time.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose for a contradiction that $a,\ldots,9$ are segments satisfying all these properties. The intersection point of segments $1$ and $2$, which we shall call $A$, must lie left of $R_8$, and the intersection point of segments $3$ and $4$, which we shall call $B$, must lie right of $L_9$. See Figure~\ref{fig_2parabolas}.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics{fig_2parabolas.pdf}}
\caption{\label{fig_2parabolas}An impossible configuration of segments.}
\end{figure}
Define:
\begin{align*}
\alpha_1 &=L_{bx} - L_{ax}, & \beta_1 &=R_{bx}-R_{ax},\\
\alpha_2 &=L_{cx} - L_{bx}, & \beta_2 &=R_{cx}-R_{bx},\\
\alpha_3 &=L_{dx} - L_{cx}, & \beta_3 &=R_{dx}-R_{cx},\\
\alpha_4 &=L_{ex} - L_{dx}, & \beta_4 &=R_{ex}-R_{dx}.
\end{align*}
Segments $a,b,c,d,e$ must intersect concavely, so by the second claim of Lemma~\ref{lem_ratios}, we must have
\begin{equation}\label{eq_dec_ratios}
\frac{\alpha_1}{\beta_1} > \frac{\alpha_2}{\beta_2} > \frac{\alpha_3}{\beta_3} > \frac{\alpha_4}{\beta_4}.
\end{equation}
We will show, however, that this is impossible.
Define:
\begin{align*}
p &= L_{2x} - L_{1x}, & p' &= L_{4x} - L_{3x},\\
r &= A_x - L_{2x}, & r' &= B_x - L_{4x},\\
s &= R_{1x} - A_x , & s' &= R_{3x} - B_x ,\\
q &= R_{2x} - R_{1x}, & q' &= R_{4x} - R_{3x}.
\end{align*}
Then,
\begin{align*}
\alpha_1 &< p, & \beta_1 &> p',\\
\alpha_2 &> r, & \beta_2 &< r',\\
\alpha_3 &< s, & \beta_3 &> s',\\
\alpha_4 &> q, & \beta_4 &< q'.
\end{align*}
Furthermore, by Lemma~\ref{lem_parabola} we have $p/q = r/s$, $p'/q' = r'/s'$. Hence,
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\alpha_1\alpha_3}{\beta_1\beta_3} < \frac{ps}{p's'} = \frac{qr}{q'r'} < \frac{\alpha_2\alpha_4}{\beta_2\beta_4},
\end{equation*}
contradicting (\ref{eq_dec_ratios}).
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor_useless_forbidden}
Let $S$ be the lower inner-zone sequence of the parabola $C$ in an arrangement of lines. Then $S$ cannot contain a subsequence isomorphic to
\begin{equation*}
u = 81ab12181cd12dedcbab34bc49434de49.
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
We have
\begin{equation*}
E(u) = L_8\, L_1\, L_a\, L_b\, L_2\, R_8\, L_c\, L_d\, R_1\, R_2\, L_e\, R_a\, L_3\, L_4\, R_b\, R_c\, L_9\, R_3\, R_d\, R_e\, R_4\, R_9,
\end{equation*}
exactly matching (\ref{eq_useless_LR}). Furthermore, as a tedious examination shows, all symbols but $8$ are left-clamped in $u$, and all symbols but $9$ are right-clamped in $u$. Furthermore,
$u$ contains the $N$-shaped subsequences $8121812$, $3494349$, and $abcdedcbabcde$. Hence, by Lemma~\ref{lemma_clamped} and Observation~\ref{obs_Nshaped}, $u$ forces the impossible segment configuration of Theorem~\ref{thm_useless_impossible}.
\end{proof}
(We obtained the sequence $u$ by simply taking the lower inner-zone sequence of the configuration of Theorem~\ref{thm_useless_impossible}, and removing from it unnecessary symbols.)
If we are only interested in a pattern avoided by $N$, the lower-envelope sequence, then we can omit the symbols $8$ and $9$ from $u$. Their only role is preventing the intersection points $A$ and $B$ from ``hiding" above the segment $c$.
Unfortunately, as we said in the Introduction, the forbidden pattern $u$ is useless for establishing Conjecture~\ref{conj}, since $u$ contains both $ab\, cac\, cbc$ and its reversal (e.g., $be\,4b4\,4e4$, $1a1\,1d1\,ad$). Furthermore, there does not seem to be a simple way to ``fix" $u$.
\section{A more promising impossible configuration}\label{sec_forbidden_2}
In this section we construct a $173$-segment impossible configuration $X$. Then, in Section~\ref{sec_ababa} we will show that the Hart--Sharir sequences eventually force the configuration $X$.
We will now work with endpoint sequences in which some contiguous subsequences (\emph{blocks}) that contain only left endpoints are designated as \emph{special blocks}. It will always be the case that all the special blocks in a sequence have the same length. We denote special blocks by enclosing them in parentheses.
We define an operation on endpoint sequences called \emph{endpoint shuffling}. This operation is derived from the \emph{shuffling} operation used to construct the Hart--Sharir sequences, which we will present in Section~\ref{sec_ababa} below.
Let $A$ be a sequence that has $k$ special blocks of length $m$, and let $B$ be a sequence that has $\ell$ special blocks of length $k$. Then the \emph{endpoint shuffle} of $A$ and $B$, denoted $A \circ B$, is a new sequence having $k\ell$ special blocks of length $m+1$, formed as follows: We make $\ell$ copies of $A$ (one for each special block of $B$), each one having ``fresh" symbols that do not occur in $B$ nor in any other copy of $A$.
For each special block $\Gamma_i = (L_1\, \cdots\, L_k)$ in $B$, $1\le i\le\ell$, let $A_i$ be the $i$th copy of $A$. We insert each $L_j$ at the end of the $j$th special block of $A_i$. Then we insert the resulting sequence in place of $\Gamma_i$ in $B$. The result of all these replacements is the desired sequence $A\circ B$.
For example, let
\begin{equation*}
A = (L_a)\, (L_b)\, (L_c)\, R_a\, R_b\, R_c, \qquad B = (L_1\, L_2\, L_3)\, (L_4\, L_5\, L_6)\, R_1\, R_4\, R_2\, R_5\, R_3\, R_6.
\end{equation*}
Then,
\begin{multline*}
A\circ B = (L_a\, L_1)\, (L_b\, L_2)\, (L_c\, L_3)\, R_a\, R_b\, R_c\, (L_{a'}\, L_4)\\
(L_{b'}\, L_5)\, (L_{c'}\, L_6)\, R_{a'}\,R_{b'}\, R_{c'}\, R_1\, R_4\, R_2\, R_5\, R_3\, R_6.
\end{multline*}
Now, define the following endpoint sequences:
\begin{align*}
F_m &= (L_1\cdots L_m)\quad R_1\cdots R_m, \qquad m\ge 1;\\
Z_m &= L_a\, L_b\quad (L_1\cdots L_m)\quad R_1\cdots R_m\quad L_c\, R_a\\
&\qquad\qquad(L_{m+1}\cdots L_{2m})\quad R_{m+1}\cdots R_{2m}\quad R_b\, R_c, \qquad m\ge 1;\\
Y &= L_d\, L_e\, ()\, ()\, L_f\, R_d\, ()\, ()\, R_e\, R_f\, (),
\end{align*}
where $Y$ has five empty special blocks.
Recall from Section~\ref{sec_preliminaries} the definition of a \emph{wide} set of segments. We will now show how, by shuffling the $Z$ and $F$ sequences in the appropriate way, we can create, for every $n$, a configuration that contains a wide set of $n$ segments.\footnote{With a slight abuse of terminology, we do not always distinguish between endpoint sequences and the corresponding segment configurations.}
Consider the segment configuration
\begin{equation*}
T_n = (\cdots (((Z_1 \circ Z_2)\circ Z_4)\circ Z_8)\circ \cdots Z_{2^{n-1}})\circ F_{2^n}.
\end{equation*}
$T_n$ contains $2^{n-k-1}$ copies of $Z_{2^k}$ for each $0\le k<n$, plus one copy of $F_{2^n}$. Each copy of $Z_m$ contains its own triple of segments $a,b,c$. These segments resemble a cat's whiskers, so let us call each such triple $a,b,c$ a \emph{whisker} for short. The whiskers of $T_n$ are nested inside one another in the form of a complete binary tree of height $n$.
In addition, each copy $F_m$ and $Z_m$ contains segments labeled $1,\ldots, m$ and $m+1,\ldots,2m$, which we shall call \emph{numeric segments}. In total, $T_n$ contains $(n+1) 2^n$ numeric segments, whose left endpoints appear in $2^n$ special blocks of length $n+1$. Each such special block appears where we would expect to find the whiskers of level $n+1$ of the binary tree.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics{fig_T.pdf}}
\caption{\label{fig_T}The configuration $T_n$ contains \emph{whiskers} (triples of segments labeled $a$, $b$, $c$) organized in a nested, binary-tree structure. In addition, it contains \emph{numeric segments}, grouped into sets of size $n+1$. This sketch shows only one such set of numeric segments, and it only shows their endpoints. For each set of numeric segments, their left endpoints lie in a special block of length $n+1$ (indicated by parentheses in the figure).}
\end{figure}
Consider one such special block $(L^{(1)}, \ldots, L^{(n+1)})$ (where the endpoints have been renamed for clarity of exposition). The corresponding right endpoints are located as follows: Let $w_1, \ldots, w_n$ be the whiskers containing our special block, where $w_1$ is the innermost whisker and $w_n$ is the outermost one. Then, the first right endpoint $R^{(1)}$ appears within $w_1$, right after $L^{(n+1)}$. For each $2\le i\le n$, the right endpoint $R^{(i)}$ appears outside $w_{i-1}$ but inside $w_i$. Finally, $R^{(n+1)}$ appears outside $w_n$. See Figure~\ref{fig_T} for a rough sketch of $T_n$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma_one_wide}
Suppose that, in $T_n$, the segments $a,b,c$ in each whisker intersect concavely. Then at least one the sets of $n+1$ numeric segments must be wide.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $w=(a,b,c)$ be the outermost whisker of $T_n$. By the third claim of Lemma~\ref{lem_ratios}, we have $R_{bx} - R_{ax} < R_{cx} - R_{bx}$ or $L_{cx}-L_{bx} < R_{cx} - L_{cx}$ (or both). In the first case, we proceed to the left branch in the binary tree of whiskers. In the second case, we proceed to the right branch. Let $w'=(a',b',c')$ be the next whisker in the chosen branch. We invoke Lemma~\ref{lem_ratios} again on $w'$, and we proceed in this way, going down the binary tree of whiskers until we reach a ``leaf" whisker $w^*$. We invoke Lemma~\ref{lem_ratios} one final time on $w^*$ in the same way, and we choose one of the two special blocks that lie within $w^*$. The $n+1$ numeric segments in that special block form a wide set, as can be easily checked.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{remark_binary_tree}
As we saw, in the whisker $w=(a,b,c)$ of $Z_m$, one of two gaps is shorter than the distance from the end of the gap to the end of the whisker. If we could find a configuration in which a \emph{specific} gap is shorter than the distance to the end of the configuration, we could obviate the need for a binary tree and significantly reduce the size of our construction.
\end{remark}
Next, we show how a wide set of $5$ segments can lead to trouble:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem_smash_wide}
Consider the sequence
\begin{equation*}
Y\circ F_5 = L_d\, L_e\, L_1\, L_2\, L_f\, R_d\, L_3\, L_4\, R_e\, R_f\, L_5\, R_1\, R_2\, R_3\, R_4\, R_5.
\end{equation*}
It is impossible for the segments $d,e,f$ to intersect concavely, and for the segments $1,2,3,4,5$ to form a wide set and intersect concavely, all at the same time.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose for a contradiction that we have a realization of such a configuration. Applying Lemma~\ref{lemma_wide_fan} on the segments $1,2,3,4,5$ (with $k=1$ and $k=3$), we have
\begin{equation*}
L_{2x} - L_{1x} > L_{5x} - L_{2x}, \qquad L_{4x} - L_{3x} > L_{5x} - L_{4x}.
\end{equation*}
Hence, we have both
\begin{equation*}
R_{ex}-R_{dx} > L_{4x} - L_{3x} > L_{5x} - L_{4x} > R_{fx} - R_{ex}
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
L_{fx} - L_{ex} > L_{2x} - L_{1x} > L_{5x} - L_{2x} > R_{fx} - L_{fx},
\end{equation*}
contradicting the third claim of Lemma~\ref{lem_ratios} on the segments $d,e,f$.
\end{proof}
Now we can put everything together. Define the endpoint sequence
\begin{equation*}
X = Y \circ T_4.
\end{equation*}
$X$ contains $15$ whiskers, $16$ groups of segments of type $d,e,f$, and $16$ groups of numeric segments, with five segments in each group. Hence, $X$ contains a total of $173$ segments.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm_forbidden_2}
It is impossible to realize $X$ such that the segments $a,b,c$ in each whisker intersect concavely, the segments $d,e,f$ in each copy of $Y$ intersect concavely, and the five numeric segments in each group of numeric segments intersect concavely.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
In $X$, each group of numeric segments of $T_4$ is shuffled into a copy of $Y$ as in the premise of Lemma~\ref{lem_smash_wide}. But by Lemma~\ref{lemma_one_wide}, one of these groups must form a wide set. This is impossible by Lemma~\ref{lem_smash_wide}.
\end{proof}
\section{The Hart--Sharir sequences are unrealizable}\label{sec_ababa}
In this section we show that the Hart--Sharir sequences eventually force a copy of the configuration $X$ whose segments intersect in the way specified in Theorem~\ref{thm_forbidden_2}. (Recall the definition of \emph{forcing} a segment configuration from Section~\ref{subsec_our_results}.) Hence, the Hart--Sharir sequences cannot be realized as lower inner-zone sequences of a parabola.
\subsection{The Hart--Sharir sequences}
We first recall the Hart--Sharir construction~\cite{HS} of superlinear-length order-$3$ DS sequences.
The Hart--Sharir sequences form a two-dimensional array $S_k(m)$, for $k,m\ge 1$; they satisfy the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item Some contiguous subsequences (\emph{blocks}) in $S_k(m)$ are designated as \emph{special blocks}.
\item All special blocks in $S_k(m)$ have length exactly $m$.
\item Each symbol in $S_k(m)$ makes it first occurrence in a special block, and each special block contains only first occurrences of symbols.
\item $S_k(m)$ contains no adjacent repetitions and no alternation $ababa$.
\item Each symbol in $S_k(m)$ occurs at least twice (unless $k=m=1$).
\end{itemize}
The construction uses an operation called \emph{shuffling}, which, as we will see, is very closely related to the \emph{endpoint shuffling} defined in Section~\ref{sec_forbidden_2}.
\begin{definition}
Let $A$ be a sequence that has $k$ special blocks of length $m$, and let $B$ be a sequence that has $\ell$ special blocks of length $k$. Then the \emph{shuffle} of $A$ and $B$, denoted $A\bullet B$, is a new sequence having $k\ell$ special blocks of length $m+1$, formed as follows: We make $\ell$ copies of $A$ (one for each special block of $B$), each one having ``fresh" symbols that do not occur in $B$ or in any other copy of $A$.
For each special block $\Gamma_i = (a_1 a_2 \cdots a_k)$ in $B$, $1\le i \le \ell$, let $A_i$ be the $i$th copy of $A$. For each special block $\Delta_j$ in $A_i$, $1\le j\le k$, we insert the symbol $a_j$ at the end of $\Delta_j$ (so its length grows from $m$ to $m+1$) and we duplicate the $m$th symbol of $\Delta_j$ immediately after $\Delta_j$. Then we place another copy of $a_k$ immediately after $A_i$. Call the resulting sequence $A'_i$.
Then $A\bullet B$ is obtained from $B$ by replacing each special block $\Gamma_i$ in it by $A'_i$.
\end{definition}
In the construction of $A\bullet B$, the symbols of the copies of $A$ are usually called \emph{local}, while the symbols of $B$ are called \emph{global}.
For example, let $A = (a)(b)(c)babc$ and $B=(123)21(456)5414525636$. Then,
\begin{equation*}
A\bullet B = (a1)a(b2)b(c3)cbabc3\ 21\ (a'4)a'(b'5)b'(c'6)c'b'a'b'c'6\ 5414525636.
\end{equation*}
Let $S$ be a sequence of symbols in which the first occurrences of the symbols appear in special blocks, and in which each symbol occurs at least twice. Let us extend the definition of the \emph{endpoint sequence} $E(S)$ from Section~\ref{sec_preliminaries}, by specifying that $E(S)$ has special blocks of left endpoints, which are inherited from the special blocks of $S$ in the natural way.
\begin{observation}\label{ref_obs_shuffling}
The relation between shuffling and endpoint shuffling is as follows:
\begin{equation*}
E(A\bullet B) = E(A) \circ E(B).
\end{equation*}
\end{observation}
\begin{proof}
This is immediate from the definitions of $\bullet$ and $\circ$.
\end{proof}
The Hart--Sharir sequences $S_k(m)$ are defined by double induction. The base cases are $k=1$ and $m=1$. For $k=1$ we let
\begin{equation*}
S_1(m) = \Bigl(12\cdots (m-1)m\Bigr)\, (m-1)\cdots 212\cdots m,
\end{equation*}
be an $N$-shaped sequence having a single special block of length $m$. (Actually, of all sequences $S_1(m)$, the construction only uses $S_1(2) = (12)12$.)
For $m=1$, $k\ge 2$, we let $S_k(1)$ be equal to $S_{k-1}(2)$, but with each special block of size $2$ split into two special blocks of size $1$.
Finally, for $m,k\ge 2$, we let
\begin{equation*}
S_k(m) = S_k(m-1) \bullet S_{k-1}(N),
\end{equation*}
where $N$ is the number of special blocks in $S_k(m-1)$.
Thus, we have, up to a renaming of the symbols,
\begin{align*}
S_2(1) &= (1)(2)12,\\
S_2(2) &= (12)1(34)313424,\\
S_2(3) &= (123)21(456)5414525636,\\
S_2(4) &= (1234)321(5678)76515626737848,\\
\vdots\\
S_3(1) &= (1)(2)1(3)(4)313424,\\
S_3(2) &= (12)1(34)31(56)5(78)75157378642\\
&\qquad(9A)9(BC)B9(DE)D(FG)FD9DFBFGECA2AC4CE6EG8G,\\
\vdots\\
S_4(1) &= (1)(2)1(3)(4)31(5)(6)5(7)(8)75157378642\\
&\qquad(9)(A)9(B)(C)B9(D)(E)D(F)(G)FD9DFBFGECA2AC4CE6EG8G,\\
\vdots
\end{align*}
Note that, in the construction of $S_k(m)$, the special blocks of $S_{k-1}(N)$ ``dissolve", and the only special blocks present in $S_k(m)$ are those that come from the copies of $S_k(m-1)$ (enlarged by one).
\subsection{Properties}
Here we establish some important properties of $S_k(m)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma_SB_N}
Each special block $\bigl(1\cdots m\bigr)$ in $S_k(m)$ is immediately followed by $(m-1)\cdots 1$, and followed later on by $\cdots 2\cdots 3\cdots\ \cdots\ m$, thus forming an $N$-shaped subsequence.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By induction. The claim is true for $k=1$ and all $m$. If the claim is true for $S_{k-1}(2)$, then it is also true for $S_k(1)$. Now, let $k,m\ge 2$, and suppose the claim is true for $S_k(m-1)$. Then, by the definition of $\bullet$, and since each symbol in $S_{k-1}(N)$ occurs at least twice, the claim is also true for $S_k(m) = S_k(m-1) \bullet S_{k-1}(N)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
$S_k(m)$ does not contain $ababa$ (Hart, Sharir~\cite{HS}) nor $abcaccbc$ (Pettie~\cite{pettie_origins}).\footnote{Note that $S_3(2)$ already contains $(abcaccbc)^R$.}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Proof sketch]
For the first claim, suppose for a contradiction that $k$ and $m$ are minimal such that $S_k(m)$ contains $ababa$. Recall that $S_k(m) = S_k(m-1)\bullet S_{k-1}(N)$. Each of the symbols $a$, $b$ must have come either from a copy of $S_k(m-1)$ (in which case it is a local symbol) or from $S_{k-1}(N)$ (in which case it is a global symbol). A case analysis shows that none of the possibilities work. For example, it cannot be that $a$ is local and $b$ is global, because then there would be at most one $b$ between two $a$'s. It cannot be either that $a$ is global and $b$ is local, because then only the \emph{first} $a$ could appear between two $b$'s.
For the second claim, first note that Lemma~\ref{lemma_SB_N} implies that $S_k(m)$ cannot contain $(bc)ccb$ (with the first $b$ and $c$ in the same special block), since, otherwise, $S_k(m)$ would contain $bcbcb$. For the same reason, if $S_k(m)$ contains $(bc)cb$, then $c$ is \emph{not} the last symbol in the special block.
Now, suppose for a contradiction that $k,m$ are minimal such that $S_k(m)$ contains $abcaccbc$. There are eight possibilities as to which of the symbols $a,b,c$ are local and which are global. We rule them all out by a case analysis. First of all, if $a,b,c$ are all local (resp.~all global), then the only possibility would be for $S_k(m-1)$ (resp.~$S_{k-1}(N)$) to contain $abcacbc$, so that the second $c$ gets duplicated into $cc$ in $S_k(m)$. But this cannot happen, since only \emph{first} occurrences of symbols get duplicated. The case of $a$ being local and $b,c$ being global is ruled out by the considerations in the previous paragraph. The remaining cases are also readily ruled out.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}\label{def_structurally}
Let $A$ and $B$ be two sequences in which the first occurrences of symbols appear in special blocks. Then we say that $B$ \emph{structurally contains} $A$ if $B$ contains a subsequence $A'$ that not only is isomorphic to $A$, but for every two symbols in $A'$, their first occurrences lie in the same special block if and only if the corresponding symbols in $A$ lie in the same special block.
\end{definition}
We now want to prove that $S_{k'}(m')$ structurally contains $S_k(m)$ for all $k'\ge k$, $m'\ge m$. Hence, any problematic configuration that arises in some $S_k(m)$ will also be present in all subsequent $S_{k'}(m')$.
The proof is somewhat delicate. It is clear, for example, that $S_{k+1}(m)$ contains a sequence isomorphic to $S_k(m)$: $S_{k+1}(m)$ contains a global copy of $S_k(N)$ for some $N$ larger than $m$, and in turn $S_k(N)$ contains many local copies of $S_k(N-1)$, et cetera. This simple observation, however, does not imply that $S_{k+1}(m)$ \emph{structurally} contains $S_k(m)$, because the copy of $S_k(m)$ that we found in $S_{k+1}(m)$ has its special blocks completely ``dissolved". To prove that $S_{k+1}(m)$ structurally contains $S_k(m)$ we have to work a bit more carefully.
\begin{definition}\label{def_rank}
The \emph{rank} of a symbol $a$ in $S_k(m)$ is the position (between $1$ and $m$) that the first occurrence of $a$ occupies within its special block.
\end{definition}
Thus, the local symbols of $S_k(m)$ are those with ranks $1,\ldots,m-1$, and the global symbols are those with rank $m$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem_structurally}
For every $k'\ge k$, $m'\ge m$, and for every choice of $m$ ranks $1\le r_1 < r_2 < \cdots < r_m \le m'$, the sequence $S_{k'}(m')$ structurally contains $S_k(m)$ using symbols of these ranks.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Denote $B = S_k(m)$ and $D= S_{k'}(m')$, and let $N_2$ and $N_2'$ denote, respectively, the number of special blocks in $B$ and $D$. Note that, in order to specify how $B$ lies within $D$, all we have to do is specify which $N_2$ special blocks $1\le b_1 < b_2 < \cdots < b_{N_2} \le N_2'$ of $D$ we take the symbols from.
We will first take care of the base cases $k = 1$ and $m = 1$.
If $k=1$ then the claim follows by Lemma~\ref{lemma_SB_N}. If $m = m'= 1$ then there is nothing to prove, since in this case structural containment is the same as regular containment. Now suppose $m=1$ and $m'\ge 2$. Recall that in this case we have $B = S_{k-1}(2)$. We are given a rank $r_1$. The symbols of rank $r_1$ in $D$ are the global symbols of $S_{k'}(r_1)$. The global sequence used in forming $S_{k'}(r_1)$ is $S_{k'-1}(N)$ for some $N$. This latter sequence contains $B = S_{k-1}(2)$ in the regular sense, which is enough for us.
Now suppose $k,m\ge 2$.
For convenience let $A = S_k(m-1)$, $C = S_{k'}(m'-1)$. Let $N$ and $N'$ be, respectively, the number of special blocks in $A$ and $C$. Let $X = S_{k-1}(N)$, $Y = S_{k'-1}(N')$. Hence,
\begin{align*}
B &= A \bullet X,\\
D &= C \bullet Y.
\end{align*}
We assume by induction that $C$ contains $A$, and that $Y$ contains $X$, in the stronger sense of our lemma. If $m'>m$ we can also assume by induction that $C$ contains $B$ in this stronger sense. Our objective, as we said, is to show that $D$ contains $B$ in this stronger sense.
We consider two cases: If $r_m < m'$ (which implies $m<m'$), then we wish to find $B$ using only local symbols of $D$. But we know by induction that $C$ (which is structurally contained in $D$) contains $B$ in the desired way.
The second case is if $r_m = m'$. We know by induction that $C$ contains $A$ using ranks $r_1, \ldots, r_{m-1}$. Let $1\le b_1 < b_2 < \cdots < b_{N}\le N'$ be the special blocks of $C$ from which we take the symbols that form $A$ this way.
Next, find $X$ in $Y$ using ranks $b_1, b_2, \ldots, b_N$. We know this is possible by induction. Let $1\le c_1 < c_2 < \cdots$ be the special blocks of $Y$ from which we take the symbols that form $X$ this way.
Now, in order to find $B$ in $D$, take only the local copies numbered $c_1, c_2, \ldots$ of $C$, and within each local copy of $C$, take only the special blocks numbered $b_1, b_2, \ldots, b_{N'}$. Then the symbols of $Y$ that are shuffled into these special blocks are exactly those that form $X$.
Hence, we exactly mimic the construction of $B$ from $A$ and $X$ inside the construction of $D$ from $C$ and $Y$---with only one exception: In the construction of $B$, we duplicate the last symbols of the special blocks of $A$ and $X$. This might not happen to the corresponding symbols in $D$, if these symbols are not the last symbols of the special blocks of $C$ and $Y$. However, we do not need these duplications, since they are \emph{already} present immediately after the special blocks, by Lemma~\ref{lemma_SB_N}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Clamped symbols in the Hart--Sharir sequences}
Recall the definition of left- and right-clamped symbols (Definition~\ref{def_clamped}) and its use in Lemma~\ref{lemma_clamped}. We now proceed to show that most symbols in $S_k(m)$ are left- and right-clamped.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem_leader}
All symbols in $S_k(m)$ that have rank at least $2$ are left-clamped, and all the symbols, other than the very last symbol in $S_k(m)$, are right-clamped.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The first claim follows immediately from Lemma~\ref{lemma_SB_N}.
For the second claim, recall that $S_k(m) = S_k(m-1)\bullet S_{k-1}(N)$. If $a$ is the very last symbol of $S_{k-1}(N)$, then it is the very last symbol of $S_k(m)$ and there is nothing to prove. If $a$ is the very last symbol of a copy $S'$ of $S_k(m-1)$, then its last occurrence in $S_k(m)$ is immediately followed by a global symbol $b$, whose first occurrence was shuffled at the end of the \emph{last} special block of $S'$. The first occurrence of $a$ must lie further to the left (also in $S'$).
In any other case, the claim follows by induction on $S_k(m-1)$ or $S_{k-1}(N)$, depending on whether $a$ is a local or a global symbol, since the shuffling operation does not separate the last occurrence of any symbol from the immediately following symbol.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor_global_clamped}
Once a copy of $S_k(m)$ is shuffled into another sequence ($S_{k+1}(m')$ for some $m'>1$), all its symbols are left-clamped, and all its symbols except for the very last one are right-clamped.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
All the symbols of the copy of $S_k(m)$ that resides in $S_{k+1}(m')$ are global (their rank is $m'$).
\end{proof}
We can also say something about left-clamped rank-$1$ symbols:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem_rank1_leftclamped}
Let $k, m \ge 2$, and let $a$ be a rank-$1$ symbol in $S_k(m) = S_k(m-1)\bullet S_{k-1}(N)$. If $a$ was left-clamped in its local copy of $S_k(m-1)$, then it is also left-clamped in $S_k(m)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma~\ref{lemma_SB_N}, $S_k(m-1)$ contains adjacent special blocks only if $m=2$. Hence, for $m\ge 3$, the symbol $b$ immediately preceding the first $a$ in $S_k(m-1)$ does not belong to a special block, so $b$ remains adjacent to that $a$ in $S_k(m)$. For $m=2$, the said symbol $b$ might belong to a special block. But then, in the construction of $S_k(m)$, a copy of $b$ is created and placed right before the first $a$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Geometric unrealizability}
We are now ready to show that the Hart--Sharir sequences force the impossible configuration $X$ of Section~\ref{sec_forbidden_2}.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm_HS_forces_X}
There exists an $m$ such that the Hart--Sharir sequence $S_7(m)$ forces a copy of the configuration $X$ whose segments intersect in the way specified in Theorem~\ref{thm_forbidden_2}. Hence, if $S$ is the lower inner-zone sequence of the parabola $C$, then $S$ cannot contain $S_7(m)$ as a subsequence.\footnote{It should probably be enough to take $m=2$ in the theorem, but the calculations do not seem to be worth the effort.}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Recall that in Section~\ref{sec_forbidden_2} we defined
\begin{equation*}
F_m = (L_1\cdots L_m)\quad R_1\cdots R_m.
\end{equation*}
Let
\begin{equation*}
Z_{j,m} = L_{a_1}\, F_m\, L_{a_2}\, F_m\, \cdots \, F_m\, L_{a_j}\quad R_{a_1}\, F_m\, R_{a_2}\, F_m\, \cdots\, F_m\, R_{a_j}
\end{equation*}
(where the $2j-2$ copies of $F_m$ use distinct symbols). Note that the $Z_m$ of Section~\ref{sec_forbidden_2} is contained in $Z_{j,m}$ for $j\ge 3$. Following this correspondence, let us call the $j$-tuple of segments $a_1, \ldots, a_j$ in $Z_{j,m}$ a \emph{whisker}, and let us call the segments in the copies of $F_m$ \emph{numeric segments}.
Define
\begin{equation*}
T_{j,n} = ( \cdots (((Z_{j,1} \circ Z_{j,2j-2}) \circ Z_{j,(2j-2)^2}) \circ Z_{j,(2j-2)^3}) \circ \cdots Z_{j,(2j-2)^{n-1}}) \circ F_{(2j-2)^n}.
\end{equation*}
For $j\ge 3$, $T_{j,n}$ is a supersequence of the endpoint sequence $T_n$ that we defined in Section~\ref{sec_forbidden_2}. $T_{j,n}$ contains whiskers that are nested inside one another in the form of a full $(2j-2)$-ary tree of height $n$. In addition, it contains numeric segments, whose left endpoints are grouped into special blocks of length $n+1$, and whose right endpoints are located in a manner analogous to the one described in Section~\ref{sec_forbidden_2}.
Our first goal is to show that the Hart--Sharir sequences force segment configurations of the form $T_{j,n}$ for arbitrarily large $j$ and $n$, in which the $j$ segments in each whisker intersect concavely. From Lemma~\ref{lemma_SB_N} and Observation~\ref{obs_Nshaped}, it follows that the $n+1$ numeric segments in each special block must also intersect concavely.
\begin{observation}\label{obs_S1}
$E(S_1(m)) = F_m$, and $E(S_2(m))$ contains
\begin{equation}\label{eq_obs_S1}
(L_1 \cdots L_m)\,(\,)\,R_1\cdots R_m.
\end{equation}
\end{observation}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor_S3}
$E(S_3(m))$ contains
\begin{equation}\label{eq_cor_S3}
(L_1\,L_2 \cdots L_m)\,(\,)\,R_1\,(\,)\,R_2\,(\,)\cdots(\,)\,R_m.
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
By induction on $m$. Consider $S_3(m) = S_3(m-1)\bullet S_2(N)$, and assume by induction that $S_3(m-1)$ contains an instance $A$ of (\ref{eq_cor_S3}) with $m-1$ in place of $m$. Consider an instance $B$ of (\ref{eq_obs_S1}) in $E(S_2(N))$ with $N$ in place of $m$. The first special block of $B$ is shuffled into a copy of $S_3(m-1)$; hence, one of its symbols $L^*$ is inserted at the end of the first special block of $A$ in this copy of $S_3(m-1)$. Furthermore, the $(\,)$ and the corresponding symbol $R^*$ of $B$ are placed after this copy of $A$. Hence, $S_3(m)$ contains (\ref{eq_cor_S3}).
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor_S4}
For each $m\ge 2$, $S_4(m)$ forces a configuration of the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq_cor_S4}
L_1\,(\,)\,L_2\,(\,)\cdots(\,)\,L_N\,(\,)\,R_1\,(\,)\,R_2\,(\,)\cdots(\,)\,R_N
\end{equation}
for some very large $N=N(m)$, in which the segments $1,2,\ldots, N$ intersect concavely and have rank $m$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The global sequence $S_3(N')$ used in forming $S_4(m)$ satisfies Corollary~\ref{cor_S3}. The left endpoints $L_1, L_2, \ldots$ of (\ref{eq_cor_S3}) receive rank $m$ and go into separate special blocks. In order to guarantee the presence of a special block between $L_i$ and $L_{i+1}$ for each $i$, we ``sacrifice" every second symbol among $1,2,\ldots,N'$; we are still left with $N=N'/2$ symbols. The $N$-shaped sequence $1\cdots N'\cdots 1\cdots N'$ that was present in $S_3(N')$ (by Lemma~\ref{lemma_SB_N}) is obviously still present in $S_4(m)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor_S5}
For each $m\ge 2$, $S_5(m)$ forces a configuration of the form $Z_{N,m-1}$ for some very large $N = N(m)$, in which the whisker segments $a_1, \ldots,\allowbreak a_N$ intersect concavely, and in which the numeric segments of each copy of $F_{m-1}$ have ranks $1,\ldots,m-1$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The global sequence $S_4(N')$ used in forming $S_5(m)$ satisfies Corollary~\ref{cor_S4}. Each special block of (\ref{eq_cor_S4}) is replaced by a copy of $S_5(m-1)$, which structurally contains $S_1(m-1)$.
\end{proof}
Finally:
\begin{corollary}\label{cor_S6}
For every $j$ and $n$, if $m$ is large enough, then $S_6(m)$ forces a configuration of the form $T_{j,n}$, in which the segments $a_1, \ldots, a_j$ in each whisker intersect concavely.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The iterated shuffling used to form $T_{j,n}$ occurs naturally in the formation of $S_6(m) = S_6(m-1) \bullet S_5(N)$.
More precisely, we will show by induction on $n$ that, if $m$ is large enough in terms of $j$ and $n$, then $S_6(m)$ forces a configuration of the form
\begin{equation*}
T'_{j,n} = ( \cdots ((Z_{j,1} \circ Z_{j,2j-2}) \circ Z_{j,(2j-2)^2}) \circ \cdots )\circ Z_{j,(2j-2)^n},
\end{equation*}
in which the segments of each whisker intersect concavely. Since $Z_{j,(2j-2)^n}$ contains $F_{(2j-2)^n}$, it will follow that $T'_{j,n}$ contains $T_{j,n}$.
Suppose by induction that, for some $m$, the sequence $S_6(m)$ forces such a configuration $T'_{j,n-1}$. Let $N$ be the number of special blocks of $S_6(m)$, and let $1\le b_1 < b_2 < \cdots < b_k\le N$, for $k=(2j-2)^n$, be the special blocks of $S_6(m)$ involved in this occurrence of $T'_{j,n-1}$. By Corollary~\ref{cor_S5}, there exists an $N'$ such that $S_5(N')$ forces a copy of $Z_{j,b_k}$ in which the numeric segments of each $F_{b_k}$ have ranks $1,\ldots, b_k$. Out of the $b_k$ segments in each $F_{b_k}$, we are only interested in the ones ranked $b_1, \ldots, b_k$: They are the ones that will be shuffled into the right places in $T'_{j,n-1}$. Let $m'\ge m$ and $N''\ge N'$ be such that $S_6(m'+1) = S_6(m')\bullet S_5(N'')$. Now, $S_6(m')$ contains a copy of $S_6(m)$ using the first $N$ special blocks of $S_6(m')$. And the above-mentioned copy of $Z_{j,b_k}$ that is present in $S_5(N')$ is also present in $S_5(N'')$. Hence, $S_6(m'+1)$ forces the desired copy of $T'_{j,n}$.
\end{proof}
Hence, as claimed, the sequences $S_6(m)$ force arbitrarily wide and tall configurations of the form $T_{j,n}$, in which the segments of each whisker intersect concavely. In particular, they force one such copy of $T_{3,4}$, which contains the configuration $T_4$ of Section~\ref{sec_forbidden_2}.
Our second goal is to show that this sequence $T_{3,4}$ is appropriately shuffled into a sequence containing $Y$ (which was defined in Section~\ref{sec_forbidden_2}).
We observe that (\ref{eq_cor_S4}) already contains $Y$ whenever $N\ge 6$. Hence, $S_7(1)$ also contains $Y$. Let $b_1 < b_2 < \cdots < b_5$ be the special blocks of $S_7(1)$ involved in this occurrence of $Y$. By Corollary~\ref{cor_S6} and Lemma~\ref{lem_structurally}, $S_6(m)$ contains, for large enough $m$, a copy of $T_{3,4}$ in which the numeric segments have ranks $b_1, b_2, \ldots, b_5$. Therefore, there exists an $m$ (probably $m=2$ should be enough) such that, in $S_7(m) = S_7(m-1) \bullet S_6(N)$, these numeric segments are shuffled into the right places, creating the desired copy of $X$. In this copy of $X$, all the sets of segments that should intersect concavely according to Theorem~\ref{thm_forbidden_2}, actually do.
Finally, all the symbols in this copy of $X$ are left- and right-clamped in $S_7(m)$: The copy of $Y$ in $S_7(1) = S_6(2)$ uses symbols that, in $S_6(2)$, had rank $2$, so they were clamped by Lemma~\ref{lem_leader}. Hence, by Lemma~\ref{lem_rank1_leftclamped}, they stay clamped in $S_7(m)$. And the symbols of $S_6(N)$ become global in $S_7(2)$, so they are also clamped by Lemma~\ref{lem_leader}. Hence, by Lemma~\ref{lemma_clamped}, if $S$ is a lower inner-zone sequence that contains $S_7(m)$, then the endpoints of $X$ appear in the right order in $E(S)$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{How we found these results}
Our results of Sections~\ref{sec_forbidden_2} and~\ref{sec_ababa} were obtained as follows:
Matou\v sek~\cite{mat_DG} and Sharir and Agarwal~\cite{DS_book} describe a construction by P. Shor of segments in the plane whose lower-envelope sequences are the Hart--Sharir sequences. We tried to force the segment endpoints in the construction to lie on the parabola $C$. We managed to do this for $S_1(m)$, $S_2(m)$, and $S_3(m)$ and all $m$, but for $S_4(m)$ this seems impossible.
Shor's construction is based on \emph{fans}---sets of segments that intersect concavely, whose left endpoints are very close to one another, and whose lengths increase very rapidly. Global fans have their left endpoints shuffled into tiny local fans. In order for the global fan to intersect concavely, its segments are given slopes $1, 1+\varepsilon_1, 1+\varepsilon_2, \ldots$ for very small values of $\varepsilon_1, \varepsilon_2, \ldots$. This gives a lot of freedom to play with the exact position of the segments' left endpoints.
However, if we want all endpoints to lie on a parabola, then the slopes in the global fan must increase very rapidly, which leads to the absurd requirement that the distances between the left endpoints decrease very rapidly (Lemma~\ref{lemma_wide_fan} above). Then it is impossible to appropriately shuffle the global fan into the local fans.
The impossible segment configuration $X$ of Section~\ref{sec_forbidden_2} (which, as we saw in Section~\ref{sec_ababa}, is forced by $S_7(m)$) is the best way we found to isolate the contradiction.
It would be nice to be able to isolate a smaller impossible segment configuration forced by the Hart-Sharir sequences (say, by $S_4(m)$). However, it is unlikely that such an improvement would be of additional help in proving Conjecture~\ref{conj}. The most promising line of attack is described in the next section.
\section{Directions for future work}\label{sec_conj_only_DS}
We believe that our geometric results are sufficient to prove Conjecture~\ref{conj}, and that the remaining work is purely combinatorial:
\begin{conjecture}\label{conj_only_HS}
The Hart--Sharir sequences are the only way to achieve superlinear-length $ababa$-free sequences. Namely, for every Hart--Sharir sequence $S_k(m)$ we have
\begin{equation*}
\Ex\bigl(\bigl\{ababa, S_k(m), (S_k(m))^R\bigr\}, n\bigr)=O(n);
\end{equation*}
where the hidden constant depends on $k$ and $m$.
\end{conjecture}
In order to establish Conjecture~\ref{conj}, it is enough to prove Conjecture~\ref{conj_only_HS} for the specific (gigantic) case of Theorem~\ref{thm_HS_forces_X}. However, our hope is that Conjecture~\ref{conj_only_HS} can be somehow more easily proven for \emph{all} $k$ and $m$ by a double induction argument.
Conjecture~\ref{conj_only_HS} is known to be true for $k=1$, since $S_1(m)$ are $N$-shaped sequences: Klazar and Valtr~\cite{KV} showed that (even without forbidding $ababa$) we have $\Ex\bigl(S_1(m),n\bigr) \le c_m n$ for some constants $c_m$. Pettie~\cite{pettie_forbid} subsequently improved the dependence of $c_m$ on $m$ to $c_m \le 2^{\Theta(m^2)}$, which is still quite large. No interesting lower bounds for $c_m$ are known. In any case, we conjecture that, forbidding both $ababa$ and an $N$-shaped pattern, we should have $\Ex\bigl(\bigl\{ababa, S_1(m)\bigr\},n\bigr) \le c'_m n$ for some quite small $c'_m$.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics{fig_abacdcacdbd.pdf}}
\caption{\label{fig_abacdcacdbd} The case $k=m=2$ of Conjecture~\ref{conj_only_HS} states that this pattern must be present in any configuration of $n$ $x$-monotone pseudosegments, if its lower-envelope sequence has length $cn$ for some large enough constant $c$. The highlighted subsegments must be visible from $-\infty$.}
\end{figure}
The first open case in Conjecture~\ref{conj_only_HS} is $k=m=2$. In this case, $S_2(2) = aba\,cdcac\,dbd \equiv (S_2(2))^R$; see Figure~\ref{fig_abacdcacdbd}. However, as we mentioned in the Introduction, even the weaker conjecture, that $\Ex(\{ababa, ab\,cacbc\}, n)=O(n)$, is still open.
(Similarly, the other conjecture mentioned in the Introduction, namely that $\Ex(\{ababa,\allowbreak ab\,cac\,cbc,\allowbreak (ab\,cac\,cbc)^R\}, n)=O(n)$, would follow from the case $k=3$, $m=2$ of Conjecture~\ref{conj_only_HS}.)
\subsection{Linear vs.~nonlinear forbidden patterns}
Conjecture~\ref{conj_only_HS} fits into the following more general question: For which patterns $u$ is $\Ex(u,n)$ linear in $n$? This question has been previously explored in several papers~\cite{AKV,klazar_93,klazar_survey,pettie_forbid,pettie_origins}. The known results in this area are somewhat patchy, and a proof (or disproof) of our conjecture will shed additional light in this area. For one, our conjecture already highlights the fact that forbidding a \emph{set} of patterns might have a stronger effect than forbidding each pattern separately, and hence, the right question should be: For which \emph{sets} of patterns $U$ is $\Ex(U, n)$ linear in $n$?
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec_discussion}
We end by listing some related open problems:
\begin{itemize}
\item As mentioned at the end of Section~\ref{sec_ababa}, it would be nice to isolate a smaller impossible segment configuration forced by the Hart--Sharir sequences (say, by $S_4(m)$ for some $m$); see Remark~\ref{remark_binary_tree} above. (Still, it is unlikely that such an improvement would make proving Conjecture~\ref{conj} much easier.)
\item What if we do not require $C$ to be a circle, but only a convex curve? It still seems impossible to implement Shor's construction forcing the endpoints to lie on a convex curve.
\item Can the $ababa$-free sequences of Nivasch--Geneson~\cite{geneson,yo_DS} be realized as lower-envelope sequences of line segments? Is there an $ababa$-free sequence that \emph{cannot} be realized in such a way?
\item The longest Davenport--Schinzel sequences of order $4$ ($ababab$-free) have length $\Theta\bigl(n\cdot 2^{\alpha(n)}\bigr)$. However, no one knows how to realize them as lower-envelope sequences of parabolic segments. Perhaps it is impossible. One could start by finding forbidden patterns here.
\item \emph{Higher dimensions:} Raz~\cite{raz} recently proved that the combinatorial complexity of the outer zone of the boundary of a convex body in an arrangement of hyperplanes in $R^d$ is $O(n^{d-1})$. The complexity of the inner zone is only known to be $O(n^{d-1}\log n)$ (Aronov et al.~\cite{APS}). Whether the latter is also linear in $n$ is an open question.
\end{itemize}
\paragraph{Acknowledgements} I would like to give special thanks to Seth Pettie for useful discussions on generalized DS sequences with different forbidden patterns. Thanks also to the referees of previous versions of this work for their careful reading and for their useful suggestions (including the idea in Section~\ref{subsec_conic}). Finally, thanks to Micha Sharir for useful discussions, and to Dan Halperin for encouraging me to work on this problem (several years ago).
|
\section*{Introduction}
Set $[n]:=\{x_1,\ldots,x_n\}$. Let $K$ be a field and
$S=K[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$, a polynomial ring over $K$. Let $\Delta$ be a
simplicial complex over $[n]$. For an integer $t\geq 0$, Haghighi,
Yassemi and Zaare-Nahandi introduced the concept of ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$-ness
which is the pure version of simplicial complexes
\emph{Cohen-Macaulay in codimension $t$} studied in \cite{MiNoSw}. A
reason for the importance of ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ simplicial complexes is that
they generalizes two notions for simplicial complexes: being
Cohen-Macaulay and Buchsbaum. In particular, by the results from
\cite{Re,Sh}, ${\mathrm{CM}}_0$ is the same as Cohen-Macaulayness and ${\mathrm{CM}}_1$
is identical with Buchsbaum property.
In \cite{HaYaZa1}, the authors described some combinatorial properties
of ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ simplicial complexes and gave some characterizations of them
and generalized some results of \cite{Hi,Mi}. Then, in \cite{HaYaZa2},
they generalized a characterization of Cohen-Macaulay bipartite graphs
from \cite{HeHi} and \cite{CoNa} on unmixed Buchsbaum graphs.
Bayati and Herzog defined the expansion functor in the category of
finitely generated multigraded $S$-modules and studied some homological
behaviors of this functor (see \cite{BaHe}). The expansion functor helps
us to present other multigraded $S$-modules from a given finitely generated
multigraded $S$-module which may have some of algebraic properties of the
primary module. This allows to introduce new structures of a given multigraded
$S$-module with the same properties and especially to extend some homological
or algebraic results for larger classes (see for example \cite[Theorem 4.2]{BaHe}.
There are some combinatorial versions of expansion functor which we will recall in this paper.
The purpose of this paper is the study of behaviors of expansion
functor on ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ complexes. We first recall some notations and
definitions of ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ simplicial complexes in Section 1. In the
next section we describe the expansion functor in three contexts,
the expansion of a simplicial complex, the expansion of a simple
graph and the expansion of a monomial ideal. We show that there is a
close relationship between these three contexts. In Section 3 we
prove that the expansion of a ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ complex $\Delta$ with respect to
$\alpha$ is ${\mathrm{CM}}_{t+e-k+1}$ but it is not ${\mathrm{CM}}_{t+e-k}$ where
$e=\dim(\Delta^\alpha)+1$ and $k$ is the minimum of the components of
$\alpha$ (see Theorem \ref{main}). In Section 4, we introduce a new
functor, called contraction, which acts in contrast to expansion
functor. As a main result of this section we show that if the
contraction of a ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ complex is pure and all components of the
vector obtained from contraction are greater than or equal to $t$
then it is Buchsbaum (see Theorem \ref{contract,CM-t}). The section
is finished with a view towards the contraction of simple graphs.
\section{Preliminaries}
Let $t$ be a non-negative integer. We recall from \cite{HaYaZa1}
that a simplicial complex $\Delta$ is called ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ or
\emph{Cohen-Macaulay in codimension $t$} if it is pure and for every
face $F\in\Delta$ with $\#(F)\geq t$, $\mathrm{link}_\Delta(F)$ is Cohen-Macaulay.
Every ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ complex is also ${\mathrm{CM}}_r$ for all $r\geq t$. For $t<0$,
${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ means ${\mathrm{CM}}_0$. The properties ${\mathrm{CM}}_0$ and ${\mathrm{CM}}_1$ are the
same as Cohen-Macaulay-ness and Buchsbaum-ness, respectively.
The link of a face $F$ in a simplicial complex $\Delta$ is denoted by
$\mathrm{link}_\Delta(F)$ and is $$\mathrm{link}_\Delta(F)=\{G\in\Delta: G\cap F=\emptyset,
G\cup F\in\Delta\}.$$ The following lemma is useful for checking the
${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ property of simplicial complexes:
\begin{lem}\label{CM-t eq}
(\cite[Lemma 2.3]{HaYaZa1}) Let $t\geq 1$ and let $\Delta$ be a nonempty complex. Then $\Delta$ is ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ if and only if $\Delta$ is pure and $\mathrm{link}_\Delta(v)$ is ${\mathrm{CM}}_{t-1}$ for every vertex $v\in\Delta$.
\end{lem}
Let $\mathcal G=(V(\mathcal G),E(\mathcal G))$ be a simple graph with vertex set $V$ and edge set $E$. The \emph{independence complex} of $\mathcal G$ is the complex $\Delta_\mathcal G$ with vertex set $V$ and with faces consisting of independent sets of vertices of $\mathcal G$. Thus $F$ is a face of $\Delta_\mathcal G$ if and only if there is no edge of $\mathcal G$ joining any two
vertices of $F$.
The \emph{edge ideal} of a simple graph $\mathcal G$, denoted by $I(\mathcal G)$, is an ideal of $S$ generated by all squarefree monomials $x_ix_j$ with $x_ix_j\in E(\mathcal G)$.
A simple graph $\mathcal G$ is called ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ if $\Delta_\mathcal G$ is ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ and it is called \emph{unmixed} if $\Delta_\mathcal G$ is pure.
For a monomial ideal $I\subset S$, We denote by $G(I)$ the unique minimal set of monomial generators of $I$.
\section{The expansion functor in combinatorial and algebraic concepts}
In this section we define the expansion of a simplicial complex and recall the expansion of a simple graph from \cite{Sc} and the expansion of a monomial ideal from \cite{BaHe}. We show that these concepts are intimately related to each other.
(1) Let $\alpha=(k_1,\ldots,k_n)\in\mathbb N^n$. For $F=\{x_{i_1},\ldots,x_{i_r}\}\subseteq \{x_1,\ldots,x_n\}$ define
$$F^\alpha=\{x_{i_11},\ldots,x_{i_1k_{i_1}},\ldots,x_{i_r1},\ldots,x_{i_rk_{i_r}}\}$$
as a subset of $[n]^\alpha:=\{x_{11},\ldots,x_{1k_1},\ldots,x_{n1},\ldots,x_{nk_n}\}$. $F^\alpha$ is called \emph{the expansion of $F$ with respect to $\alpha$.}
For a simplicial complex $\Delta=\langle F_1,\ldots,F_r\rangle$ on $[n]$, we define \emph{the expansion of $\Delta$ with respect to $\alpha$} as the simplicial complex
$$\Delta^\alpha=\langle F^\alpha_1,\ldots,F^\alpha_r\rangle.$$
(2) The \emph{duplication} of a vertex $x_i$ of a simple graph $\mathcal G$ was first introduced by Schrijver \cite{Sc} and it means extending its vertex set $V(\mathcal G)$ by a new vertex $x'_i$ and replacing $E(\mathcal G)$ by
$$E(\mathcal G)\cup\{(e\backslash\{x_i\})\cup\{x'_i\}:x_i\in e\in E(\mathcal G)\}.$$
For the $n$-tuple $\alpha=(k_1,\ldots,k_n)\in\mathbb N^n$, with positive integer entries, the \emph{expansion} of the simple graph $\mathcal G$ is denoted by $\mathcal G^\alpha$ and it is obtained from $\mathcal G$ by successively duplicating $k_i-1$ times every vertex $x_i$.
(3) In \cite{BaHe} Bayati and Herzog defined the expansion functor in the category of finitely generated multigraded $S$-modules and studied some homological behaviors of this functor. We recall the expansion functor defined by them only in the category of monomial ideals and refer the reader to \cite{BaHe} for more general case in the category of finitely generated multigraded $S$-modules.
Let $S^\alpha$ be a polynomial ring over $K$ in the variables
$$x_{11},\ldots,x_{1k_1},\ldots,x_{n1},\ldots,x_{nk_n}.$$
Whenever $I\subset S$ is a monomial ideal minimally generated by
$u_1,\ldots,u_r$, the expansion of $I$ with respect to $\alpha$ is
defined by
$$I^\alpha=\sum^r_{i=1}P^{\nu_1(u_i)}_1\ldots P^{\nu_n(u_i)}_n\subset S^\alpha$$
where $P_j=(x_{j1},\ldots,x_{jk_j})$ is a prime ideal of $S^\alpha$ and $\nu_j(u_i)$ is the exponent of $x_j$ in $u_i$.
It was shown in \cite{BaHe} that the expansion functor is exact and
so $(S/I)^\alpha=S^\alpha/I^\alpha$. In the following lemmas we
describe the relations between the above three concepts of expansion
functor.
\begin{lem}\label{epansion s-R}
For a simplicial complex $\Delta$ we have $I^\alpha_\Delta=I_{\Delta^\alpha}$. In particular, $K[\Delta]^\alpha=K[\Delta^\alpha]$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Delta=\langle F_1,\ldots,F_r\rangle$. Since $I_\Delta=\bigcap^r_{i=1}P_{F^c_i}$, it follows from Lemma 1.1 in \cite{BaHe} that $I^\alpha_\Delta=\bigcap^r_{i=1}P^\alpha_{F^c_i}$. The result is obtained by the fact that $P^\alpha_{F^c_i}=P_{(F^\alpha_i)^c}$.
\end{proof}
Let $u=x_{i_1}\ldots x_{i_t}\in S$ be a monomial and $\alpha=(k_1,\ldots,k_n)\in\mathbb N^n$. We set $u^\alpha=G((u)^\alpha)$
and for a set $A$ of monomials in $S$, $A^\alpha$ is defined $$A^\alpha=\bigcup_{u\in A} u^\alpha.$$
One can easily obtain the following lemma.
\begin{lem}
Let $I\subset S$ be a monomial ideal and $\alpha\in\mathbb N^n$. Then $G(I^\alpha)=G(I)^\alpha$.
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}
For a simple graph $\mathcal G$ on the vertex set $[n]$ and $\alpha\in\mathbb N^n$ we have $I(\mathcal G^\alpha)=I(\mathcal G)^\alpha$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\alpha=(k_1,\ldots,k_n)$ and $P_j=(x_{j1},\ldots,x_{jk_j})$. Then it follows from Lemma 11(ii,iii) of \cite{BaHe} that
$$I(\mathcal G^\alpha)=(x_{ir}x_{js}:x_ix_j\in E(\mathcal G), 1\leq r\leq k_i,1\leq s\leq k_j)=\sum_{x_ix_j\in E(\mathcal G)}P_iP_j$$
$$=\sum_{x_ix_j\in E(\mathcal G)}(x_i)^\alpha (x_j)^\alpha=(\sum_{x_ix_j\in E(\mathcal G)}(x_i)(x_j))^\alpha=I(\mathcal G)^\alpha.$$
\end{proof}
\section{The expansion of a ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ complex}
The following proposition gives us some information about the
expansion of a simplicial complex which are useful in the proof of
the next results.
\begin{prop}\label{ex indepen}
Let $\Delta$ be a simplicial complex and let $\alpha\in\mathbb N^n$.
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape (i)]
\item For all $i\leq\dim(\Delta)$, there exists an epimorphism $\theta:\tilde{H}_{i}(\Delta^\alpha;K)\rightarrow\tilde{H}_{i}(\Delta;K)$.
In particular in this case
$$\tilde{H}_{i}(\Delta^\alpha;K)/\ker(\theta)\cong\tilde{H}_{i}(\Delta;K);$$
\item For $F\in\Delta^\alpha$ such that $F=G^\alpha$ for some $G\in\Delta$, we have
$$\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}(F)=(\mathrm{link}_\Delta (G))^\alpha;$$
\item For $F\in\Delta^\alpha$ such that $F\neq G^\alpha$ for every $G\in\Delta$, we have
$$\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}F=\langle U^\alpha\backslash F\rangle\ast \mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}U^\alpha$$
for some $U\in\Delta$ with $F\subseteq U^\alpha$. Here $\ast$ means the join of two simplicial complexes.
In the third case, $\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}F$ is a cone and so acyclic,
i.e., $\tilde{H}_i(\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}F;K)=0$ for all $i>0$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
(i) Consider the map $\pi:[n]^\alpha\rightarrow [n]$ by $\pi(x_{ij})=x_i$ for all $i,j$. Let the simplicial map $\varphi:\Delta^\alpha\rightarrow\Delta$ be defined by $\varphi(\{x_{i_1j_1},\ldots,x_{i_qj_q}\})=\{\pi(x_{i_1j_1}),\ldots,\pi(x_{i_qj_q})\}=\{x_{i_1},\ldots,x_{i_q}\}$. Actually, $\varphi$ is an extension of $\pi$ to $\Delta^\alpha$ by linearity. Define $\varphi_\#:\tilde{\mathcal C}_q(\Delta^\alpha;K)\rightarrow\tilde{\mathcal C}_q(\Delta;K)$, for each $q$, by
$$\varphi_\#([x_{i_0j_0},\ldots,x_{i_qj_q}])=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
0 & \mbox{if for some indices}\ i_r=i_t \\
\left[\varphi(\{x_{i_0j_0}\}),\ldots,\varphi(\{x_{i_qj_q}\})\right] & \mbox{otherwise}.
\end{array}
\right.
$$
It is clear from the definitions of $\tilde{\mathcal C}_q(\Delta^\alpha;K)$ and $\tilde{\mathcal C}_q(\Delta;K)$ that $\varphi_\#$ is well-defined. Also, define $\varphi_\alpha:\tilde{H}_{i}(\Delta^\alpha;K)\rightarrow\tilde{H}_{i}(\Delta;K)$ by
$$\varphi_\alpha:z+B_i(\Delta^\alpha)\rightarrow \varphi_\#(z)+B_i(\Delta).$$
It is trivial that $\varphi_\alpha$ is onto.
(ii) The inclusion $\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}(F)\supseteq(\mathrm{link}_\Delta (G))^\alpha$ is trivial. So we show the reverse inclusion. Let $\sigma\in\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}(G^\alpha)$. Then $\sigma\cap G^\alpha=\emptyset$ and $\sigma\cup G^\alpha\in\Delta^\alpha$. We want to show $\pi(\sigma)\in\mathrm{link}_\Delta (G)$. Because in this case, $\pi(\sigma)^\alpha\in(\mathrm{link}_\Delta (G))^\alpha$ and since that $\sigma\subseteq \pi(\sigma)^\alpha$, we can conclude that $\sigma\in (\mathrm{link}_\Delta (G))^\alpha$.
Clearly, $\pi(\sigma)\cup G\in\Delta$. To show that $\pi(\sigma)\cap G=\emptyset$, suppose, on the contrary, that $x_i\in \pi(\sigma)\cap G$. Then $x_{ij}\in \sigma$ for some $j$. Especially, $x_{ij}\in G^\alpha$. Therefore $\sigma\cap G^\alpha\neq\emptyset$, a contradiction.
(iii) Let $\tau\in\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}F$. Let $\tau\cap \pi(F)^\alpha=\emptyset$. It follows from $\tau\cup F\in \Delta^\alpha$ that $\pi(\tau)^\alpha\cup\pi(F)^\alpha\in \Delta^\alpha$. Now by $\tau\subset\pi(\tau)^\alpha$ it follows that $\tau\cup\pi(F)^\alpha\in \Delta^\alpha$. Hence $\tau\in\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}(\pi(F)^\alpha)$. So we suppose that $\tau\cap \pi(F)^\alpha\neq\emptyset$. We write
$\tau=(\tau\cap \pi(F)^\alpha)\cup (\tau\backslash \pi(F)^\alpha)$. It is clear that $\tau\cap \pi(F)^\alpha\subset \pi(F)^\alpha\backslash F$ and $\tau\backslash \pi(F)^\alpha\in\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}\pi(F)^\alpha$. The reverse inclusion is trivial.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}\label{pure expan}
Let $\Delta=\langle x_1x_2,x_2x_3\rangle$ be a complex on $[3]$ and
$\alpha=(2,1,1)\in\mathbb N^3$. Then $\Delta^\alpha=\langle
x_{11}x_{12}x_{21},x_{21}x_{31}\rangle$ is a complex on
$\{x_{11},x_{12},x_{21},x_{31}\}$. Notice that $\Delta$ is pure but
$\Delta^\alpha$ is not. Therefore, the expansion of a pure simplicial
complex is not necessarily pure.
\end{rem}
\begin{thm}\label{main}
Let $\Delta$ be a simplicial complex on $[n]$ of dimension $d-1$ and
let $t\geq 0$ be the least integer that $\Delta$ is ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$. Suppose
that $\alpha=(k_1,\ldots,k_n)\in\mathbb N^n$ such that $k_i>1$ for some
$i$ and $\Delta^\alpha$ is pure. Then $\Delta^\alpha$ is ${\mathrm{CM}}_{t+e-k+1}$
but it is not ${\mathrm{CM}}_{t+e-k}$, where $e=\dim(\Delta^\alpha)+1$ and
$k=\min\{k_i:k_i>1\}$ .
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We use induction on $e\geq 2$. If $e=2$, then $\dim(\Delta^\alpha)=1$ and $\Delta$ should be only in form $\Delta=\langle x_1,\ldots,x_n\rangle$. In particular, $\Delta^\alpha$ is of the form
$$\Delta^\alpha=\langle \{x_{i_11},x_{i_12}\},\{x_{i_21},x_{i_22}\},\ldots,\{x_{i_r1},x_{i_r2}\}\rangle.$$
It is clear that $\Delta^\alpha$ is ${\mathrm{CM}}_1$ but it is not Cohen-Macaulay.
Assume that $e>2$. Let $\{x_{ij}\}\in\Delta^\alpha$. We want to show that $\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}(x_{ij})$ is ${\mathrm{CM}}_{e-k}$. Consider the following cases:
Case 1: $k_i>1$. Then
$$\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}(x_{ij})=\langle\{x_i\}^\alpha\backslash x_{ij}\rangle\ast(\mathrm{link}_{\Delta}(x_i))^\alpha.$$
$(\mathrm{link}_{\Delta}(x_i))^\alpha$ is of dimension $e-k_i-1$ and, by induction hypothesis, it is ${\mathrm{CM}}_{t+e-k_i-k+1}$. On the other hand, $\langle\{x_i\}^\alpha\backslash x_{ij}\rangle$ is Cohen-Macaulay of dimension $k_i-2$. Therefore, it follows from Theorem 1.1(i) of \cite{HaYaZa2} that $\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}(x_{ij})$ is ${\mathrm{CM}}_{t+e-k}$.
Case 2: $k_i=1$. Then
$$\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}(x_{ij})=(\mathrm{link}_{\Delta}(x_i))^\alpha$$
which is of dimension $e-2$ and, by induction, it is ${\mathrm{CM}}_{t+e-k}$.
Now suppose that $e>2$ and $k_s=k$ for some $s\in [n]$. Let $F$ be a facet of $\Delta$ such that $x_s$ belongs to $F$.
If $\dim(\Delta)=0$, then $k_l=k$ for all $l\in [n]$. In particular, $e=k$. It is clear that $\Delta^\alpha$ is not ${\mathrm{CM}}_{t+e-k}$ (or Cohen-Macaulay). So suppose that $\dim(\Delta)>0$. Choose $x_i\in F\backslash x_s$. Then
$$\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}(x_{ij})=\langle \{x_i\}^\alpha\backslash x_{ij}\rangle\ast (\mathrm{link}_\Delta(x_i))^\alpha.$$
By induction hypothesis, $(\mathrm{link}_\Delta(x_i))^\alpha$ is not ${\mathrm{CM}}_{t+e-k_i-k}$. It follows from Theorem 3.1(ii) of \cite{HaYaZa2} that $\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha}(x_{ij})$ is not ${\mathrm{CM}}_{t+e-k-1}$. Therefore $\Delta^\alpha$ is not ${\mathrm{CM}}_{t+e-k}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
Let $\Delta$ be a non-empty Cohen-Macaulay simplicial complex on
$[n]$. Then for any $\alpha\in\mathbb N^n$, with $\alpha\neq\mathbf 1$,
$\Delta^\alpha$ can never be Cohen-Macaulay.
\end{cor}
\section{The contraction functor}
Let $\Delta=\langle F_1,\ldots,F_r\rangle$ be a simplicial complex on $[n]$. Consider the equivalence relation `$\sim$' on the vertices of $\Delta$ given by
$$x_i\sim x_j\Leftrightarrow\langle x_i\rangle\ast\mathrm{link}_\Delta(x_i)=\langle x_j\rangle\ast\mathrm{link}_\Delta(x_j).$$
In fact $\langle x_i\rangle\ast\mathrm{link}_\Delta(x_i)$ is the cone over
$\mathrm{link}_\Delta(x_i)$, and the elements of
$\langle x_i\rangle\ast\mathrm{link}_\Delta(x_i)$ are those faces of $\Delta$,
which contain $x_i$. Hence $\langle x_i\rangle\ast\mathrm{link}_\Delta(x_i)
=\langle x_j\rangle\ast\mathrm{link}_\Delta(x_j)$, means the cone with vertex $x_i$ is equal to the cone with vertex $x_j$. In other words,
$x_i\sim x_j$ is equivalent to saying that for a facet $F\in\Delta$, $F$ contains $x_i$ if and only if it contains $x_j$.
Let $[\bar{m}]=\{\bar{y}_1,\ldots,\bar{y}_m\}$ be the set of
equivalence classes under $\sim$. Let
$\bar{y}_i=\{x_{i1},\ldots,x_{ia_i}\}$. Set
$\alpha=(a_1,\ldots,a_m)$. For $F_t\in\Delta$, define
$G_t=\{\bar{y}_i:\bar{y}_i\subset F_t\}$ and let $\Gamma$ be a
simplicial complex on the vertex set $[m]$ with facets
$G_1,\ldots,G_r$. We call $\Gamma$ the \emph{contraction of $\Delta$
by $\alpha$} and $\alpha$ is called \emph{the vector obtained from
contraction}.
For example, consider the simplicial complex $\Delta=\langle x_1x_2x_3,x_2x_3x_4,x_1x_4x_5,x_2x_3x_5\rangle$
on the vertex set $[5]=\{x_1,\ldots,x_5\}$. Then $\bar{y}_1=\{x_1\}$, $\bar{y}_2=\{x_2,x_3\}$, $\bar{y}_3=\{x_4\}$,
$\bar{y}_4=\{x_5\}$ and $\alpha=(1,2,1,1)$. Therefore, the contraction of $\Delta$ by $\alpha$ is
$\Gamma=\langle \bar{y}_1\bar{y}_2,\bar{y}_2\bar{y}_3,\bar{y}_1\bar{y}_3\bar{y}_4,\bar{y}_2\bar{y}_4\rangle$ a
complex on the vertex set $[\bar{4}]=\{\bar{y}_1,\ldots,\bar{y}_4\}$.
\begin{rem}
Note that if $\Delta$ is a pure simplicial complex then the contraction of $\Delta$ is not necessarily pure (see the above example). In the special case where the vector $\alpha=(k_1,\dots,k_n)\in\mathbb N^n$ and $k_i=k_j$ for all $i,j$, it is easy to check that in this case $\Delta$ is pure if and only if $\Delta^\alpha$ is pure. Another case is introduced in the following proposition.
\end{rem}
\begin{prop}
Let $\Delta$ be a simplicial complex on $[n]$ and assume that
$\alpha=(k_1,\dots,k_n)\in\mathbb N^n$ satisfies the following condition:
$(\dag)$ for all facets $F,G\in\Delta$, if $x_i\in F\backslash G$ and $x_j\in G\backslash F$ then $k_i=k_j$.
Then $\Delta$ is pure if and only if $\Delta^\alpha$ is pure.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Delta$ be a pure simplicial complex and let $F,G\in\Delta$ be two facets of $\Delta$. Then $$|F^\alpha|-|G^\alpha|=\sum_{x_i\in F}k_i-\sum_{x_i\in G}k_i=\sum_{x_i\in F\backslash G}k_i-\sum_{x_i\in G\backslash F}k_i.$$
Now the condition $(\dag)$ implies that $|F^\alpha|=|G^\alpha|$. This means that all facets of $\Delta^\alpha$ have the same cardinality.
Let $\Delta^\alpha$ be pure. Suppose that $F,G$ are two facets in
$\Delta$. If $|F|>|G|$ then $|F\backslash G|>|G\backslash F|$.
Therefore $\sum_{x_i\in F\backslash G}k_i>\sum_{x_i\in G\backslash
F}k_i$. This concludes that $|F^\alpha|=\sum_{x_i\in
F}k_i>\sum_{x_i\in G}k_i=|G^\alpha|$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
There is a close relationship between a simplicial complex and its contraction. In fact, the expansion of the contraction of a simplicial complex is the same complex. The precise statement is the following.
\begin{lem}
Let $\Gamma$ be the contraction of $\Delta$ by $\alpha$. Then $\Gamma^\alpha\cong \Delta$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\Delta$ and $\Gamma$ are on the vertex sets $[n]=\{x_1,\ldots,x_n\}$ and $[\bar{m}]=\{\bar{y}_1,\ldots,\bar{y}_m\}$, respectively. Let $\alpha=(a_1,\ldots,a_m)$. For $\bar{y}_i\in\Gamma$, suppose that $\{\bar{y}_i\}^\alpha=\{\bar{y}_{i1},\ldots,\bar{y}_{ia_i}\}$. So $\Gamma^\alpha$ is a simplicial complex on the vertex set $[\bar{m}]^\alpha=\{\bar{y}_{ij}:i=1,\ldots,m,\ j=1,\ldots,a_i\}$. Now define $\varphi:[\bar{m}]^\alpha\rightarrow [n]$ by $\varphi(\bar{y}_{ij})=x_{ij}$. Extending $\varphi$, we obtain the isomorphism $\varphi:\Gamma^\alpha\rightarrow \Delta$.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}\label{CM indepen}
Let $\Delta$ be a simplicial complex and assume that $\Delta^\alpha$ is
Cohen-Macaulay for some $\alpha\in\mathbb N^n$. Then $\Delta$ is
Cohen-Macaulay.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{ex indepen}(i), for all $i\leq \dim(\mathrm{link}_\Delta F)$ and all $F\in\Delta$ there exists an epimorphism $\theta:\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha} F^\alpha\rightarrow \mathrm{link}_\Delta F$ such that
$$\tilde{H}_{i}(\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha} F^\alpha;K)/\ker(\theta)\cong\tilde{H}_{i}(\mathrm{link}_\Delta F;K).$$
Now suppose that $i<\dim(\mathrm{link}_\Delta F)$. Then $i<\dim(\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha} G^\alpha)$ and by Cohen-Macaulayness of $\Delta^\alpha$, $\tilde{H}_{i}(\mathrm{link}_{\Delta^\alpha} F^\alpha;K)=0$. Therefor $\tilde{H}_{i}(\mathrm{link}_\Delta F;K)=0$. This means that $\Delta$ is Cohen-Macaulay.
\end{proof}
It follows from Proposition \ref{CM indepen} that:
\begin{cor}\label{CM-ness}
The contraction of a Cohen-Macaulay simplicial complex $\Delta$ is Cohen-Macaulay.
\end{cor}
This can be generalized in the following theorem.
\begin{thm}\label{contract,CM-t}
Let $\Gamma$ be the contraction of a ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ simplicial complex
$\Delta$, for some $t\geq 0$, by $\alpha=(k_1,\ldots,k_n)$. If
$k_i\geq t$ for all $i$ and $\Gamma$ is pure, then $\Gamma$ is
Buchsbaum.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
If $t=0$, then we saw in Corollary \ref{CM-ness} that $\Gamma$ is Cohen-Macaulay and so it is ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$. Hence assume that $t>0$. Let $\Delta=\langle F_1,\ldots,F_r\rangle$. We have to show that $\tilde{H}_i(\mathrm{link}_\Gamma G;K)=0$, for all faces $G\in\Gamma$ with $|G|\geq 1$ and all $i<\dim(\mathrm{link}_\Gamma G)$.
Let $G\in\Gamma$ with $|G|\geq 1$. Then $|G^\alpha|\geq t$. It follows from Lemma \ref{CM-t eq} and ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$-ness of $\Delta$ that
$$\tilde{H}_{i}(\mathrm{link}_\Gamma G;K)\cong\tilde{H}_{i}(\mathrm{link}_\Delta G^\alpha;K)=0$$
for $i<\dim(\mathrm{link}_\Delta G^\alpha)$ and, particularly, for $i<\dim(\mathrm{link}_\Gamma G)$. Therefore $\Gamma$ is Buchsbaum.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
Let $\Gamma$ be the contraction of a Buchsbaum simplicial complex
$\Delta$. If $\Gamma$ is pure, then $\Gamma$ is also Buchsbaum.
\end{cor}
Let $\mathcal G$ be a simple graph on the vertex set $[n]$ and let $\Delta_\mathcal G$ be its independence complex on $[n]$, i.e., a simplicial complex whose faces are the independent vertex sets of $G$. Let $\Gamma$ be the contraction of $\Delta_\mathcal G$. In the following we show that $\Gamma$ is the independence complex of a simple graph $\mathcal H$. We call $\mathcal H$ the \emph{contraction} of $\mathcal G$.
\begin{lem}
Let $\mathcal G$ be a simple graph. The contraction of $\Delta_\mathcal G$ is the independence complex of a simple graph $\mathcal H$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
It suffices to show that $I_\Gamma$ is a squarefree monomial ideal generated in degree 2. Let $\Gamma$ be the contraction of $\Delta_\mathcal G$ and let $\alpha=(k_1,\ldots,k_n)$ be the vector obtained from the contraction. Let $[n]=\{x_1,\ldots,x_n\}$ be the vertex set of $\Gamma$. Suppose that $u=x_{i_1}\ldots x_{i_t}\in G(I_\Gamma)$. Then $u^\alpha\subset G(I_\Gamma)^\alpha=G(I_{\Delta_\mathcal G})=G(I(\mathcal G)$. Since $u^\alpha=\{x_{i_1j_1}\ldots x_{i_tj_t}:1\leq j_l\leq k_{i_l},1\leq l\leq t\}$ we have $t=2$ and the proof is completed.
\end{proof}
\begin{exam}
Let $\mathcal G_1$ and $\mathcal G_2$ be, respectively, from left to right the following graphs:
$$\begin{array}{cccc}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\coordinate (a) at (0,0);\fill (0,0) circle (1pt);
\coordinate (b) at (0,1);\fill (0,1) circle (1pt);
\coordinate (c) at (1,0);\fill (1,0) circle (1pt);
\coordinate (d) at (0,-1);\fill (0,-1) circle (1pt);
\coordinate (e) at (-1,0);\fill (-1,0) circle (1pt);
\draw[black] (a) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- (b);
\end{tikzpicture}
&&&
\begin{tikzpicture}
\coordinate (a) at (0,0);\fill (0,0) circle (1pt);
\coordinate (b) at (0,1);\fill (0,1) circle (1pt);
\coordinate (c) at (1,0);\fill (1,0) circle (1pt);
\coordinate (d) at (0,-1);\fill (0,-1) circle (1pt);
\coordinate (e) at (-1,0);\fill (-1,0) circle (1pt);
\draw[black] (e) -- (a) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- (b) -- (c);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{array}$$
The contraction of $\mathcal G_1$ and $\mathcal G_2$ are
$$\begin{array}{cccc}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\coordinate (a) at (0,0);\fill (0,0) circle (1pt);
\coordinate (b) at (0,1);\fill (0,1) circle (1pt);
\coordinate (c) at (1,0);\fill (1,0) circle (1pt);
\coordinate (d) at (0,-1);\fill (0,-1) circle (1pt);
\coordinate (e) at (-1,0);\fill (-1,0) circle (1pt);
\draw[black] (a) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- (b);
\end{tikzpicture}
&&&
\begin{tikzpicture}
\coordinate (a) at (0,0);\fill (0,0) circle (1pt);
\coordinate (b) at (1,0);\fill (1,0) circle (1pt);
\draw[black] (a) -- (b);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{array}$$
The contraction of $\mathcal G_1$ is equal to itself but $\mathcal G_2$ is contracted to an edge and the vector obtained from contraction is $\alpha=(2,3)$.
\end{exam}
We recall that a simple graph is ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ for some $t\geq 0$, if the associated independence complex is ${\mathrm{CM}}_t$.
\begin{rem}
The simple graph $\mathcal G'$ obtained from $\mathcal G$ in Lemma 4.3 and Theorem
4.4 of \cite{HaYaZa2} is the expansion of $\mathcal G$. Actually, suppose
that $\mathcal G$ is a bipartite graph on the vertex set $V(\mathcal G)=V\cup W$
where $V=\{x_1,\ldots,x_d\}$ and $W=\{x_{d+1},\ldots,x_{2d}\}$. Then
for $\alpha=(n_1,\ldots,n_d,n_1,\ldots,n_d)$ we have
$\mathcal G'=\mathcal G^\alpha$. It follows from Theorem \ref{main} that if $\mathcal G$ is
${\mathrm{CM}}_t$ for some $t\geq 0$ then $\mathcal G'$ is ${\mathrm{CM}}_{t+n-n_{i_0}+1}$ where
$n=\sum^d_{i=1}n_i$ and $n_{i_0}=\min\{n_i>1:i=1,\ldots,d\}$. This
implies that the first part of Theorem 4.4 of \cite{HaYaZa2} is an
obvious consequence of Theorem \ref{main} for $t=0$.
\end{rem}
\subsection*{Acknowledgment}
The author would like to thank Hassan Haghighi from K. N. Toosi University of Technology and Rahim Zaare-Nahandi from University of Tehran for careful
reading an earlier version of this article and for their helpful comments.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{s1}
The current mapping of neural connectivity patterns relies on advanced
neuro-imaging techniques, which have recently allowed for the
reconstruction of structural human brain networks, establishing at an
individual-based level which brain regions are mutually connected, as
well as the strength of pairwise connections. The resulting ``human
connectome network'' \cite{Hagmann,Honey09} has been found to be
structured in moduli or compartments --characterized by a much larger
intra than inter connectivity-- organized in a hierarchical
fractal-like fashion across diverse scales
\cite{Bullmore-Sporns,Sporns,Review-Kaiser,Review-Bullmore,Zhou06,Ivkovic}.
On the other hand, functional connections between different brain
regions can be inferred e.g. from correlations in neural activity as
detected in EEG or fMRI time series. Unveiling the relation between
structural and functional networks is a current challenge in modern
neuroscience. In this context, a few pioneering works found that the
hierarchical-modular organization of structural brain networks has
remarkable implications for neural dynamics
\cite{Zhou06,Zhou07,Kaiser07,Kaiser10}. As opposed to the case of
simpler network structures, neural activity propagates in hierarchical
networks in a peculiar way. For example, models of neural activity
propagation usually exhibit two familiar phases --percolating and
non-percolating, respectively-- but it has been recently found
\cite{Nat-Comm} that when such models operate on top of the ``human
connectome'' structural network a novel intermediate regime, named a
``Griffiths phase'' \cite{Vojta-Review,GPCN} emerges. This novel
phase originates from the highly-diverse and relatively isolated
structural moduli where dynamical activity may remain mostly localized
for long time periods \cite{Nat-Comm,GPCN}.
Given that the correct brain functioning requires coherent neural
activity at a wide range of scales \cite{Niebur2000,Kandel00}, the
study of synchronization among neural populations is one of the
central ideas in computational neuroscience
\cite{Buzsaki,Breakspear-multiscale}.
In a recent work \cite{Villegas2014}, some of us scrutinized the
special features of synchronization dynamics \cite{RPK-book} using the
canonical Kuramoto model for phase synchronization
\cite{Kuramoto75,Strogatz00,Acebron-Review}, in the actual human
connectome (HC) network \cite{Hagmann,Honey09,Arenas-Review}. In
analogy to what described above for activity propagation, we uncovered
the existence of a novel intermediate phase for synchronization
dynamics, stemming from the hierarchical modular organization of the
HC. Furthermore, we found that the dynamics in such a region presented
a plethora of complex and interesting dynamical features
\cite{Villegas2014}.
Our goal here is to describe in more detail the complex behavior
within such an intermediate regime, both in individual moduli and at a
global brain level. We measure the fluctuations of the global order
parameter as a function of the overall coupling strength, and we show
that there is a broad region (rather than a unique ``critical'' point)
with huge variability and response. Finally, we assess the role of
noise and perturbations in the robustness of the metastable stated
arising in the intermediate regime, and we show that adding intrinsic fluctuations to the picture of
synchronization dynamics in hierarchical modular networks accounts for
the ability of the brain to explore different attractors, giving
access to the varied functional configurations recorded in experiments
\cite{Chialvo10,Deco2012,Haimovici}.
\section{Kuramoto model in the Human-Connectome network}
The HC network we employ consists of a set of $N=998$ nodes, each of
them representing a population of neurons producing self-sustained
oscillations \cite{Sporns2011}, connected pairwise through a precise
pattern of symmetric weighted edges, altogether determining a
connectivity matrix $\mathbf{W}$ \cite{Hagmann,Honey09}.
On top of such a HC network, we implement a noisy Kuramoto dynamics,
defined by the set of differential equations \cite{Kuramoto75,Strogatz00,Acebron-Review}:
\begin{equation}
{\dot\theta}_{i}(t)=\alpha \eta_i(t)+\omega_{i}+ k \sum_{j=1}^{N}
W_{ij}\sin\left[\theta_{j}(t)-\theta_{i}(t)\right], \label{eq:Kuramoto}
\end{equation}
where ${\theta}_{i}(t)$ is the phase at node $i$ at time $t$, the
intrinsic frequencies $\omega_{i}$ --accounting for region
heterogeneity-- are extracted from some probability distribution function $g(w)$,
$W_{ij}$ are the elements of the $N \times N$ weighted connectivity matrix
$\mathbf{W}$, $k$ is an overall coupling parameter and $\eta_i(t)$ is a
zero-mean delta-correlated Gaussian noise, tuned by the real-valued
amplitude $\alpha$.
The Kuramoto complex order parameter is defined by
$Z(t)=R(t)e^{i\psi(t)} = \langle e^{i \theta_k(t)} \rangle_k$, where $0
\leq R \leq 1$ gauges the overall coherence and $\psi(t)$ is the
average phase. It is common wisdom that for an (infinitely) large
population of oscillators interacting in a fully connected network,
the model exhibits a phase transition at some value of $k$, separating
a coherent steady state ($R > 0$) from an incoherent one ($R=0$, plus
$1/\sqrt{N}$ finite-size corrections)
\cite{Kuramoto75,Strogatz00,Acebron-Review}. On the other hand, in the
absence of frequency heterogeneity the system always reaches a
coherent state. Thus, frequency heterogeneity is responsible for
frustrating synchronization if the coupling strength is weak.
Similarly, in our recent work \cite{Villegas2014} we argued that the
combined effect of frequency heterogeneity {\it and} network
heterogeneity (in particular, a hierarchical modular structure) can
lead to much richer and interesting ways of ordering frustration.
Here we explore that phenomenology in much deeper detail, introducing
external stochastic fluctuations (i.e. noise) as the mechanism
accounting for the ability of the system to explore metastable
configurations.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{fig1.pdf}
\caption{Adjacency matrix of the HC network with nodes ordered to
emphasize its modular structure as highlighted by a community
detection algorithm (see main text), showing also the partition
into the $2$ hemispheres (dashed lines). $12$ moduli can be
distinguished (each plotted with a different color); $4$ of them
correspond to one of the two hemispheres, $5$ to the other, and
only $3$ moduli overlap with both hemispheres (cyan, blue and red
moduli). Inter-modular connections (grey) are limited to small
subsets, acting as interfaces or connectors between moduli.}
\end{figure}
\section{Results}
We considered the HC network \cite{Hagmann,Honey09} and employed
standard community detection algorithms \cite{Radatools,Ivkovic} to
identify the underlying modular structure. The optimal partition into
communities --i.e. the one maximizing the modularity parameter
\cite{Newman-Review}-- turns out to correspond to a division in $12$
moduli \cite{Villegas2014}. At a higher hierarchical level, a
separation into just $2$ moduli (roughly corresponding to the $2$
cerebral hemispheres) also provides a quite high modularity value. As
illustrated in Fig. 1, $4$ (out of the $12$) moduli belong to one of
the two hemispheres, $5$ to the other, while $3$ moduli (cyan, blue
and red) overlap with both hemispheres. We label these two
hierarchical levels as $l=2$ ($2$ large moduli) and $l=1$ ($12$
smaller moduli), respectively.
We have conducted computational analyses of the noisy Kuramoto model
on top of the HC network and performed a number of new computational
experiments complementing the analyses in our previous work
\cite{Villegas2014}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm,angle=0]{fig2.pdf}
\caption{(Main) Time-averaged value of the order parameter for the
noisy Kuramoto dynamics running upon the Human Connectome network
($998$ nodes) with a Gaussian distribution of frequencies. Three
different regimes emerge: an incoherent phase ($k < 1.6$), a
synchronous one ($k > 3.3$), and an intermediate irregular one. In
this last, much larger averaging times would be required to obtain
reliable mean values and these would depend upon initial conditions,
reflecting metastability. We have chosen not so large measuring
times ($t=100$ for all values of $k$) to illustrate the
variability in the intermediate region. (Inset) Time-series for $4$
different $k$ values, indicated by arrows in the x-axis (from left
to right: $k=0.5, 2.7, 3.0$ and $4.0$). }
\end{figure}
As illustrated in Fig. 2, beside the aforementioned coherent and
incoherent phases (usually encountered in synchronizing systems) there is
an intermediate regime between them exhibiting a large variability.
Individual trajectories are depicted in the inset, for different
values of the coupling strength $k$; observe in particular the irregular
oscillations obtained for intermediate values of $k$.
The reported values of $\langle R \rangle_t $ in the main plot of Fig. 2
correspond to the time-averaged value for a single realization in its
steady state, considering up to a fixed maximum time $T$. The
observed variability in the central region means either that (i)
larger time windows would be required for the system to self-average
or (ii) that ergodicity is broken and for each parameter value the
realization ends up in a different type of (stable or metastable)
steady state, depending on the initial condition. This last
possibility implies that the system may remain trapped in some sort of
metastable states, from which it can escape away only after very rare
and large fluctuations.
These observations are robust against changes in the frequency
distribution, connectivity matrix normalization, and other details,
whereas the location and width of the intermediate phase are not
universal. For example, Fig. 2 has been obtained for a Gaussian
frequency distribution but similar curves are obtained for, usually
employed, Lorentzian or uniform distributions.
As this robust intermediate regime is reminiscent of Griffiths phases
in networks --posed in between order and disorder and emerging from
rare-region effects \cite{Vojta-Review,GPCN,Nat-Comm}-- it is natural
to wonder how the structural network modularity affects
synchronization dynamics in general. As a matter of fact, it is
straightforward to convince oneself that any network consisting of
perfectly isolated moduli, each of them synchronized at different
intrinsic frequencies and phases, should exhibit oscillations of the
collective order parameter, $R$, and these oscillations are preserved
when the moduli are weakly interconnected \cite{Villegas2014}. Thus,
in large networks without delays or other additional ingredients, time
oscillations in the global coherence are the trademark of an
underlying modular structure.
To illustrate the role played by internal network modularity on global
synchronization, Fig. 3 portraits the trajectories of the parameter
$Z(t)$ in the complex plane for different values of the control
parameter $k$, measured at different hierarchical levels: two (out of
the existing $12$) different small moduli (violet and orange curves),
the two hemispheres (red and green), and the overall brain (blue).
In the incoherent phase (panel a), the real and imaginary
parts of $Z$ fluctuate around zero at all scales in the hierarchy. On
the other hand, in the coherent phase (panel d), all nodes are
synchronized, and trajectories are circles with radii close to unity
at all hierarchical levels
A much richer behavior is found in the intermediate region: panel b
(left) illustrates a situation in which one modulus
(orange) is mostly coherent, while the other (violet) is not; however,
hemispheres and global dynamics remain mostly unsynchronized (panel b
(right)). In panel c (left), we have slightly increased the control
parameter with respect to panel b, with a subsequent
increase of the coherence for all hierarchical levels.
Interestingly, as not all moduli exhibit the same state of coherence,
chaotic-like oscillations of the order parameter are observed at the global scale.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm,angle=0]{fig3.pdf}
\caption{Phase portraits of the complex order parameter $Z(t)$,
measured at different scales in the hierarchy for a Gaussian $g(w)$
(different realizations from those in Fig. 2): two of the
existing moduli are plotted in violet and orange, respectively, the
two hemispheres in red and green, and the global scale in blue.
Panels (a)-(d) correspond to values of the control parameter
$k=1,3,5$ and $8$, respectively (panels (b) and (c) have been split
into two to enhance clarity). (a) In the non-ordered phase, the real
and imaginary components of $Z$ fluctuate around zero, not
exhibiting synchronization at any scale. (b) In the early region of
the intermediate phase, a few moduli are coherent (as the one in
orange) but most of them remain unsynchronized (violet), and the
system does not present coherence for upper scales in the
hierarchy. (c) Increasing $k$, more heterogeneity of synchronization
among moduli is found, and the system exhibits complex trajectories
for the intermediate (hemispheres) and global scale. (d) In the
coherent phase, all moduli are synchronized, and trajectories are
concentric circles.}
\end{figure}
We are interested in quantifying the observed variability of $R$ in
the intermediate phase. To this end, we take a particular realization
of frequencies (extracted from a Gaussian $g(w)$) and, starting from
an initial --uniformly distributed-- random configuration of
individual phases, $\{\theta_i(t=0)\}_{i=1}^N$, we measure the
temporal standard deviation of the global coherence parameter $R$
(after the transient) up to a maximum time $T=10^4$,
\begin{equation}
\sigma=\left(\langle \left(R - \langle R \rangle_t\right)^2
\rangle_{t}\right)^{1/2}
\end{equation}
as a function of the coupling strength $k$.
\footnote{Notice that this definition of $\sigma$, that we call, ``\emph{time
variability}'' is closely related to the chimera index introduced by
Shanahan \cite{Shanahan2010}. While chimera indices are averaged
between individual network moduli and measure the onset of local
coherence, $\sigma$ is defined at the global level and records
fluctuations of the global order parameter.}
As ergodicity may be broken, different initial conditions may lead to
different attractors of the dynamics, therefore we also average
$\sigma$ over $100$ different independent realizations of the
dynamical process. Results are illustrated in Fig. 4, in which we also
have plotted the diagram of the order parameter obtained for this
particular realization of $g(\omega)$ averaged over the $100$
realizations. Let us stress the following salient aspects: {\it i)}
averaged time variabilities are small in the non-coherent
($k\lesssim1$) as well as in the coherent ($k\gtrsim5$) phases,
whereas much larger variabilities are found in the intermediate region
($1\lesssim k \lesssim5$); {\it ii)} the curve of time variabilities presents
several peaks for the intermediate region, lying in the vicinity of
values of the control parameter at which the system experiences a
change in its level of coherence (see the corresponding jumps in the
derivative of the order parameter); and finally, {\it iii)} error bars
are also larger in the intermediate phase; this variability of
time variabilities means that different initial conditions can lead to
different types of time-series, suggesting a large degree of
metastability in the intermediate regime.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm,angle=0]{fig4.pdf}
\caption{Time-averaged order parameter $R=\langle R(t)\rangle$ and
standard deviation of time-series, averaged over realizations
with different --uniformly distributed-- initial conditions. Maximal
variability is found in the intermediate phase, where the system is
neither too unsynchronized nor too coherent. Several peaks in the
variability can be distinguished (dashed lines), which appear at
values of the control parameter $k$ for which the system experiments
a fast increase in global synchronization. Statistical sampling of
different realizations indicate that errorbars are larger in the
intermediate region, suggesting the existence of several attractors
depending on the initial conditions. We have averaged $100$
different realizations, each one integrated for $10^4$ time
steps. }
\end{figure}
\subsection{Metastability in HMNs}
Our previous results vividly illustrate the existence of an
intermediate region in which the HC exhibits maximal dynamical
variability at the global scale, suggesting metastable behavior. In
order to explore more directly whether metastable states exist, we now
assess if the dynamics may present different attractors and, for some
values of the control parameter $k$ and noise amplitudes, if the
system may switch between different global attractors with different
levels of coherence.
Fig. 5 (a) shows a time series of the global parameter, for a fixed
realization of internal frequencies and initial phases. It clearly
illustrates how the HC spontaneously switches between two different
attractors. These type of events, however, are not easy to observe in
the HC network. Due to the coarse-grained nature of the HC mapping,
different attractors may actually have comparable average values of
the coherence $R$, which makes their discrimination especially
difficult at the global scale.
Instead, such events are easier to spot in synthetic hierarchical
modular networks (HMN), such as proposed to model brain networks in an
efficient way (see \cite{Nat-Comm} and references therein). In such
hierarchical networks, the effects of modularity and hierarchy are
much enhanced, as they develop across a larger number of hierarchical
levels than the one allowed by current imaging techniques for
empirically obtained connectomes.
All the previously reported phenomenology is still present in such
HMNs (see \cite{Villegas2014}); in particular, the phase diagram of
the synchronization order parameter exhibits a phase transition with
an intermediate region, where variability is much enhanced
\cite{Villegas2014}. Fig. 5 (b) illustrates the bi-stable nature of
the global parameter in the intermediate phase for a HMN, in which
metastability can be very well appreciated. This switching behavior
closely resembles ``up and down'' states, which are well known to
appear in certain phases of sleep or under anaesthesia (see
\cite{Jordi} and refs. therein).
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering\includegraphics[width=13cm]{fig5.pdf}
\caption{Time series exhibit metastability of the global
synchronization in the Human Connectome and in HMNs, in the
intermediate region. (a) Times series of the noisy Kuramoto
dynamics in the HC with Gaussian $g(w)$ in the intermediate region: for low
noise amplitudes ($\alpha=0$ and $0.1$), the system stays stable in
the same attractor. But, for sufficiently large values, such as
$\alpha=0.2$, the system is able to ``jump'' to another more
coherent attractor, where it settles. (b) In HMNs (size $N=1024$,
$9$ hierarchical levels), we observe the same phenomenology, but
much enhanced: when noise is very low ($\alpha\leq0.45$), the system
tends to remain stable in a certain attractor (with a few exceptions
after very large waiting times). Choosing a higher $\alpha$
($\alpha\geq0.5$), the system exhibits bi-stable behavior, switching
intermittently between two different attractors. For large enough
$\alpha$ ($\alpha\geq0.55$), the dynamics becomes too erratic to
appreciate metastability. Here, frequencies were
extracted from a Lorentz distribution. }
\label{fig:bistability}
\end{figure}
We hypothesize that hierarchical modular networks in general (and the
HC in particular) enable the possibility of a large repertoire of
attractors, with different degrees of coherence and stability. Such
metastability can be made evident and quantified by performing the
following type of numerical test. Starting from a fixed random
initial condition and considering a vanishing noise amplitude
(i.e. $\alpha=0$), the system might deterministically fall into a
number of different attractors, each of them with an associated value
of the global coherence depending on the initial conditions, the
network structure, and the choice of natural frequencies. Once this
attractor A is reached, the system is perturbed by switching on a
non-vanishing noise amplitude ($\alpha >0$) during a finite time
window. The system may remain stable in the same attractor A if the
noise is weak enough ($\alpha\ll1$). However, if larger values of the
noise amplitude are chosen, the system may jump into another close,
more stable, attractor. If the noise amplitude is very large
($\alpha\gg 1$), the system can in principle jump to any attractor,
but, very likely, will also escape from it, wandering around a large
fraction of the configuration space. After the perturbation
time-window is over, we let the system relax once again, and check if
the new resulting steady steady state B has changed with respect to
A. In that case, we can conclude that the systems was in a metastable
state A before the perturbation, and has reached another state B after
it -- potentially a metastable state itself.
We have carried out this type of test using an artificial HMN
(see Fig. 6) for a specific value of the control parameter, $k$,
belonging in the intermediate region. Natural frequencies are sampled
from the a Lorentzian distribution $g(\omega)$ (as above, our main
results are not sensible to this choice). Starting from a random
initial configuration of phases, we integrate Eq. \ref{eq:Kuramoto}
up to time $500$ with $\alpha=0$. After this, we introduce the
external perturbation by switching the noise coefficient $\alpha$ to a
certain non-zero value during a time window of duration $100$. Finally
we revert to $\alpha=0$ and continue the integration up to time
$t=1000$. The last steady state value is averaged over $10^{4}$
realizations of initial conditions, networks, and intrinsic
frequencies.
As illustrated in Fig. 6, for low as well as for high values of the
noise amplitude, the system has the same average order parameter close
to $\langle R \rangle_{t,\mathrm{runs}} \simeq 0.2$, as could have been
anticipated. However, a resonant peak emerges for intermediate values
of the noise, where the system switches to states with different
levels of coherence. This plot explicitly illustrates the existence of
metastability and noise-induced jumps between attractors. As noise is
enhanced, progressively more stable states are found, but above some
noise threshold, the system does not remain trapped in a single
attractor but jumps among many, resulting in a progressive decrease of
the overall coherence.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering\includegraphics[width=9cm]{fig6.pdf}
\caption{Perturbations can lead the system to more coherent attractors
in the intermediate non-coherent phase. (a) Order parameter $R$
averaged in time over $10^{4}$ realizations. A noise pulse of
amplitude $\alpha$ is applied during the green interval. This same
protocol is repeated for different values of $\alpha$. (b) Average
order parameter in the final steady state (after the noise pulse) as
a function of $\alpha$. For intermediate values of $\alpha$, a
resonant peak emerges for $1<\alpha<10$, illustrating that the
system can jump to a close, more coherent on-average
attractor. Simulations are run on HMN networks of size $N=1024$,
with $9$ hierarchical levels.}
\label{fig:ordering}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion}
It is well established that in the absence of frequency dispersion,
the Kuramoto dynamics leads to a perfectly coherent state, which is
progressively achieved in time by following a bottom-up ordering
dynamics in which increasingly larger communities become synchronized
\cite{Arenas_scales}.
If a hierarchical modular networks is loosely connected, this type of
``matryovska-doll'' synchronization process is constrained at all
levels by structural bottlenecks, bringing about anomalously-slow
synchronization dynamics as recently reported \cite{Villegas2014}.
In the presence of intrinsic frequency dispersion the above slow
ordering process is further frustrated \cite{Villegas2014}. For small
values of $k$ the system may remain trapped into metastable states in
which the loose connectivity between some moduli does not allow them
to overcome intrinsic-frequency differences and achieve coherence.
While persistence in metastable states may extend indefinitely,
experimental evidence suggests that the brain is able to switch
between a rich repertoire of attractors
\cite{Chialvo10,Deco2012,Haimovici}. We have shown that a simple
description of neural coherence dynamics based on the noisy Kuramoto
model may suffice to reproduce a very rich phenomenology, in
hierarchical modular networks and in particular in the human
connectome. The introduction of small fluctuations (exemplifying
external perturbations, stimuli, or intrinsic stochasticity) allow the
system to escape from metastable states and sample the configuration
space, proving a paradigmatic modeling tool for the attractor surfing
behavior suggested by experiments. Additional ingredients, such as
explicit phase frustration \cite{Shanahan2010} or time delays
\cite{Sporns2011,Shanahan2012}, should only add complexity to the
structural frustration effect reported here, providing a finer
description of brain activity.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
We acknowledge financial support from J. de Andaluc{\'\i}a
P09-FQM-4682 and the Spanish MINECO FIS2012-37655-C02-01 and
FIS2013-43201-P.
|
\section*{Arni S.R. Srinivasa Rao%
\footnote{
\dedicatory{1. To commemorate MPE2013 launched by the International Mathematics
Union, the author dedicates this work to Alfred J. Lotka.}\maketitle
}$^{,}$%
\footnote{
\dedicatory{Arni S.R. Srinivasa Rao is an Associate Professor at Georgia Regents
University, Augusta, USA. His email address is <EMAIL> }\maketitle
}$ $$^{,}$%
\footnote{
\dedicatory{Acknowledgements: Very useful comments by referees have helped to
re-write some parts of the article for better readability. Comments
from Professor JR Drake (University of Georgia, Athens), NV Joshi
(Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore) and from Dr. Cynthia Harper
(Oxford) helped very much in exposition of the paper. My sincere gratitude
to all. Author is partially supported by DFID and BBSRC, UK in the
form of CIDLID project BB/H009337}\maketitle
}}
(\textbf{Appeared in }\textbf{\emph{Notices of the American Mathematical
Society)}}
\begin{abstract}
A new approach is developed to understand stability of a population
and further understanding of population momentum. These ideas can
be generalized to populations in ecology and biology.
\end{abstract}
\section{Introduction}
One commonly prescribed approach for understanding the stability of
system of dependent variables is that of Lyapunov. In a possible alternative
approach - when variables in the system have momentum then that can
trigger additional dynamics within the system causing the system to
become unstable. In this study stability of population is defined
in terms of elements in the set of births and elements in the set
of deaths. Even though the cardinality of the former set has become
equal to the cardinality of the latter set, the momentum with which
this equality has occurred determines the status of the population
to remain at \emph{stable.} Such arguments also works for the other
population ecology problems.
\section{Population Stability Theory}
Suppose $\left|P_{N}(t_{0})\right|$ be the cardinality of the set
of people, $P_{N}(t_{0}),$ representing population at global level
at time $t_{0}$, where $P_{N}(t_{0})=\left\{ u_{1},u_{2},\cdots,u_{N}\right\} $,
the elements $u_{1},u_{2},\cdots,u_{N}$ represent individuals in
the population. Broadly speaking, the Lyapunov stability principles
(see \cite{VLL}) suggests, $ $$\left|P_{N}(t_{0})\right|$ is asymptotically
stable at population size $U$, if $\left|\left|P_{N}(T)\right|-U\right|<\epsilon$
($\epsilon>0)$ at all $T$ whenever $T>t_{0}$. In some sense, $\left|P_{N}(t_{0})\right|$
attains the value $U$ over the period of time. Lotka-Voltera's predator
and prey population models provide one of the classical and earliest
stability analyses of population biology (see for example, \cite{JDM})
and Lyapunov stability principles often assist in the analysis of
such models. These models have equations that describe the dynamics
of at least two interacting populations with parameters describing
interactions and natural growth. Outside human population models and
ecology models, stability also plays a very important role in understanding
epidemic spread \cite{AR}. In this paper, we are interested in factors
that cause dynamics in $P_{N}$ and relate these factors with status
of stability. A set of people $P_{M}(t_{0})=\left\{ u_{m_{1}},u_{m_{2}},\cdots,u_{m_{M}}\right\} $,
where $P_{M}(t_{0})\subset P_{N}(t_{0})$, are responsible for increasing
the population (reproduction) during the period $(t_{0},s)$ and contribute
to $P_{N}(s)$, the set of people at $s$ (if they survive until the
time $s$). The set $Q_{M_{1}}(s-t_{0})=\left\{ v_{M_{11}},v_{M_{12}},\cdots,v_{M_{1M_{1}}}\right\} $
represent removals (due to deaths) from $P_{N}(t_{0})$ during the
time interval $(t_{0},s)$. Let $\mbox{R}_{\phi}(s-t_{0})$ be the
period reproductive rate (net) applied on $P_{M}(t_{0})$ for the
period $(t_{0},s)$, then the number of new population added during
$(t_{0},s)$ is $\mbox{R}_{\phi}(s-t_{0})\left|P_{M}(t_{0})\right|.$
Net reproduction rate at time $t_{0}$ (or in a year $t_{0}$) is
the average number of female children that would be born to single
women if she passes through age-specific fertility rates and age-specific
mortality rates that are observed at $t_{0}$ (for the year $t_{0}$).
Since net reproductive rates are futuristic measures, we use period
(annual) reproductive rates for computing period (annual) increase
in population. Let $\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}(s-t_{0})=\left\{ w_{1},w_{2},\cdots,w_{N_{1}}\right\} $
be the set of newly added population during $(t_{0},s)$ to the set
$P_{N}(t_{0}).$ After allowing the dynamics during $(t_{0},s)$,
the population at $s$ will be
\begin{eqnarray}
P_{N}(t_{0})\cup C_{N_{1}}(s-t_{0})-Q_{M_{1}}(s-t_{0}) & = & \begin{cases}
\left.\begin{array}{c}
u:u\in P_{N}(t_{0})\cup C_{N_{1}}(s-t_{0})\mbox{ }\\
\mbox{and }u\notin Q_{M_{1}}(s-t_{0})
\end{array}\right\} \end{cases}\nonumber \\
& = & \left\{ u_{1},u_{2},\cdots,u_{N+N_{1}-M_{1}}\right\} \label{eq:1}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that, $Q_{M_{1}}(s-t_{0})\subset P_{N}(t_{0})\cup C_{N_{1}}(s-t_{0})$,
because the set of elements $\left\{ v_{M_{1}},v_{M_{12}},\right.$
$\left.\cdots,v_{M_{1M_{1}}}\right\} $ eliminated during the time
period $(t_{0},s)$ are part of the set of elements
$\left\{ u_{1},u_{2},\cdots,u_{N},w_{1}\right.$ $\left.,w_{2},\cdots,w_{N_{1}}\right\} $
and the resulting elements surviving by the time $s$ are represented
in equation (\ref{eq:1}). The element $u_{1}$ in the set (\ref{eq:1})
may not be the same individual in the set $P_{N}(t_{0})$. Since we
wanted to retain the notation that represents people living at each
time point, so for ordering purpose, we have used the symbol $u_{1}$
in the set (\ref{eq:1}).
Using Cantor\textendash{}Bernstein\textendash{}Schroeder theorem \cite{PS},
$ $$\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}(s-t_{0})\right|=$ $\left|Q_{M_{1}}(s-t_{0})\right|$
if $ $$\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}(s-t_{0})\right|$ $\leq$ $\left|Q_{M_{1}}(s-t_{0})\right|$
and $ $$\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}(s-t_{0})\right|$ $\geq\;$ $ $ $\left|Q_{M_{1}}(s-t_{0})\right|.$
If $ $$\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}(s-t_{0})\right|=$ $\left|Q_{M_{1}}(s-t_{0})\right|$
then the natural growth of the population (in a closed situation)
is zero and if this situation continues further over the time then
the population could be termed as stationary. Assuming these two quantities
are not same at $t_{0}$, the process of two quantities $\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|$
and $\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$ becoming equal could eventually happen
due to several sub-processes.
Case I: $\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|>$ $\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$
at time $t_{0}.$ We are interested in studying the conditions for
the process $\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|\rightarrow$ $\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$
for some $s>t_{0}$. Two factors play a major role in determining
the speed of this process, they are, compositions of the family of
sets $\left[\left\{ P_{M}(s)\right\} :\forall s>t_{0}\right]$ and
$\left[\left\{ \mbox{R}_{\phi}(s)\right\} :\forall s>t_{0}\right]$.
Suppose $\left|P_{M}(s_{1})\right|>\left|P_{M}(s_{2})\right|>\cdots>\left|P_{M}(s_{T})\right|$
but the family of $\left\{ \left|\mbox{R}_{\phi}(s)\right|\right\} $
does not follow any decreasing pattern for some $t_{0}<s_{1}<s_{2}<...<s_{T}<s$,
then $\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|\nrightarrow\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$
by the time $s_{T}$. If $\mbox{R}_{\phi}(s_{1})>\mbox{R}_{\phi}(s_{2})>...>\mbox{R}_{\phi}(s_{T})$
for $t_{0}<s_{1}<s_{2}<...<s_{T}<s$ such that $\left|\mbox{R}_{\phi}(s_{T}-s_{T-1})\left|P_{M}(s_{T-1})\right|-Q_{M_{1}}(s_{T}-s_{T-1})\right|\rightarrow0$
for some sufficiently large $T>t_{0}$ and sufficiently small $\left|\mbox{R}_{\phi}(s_{T}-s_{T-1})\right|$,
then $\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|\rightarrow$ $\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$
by the time $s_{T}.$ Note that in an ideal demographic transition
situation, both these quantities should decline over the period and
the rate of decline of $ $$\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$ is slower than
the rate of decline in $\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|$ because $\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|>$
$\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$ at time $t_{0}.$ Demographic transition
theory, in simple terms, is all about, determinants, consequences
and speed of declining of high rates of fertility and mortality to
low levels of fertility and mortality rates. For introduction of this
concept see \cite{KD} and for an update of recent works, see \cite{Caldwell}.
Above trend of $\left|P_{M}(s_{1})\right|>\left|P_{M}(s_{2})\right|>\cdots>\left|P_{M}(s_{T})\right|$
(i.e. decline in people of reproductive ages over the time after $t_{0}$)
happens when births continuously decrease for several years. Following
the trend $\mbox{R}_{\phi}(s_{1})>\mbox{R}_{\phi}(s_{2})>...>\mbox{R}_{\phi}(s_{T})$
will lead to decline in new born babies and this will indirectly result
in decline in rate of growth of people who have reproductive potential.
However the decline in $\left|\mbox{R}_{\phi}(s)\right|$ for $s>t_{0}$
is well explained by social and biological factors, which need not
follow any pre-determined mathematical model. However the trend in
$\left|\mbox{R}_{\phi}(t)\right|$ for $t<t_{0}$ can be explained
using models by fitting parameters obtained from data. During the
entire process the value of $\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$ after time $t_{0}$
is assumed to be dynamic and decreases further. If a population continues
to remain at this stage of replacement we call it a \emph{stable population}.
The cycle of births, population aging and deaths is a \emph{continuous
process} with \emph{discretely quantifiable factors}. Due to improvement
in medical sciences there could be some delay in deaths, but eventually
the aged population has to be moved out of $\left\{ P_{N}\right\} $,
and consequently, population stability status can be broken with a
continuous decline in $\left\{ \left|C_{N_{1}}\right|\right\} $.
Case II: $\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|=$ $\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$
at time $t_{0}.$ It is important to ascertain whether this situation
was immediately proceeded by case I or case II before determining
the stability process. Suppose case II is immediately preceded by
case I, then the rapidity and magnitude at which the difference between
$\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|$ and $\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$ was
shrunk prior to $t_{0}$ need to be quantified. Let us understand
the contributing factors for the set $Q_{M}$. At each $t$, there
is a possibility that the elements from the sets $C_{N_{1}}$, $P_{N}-C_{N_{1}}-P_{M}$,
$P_{M}$ are contributing to the set $Q_{M}.$ Due to high infant
mortality rates, the contribution of $C_{N_{1}}$ into $Q_{M}$ is
considered to be high, deaths of adults of reproductive ages, $P_{M}$,
and all other individuals (including the aged), $P_{N}-C_{N_{1}}-P_{M}$,
will be contributing to the set $Q_{M}$. Case II could occur when
$\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|$ and $\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$ are
at higher values or at lower values. Equality at higher values possibly
indicates, the number of deaths due to three factors mentioned here
are high (including high old age deaths) and these are replaced by
equal high number of births, i.e. $\left|R_{\phi}\right|$ and $\left|P_{M}\right|$
are usually high to reproduce a high birth numbers. If equality at
lower values of $\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|$ and $\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$
occurs after phase of case I then the chance of $P_{N}$ remaining
in stable position is higher. Suppose elements of $P_{N}$ are arbitrarily
divided into $k-$independent and non-empty subsets, $A(1)$, $A(2)$,
$\cdots$,$A(k)$ such that $ $$\left|P_{N}\right|$$=$$\int_{1}^{k}\left|A(s)\right|ds$.
Let $F$ be the family of all the sets $A(s)$ such that $\cup\left(A(s\right))=P_{N}$.\textbf{
}Members of $F$ are disjoint. Suppose $\left(\begin{array}{c}
F\\
k^{*}
\end{array}\right)$ be an arbitrary size of $k^{*}$ of subset of $F$ are satisfying
the case II and $F-\left(\begin{array}{c}
F\\
k^{*}
\end{array}\right)$ are not satisfying at time $t_{0}$ and $t>t_{0}$, then we are not
sure of total population also attains stability by Theorem \ref{local vs global stability theorem}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{1}
\caption{(a) The cycle of all the cases could follow one after another and
the quantity at which equality of $C_{N_{1}}$ and $Q_{M_{1}}$ occurs
determines the duration of the case II. (b) Some of the sub-populations
which are not satisfied the equality of $C_{N_{1}}$ and $Q_{M_{1}}$
is compensated by the other sub-populations which are satisfying either
$C_{N_{1}}>$ $Q_{M_{1}}$ or $C_{N_{1}}$ $<Q_{M_{1}}$. }
\end{figure}
\begin{thm}
\label{local vs global stability theorem}Suppose each of the member
of $\left(\begin{array}{c}
F\\
k^{*}
\end{array}\right)$ is satisfying the condition $\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|=$ $\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$
and $F-\left(\begin{array}{c}
F\\
k^{*}
\end{array}\right)$ are not satisfying the condition $\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|=$
$\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$ at time $t\geq t_{0}$, then this does not
always leads $P_{N}$ to stability. \end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Note that $F$ has collection of $k-$sets. Suppose a collection $C$
divides $C_{N_{1}}$ into $k-$components of subpopulations $\left\{ C_{N_{1}}(1),C_{N_{1}}(2),\right.$
$\left.\cdots,C_{N_{1}}(k)\right\} $$ $ such that $ $$\left|C_{N_{1}}\right|$$=$$\int_{1}^{k}\left|C_{N_{1}}(s)\right|ds$,
where $C_{N_{1}}(s)$ is the $s^{th}-$ subset in $C$ and a collection
$Q$ divides $Q_{M_{1}}$ into $k-$ components of subpopulations
$\left\{ Q_{M_{1}}(1),Q_{M_{1}}(2),\cdots,Q_{M_{1}}(k)\right\} $
such that
$ $$\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$ $\;=\;$$\int_{1}^{k}\left|C_{M_{1}}(s)\right|ds$,
where $Q_{M_{1}}(s)$ is the $s^{th}-$subset in $Q$.
By hypothesis, $\left|C_{N_{1}}(s^{*})\right|=\left|Q_{M_{1}}(s^{*})\right|$
for $s^{*}\in$ $\left\{ 1^{*},2^{*},\cdots,k^{*}\right\} $ at each
time $t\geq t_{0}$ until, say, $t_{T}$. The order between $k^{*}$
and $k-k^{*}$ could be one of the following: $2k^{*}<k$, $2k^{*}>k$,
$k^{*}=\frac{k}{2}$. Suppose $C_{N_{1}}\subset C$ and $Q_{M_{1}}\subset Q$
with
\begin{eqnarray*}
C_{N_{1}}^{*} & = & \left\{ C_{N_{1}}^{*}(1),C_{N_{1}}^{*}(2),\cdots,C_{N_{1}}^{*}(k)\right\} \\
Q_{M_{1}} & = & \left\{ Q_{M_{1}}^{*}(1),Q_{M_{1}}^{*}(2),\cdots,Q_{M_{1}}^{*}(k)\right\}
\end{eqnarray*}
for same above arbitrary combination of $k^{*}-$components and rest
of the $k-k^{*}$ components are satisfying $\left|C_{N_{1}}^{**}(s^{**})\right|-\left|Q_{M_{1}}^{**}(s^{**})\right|\neq0$
for all $s^{**}=1,2,\cdots,k-k^{*}$. We obtain unstable integral
over all $k-k^{*}$ components to ascertain the magnitude of unstability.
$ $
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_{1}^{k-k^{*}}\left[\left|C_{N_{1}}^{**}(s^{**})\right|-\left|Q_{M_{1}}^{**}(s^{**})\right|\right]ds^{**}\label{destable-integral}\\
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The stable integral for this situation is
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_{1}^{k^{*}}\left[\left|C_{N_{1}}^{*}(s^{*})\right|-\left|Q_{M_{1}}^{*}(s^{*})\right|\right]ds^{*}\label{stable-integral}\\
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
To check the unstable and stable points over the time period $(t_{0},t_{T})$,
one can compute following integrals:
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_{t_{0}}^{t_{T}}\int_{1}^{k-k^{*}}\left[\left|C_{N_{1}}^{**}(s^{**})\right|-\left|Q_{M_{1}}^{**}(s^{**})\right|\right]ds^{**}du\label{destable-integral over time period}\\
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_{t_{0}}^{t_{T}}\int_{1}^{k^{*}}\left[\left|C_{N_{1}}^{*}(s^{*})\right|-\left|Q_{M_{1}}^{*}(s^{*})\right|\right]ds^{*}du\label{stable-integral-during time period}\\
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
For each of the $k-k^{*}$ component, the values of $\left|C_{N_{1}}^{**}(s^{**})\right|-\left|Q_{M_{1}}^{**}(s^{**})\right|$
can be either positive or negative. If at time $t_{0}$, for all $s^{**}=1,2,\cdots,k-k^{*}$,
the values of $\left|C_{N_{1}}^{**}(s^{**})\right|-\left|Q_{M_{1}}^{**}(s^{**})\right|$
are positive (or negative) then the eq. (\ref{destable-integral})
will take a positive (or negative) quantity and the population at
time $t_{0}$ is not stable. If such a situation continues for all
$t_{T}\geq t_{0}$, then the integral in eq. (\ref{destable-integral over time period})
would never become zero and the population remains unstable in the
entire period $(t_{0},t_{T})$. However, for some of the $s^{**}$,
if the quantity $\left|C_{N_{1}}^{**}(s^{**})\right|-\left|Q_{M_{1}}^{**}(s^{**})\right|$
is positive and for other $s^{**}$, if the quantity $\left|C_{N_{1}}^{**}(s^{**})\right|-\left|Q_{M_{1}}^{**}(s^{**})\right|$
is negative such that eq. (\ref{destable-integral}) is zero at each
of the time points for the period $(t_{0},t_{T})$ then the population
remains stable during this period (because by hypothesis the eq. (\ref{stable-integral-during time period})
is zero).
\end{proof}
Case III. $\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|<$ $\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$
at time $t_{0}.$ Global occurrence of this case at lower values of
$\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|$ and $\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$ indicates
that the $P_{N}$ is declining and also is in unstable mode. $R_{\phi}$
has been very low consistently for the period $t<t_{0}$ and the supply
to the set $P_{M}$ has diminished over a period in the past. All
the subsets of $C_{N_{1}}$ and $Q_{M_{1}}$ might not be stable in
case III, but by similar arguments of the Theorem \ref{local vs global stability theorem},
global population behavior nullifies some of the local population
and case III is still satisfied globally.
All three cases would be repeated one following another. Most countries
are currently facing case I with varying distance between $\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}\right|$
and $\left|Q_{M_{1}}\right|$ .
\section{Replacement Metric}
We introduce a metric, $d_{M}$, which we call \emph{a replacement
metric,} with a space, $M_{r}$ as follows:
\begin{defn}
\label{(Replacement-Metric)}(Replacement Metric).
Let $A_{1}=\min\left\{ \left|\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}(s)\right|-\left|Q_{M_{1}}(s)\right|\right|:s>t_{0}\right\} $
and
$A_{2}=\max\left\{ \left|\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}(s)\right|-\left|Q_{M_{1}}(s)\right|\right|:s>t_{0}\right\} $.
Let $M_{r}=\left[A_{1},A_{2}\right]\subset\mathbb{R}^{+}$ and $M=\left\{ \left|\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}(s)\right|-\left|Q_{M_{1}}(s)\right|\right|\right.$
$\left.:s>t_{0}\right\} $ with the metric $d_{M}(x,y)=\frac{\left|x-y\right|}{2}$
. We can verify that $\left(M,d_{M}\right)$ is a metric space with
$d_{M}:\left(M\times M\right)\rightarrow M_{r}$ and non-empty set
$M.$
\end{defn}
The metric $M$, in the definition 1 is bounded, because $d_{M}\left(x,y\right)<k$
for $k>0.$
\begin{defn}
Suppose $\left|\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}(s_{1})\right|-\left|Q_{M_{1}}(s_{1})\right|\right|=f_{1}$,
$\left|\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}(s_{2})\right|\right.$ $-$$\left.\left|Q_{M_{2}}(s_{2})\right|\right|=f_{2}$
and so on for $s_{1}<s_{2}<...$ . Then we say population is stable
if $f_{s_{T}}\rightarrow0$ for sufficiently large $T$ and $ $$\frac{d}{ds_{T}}\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}(s_{T})\right|=\frac{d}{ds_{T}}\left|\mbox{C}_{N_{1}}(s_{T})\right|=0$.
\end{defn}
\section{Conclusions}
We can prove that the value at which the population remains stable
is variable, i.e. the value at which the population becomes unstable
by deviating from case II could be different from the value (at a
future point in time) population becomes stable when it converges
to case II. \emph{Replacement metrics }(see definition \ref{(Replacement-Metric)})
are helpful in seeing this argument and such analysis is not possible
by Lotka-Voltera or Lyupunov methods. Due to population momentum,
there will be an increase in the population even though the reproduction
rate of the population becomes below the replacement level. Population
stability will always attain a local stable points before diverging
and again converging at a local stable point. The duration of a local
stable point depends on the density of the population and resources
available for the population.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{introduction}
In this paper, we consider finite simple graphs,
which have neither loops nor multiple edges.
For terminology and notation not defined in this paper, we refer the readers to \cite{Diestel}.
Let $G$ be a graph.
We denote by $V(G)$, $E(G)$ and $\delta(G)$
the vertex set, the edge set and the minimum degree of $G$, respectively.
We write $|G|$ for the order of $G$, that is, $|G|=|V(G)|$.
We denote by $d_{G}(v)$ the degree of a vertex $v$ in $G$.
The invariant $\sigma_2(G)$ is defined to be the minimum degree sum
of two non-adjacent vertices of $G$, i.e.,
$\sigma_2(G)=\min \big\{ d_G(u) + d_G(v): u, v \in V(G), u \neq v, uv \notin E(G) \big\}$
if $G$ is non-complete;
otherwise,
let $\sigma_2(G) = + \infty$.
We denote by $g(G)$ the \textit{girth} of $G$,
i.e., the length of a shortest cycle of $G$.
In this paper, ``disjoint'' always means ``vertex-disjoint''.
A pair $(H_{1}, H_{2})$ is called a \textit{partition of} $G$
if $H_{1}$ and $H_{2}$ are two disjoint induced subgraphs of $G$
such that $V(G) = V(H_{1}) \cup V(H_{2})$.
\medskip
Stiebitz \cite{Stiebitz} considered the decomposition of graphs under degree constraints
and proved the following result.
\begin{Thm}[Stiebitz \cite{Stiebitz}]
\label{Stiebitz}
Let $s_{1}, s_{2} \ge 1$ be integers,
and $G$ be a graph.
If $\delta(G) \ge s_{1} + s_{2} + 1$,
then there exists a partition $(H_{1}, H_{2})$ of $G$ such that
$\delta(H_{i}) \ge s_{i}$ for $i \in \{ 1, 2 \}$.
\end{Thm}
Kaneko \cite{Kaneko} showed that this result holds for triangle-free graphs with minimum degree at least $s_{1} + s_{2}$.
(Diwan further improved Theorem~\ref{Stiebitz} for graphs with girth at least $5$, see \cite{Diwan}.
Bazgan, Tuza and Vanderpooten \cite{Bazgan et al.} gave polynomial-time algorithms that find such partitions.)
\begin{Thm}[Kaneko \cite{Kaneko}]
\label{Kaneko}
Let $s_{1}, s_{2} \ge 1$ be integers,
and $G$ be a graph.
If $\delta(G) \ge s_{1} + s_{2}$ and $g(G) \ge 4$,
then there exists a partition $(H_{1}, H_{2})$ of $G$ such that
$\delta(H_{i}) \ge s_{i}$ for $i \in \{ 1, 2 \}$.
\end{Thm}
The purpose of this paper is to consider $\sigma_{2}$-versions of Theorems~\ref{Stiebitz} and \ref{Kaneko}.
More precisely,
we consider the following problems.
\begin{problem}
\label{partition problem sigma2}
Let $s_{1}, s_{2} \ge 2$ be integers,
and $G$ be a non-complete graph.
If $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 2(s_{1} + s_{2} + 1) - 1$,
then
there exists a partition $(H_{1}, H_{2})$ of $G$ such that
$\sigma_{2}(H_{i}) \ge 2s_{i} - 1$
and $|H_{i}| \ge s_{i} + 1$ for $i \in \{ 1, 2 \}$.
\end{problem}
\begin{problem}
\label{partition problem sigma2 tri-free}
Let $s_{1}, s_{2} \ge 2$ be integers,
and $G$ be a graph of order at least $3$.
If $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 2(s_{1} + s_{2}) - 1$ and $g(G) \ge 4$,
then there exists a partition $(H_{1}, H_{2})$ of $G$ such that
$\sigma_{2}(H_{i}) \ge 2s_{i} - 1$
and
$|H_{i}| \ge 2s_{i}$ for $i \in \{ 1, 2 \}$.
\end{problem}
In Problem~\ref{partition problem sigma2} (resp., Problem~\ref{partition problem sigma2 tri-free}),
if we drop the condition ``$|H_{i}| \ge s_{i} + 1$ (resp., $|H_{i}| \ge 2s_{i}$)'' in the conclusion,
then it is an easy problem.
Because,
for each edge $xy$ in a graph $G$ satisfying the assumption of Problem~\ref{partition problem sigma2}
(resp., the assumption of Problem~\ref{partition problem sigma2 tri-free}),
$H_{1} = G[\{x, y\}]$ and $H_{2} = G - \{x, y\}$ satisfy
$\sigma_{2}(H_{1}) = \infty > 2s_{1} - 1$ and $\sigma_{2}(H_{2}) \ge \sigma_{2}(G) - 2|\{x, y\}| \ge 2s_{2} - 1$.
Here, for a vertex subset $X$ of a graph $G$,
$G[X]$ denotes the subgraph of $G$ induced by $X$,
and let $G - X = G[V(G) \setminus X]$.
(Similarly, for the case where $s_{i} = 1$ for some $i$, we can easily solve it.)
In addition,
if $G_{2}$ is a complete bipartite graph $K_{s_{1} + s_{2} - 1, s_{1}+s_{2}}$,
then $\sigma_{2}(G_{2}) = 2(s_{1} + s_{2}) - 2$
and $G_{2}$ does not contain partitions as in Problem~\ref{partition problem sigma2 tri-free}.
Thus, $G_{2}$
shows that
the condition ``$\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 2(s_{1} + s_{2}) - 1$''
in Problem~\ref{partition problem sigma2 tri-free}
is best possible if it's true.
Moreover,
if $G_{1}$ is a balanced complete multipartite graph with $r+1 \ ( \ \ge 4)$ partite sets of size $s \ ( \ \ge 2)$,
then $\sigma_{2}(G_{1}) = 2rs = 2 \big( (rs- r + 1) + (r-1) + 1 \big) - 2$, and
we can check that $G_{1}$ contains no partitions as in Problem~\ref{partition problem sigma2} for $(s_{1}, s_{2}) = (rs- r + 1, r -1)$.
Thus, the condition ``$\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 2(s_{1} + s_{2}+1) - 1$'' in Problem~\ref{partition problem sigma2} is also best possible in a sense
if it's true.
\medskip
Before giving the main result, we introduce the outline of the proof of Theorems~\ref{Stiebitz} and \ref{Kaneko}.
The proof consists of the following two steps:
\begin{enumerate}[{\textup{{\bf Step \arabic{enumi}:}}}]
\setlength{\parskip}{1.5pt}
\setlength{\itemsep}{1.5pt}
\item
To show the existence of two disjoint subgraphs of high minimum degree,
i.e.,
we show the existence of two disjoint subgraphs $H_{1}$ and $H_{2}$ such that $\delta(H_{i}) \ge s_{i}$ for $i \in \{1, 2\}$.
\item
To show the existence of two disjoint subgraphs of high minimum degree that partition $V(G)$
by using Step~1.
\end{enumerate}
In particular,
in the proof of Theorems~\ref{Stiebitz} and \ref{Kaneko},
Step~2 is easily solved.
In fact,
if $G$ is a graph with $\delta(G) \ge s_{1} + s_{2} - 1$,
and
if $G$ contains
a pair $(H_{1}, H_{2})$ of disjoint subgraphs with $\delta(H_{i}) \ge s_{i}$ for $i \in \{1, 2\}$,
then we can easily transform the pair into the partition of $G$ keeping its minimum degree condition
(see \cite[Proposition 4]{Stiebitz}).
Considering the situation for the proof of Theorems~\ref{Stiebitz} and \ref{Kaneko},
one may approach Problems~\ref{partition problem sigma2} and~\ref{partition problem sigma2 tri-free}
by following the same steps as above.
However,
for the case of $\sigma_{2}$-versions,
Step~2 as well as Step~1 are not an easy problem
because we allow vertices with low degree.
In fact, in the proof of Step~2 for Theorem~\ref{Stiebitz} (\cite[Proposition~4]{Stiebitz}),
the assumption that every vertex has high degree plays a crucial role.
At the moment,
we don't know
whether we can extend disjoint subgraphs of high minimum ``degree sum'' to a partition or not.
However,
we can solve Step~1 for Problems~\ref{partition problem sigma2} and \ref{partition problem sigma2 tri-free}.
The following are our main results.
\begin{thm}
\label{disjoint subgraphs sigma2}
Let $s_{1}, s_{2} \ge 2$ be integers,
and $G$ be a non-complete graph.
If $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 2(s_{1} + s_{2} + 1) - 1$,
then
there exist two disjoint induced subgraphs $H_{1}$ and $H_{2}$ of $G$
such that
$\sigma_{2}(H_{i}) \ge 2s_{i} - 1$
and
$|H_{i}| \ge s_{i} + 1$ for $i \in \{ 1, 2 \}$.
\end{thm}
\begin{thm}
\label{disjoint subgraphs sigma2 tri-free}
Let $s_{1}, s_{2} \ge 2$ be integers,
and $G$ be a graph of order at least $3$.
If $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 2(s_{1} + s_{2}) - 1$ and $g(G) \ge 4$,
then
there exist two disjoint induced subgraphs $H_{1}$ and $H_{2}$ of $G$
such that
$\sigma_{2}(H_{i}) \ge 2s_{i} - 1$
and
$|H_{i}| \ge 2s_{i}$ for $i \in \{ 1, 2 \}$.
\end{thm}
Note that the above graphs $G_{1}$ and $G_{2}$ also show that
$\sigma_{2}$ conditions in Theorems~\ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2} and \ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2 tri-free}
are best possible, respectively.
In order to show Theorems~\ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2} and \ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2 tri-free},
we actually prove slightly stronger results as follows.
Here, for a graph $G$ and an integer $s$,
we define $V_{\le s}(G) = \{v \in V(G) : d_{G}(v) \le s\}$.
\begin{thm}
\label{feasible pair}
Let $s_{1}, s_{2} \ge 2$ be integers,
and $G$ be a non-complete graph.
If $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 2(s_{1} + s_{2} + 1) - 1$,
then there exist two disjoint induced subgraphs $H_{1}$ and $H_{2}$ of $G$
such that for each $i$ with $i \in \{1, 2\}$, the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}[{\upshape(i)}]
\setlength{\parskip}{1pt}
\setlength{\itemsep}{1pt}
\item $d_{H_{i}}(u) \ge s_{i}$ for $u \in V(H_{i}) \setminus V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2}}(G)$.
\item $d_{H_{i}}(u) + d_{H_{i}}(v) \ge 2s_{i} - 1$
for $u \in V(H_{i}) \setminus V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2}}(G)$
and $v \in V(H_{i}) \cap V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2}}(G)$
with $uv \notin E(H_{i})$.
\item $|H_{i}| \ge s_{i} + 1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{thm}
\label{feasible pair tri.-free}
Let $s_{1}, s_{2} \ge 2$ be integers,
and $G$ be a graph of order at least $3$.
If $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 2(s_{1} + s_{2}) - 1$ and $g(G) \ge 4$,
then there exist two disjoint induced subgraphs $H_{1}$ and $H_{2}$ of $G$
such that for each $i$ with $i \in \{1, 2\}$, the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}[{\upshape(i)}]
\setlength{\parskip}{1pt}
\setlength{\itemsep}{1pt}
\item $d_{H_{i}}(u) \ge s_{i}$ for $u \in V(H_{i}) \setminus V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2}-1}(G)$.
\item $d_{H_{i}}(u) + d_{H_{i}}(v) \ge 2s_{i} - 1$
for $u \in V(H_{i}) \setminus V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2}-1}(G)$
and $v \in V(H_{i}) \cap V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2}-1}(G)$
with $uv \notin E(H_{i})$.
\item $|H_{i}| \ge 2s_{i}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
Note that
if $G$ is a graph with $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 2(s_{1} + s_{2} + 1) - 1$,
then $G[V_{\le s_{1}+s_{2}}(G)]$ is a complete graph (see Lemma~\ref{sigma}(\ref{complete}) in Subsection~\ref{Terminology and notation}).
Therefore,
for any two distinct non-adjacent vertices in such a graph $G$,
at least one of the two vertices belongs to $V(G) \setminus V_{\le s_{1}+s_{2}}(G)$,
i.e,
(i) and (ii) of Theorem~\ref{feasible pair} imply that $\sigma_{2}(H_{i}) \ge 2s_{i} - 1$.
Thus
Theorem~\ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2}
immediately follows from Theorem~\ref{feasible pair}.
Moreover,
since $V_{\le s_{1}+s_{2}}(G) = \emptyset$ if and only if
$\delta(G) \ge s_{1} + s_{2} + 1$
for a graph $G$,
Theorem~\ref{feasible pair} also implies Step~1 for Theorem~\ref{Stiebitz}.
Similarly,
Theorem~\ref{feasible pair tri.-free} implies Theorem~\ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2 tri-free}
and Step~1 for Theorem~\ref{Kaneko}.
In the next section,
we give some concepts and lemmas to prove Theorems~\ref{feasible pair} and \ref{feasible pair tri.-free}.
We will prove Theorems~\ref{feasible pair} and \ref{feasible pair tri.-free}
in Sections~\ref{proof} and \ref{proof of tri.-free}, respectively.
This kind of results are sometimes useful tools to get degree conditions for
\textit{packing} of graphs,
i.e.,
the existence of $k$ disjoint subgraphs which belong to some fixed class of graphs.
In the last section (Section~\ref{applications}),
we will explain it by taking disjoint cycles for example,
and give some corollaries about it.
\medskip
We mention similar results.
In 1966, Lov\'{a}sz \cite{Lovasz}
proved a dual type of Theorem~\ref{Stiebitz} with respect to maximum degree;
Every graph with maximum degree at most $s_{1} + s_{2} + 1$
has a partition $(H_{1}, H_{2})$ such that
the maximum degree of each $H_{i}$ is at most $s_{i}$.
On the other hand,
Thomassen \cite{Thomassen2, Thomassen3} conjectured the connectivity version of Theorem~\ref{Stiebitz};
Every $(s_{1}+s_{2}+1)$-connected graph has
a partition $(H_{1}, H_{2})$ such that
each $H_{i}$ is $s_{i}$-connected,
and
he showed that this conjecture is true for $s_{2} \le 2$ (see \cite{Thomassen1}).
However, this conjecture is still wide open for other cases,
and hence there is a huge gap between ``degree'' and ``connectivity''.
Other similar concepts can be found in \cite{Dunbar-Frick, Dunbar-Frick-Bullock, Kuhn-Osthus, Yang-Vumar}.
Therefore, this type problem has been extensively studied.
\section{Preparations for the proofs of Theorems~\ref{feasible pair} and \ref{feasible pair tri.-free}}
\label{preparation}
\subsection{Terminology and notation}
\label{Terminology and notation}
We first prepare terminology and notation
which we use in the rest of this paper,
and we also give some lemmas in this subsection (Lemmas~\ref{sigma} and \ref{w(G_{1}, G_{2})}).
Let $G$ be a graph.
For disjoint subsets $X_{1}$ and $X_{2}$ of $V(G)$,
we define $e_{G}(X_{1}, X_{2})$ to be the number of edges of $G$
between $X_{1}$ and $X_{2}$.
We often identify a subgraph $H$ of $G$ with its vertex set $V(H)$.
For example,
we write $G-H$ instead of $G-V(H)$,
and we write $e_{G}(H_{1}, H_{2})$ instead of $e_{G}(V(H_{1}), V(H_{2}))$
for disjoint subgraphs $H_{1}$ and $H_{2}$ of $G$.
A \textit{clique} of $G$ is a (possibly empty) vertex subset of $G$ that induces a complete subgraph of $G$,
and we denote by $\omega(G)$ the cardinality of the largest clique of $G$.
By the definition of $\sigma_{2}(G)$, we can obtain the following.
Since the proof is easy, we omit it.
\begin{lem}
\label{sigma}
Let $s \ge 1$ be an integer,
and $G$ be a graph
with $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 2s - 1$.
Then,
\begin{enumerate}[{\upshape(i)}]
\item
\label{complete}
$V_{\le s - 1}(G)$ is a clique
$($and hence,
if $g(G) \ge 4$, then $|V_{\le s - 1}(G)| \le 2)$.
\item
\label{order of G}
If $G$ is non-complete, then $|G| \ge s + 2$.
\item
\label{order of G 2}
If $G$ is non-complete and $g(G) \ge 4$, then $|G| \ge 2s$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
For a partition $(G_{1}, G_{2})$ of a graph $G$ and integers $s_{1}, s_{2} \ge 1$,
we define
\begin{align*}
f(G_{1}, G_{2}, s_{1}, s_{2}) = |E(G_{1})| + |E(G_{2})| + s_{2}|G_{1}| + s_{1}|G_{2}|.
\end{align*}
Then, by the definition of the function $f$,
we can obtain the following.
(In order to find disjoint subgraphs as in Theorems~\ref{feasible pair} and \ref{feasible pair tri.-free},
we will consider some partition which was chosen so that the value $f$ is maximized,
see Sections~\ref{proof} and \ref{proof of tri.-free} for more details.)
\begin{lem}
\label{w(G_{1}, G_{2})}
Let $s_{1}, s_{2}, i$ be integers with $s_{1}, s_{2} \ge 1$ and $i \in \{1, 2\}$,
and
let $(G_{1}, G_{2})$ be a partition of a graph $G$.
If $u_{i}$ is a vertex in $G_{i}$ such that $e_{G}(u_{i}, G_{3-i}) - d_{G_{i}}(u_{i}) \ge (s_{3-i} - s_{i}) + k$ for some integer $k$,
then $f(G_{1}', G_{2}', s_{1}, s_{2}) \ge f(G_{1}, G_{2}, s_{1}, s_{2}) + k$,
where $G_{i}' = G_{i} - u_{i}$ and $G_{3-i}' = G[V(G_{3-i}) \cup \{u_{i}\}]$.
\end{lem}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
By the symmetry,
it is enough to consider the proof for only the case $i = 1$.
By the definitions of $f, G_{1}'$ and $G_{2}'$,
we get
\begin{align*}
f(G_{1}', G_{2}', s_{1}, s_{2})
&
= |E(G_{1}')| + |E(G_{2}')| + s_{2}|G_{1}'| + s_{1}|G_{2}'| \\
&
=\big( |E(G_{1})| - d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) \big) + \big( |E(G_{2})| + e_{G}(u_{1}, G_{2}) \big)
+ s_{2} ( |G_{1}| - 1) + s_{1} (|G_{2}| + 1) \\
&
= f(G_{1}, G_{2}, s_{1}, s_{2}) + \big( e_{G}(u_{1}, G_{2}) - d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) \big) - (s_{2} - s_{1}).
\end{align*}
Hence, if $e_{G}(u_{1}, G_{2}) - d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) \ge (s_{2} - s_{1}) + k$,
then the assertion clearly holds.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
\subsection{Feasible graphs and degenerate graphs}
\label{Feasible graphs and degenerate graphs}
In this subsection,
we generalize the concepts of feasible graphs and degenerate graphs
which were used in Stiebitz' argument \cite{Stiebitz},
and we will give some remarks and lemmas about it.
Now, let $G$ be a graph, and let $X$ be a clique of $G$.
For an integer $s \ge 1$,
an induced subgraph $H$ of $G$ is said to be \textit{$(s; X)$-feasible} in $G$,
if $H$ satisfies the following conditions (F\ref{f1})--(F\ref{f3}):
\begin{enumerate}
\renewcommand{\labelenumi}{\upshape{(F\arabic{enumi}})}
\item
\label{f1}
$d_{H}(u) > s$ for $u \in V(H) \setminus X$.
\item
\label{f2}
$d_{H}(u) + d_{H}(v) > 2s$ for $u \in V(H) \setminus X$ and $v \in V(H) \cap X$ with $uv \notin E(H)$.
\item
\label{f3}
$H$ is non-complete.
(Note that the conditions (F\ref{f1}) and (F\ref{f2}) imply $\sigma_{2}(H) > 2s$
because $X$ is a clique.)
\end{enumerate}
For an integer $s \ge 1$,
an induced subgraph $G'$ of $G$ is said to be \textit{$(s; X)$-degenerate} in $G$
if $G'$ satisfies the following conditions (D\ref{d1}) and (D\ref{d2}):
\begin{enumerate}
\renewcommand{\labelenumi}{\upshape{(D\arabic{enumi}})}
\item
\label{d1}
Any non-complete induced subgraph $H$ of $G'$ is not $(s; X)$-feasible in $G$,
i.e.,
one of the following holds:
\begin{itemize}
\item
$d_{H}(u) \le s$ for some $u \in V(H) \setminus X$, or
\item
$d_{H}(u) + d_{H}(v) \le 2s$ for some $u \in V(H) \setminus X$ and $v \in V(H) \cap X$ with $uv \notin E(H)$.
\end{itemize}
\item
\label{d2}
$G'$ is non-complete.
\end{enumerate}
For integers $s_{1}, s_{2} \ge 1$,
a partition $(G_{1}, G_{2})$ of $G$ is called an $(s_{1}, s_{2}; X)$-\textit{degenerate partition} of $G$
if each $G_{i}$ is $(s_{i}; X)$-degenerate.
\begin{rem}
\label{definition corollary}
Let $s \ge 1$ be an integer,
and let $G$ be a graph and $X$ be a clique of $G$.
Then,
an induced subgraph $G'$ of $G$ is non-complete and not $(s; X)$-degenerate
if and only if
$G'$ contains an $(s; X)$-feasible graph in $G$.
\end{rem}
\begin{lem}
\label{feasible and degenerate}
Let $s \ge 2$ be an integer,
and $G$ be a graph and $X$ be a clique of $G$.
Suppose that $\omega (G) \le s$.
Then, the following hold.
\begin{enumerate}[{\upshape(i)}]
\item
\label{(s; X)-feasible to (s-1; X)-feasible}
If
$H$ is an $(s; X)$-feasible graph in $G$,
then
$H - x$ is an $(s-1; X)$-feasible graph in $G$
for every vertex $x$ of $H$.
\item
\label{(s-1; X)-dege to (s; X)-dege}
If
$G'$ is an $(s-1; X)$-degenerate graph in $G$,
then
$G[V(G') \cup \{x\}]$ is an $(s; X)$-degenerate graph in $G$
for every vertex $x$ of $G-G'$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
(i) Let $x \in V(H)$, and let $H' = H - x$.
Then by (F\ref{f1}),
$d_{H'}(u) > s - |\{x\}| = s - 1$ for $u \in V(H') \setminus X$.
Similarly, by (F\ref{f2}),
we also have
$d_{H'}(u) + d_{H'}(v) > 2s - 2|\{x\}| = 2(s - 1)$
for
$u \in V(H') \setminus X$
and
$v \in V(H') \cap X$
with $uv \notin E(H')$.
Furthermore,
by (F\ref{f1})--(F\ref{f3}) and Lemma~\ref{sigma}(\ref{order of G}),
$|H| \ge s + 2$,
and hence $|H'| \ge s + 1$.
This, together with $\omega(G) \le s$,
implies that $H'$ is non-complete.
Thus (\ref{(s; X)-feasible to (s-1; X)-feasible}) is proved.
(ii) To show (\ref{(s-1; X)-dege to (s; X)-dege}),
let $x \in V(G-G')$,
and let $G'' = G[V(G') \cup \{x\}]$.
Note that by (D\ref{d2}), $G''$ is also non-complete.
Suppose that $G''$ is not $(s; X)$-degenerate.
Then by Remark~\ref{definition corollary},
$G''$ contains an $(s; X)$-feasible graph $H$ of $G$.
If $V(H) \subseteq V(G')$,
then this contradicts that $G'$ is $(s-1; X)$-degenerate.
Thus $x \in V(H)$.
But then, by Lemma~\ref{feasible and degenerate}(\ref{(s; X)-feasible to (s-1; X)-feasible}),
$H-x$ is an $(s-1; X)$-feasible graph contained in $G'$,
a contradiction again.
Thus (\ref{(s-1; X)-dege to (s; X)-dege}) is proved.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
\begin{lem}
\label{s_{i} + l + 1}
Let $s_{1}, s_{2}, \varepsilon$ be integers
with $s_{1}, s_{2} \ge 1$ and $\varepsilon \in \{0, 1\}$.
Let $G$ be a graph with $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 2(s_{1} + s_{2} + \varepsilon) - 1$,
$X = V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2} + \varepsilon-1}(G)$,
and $(G_{1}, G_{2})$ be a partition of $G$.
If $G_{i}$ is $(s_{i} - 1+ \varepsilon; X)$-degenerate
for some $i \in \{1, 2\}$,
then there exist two vertices $u_{i}$ and $v_{i}$ of $G_{i}$
satisfying one of the following (a) and (b).
\begin{enumerate}[{\upshape(a)}]
\item $e_{G}(u_{i}, G_{3-i}) - d_{G_{i}}(u_{i}) \ge (s_{3-i} - s_{i}) + 1$,
$d_{G_{i}}(u_{i}) \le s_{i} - 1 + \varepsilon$ and $u_{i} = v_{i}$, or
\item $e_{G}(u_{i}, G_{3-i}) - d_{G_{i}}(u_{i}) \ge (s_{3-i} - s_{i}) + 1$,
$d_{G}(v_{i}) \le s_{1} + s_{2} - 2$ and $v_{i} \in V(G_{i}) \cap X$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
By the symmetry, it is enough to consider the proof for only the case $i = 1$.
Suppose that $G_{1}$ is $(s_{1} - 1+ \varepsilon; X)$-degenerate.
Assume for the moment that
there exists a vertex $u$ in $V(G_{1}) \setminus X$
such that $d_{G_{1}}(u) \le s_{1} - 1 + \varepsilon$.
Then,
since $u \notin X$,
it follows that
\begin{align*}
e_{G}(u, G_{2})
&= d_{G}(u) - d_{G_{1}}(u)
\ge (s_{1} + s_{2} + \varepsilon) - (s_{1} - 1 + \varepsilon) \\
&= s_{2} + 1 = s_{2} - 1 + \varepsilon + 1 + (1 - \varepsilon) \ge s_{2} - 1 + \varepsilon + 1.
\end{align*}
This yields that $e_{G}(u, G_{2}) - d_{G_{1}}(u) \ge (s_{2} - s_{1}) + 1$,
and hence
{\rm (a)} holds as $(u_{1}, v_{1}) = (u, u)$.
Thus, we may assume that
$d_{G_{1}}(u) \ge s_{1} + \varepsilon$ for all $u \in V(G_{1}) \setminus X$.
Then,
since $G_{1}$ is $(s_{1} - 1 + \varepsilon; X)$-degenerate,
it follows that
there exist two vertices $u \in V(G_{1}) \setminus X$ and $v \in V(G_{1}) \cap X$ with $uv \notin E(G_{1})$
such that
$d_{G_{1}}(u) + d_{G_{1}}(v) \le 2(s_{1} - 1 + \varepsilon)$.
Since
$d_{G_{1}}(u) \ge s_{1} + \varepsilon$,
we have $d_{G_{1}}(v) \le s_{1} - 2 + \varepsilon$,
that is, $d_{G_{1}}(v) = s_{1} - l + \varepsilon$ for some integer $l \ge 2$.
If $e_{G}(v, G_{2}) \ge s_{2} - l + \varepsilon + 1$,
then {\rm (a)} holds as $(u_{1}, v_{1}) = (v, v)$,
and thus we may assume that
$e_{G}(v, G_{2}) \le s_{2} - l + \varepsilon$.
Then,
\begin{align*}
d_{G}(v) = d_{G_{1}}(v) + e_{G}(v, G_{2}) \le s_{1} + s_{2} - 2l + 2\varepsilon \le s_{1} + s_{2} - 2.
\end{align*}
Note that
$d_{G_{1}}(u) \le s_{1} - 2 + l + \varepsilon$ because
$d_{G_{1}}(u) + d_{G_{1}}(v) \le 2(s_{1} - 1 + \varepsilon)$ and $d_{G_{1}}(v) = s_{1} - l + \varepsilon$,
and hence
\begin{align*}
e_{G}(u, G_{2})
&\ge \sigma_{2}(G) - d_{G_{1}}(u) - d_{G}(v) \\
&\ge \big( 2(s_{1} + s_{2} + \varepsilon) - 1 \big) - (s_{1} - 2 + l + \varepsilon) - (s_{1} + s_{2} - 2l + 2\varepsilon)\\
&= s_{2} + l + 1 - \varepsilon = (s_{2} - 2 + l +\varepsilon) + 3 - 2 \varepsilon \ge (s_{2} - 2 + l + \varepsilon) + 1.
\end{align*}
This implies that $e_{G}(u, G_{2}) - d_{G_{1}}(u) \ge (s_{2} - s_{1}) + 1$.
Thus, {\rm (b)} holds as $(u_{1}, v_{1}) = (u, v)$.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
\subsection{Lemmas for Theorem~\ref{feasible pair}}
\label{lemmas for feasible pair}
In this subsection,
we prepare lemmas which will be used in the proof of Theorem~\ref{feasible pair}.
\begin{lem}
\label{|U| = s_{i}+alpha}
Let $s_{1},~s_{2},~G$ be the same as in Theorem~\ref{feasible pair},
and
$X = V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2}}(G)$
and $U \subsetneq V(G)$ with $|U| = s_{3-i} + \alpha$ for some integers $i \in \{1, 2\}$ and $\alpha \le 1$.
Under the same degree condition as in Theorem~\ref{feasible pair},
the following hold;
(i) $d_{G-U}(u) > s_{i}-\alpha$ for $u \in V(G-U) \setminus X$,
(ii) $d_{G-U}(u) + d_{G-U}(v) > 2(s_{i}-\alpha)$
for $u \in V(G-U) \setminus X$
and
$v \in V(G-U) \cap X$ with $uv \notin E(G-U)$,
and (iii) $|G-U| \ge (s_{i}-\alpha) + 3$.
\end{lem}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
It is enough to consider the proof for only the case $i=1$.
By the degree condition of $G$,
the definition of $X$ and the assumption that $|U| = s_{2} + \alpha$,
we can easily check that (i) and (ii) hold.
Moreover,
since $G$ is non-complete,
it follows from Lemma~\ref{sigma}(\ref{order of G}) that
$|G| \ge s_{1} + s_{2} + 3$,
and hence $|G-U| \ge (s_{1}-\alpha) + 3$.
Thus (iii) also holds.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
\begin{lem}
\label{G-G' is non-complete}
Let $s_{1},~s_{2},~G$ be the same as in Theorem~\ref{feasible pair}
and $X = V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2}}(G)$,
and suppose that $\omega (G) \le \min \{s_{1}, s_{2}\}$.
Under the same degree condition as in Theorem~\ref{feasible pair},
the following holds;
If $G'$ is $(s_{i};X)$-degenerate for some $i \in \{1, 2\}$,
then $G-G'$ is non-complete.
\end{lem}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
By the symmetry,
we consider the proof for only the case $i = 1$.
Suppose that
$G'$ is $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate and $G-G'$ is complete
(note that $G'$ is a proper subgraph of $G$,
because $G$ is not $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate).
Since $|G-G'| \le \omega (G) \le \min \{s_{1}, s_{2}\}$,
we have $|G-G'| = s_{2} + \alpha$ for some integer $\alpha \le 0$.
Note that $(s_{1}-\alpha) + 3 > \omega(G)$.
By applying Lemma~\ref{|U| = s_{i}+alpha} with $U = V(G-G')$ and $i = 1$,
it follows that
$G' = G-U$ is an $(s_{1} - \alpha)$-feasible graph in $G$,
which contradicts that $G'$ is $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
\subsection{Lemmas for Theorem~\ref{feasible pair tri.-free}}
\label{lemmas for feasible pair tri.-free}
In this subsection,
we prepare lemmas which will be used in the proof of Theorem~\ref{feasible pair tri.-free}.
\begin{lem}
\label{(s-alpha)-feasible subgraph}
Let $s_{1},~s_{2},~G$ be the same as in Theorem~\ref{feasible pair tri.-free}
and $X = V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2}-1}(G)$,
and let $\alpha$ be an integer with $\alpha \in \{0, 1\}$.
Under the same conditions as in Theorem~\ref{feasible pair tri.-free},
the following holds;
If $U$ is a vertex subset of $G$ such that
$|U| \le 3$ and
$e_{G}(x, U) \le 1 + \alpha$ for all $x \in V(G) \setminus U$,
then
$G-U$ is non-complete and not $(s_{1}-\alpha; X)$-degenerate,
and not $(s_{2}-\alpha; X)$-degenerate.
\end{lem}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
By the degree condition of $G$ and the definition of $X$,
$d_{G-U}(u) \ge d_{G}(u) - e_{G}(u, U) \ge (s_{1} + s_{2}) - (1 + \alpha)
= (s_{1} - \alpha) + s_{2} - 1 > s_{1} - \alpha$ for $u \in V(G-U) \setminus X$.
Similarly,
$d_{G-U}(u) + d_{G-U}(v)
\ge \sigma_{2}(G) - e_{G}(\{u, v\}, U) \ge \big( 2(s_{1} + s_{2})-1 \big) - 2(1 + \alpha)
= 2(s_{1} - \alpha) + 2s_{2} - 3 > 2(s_{1} - \alpha)$ for
$u \in V(G-U) \setminus X$ and $v \in V(G-U) \cap X$ with $uv \notin E(G-U)$.
By Lemma~\ref{sigma}(\ref{order of G 2}), $|G| \ge 2(s_{1} + s_{2}) > 6$,
and hence $|G-U| \ge 3$.
Since $g(G) \ge 4$, this implies that $G-U$ is non-complete.
Thus, $G-U$ is $(s_{1}-\alpha; X)$-feasible in $G$.
By the symmetry of $s_{1}$ and $s_{2}$,
$G-U$ is also $(s_{2}-\alpha; X)$-feasible in $G$.
Therefore,
it follows from Remark~\ref{definition corollary} that the lemma holds.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
\begin{lem}
\label{G-G' is non-complete tri.-free}
Let $s_{1},~s_{2},~G$ be the same as in Theorem~\ref{feasible pair tri.-free}
and $X = V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2}-1}(G)$.
Under the same conditions as in Theorem~\ref{feasible pair tri.-free},
the following holds;
If $G'$ is $(s_{i}; X)$-degenerate for some $i \in \{1, 2\}$, then
$G-G'$ is non-complete.
\end{lem}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad By the symmetry, it suffices to consider the proof for only the case $i=1$.
Suppose that
$G'$ is $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate and $G-G'$ is complete
(note that $G'$ is a proper subgraph of $G$,
because $G$ itself is not $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate).
Then by Lemma~\ref{sigma}(\ref{complete}),
$|G-G'| \le 2$.
Since $g(G) \ge 4$,
this implies that
$e_{G}(x, G-G') \le 1$ for all $x \in V(G') = V(G) \setminus V(G-G')$.
Therefore,
by applying Lemma~\ref{(s-alpha)-feasible subgraph}
with $U = V(G-G')$ and $\alpha = 0$,
it follows that $G' = G-U$ is not $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate,
a contradiction.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
\begin{lem}
\label{(s-1)-feasible subgraph}
Let $s_{1},~s_{2},~G$ be the same as in Theorem~\ref{feasible pair tri.-free}
and $X = V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2}-1}(G)$,
and let
$(G_{1}, G_{2})$ be a pair
which
is an $(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate partition
or
an $(s_{1}-1, s_{2}; X)$-degenerate partition of $G$.
Suppose that
$(G_{1}, G_{2})$ was chosen so that $f(G_{1}, G_{2}, s_{1}, s_{2})$ is maximized
in such partitions.
Under the same conditions as in Theorem~\ref{feasible pair tri.-free},
the following holds;
If $G_{i}$ is $(s_{i}-1; X)$-degenerate for some $i \in \{1, 2\}$,
then $G_{3-i}$ is not $(s_{3-i}-1; X)$-degenerate.
\end{lem}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
By the symmetry of $s_{1}$ and $s_{2}$,
we only show that
if $G_{2}$ is $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate,
then
$G_{1}$ is not $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate.
Suppose that $G_{2}$ is $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate
(note that by the assumption of Lemma~\ref{(s-1)-feasible subgraph},
$G_{1}$ is $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate).
By applying Lemma~\ref{s_{i} + l + 1} with $\varepsilon = 0$ and $i=2$,
we can take a vertex $u_{2}$ of $G_{2}$
such that
$e_{G}(u_{2}, G_{1}) - d_{G_{2}}(u_{2}) \ge (s_{1} - s_{2}) + 1$.
Then, by Lemma~\ref{w(G_{1}, G_{2})},
$f(G_{1}', G_{2}', s_{1}, s_{2}) > f(G_{1}, G_{2}, s_{1}, s_{2})$,
where $G_{1}' = G[V(G_{1}) \cup \{u_{2}\}]$ and $G_{2}' = G_{2} - u_{2}$.
Assume first that $G_{2}'$ is non-complete.
Then,
since $G_{2}$ is $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate,
$G_{2}'$ is clearly $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate.
Hence by the choice of $(G_{1}, G_{2})$,
$G_{1}'$ is not $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate.
Note that $G_{1}'$ is non-complete because $G_{1}$ is non-complete,
and hence by Remark~\ref{definition corollary},
$G_{1}'$ contains an $(s_{1}; X)$-feasible graph $H$ of $G$.
If $u_{2} \notin V(H)$,
then $H$ is an induced subgraph of $G_{1}$,
which contradicts that $G_{1}$ is $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate.
Thus $u_{2} \in V(H)$.
Note that $\omega(G) \le 2 \le s_{1}$ because $g(G) \ge 4$.
Then,
by Lemma~\ref{feasible and degenerate}(\ref{(s; X)-feasible to (s-1; X)-feasible}),
$H-u_{2}$ is an induced subgraph of $G_{1}$
which is $(s_{1}-1;X)$-feasible in $G$.
Thus, by Remark~\ref{definition corollary},
$G_{1}$ is not $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate.
Assume next that $G_{2}'$ is complete.
Then by Lemma~\ref{sigma}(\ref{complete}), $|G_{2}'| \le 2$,
and hence
we have $|G_{2}| \le 3$.
Then, since $g(G) \ge 4$,
it follows that
$e_{G}(x, G_{2}) \le 2$ for all $x \in V(G_{1})$.
Therefore,
by applying Lemma~\ref{(s-alpha)-feasible subgraph}
with $U = V(G_{2})$ and $\alpha = 1$,
it follows that
$G_{1} = G - U$ is not $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate.
Thus, we can obtain the desired conclusion.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{feasible pair}}
\label{proof}
Let $s_{1},~s_{2},~G$ be the same as in Theorem~\ref{feasible pair},
and suppose that $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 2 (s_{1} + s_{2} + 1) - 1$.
We first show the following claim.
\begin{claim}
\label{no big complete subgraph}
We may assume that
$\omega(G) \le \min\{s_{1}, s_{2}\}$.
\end{claim}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
Suppose not,
and let $H_{1}$ be the complete subgraph of order exactly $\min\{s_{1},$ $s_{2}\} + 1$,
and let $H_{2} = G- H_{1}$.
Without loss of generality,
we may assume that $\min\{s_{1},$ $s_{2}\} = s_{1}$.
Then by applying Lemma~\ref{|U| = s_{i}+alpha} as $(U, i, \alpha) = (V(H_{1}), 2, 1)$,
we can easily see that $H_{1}$ and $H_{2}$ are desired subgraphs.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
Now let $X = V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2}}(G)$,
and we will find a partition $(G_{1}^{*}, G_{2}^{*})$ of $G$
such that
\begin{align*}
\textup{each $G_{i}^{*}$ is non-complete
and is not $(s_{i}-1; X)$-degenerate}
\end{align*}
(if such a partition exists,
then by Lemma~\ref{sigma}(\ref{order of G}) and Remark~\ref{definition corollary},
our result follows).
\begin{claim}
\label{(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)-degenerate partition}
We may assume that
$G$ contains an $(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate partition.
\end{claim}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
Take an induced subgraph $G_{1}$ which is non-complete
and not $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate
(we can actually take such a subgraph
because $G$ itself is one of such subgraphs).
Choose $G_{1}$ so that $|G_{1}|$ is as small as possible.
We first claim that
$G_{1}$ is $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate.
Suppose not.
Then,
since $G_{1}$ is non-complete,
$G_{1}$ contains an $(s_{1}; X)$-feasible graph $H$ of $G$.
Let $x \in V(H)$, and let $G_{1}' = H-x$.
Then
by Lemma~\ref{feasible and degenerate}(\ref{(s; X)-feasible to (s-1; X)-feasible}) and Claim~\ref{no big complete subgraph},
$G_{1}'$ is an $(s_{1}-1; X)$-feasible graph of order less than $G_{1}$,
i.e.,
$G_{1}'$ is non-complete and not an $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate graph
such that $|G_{1}'| < |G_{1}|$ from Remark~\ref{definition corollary},
which contradicts the choice of $G_{1}$.
Thus $G_{1}$ is $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate.
Note that
by Lemma~\ref{G-G' is non-complete} and Claim~\ref{no big complete subgraph},
$G_{2} := G-G_{1}$ is non-complete.
Therefore,
if $G_{2}$ is not $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate,
then $(G_{1}, G_{2})$ is the desired partition $(G_{1}^{*}, G_{2}^{*})$.
Thus, we may assume that
$G_{2}$ is $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
Let $(G_{1}, G_{2})$ be a pair
which is an $(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate partition
or an $(s_{1}-1, s_{2}; X)$-degenerate partition of $G$
(we can take such a partition by Claim~\ref{(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)-degenerate partition}).
Choose such a partition
so that
$f(G_{1}, G_{2}, s_{1}, s_{2})$
is as large as possible
(see the definition of $f$ in Subsection~\ref{Terminology and notation}).
By the symmetry,
we may assume that
$(G_{1}, G_{2})$ is an $(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate partition of $G$.
We now apply Lemma~\ref{s_{i} + l + 1} with $\varepsilon = 1$ and $i = 1$.
Then, we can take a vertex $u_{1}$ of $G_{1}$
such that $e_{G}(u_{1}, G_{2}) - d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) \ge (s_{2} - s_{1}) + 1$,
and hence by Lemma~\ref{w(G_{1}, G_{2})},
$f(G_{1}', G_{2}', s_{1}, s_{2}) > f(G_{1}, G_{2}, s_{1}, s_{2})$,
where $G_{1}' = G_{1} - u_{1}$ and $G_{2}' = G[V(G_{2}) \cup \{u_{1}\}]$.
Suppose first that
$G_{2}'$ is $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate.
Note that by Lemma~\ref{G-G' is non-complete} and Claim~\ref{no big complete subgraph},
$G_{1}' = G- G_{2}'$ is non-complete,
and then $G_{1}'$ is clearly $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate
because
$G_{1}$ is $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate.
Thus,
$(G_{1}', G_{2}')$ is an $(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate partition
such that $f(G_{1}', G_{2}', s_{1}, s_{2}) > f(G_{1}, G_{2}, s_{1}, s_{2})$,
which contradicts the choice of $(G_{1}, G_{2})$.
Suppose next that
$G_{2}'$ is not $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate.
Since $G_{2}' = G[V(G_{2}) \cup \{u_{1}\}]$
and $G_{2}$ is $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate,
it follows from Lemma~\ref{feasible and degenerate}(\ref{(s-1; X)-dege to (s; X)-dege})
and Claim~\ref{no big complete subgraph}
that $G_{2}'$ is $(s_{2}; X)$-degenerate.
Then, the choice of $(G_{1}, G_{2})$ yields that
$G_{1}'$ is not $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate.
Moreover,
since $G_{2}'$ is $(s_{2}; X)$-degenerate,
it follows from Lemma~\ref{G-G' is non-complete} and Claim~\ref{no big complete subgraph}
that $G_{1}' = G - G_{2}'$ is non-complete.
On the other hand, since $G_{2}$ is non-complete,
we also see that $G_{2}'$ is non-complete,
i.e., $G_{2}'$ is non-complete and not $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate.
Therefore,
$(G_{1}', G_{2}')$ is the desired partition $(G_{1}^{*}, G_{2}^{*})$.
This completes the proof of Theorem~\ref{feasible pair}.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{feasible pair tri.-free}}
\label{proof of tri.-free}
Let $s_{1},~s_{2},~G$ be the same as in Theorem~\ref{feasible pair tri.-free},
and suppose that $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 2(s_{1} + s_{2}) - 1$ and $g(G) \ge 4$.
We first show the following claim.
\begin{claim}
\label{degree of X}
If $v_{1}$ and $v_{2}$ are distinct vertices of $V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2} - 1}(G)$,
then
we may assume that $d_{G}(v_{1}) = s_{1} + s_{2} - 1$ or $d_{G}(v_{2}) = s_{1} + s_{2} - 1$.
\end{claim}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
Suppose that
there exist two distinct vertices $v_{1}$ and $v_{2}$ of $X := V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2} - 1}(G)$
such that $d_{G}(v_{i}) \le s_{1} + s_{2} - 2$ for $i \in \{1, 2\}$.
Note that by Lemma~\ref{sigma}(\ref{complete}),
$X$ is a clique
and
$X = \{v_{1}, v_{2}\}$.
Since
$g(G) \ge 4$,
we have $e_{G}(u, X) \le 1$ for all $u \in V(G) \setminus X$.
Let $u$ be an arbitrary vertex
of $G- X$,
and let $v_{i}$ be a vertex of $X$
with $uv_{i} \notin E(G)$.
Then,
\begin{align*}
d_{G-X}(u) \ge \sigma_{2}(G) - d_{G}(v_{i}) - e_{G}(u, X)
\ge \big( 2(s_{1} + s_{2}) - 1\big) - (s_{1} + s_{2} - 2) - 1 = s_{1} + s_{2}.
\end{align*}
Since $u$ is an arbitrary vertex of $G- X$,
this implies that
$\delta(G - X) \ge s_{1} + s_{2}$.
Hence, by Theorem~\ref{Kaneko},
there exists a partition $(H_{1}, H_{2})$ of $G-X$
such that $\delta(H_{i}) \ge s_{i}$ for $i \in \{ 1, 2 \}$.
By Lemma~\ref{sigma}(\ref{order of G 2}),
$H_{1}$ and $H_{2}$ are the desired subgraphs.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
Now let $X = V_{\le s_{1} + s_{2}-1}(G)$,
and we will find a partition $(G_{1}^{*}, G_{2}^{*})$ of $G$
such that
\begin{align*}
\textup{each $G_{i}^{*}$ is non-complete
and is not $(s_{i}-1; X)$-degenerate}
\end{align*}
(if such a partition exists,
then by Lemma~\ref{sigma}(\ref{order of G 2}) and Remark~\ref{definition corollary},
our result follows).
\begin{claim}
\label{(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)-degenerate partition tri.-free}
We may assume that
$G$ contains an $(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate partition.
\end{claim}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
Note that $\omega(G) \le 2 \le \min \{s_{1}, s_{2}\}$
and hence, replacing ``Lemma~\ref{G-G' is non-complete}'' with ``Lemma~\ref{G-G' is non-complete tri.-free}''
in the proof of Claim~\ref{(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)-degenerate partition},
the same argument as Claim~\ref{(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)-degenerate partition} can work.
Thus, we can obtain the desired conclusion.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
Let $(G_{1}, G_{2})$ be a pair
which is an $(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate partition
or an $(s_{1}-1, s_{2}; X)$-degenerate partition of $G$
(we can take such a partition by Claim~\ref{(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)-degenerate partition tri.-free}).
Choose $(G_{1}, G_{2})$
so~that
\begin{enumerate}[]
\item{(C1)}
$f(G_{1}, G_{2}, s_{1}, s_{2})$
is as large as possible.
\end{enumerate}
By the symmetry,
we may assume that
$(G_{1}, G_{2})$ is an $(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate partition.
Then,
by Lemma~\ref{(s-1)-feasible subgraph} and (C1),
$G_{1}$ is not $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate.
We further choose such a partition $(G_{1}, G_{2})$ so that
\begin{enumerate}[]
\item{(C2)}
$|G_{1}|$ is as small as possible, subject to (C1).
\end{enumerate}
Then by (C1) and (C2),
we can obtain the following.
\begin{claim}
\label{difference}
If $x$ is a vertex of $G_{1}$,
then
we may assume that
$e_{G}(x, G_{2})-d_{G_{1}}(x) \le s_{2} -s_{1}$.
In particular,
if the equality holds,
then
$G_{1}-x$ is $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate.
\end{claim}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
Let $x \in V(G_{1})$,
and suppose that
$e_{G}(x, G_{2}) - d_{G_{1}}(x) = s_{2} - s_{1} + k$ for some integer $k \ge 0$.
Then by Lemma~\ref{w(G_{1}, G_{2})},
$f(G_{1}', G_{2}', s_{1}, s_{2}) \ge f(G_{1}, G_{2}, s_{1}, s_{2}) + k$,
where $G_{1}' = G_{1} - x$ and $G_{2}' = G[V(G_{2}) \cup \{x\}]$.
Suppose first that
$G_{2}'$ is $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate.
Note that by Lemma~\ref{G-G' is non-complete tri.-free},
$G_{1}' = G- G_{2}'$ is non-complete,
and then $G_{1}'$ is clearly $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate
because
$G_{1}$ is $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate.
Thus,
$(G_{1}', G_{2}')$ is an $(s_{1}, s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate partition
such that $f(G_{1}', G_{2}', s_{1}, s_{2}) \ge f(G_{1}, G_{2}, s_{1}, s_{2}) + k$
and $|G_{1}'| < |G_{1}|$,
which contradicts (C1) or (C2).
Thus $G_{2}'$ is not $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate.
Since $\omega(G) \le 2 \le s_{2}$
and $G_{2}$ is $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate,
it follows from Lemma~\ref{feasible and degenerate}(\ref{(s-1; X)-dege to (s; X)-dege})
that $G_{2}'$ is $(s_{2}; X)$-degenerate.
Therefore,
if $k \ge 1$,
then (C1) yields that
$G_{1}'$ is not $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate,
and hence
$(G_{1}', G_{2}')$ is the desired partition $(G_{1}^{*}, G_{2}^{*})$
(note that by Lemma~\ref{G-G' is non-complete tri.-free},
$G_{1}' = G- G_{2}'$ is non-complete,
and note also that $G_{2}'$ is non-complete because $G_{2}$ is non-complete).
On the other hand,
if $G_{1}'$ is not $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate, even if $k = 0$,
then
$(G_{1}', G_{2}')$ is the desired partition $(G_{1}^{*}, G_{2}^{*})$.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
We now define
\begin{align*}
Z_{1} = \big\{ z \in V(G_{1}) \setminus X : d_{G_{1}}(z) = s_{1} \textup{ and } e_{G}(z, G_{2}) = s_{2} \big\}.
\end{align*}
\begin{claim}
\label{Z is non-empty}
We have $Z_{1} \neq \emptyset$.
\end{claim}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
On the contrary,
suppose that
$Z_{1} = \emptyset$.
\begin{subclaim}
\label{sub1}
$d_{G_{1}}(u) > s_{1}$ for $u \in V(G_{1}) \setminus X$.
\end{subclaim}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
If there exists a vertex $u$ of $V(G_{1}) \setminus X$
such that $d_{G_{1}}(u) \le s_{1}$,
then by Claim~\ref{difference} and the definition of $X$,
it is easy to check that $d_{G_{1}}(u) = s_{1}$ and $e_{G}(u, G_{2}) = s_{2}$,
and hence $u \in Z_{1}$, a contradiction.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
Since $G_{1}$ is $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate,
it follows from Subclaim~\ref{sub1} that
there exist two vertices
$u_{1} \in V(G_{1}) \setminus X$ and $v_{1} \in V(G_{1}) \cap X$
with $u_{1}v_{1} \notin E(G_{1})$
such that $d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) + d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}) \le 2s_{1}$.
Since $d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) > s_{1}$ by Subclaim~\ref{sub1},
we have $d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}) = s_{1} - l$ for some integer $l \ge 1$.
\begin{subclaim}
\label{sub2}
$d_{G}(v_{1}) \le s_{1} +s_{2} - 2l - 1 \ ( \ \le s_{1} + s_{2} - 3)$.
\end{subclaim}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
By Claim~\ref{difference},
$e_{G}(v_{1}, G_{2}) \le s_{2} - l$.
Suppose that $e_{G}(v_{1}, G_{2}) = s_{2} - l$.
Then
$e_{G}(v_{1}, G_{2}) - d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}) = (s_{2} - l) - (s_{1} - l) = s_{2} - s_{1}$.
Hence
by Claim~\ref{difference},
$G_{1} - v_{1}$ is $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate.
Note that by Subclaim~\ref{sub1},
$d_{G_{1}-v_{1}}(u) > s_{1} - 1$ for $u \in V(G_{1} - v_{1}) \setminus X$.
Therefore, there exist two vertices
$u_{1}' \in V(G_{1} - v_{1}) \setminus X$ and $v_{1}' \in V(G_{1} - v_{1}) \cap X$
with $u_{1}'v_{1}' \notin E(G_{1} - v_{1})$
such that $d_{G_{1} - v_{1}}(u_{1}') + d_{G_{1} - v_{1}}(v_{1}') \le 2(s_{1}-1)$.
Since $d_{G_{1}-v_{1}}(u_{1}') > s_{1} - 1$,
this implies that $d_{G_{1} - v_{1}}(v_{1}') \le s_{1} - 2$,
and hence $d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}') \le s_{1} - 1$.
Combining this with Claim~\ref{difference},
we also get $e_{G}(v_{1}', G_{2}) \le s_{2} - 1$.
Therefore, $v_{1}$ and $v_{1}'$ are two distinct vertices of $X$
such that $d_{G}(v_{1}) = d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}) + e_{G}(v_{1}, G_{2})
\le (s_{1} - l) + (s_{2} - l) \le s_{1} + s_{2} - 2$
and
$d_{G}(v_{1}') = d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}') + e_{G}(v_{1}', G_{2})
\le (s_{1} - 1) + (s_{2} - 1) = s_{1} + s_{2} - 2$,
which contradicts Claim~\ref{degree of X}.
Thus $e_{G}(v_{1}, G_{2}) \le s_{2} - l - 1$,
and hence
$d_{G}(v_{1}) = d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}) + e_{G}(v_{1}, G_{2})
\le s_{1} + s_{2} - 2l - 1 \ ( \ \le s_{1} + s_{2}- 3)$.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
By Subclaim~\ref{sub2},
$d_{G}(u_{1}) \ge \sigma_{2}(G) - d_{G}(v_{1})
\ge \big( 2(s_{1} + s_{2}) - 1 \big) - (s_{1} + s_{2} - 2l - 1) = s_{1} + s_{2} + 2l$.
On the other hand,
since
$d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) + d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}) \le 2s_{1}$ and $d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}) = s_{1} - l$,
it follows that
$d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) \le s_{1} + l$.
Therefore,
we get
\begin{align*}
e_{G}(u_{1}, G_{2}) - d_{G_{1}}(u_{1})
&= \big( d_{G}(u_{1}) - d_{G_{1}}(u_{1})\big) - d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) \\
&\ge \big( s_{1} + s_{2} + 2l - (s_{1} + l)\big) - (s_{1} + l) = s_{2} - s_{1}.
\end{align*}
By Claim~\ref{difference}, the equality holds in the above.
In particular,
$d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) = s_{1} + l$.
Moreover, again by Claim~\ref{difference},
$G_{1} - u_{1}$ is $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate.
We now choose such vertices $u_{1}$ and $v_{1}$ so that $d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) + d_{G_{1}}(v_{1})$
is as small as possible.
Since
$G_{1} - u_{1}$ is $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate,
there exist two vertices
$u_{1}' \in V(G_{1} - u_{1}) \setminus X$ and $v_{1}' \in V(G_{1} - u_{1}) \cap X$
with $u_{1}'v_{1}' \notin E(G_{1} - u_{1})$
such that $d_{G_{1} - u_{1}}(u_{1}') + d_{G_{1} - u_{1}}(v_{1}') \le 2(s_{1}-1)$
(recall that
by Subclaim~\ref{sub1},
$d_{G_{1}-u_{1}}(u) > s_{1} - 1$ for $u \in V(G_{1} - u_{1}) \setminus X$).
Then by the choice of $u_{1}$ and $v_{1}$,
\begin{align*}
2s_{1}
&
= (s_{1} + l) + (s_{1} - l)
= d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) + d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}) \le d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}') + d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}') \\
&
= d_{G_{1}-u_{1}}(u_{1}') + d_{G_{1}-u_{1}}(v_{1}') + |E(G) \cap \{u_{1}u_{1}', u_{1}v_{1}'\}|
\le 2(s_{1} - 1) + 2 = 2s_{1}.
\end{align*}
Thus the equality holds in the above.
The equality $|E(G) \cap \{u_{1}u_{1}', u_{1}v_{1}'\}| = 2$ implies that
$v_{1} \neq v_{1}'$ because $u_{1}v_{1} \notin E(G)$.
Since $d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) + d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}) = d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}') + d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}')$,
we can replace $u_{1}$ and $v_{1}$ with $u_{1}'$ and $v_{1}'$, respectively.
Therefore, Subclaim~\ref{sub2} also holds for the vertex $v_{1}'$,
and hence
$v_{1}$ and $v_{1}'$ are two distinct vertices of $X$
such that
$d_{G}(v_{1}) \le s_{1} + s_{2} - 3$
and
$d_{G}(v_{1}') \le s_{1} + s_{2} - 3$,
which contradicts Claim~\ref{degree of X}.
This completes the proof of Claim~\ref{Z is non-empty}.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
\begin{claim}
\label{low degree vertex}
Suppose that there exists a vertex $u_{2}$ of $G_{2}$
such that $zu_{2} \in E(G)$ for all $z \in Z_{1}$.
\begin{enumerate}[{\upshape(i)}]
\item There exists a vertex $v_{1}$ of $V(G_{1}) \cap X$
such that $d_{G}(v_{1}) \le s_{1} + s_{2} - 2$.
\item If $d_{G_{2}}(u_{2}) \le s_{2} - 1$,
then
$e_{G}(u_{2}, G_{1}) - d_{G_{2}}(u_{2}) \ge (s_{1} - s_{2}) + 3$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{claim}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
(i) Let $z \in Z_{1}$.
Then by the definition of $Z_{1}$ and Claim~\ref{difference},
$G_{1} - z$ is $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate.
Suppose first that
there exists a vertex $u_{1}$ of $V(G_{1} - z) \setminus X$ such that $d_{G_{1} - z}(u_{1}) \le s_{1} - 1$.
Then,
$d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) = d_{G_{1} - z}(u_{1}) + |E(G) \cap \{u_{1}z\}| \le (s_{1} - 1) + 1 = s_{1}$.
Combining this with Claim~\ref{difference},
we also get $e_{G}(u_{1}, G_{2}) \le s_{2}$,
and hence $d_{G}(u_{1}) = d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) + e_{G}(u_{1}, G_{2}) \le s_{1} + s_{2}$.
On the other hand,
it follows from the definition of $X$ that
$d_{G}(u_{1}) \ge s_{1} + s_{2}$.
Therefore, the inequality holds in the above.
The equalities $d_{G_{1}}(u_{1}) = s_{1}$ and $e_{G}(u_{1}, G_{2}) = s_{2}$ imply that $u_{1} \in Z_{1}$.
The equality $|E(G) \cap \{u_{1}z\}| = 1$ implies that $u_{1}z \in E(G)$.
But then, from the assumption of Claim~\ref{low degree vertex},
$G[\{u_{2}, z, u_{1}\}]$ forms a triangle, a contradiction.
Thus
$d_{G_{1} - z}(u) > s_{1} - 1$
for $u \in V(G_{1} - z) \setminus X$.
Since $G_{1}-z $ is $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate,
this implies that
there exist two vertices
$u_{1} \in V(G_{1} - z) \setminus X$ and $v_{1} \in V(G_{1} - z) \cap X$
with $u_{1}v_{1} \notin E(G_{1} - z)$
such that $d_{G_{1} - z}(u_{1}) + d_{G_{1} - z}(v_{1}) \le 2(s_{1}-1)$.
Since
$d_{G_{1} - z}(u_{1}) > s_{1} - 1$,
we have $d_{G_{1} - z}(v_{1}) \le s_{1} - 2$,
and hence $d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}) \le s_{1} - 1$.
Combining this with Claim~\ref{difference},
we also get $e_{G}(v_{1}, G_{2}) \le s_{2} - 1$,
and hence $d_{G}(v_{1}) \le s_{1} + s_{2} -2$.
Thus (i) is proved.
(ii) It suffices to show that $e_{G}(u_{2}, G_{1}) \ge s_{1} + 2$. To show it,
let $z \in Z_{1}$ and $v_{1}$ be a vertex of $V(G_{1}) \cap X$
such that $d_{G_{1}}(v_{1}) \le s_{1} + s_{2} - 2$
(we can take such a vertex $v_{1}$ by (i)).
By the degree condition of $G$,
$zv_{1} \in E(G)$.
Recall that by the assumption of Claim~\ref{low degree vertex},
$zu_{2} \in E(G)$,
and hence
$u_{2}v_{1} \notin E(G)$ because $g(G) \ge 4$.
Therefore,
if $e_{G}(u_{2}, G_{1}) \le s_{1} + 1$,
then
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{2}(G)
&\le d_{G}(v_{1}) + d_{G}(u_{2})
= d_{G}(v_{1}) + \big( d_{G_{2}}(u_{2}) + e_{G}(u_{2}, G_{1}) \big)\\
&\le (s_{1} + s_{2} - 2) + \big( (s_{2} - 1) + (s_{1} + 1) \big)
= 2(s_{1} + s_{2}) - 2,
\end{align*}
a contradiction.
Thus $e_{G}(u_{2}, G_{1}) \ge s_{1} + 2$.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
\begin{claim}
\label{good vertices}
There exist two vertices $z_{1} \in Z_{1}$
and $u_{2} \in V(G_{2})$
satisfying one of the following (A) and (B).
\begin{enumerate}[{\upshape(A)}]
\item $z_{1}u_{2} \notin E(G)$ and $e_{G}(u_{2}, G_{1}) - d_{G_{2}}(u_{2}) \ge (s_{1} - s_{2}) + 1$,
or
\item $z_{1}u_{2} \in E(G)$ and $e_{G}(u_{2}, G_{1}) - d_{G_{2}}(u_{2}) \ge (s_{1} - s_{2}) + 3$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{claim}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
We apply Lemma~\ref{s_{i} + l + 1} with $\varepsilon = 0$ and $i = 2$.
Then, there exist two vertices $u_{2}$ and $v_{2}$ of $G_{2}$ satisfying one of the following
(a) and (b):
\begin{enumerate}[{\upshape(a)}]
\item $e_{G}(u_{2}, G_{1}) - d_{G_{2}}(u_{2}) \ge (s_{1} - s_{2}) + 1$,
$d_{G_{2}}(u_{2}) \le s_{2} - 1$ and $u_{2} = v_{2}$, or
\item $e_{G}(u_{2}, G_{1}) - d_{G_{2}}(u_{2}) \ge (s_{1} - s_{2}) + 1$,
$d_{G}(v_{2}) \le s_{1} + s_{2} - 2$ and $v_{2} \in V(G_{2}) \cap X$.
\end{enumerate}
We further take $z_{1} \in Z_{1}$,
and choose it so that $z_{1}u_{2} \notin E(G)$ if possible.
If $z_{1}u_{2} \notin E(G)$,
then (a) and (b) directly imply (A).
Thus we may assume that $z_{1}u_{2} \in E(G)$.
Then
by the choice of $z_{1}$,
$zu_{2} \in E(G)$ for all $z \in Z_{1}$.
It follows from Claims~\ref{degree of X} and \ref{low degree vertex}(i)
that (b) does not occur.
Thus, (a) holds.
By Claim~\ref{low degree vertex}(ii),
the inequality $d_{G_{2}}(u_{2}) \le s_{2} - 1$ implies that
$e_{G}(u_{2}, G_{1}) - d_{G_{2}}(u_{2}) \ge (s_{1} - s_{2}) + 3$.
Thus (B) holds.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
Let $z_{1}$ and $u_{2}$ be the same as in Claim~\ref{good vertices}.
Consider the graphs
\begin{align*}
\begin{array}{ll}
G_{1}' = G_{1} - z_{1}, &\quad G_{2}' = G[V(G_{2}) \cup \{z_{1}\}], \\[1mm]
G_{1}'' = G[V(G_{1}') \cup \{u_{2}\}], &\quad G_{2}'' = G_{2}' - u_{2}.
\end{array}
\end{align*}
Note that $(G_{1}', G_{2}')$ and $(G_{1}'', G_{2}'')$ are partitions of $G$, respectively.
Then by Lemma~\ref{w(G_{1}, G_{2})}, Claim~\ref{good vertices} and
the definitions of $Z_{1}, G_{1}', G_{2}', G_{1}''$ and $G_{2}''$,
we get
\begin{align}
\label{w(G_{1}'', G_{2}'')}
f(G_{1}'', G_{2}'', s_{1}, s_{2}) \ge f(G_{1}', G_{2}', s_{1}, s_{2}) + 1
= f(G_{1}, G_{2}, s_{1}, s_{2}) + 1.
\end{align}
\begin{claim}
\label{property of G_{i}''}
Each $G_{i}''$ is $(s_{i}; X)$-degenerate.
\end{claim}
\medbreak\noindent\textit{Proof.}\quad
By Claim~\ref{difference} and the definitions of $Z_{1}$ and $G_{1}'$,
it follows that
$G_{1}'$ is $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate,
and hence by Lemma~\ref{feasible and degenerate}(\ref{(s-1; X)-dege to (s; X)-dege})
and the definition of $G_{1}''$,
we see that
$G_{1}''$ is $(s_{1}; X)$-degenerate
(recall that $\omega(G) \le 2 \le s_{1}$).
Combining this with Lemma~\ref{G-G' is non-complete tri.-free},
we also see that
$G_{2}'' = G - G_{1}''$ is non-complete.
Since $G_{2}$ is $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate,
it follows from Lemma~\ref{feasible and degenerate}(\ref{(s-1; X)-dege to (s; X)-dege}) and the definition of $G_{2}'$ that
$G_{2}'$ is $(s_{2}; X)$-degenerate.
Hence, $G_{2}'' = G_{2}' - u_{2}$ is clearly $(s_{2}; X)$-degenerate because $G_{2}''$ is non-complete.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
By Claim~\ref{property of G_{i}''} and (\ref{w(G_{1}'', G_{2}'')}),
if
$G_{1}''$ is $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate,
or
if
$G_{2}''$ is $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate,
then
this contradicts (C1).
Thus,
$G_{1}''$ is not $(s_{1}-1; X)$-degenerate
and
$G_{2}''$ is not $(s_{2}-1; X)$-degenerate.
Since each $G_{i}''$ is non-complete by Claim~\ref{property of G_{i}''},
it follows that
$(G_{1}'', G_{2}'')$ is the desired partition $(G_{1}^{*}, G_{2}^{*})$.
This completes the proof of Theorem~\ref{feasible pair tri.-free}.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
\section{Applications}
\label{applications}
\subsection{Degree conditions for vertex-disjoint cycles}
\label{deg conditions}
In Sections~\ref{introduction}--\ref{proof of tri.-free},
we have considered the existence of disjoint subgraphs with degree conditions,
and we have shown Theorems~\ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2} and \ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2 tri-free},
which correspond to Step~1 (the existence of two disjoint subgraphs of high minimum degree sum)
for Problems~\ref{partition problem sigma2} and \ref{partition problem sigma2 tri-free}.
This type of results is sometimes useful tools to get degree conditions for packing of graphs,
i.e., the existence of $k$ disjoint subgraphs
which belong to some fixed class of graphs.
In this section,
we explain it by taking disjoint cycles for example.
In particular,
we will give a sharp $\sigma_{2}$ condition for the existence of $k$ disjoint cycles of lengths $0$-mod~$3$
by using Theorem~\ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2 tri-free}
(see statement (S\ref{s2}), Proposition~\ref{inductive step sigma2} and Theorem~\ref{0modulo3 sigma2 k=1}).
\medskip
In \cite{Chen and Saito},
Chen and Saito gave a minimum degree condition for the existence of a cycle of length $0$-mod~$3$.
Here,
a cycle $C$ is called a \textit{cycle of length $0$-mod~$3$}
if $|C| \equiv 0 \pmod 3$.
\begin{Thm}[Chen and Saito \cite{Chen and Saito}]
\label{Chen and Saito}
Every graph $G$ with $\delta(G) \ge 3$ contains a cycle of length $0$-mod~$3$.
\end{Thm}
As a natural generalization of this result,
we can consider the following problem.
\begin{problem}
\label{0modulo3 min deg}
Is the following statement true for any $k \ge 1$?
\begin{enumerate}
\renewcommand{\labelenumi}{\upshape{(S\arabic{enumi}})}
\setcounter{enumi}{\value{mymemory2}}
\item
\label{s1}
Every graph $G$ with $\delta(G) \ge 3k$ contains $k$ disjoint cycles of lengths $0$-mod~$3$.
\setcounter{mymemory2}{\value{enumi}}
\end{enumerate}
\end{problem}
In statement (S\ref{s1}),
the minimum degree condition is best possible if it's true.
Let $k$ and $n$ be integers with $k \ge 1$ and $n \ge 6k-2$,
and consider the complete bipartite graph $K_{3k-1, n - 3k + 1}$.
The minimum degree of this graph is clearly $3k-1$,
and
every cycle of length $0$-mod~$3$ in this graph has order at least $6$,
and hence it does not contain $k$ disjoint cycles of lengths $0$-mod~$3$.
In addition,
considering this example,
we can also consider the more general problem as follows.
\begin{problem}
\label{0modulo3 sigma2}
Is the following statement true for any $k \ge 1$?
\begin{enumerate}
\renewcommand{\labelenumi}{\upshape{(S\arabic{enumi}})}
\setcounter{enumi}{\value{mymemory2}}
\item
\label{s2}
Every graph $G$ of order at least $3k$ with
$\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 6k - 1$ contains $k$ disjoint cycles of lengths $0$-mod~$3$.
\setcounter{mymemory2}{\value{enumi}}
\end{enumerate}
\end{problem}
Since $\sigma_{2}(K_{3k-1, n - 3k + 1}) = 6k-2$,
the graph
$K_{3k-1, n - 3k + 1}$ shows that
``$\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 6k-1$'' cannot be replaced by ``$\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 6k-2$'' in statement (S\ref{s2}).
Moreover,
since $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 2\delta(G)$ for a graph $G$,
it follows that
statement (S\ref{s2}) is stronger than statement (S\ref{s1})
(note that $|G| \ge 3k$ in statement (S\ref{s1})).
In order to attack the above problems,
one may use the induction on $k$.
In particular,
for Problem~\ref{0modulo3 min deg},
we already know that
statement (S\ref{s1}) is true when $k=1$ by Theorem~\ref{Chen and Saito},
that is, Problem~\ref{0modulo3 min deg} can be solved by showing the inductive step.
In the inductive step of this type problem,
Theorems~\ref{Stiebitz}, \ref{Kaneko}, \ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2} and \ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2 tri-free} sometimes can work effectively.
In fact,
we can easily obtain the following
by using Theorems~\ref{Kaneko} and \ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2 tri-free}, respectively.
\begin{prop}
\label{inductive step min deg}
If statement {\rm (S\ref{s1})} is true for $k = 1$,
then statement {\rm (S\ref{s1})} is true for any $k \ge 1$.
\end{prop}
\begin{prop}
\label{inductive step sigma2}
If statement {\rm (S\ref{s2})} is true for $k=1$,
then statement {\rm (S\ref{s2})} is true for any $k \ge 1$.
\end{prop}
We only show Proposition~\ref{inductive step sigma2}
because we can obtain Proposition~\ref{inductive step min deg}
by the same argument.
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Proof of Proposition~\ref{inductive step sigma2}.}~We show that
statement (S\ref{s2}) is true for any $k \ge 1$
by induction on $k$.
By the assumption of Proposition~\ref{inductive step sigma2},
statement (S\ref{s2}) is true when $k=1$.
Suppose that statement (S\ref{s2}) is true up to the row $k-1$, $k\geq 2$, and let us study for $k$.
Let $G$ be a graph of order at least $3k$ with
$\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 6k - 1$.
We show that
$G$ contains $k$ disjoint cycles of lengths $0$-mod~$3$.
If $G$ is complete,
then the assertion clearly holds.
Thus we may assume that $G$ is non-complete.
Suppose first that $G$ contains a triangle $C$.
Then every vertex of $G$ not in $C$ has at most $3$ neighbors in $C$,
and hence
$\sigma_{2}(G - C) \ge (6k-1) - 6 = 6(k-1) - 1$.
Note that $|G-C| \ge 3(k-1)$.
Since
statement (S\ref{s2}) is true for $k-1$ by the induction hypothesis,
$G-C$ contains $k-1$ disjoint cycles of lengths $0$-mod~$3$.
With the cycle $C$, we get then $k$ disjoint cycles of lengths $0$-mod~$3$.
Suppose now that $g(G) \ge 4$.
Then, since
$\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 6k - 1 = 2\big( 3(k-1) + 3 \big) - 1$,
it follows from Theorem~\ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2 tri-free}
that
there exist two disjoint subgraphs $H_{1}$ and $H_{2}$ of $G$
such that
$|H_{1}| \ge 2 \cdot 3(k-1) > 3(k-1)$,
$\sigma_{2}(H_{1}) \ge 2 \cdot 3(k-1) - 1 = 6(k-1) - 1$,
$|H_{2}| \ge 2 \cdot 3 > 3$ and
$\sigma_{2}(H_{2}) \ge 2 \cdot 3 - 1 = 5$.
Hence by the induction hypothesis,
$H_{1}$ contains $k-1$ disjoint cycles of lengths $0$-mod~$3$,
and $H_{2}$ contains a cycle of length $0$-mod~$3$.
We get then $k$ disjoint cycles of lengths $0$-mod~$3$ in $G$.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
By Theorem~\ref{Chen and Saito} and Proposition~\ref{inductive step min deg},
we see that Problem~\ref{0modulo3 min deg} is solved in affirmative.
Similarly,
by Proposition~\ref{inductive step sigma2},
it is only necessary to consider the case of $k=1$ for Problem~\ref{0modulo3 sigma2}.
In the next subsection,
we completely solve Problem~\ref{0modulo3 sigma2} by showing the following.
\begin{thm}
\label{0modulo3 sigma2 k=1}
Every graph $G$ of order at least $3$ with $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 5$ contains a cycle
of length $0$-mod~$3$.
\end{thm}
\medskip
We mention other cases in the rest of this subsection.
It is a well-known that
every graph $G$ of order at least $3k$ with $\delta(G) \ge 2k$ contains
$k$ disjoint cycles,
which is a classical result by Corr\'{a}di and Hajnal \cite{Corradi-Hajnal}.
By the similar argument of the proof of Proposition~\ref{inductive step sigma2},
we can easily obtain a slightly weaker version of this;
Every graph $G$ with $\delta(G) \ge 3k-1$ contains
$k$ disjoint cycles.
Because if $G$ is a graph with $\delta(G) \ge 3k-1$,
then Theorem~\ref{Stiebitz} implies that
$G$ contains disjoint subgraphs $H_{1}$ and $H_{2}$
such that
$\delta(H_{1}) \ge 3(k-1) - 1$ and $\delta(H_{2}) \ge 2$
(see also \cite[Corollary 2]{Stiebitz}).
Similarly,
Theorem~\ref{Kaneko} leads to a triangle-free version of Corr\'{a}di and Hajnal's
(note that the minimum degree condition is best possible even if we assume a triangle-freeness).
In addition,
Enomoto \cite{Enomoto} and Wang \cite{Wang} independently gave a $\sigma_{2}$-version as follows;
Every graph $G$ of order at least $3k$ with $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 4k-1$ contains
$k$ disjoint cycles.
Theorems~\ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2} and \ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2 tri-free}
immediately lead to slightly weaker versions of this result as above.
Recently,
Gould, Horn and Magnant \cite{Gould-Horn-Magnant}
proposed the following conjecture,
which is a common generalization
of the above Corr\'{a}di and Hajnal's theorem and Hajnal and Szemer\'{e}di's theorem \cite{Hajnal and Szemeredi}
``every graph $G$ of order exactly $(c+1)k$ and of minimum degree at least $ck$ contains $k$ disjoint complete graphs of orders $c+1$''.
Here, for an integer $c \ge 0$,
a $c$-\textit{chorded cycle} is a cycle with $c$ chords.
\begin{Conj}[Gould, Horn and Magnant \cite{Gould-Horn-Magnant}]
\label{Gould-Horn-Magnant conj}
Let $c, k$ be integers with $c \ge 2$ and $k \ge 1$.
Every graph $G$ of order at least $(c+1)k$ with $\delta(G) \ge ck$
contains $k$ disjoint $\frac{(c+1)(c-2)}{2}$-chorded cycles.
\end{Conj}
They showed that
this conjecture is true
for very large graphs compared to $c$ and $k$
(see \cite{Gould-Horn-Magnant} for more details).
However,
by using Theorem~\ref{Stiebitz} and the following result (Theorem~\ref{Gould-Horn-Magnant}) by Gould et al. \cite{Gould-Horn-Magnant},
we can easily obtain a slightly weaker version of Conjecture~\ref{Gould-Horn-Magnant conj}
(see Corollary~\ref{weak Gould-Horn-Magnant conj}).
\begin{Thm}[Gould, Horn and Magnant \cite{Gould-Horn-Magnant}]
\label{Gould-Horn-Magnant}
Let $c \ge 2$ be an integer.
Every graph $G$ with $\delta(G) \ge c$ contains a $\frac{(c+1)(c-2)}{2}$-chorded cycle.
\end{Thm}
\begin{cor}
\label{weak Gould-Horn-Magnant conj}
Let $c, k$ be integers with $c \ge 2$ and $k \ge 1$.
Every graph $G$ with $\delta(G) \ge (c+1)k - 1$
contains $k$ disjoint $\frac{(c+1)(c-2)}{2}$-chorded cycles.
\end{cor}
In the same paper,
they also showed that
Conjecture~\ref{Gould-Horn-Magnant conj} holds when $G$ is triangle-free (see \cite[Theorem 6]{Gould-Horn-Magnant}).
However,
we can also obtain it by using Theorems~\ref{Kaneko} and \ref{Gould-Horn-Magnant}.
Moreover,
if we can obtain a $\sigma_{2}$-version of Theorem~\ref{Gould-Horn-Magnant},
then
by combining it with
Theorem~\ref{disjoint subgraphs sigma2},
we can also get the $\sigma_{2}$-version of Corollary~\ref{weak Gould-Horn-Magnant conj}.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{0modulo3 sigma2 k=1}}
\label{proof of 0modulo3 sigma2 k=1}
In this subsection,
we prove Theorem~\ref{0modulo3 sigma2 k=1}.
In the proof,
we will use the following Chen and Saito's result which is stronger than Theorem~\ref{Chen and Saito}.
\begin{Thm}[Chen and Saito \cite{Chen and Saito}]
\label{Chen and Saito2}
Every graph $G$ of order at least $3$ with at most one vertex of degree less than $3$, contains a cycle of length $0$-mod~$3$.
\end{Thm}
For a graph $G$ of order $n$ and an unordered pair $\lbrace u,v\rbrace$ of distinct vertices of $G$ (adjacent or not),
we define the graph $G_{u,v}$ of order $n-1$, as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item The vertices of $G_{u,v}$ are the vertices $x$ of $G$ distinct from $u$ and $v$, and the pair $\lbrace u,v\rbrace$.
\item The edges of $G_{u,v}$ are the edges $xy$ of $G$ with $x, y \notin \lbrace u,v\rbrace$
and the edges $xy$ with $x = \lbrace u,v\rbrace$, $y \notin \lbrace u,v\rbrace$
and $e_{G}(y, \{u, v\}) \neq 0$.
\end{itemize}
\medskip
\noindent
For a graph $G$ and an integer $s$,
we further let
$V_{s}(G) = \{v \in V(G) : d_{G}(v) = s\}$
and
$V_{ \ge s}(G) = \{v \in V(G) : d_{G}(v) \ge s\}$.
\medskip
\noindent
\textit{Proof of Theorem~\ref{0modulo3 sigma2 k=1}.}~We proceed by induction on $n := |G|$.
Clearly the assertion is true for $n = 3$.
Suppose that the assertion is true up to the row $n-1$, $n\geq 4$, and let us study for $n$.
So $G$ is a graph of order $n\geq 4$ with $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 5$.
Clearly, if $G$ contains triangles, we are done.
So, we may suppose that $g(G) \ge 4$.
Since $\sigma_{2}(G) \ge 5$ and $g(G) \ge 4$,
it follows from Lemma~\ref{sigma}(\ref{complete}) that
$V_{\le 2}(G)$ is a clique and $|V_{\le 2}(G)| \le 2$.
If $|V_{\le 2}(G)| \le 1$, by Theorem~\ref{Chen and Saito2}, $G$ contains a cycle of length $0$-mod~$3$.
So, we may suppose that $|V_{\le 2}(G)| = 2$, say $V_{\le 2}(G) = \lbrace x, y \rbrace$.
Recall that $xy \in E(G)$.
Suppose that one of the vertices of $V_{\le 2}(G)$, say $y$ is of degree $1$ in $G$.
It is easy to see that the induced subgraph $G_1=G-y$ of $G$
has exactly one vertex of degree less than $3$.
Then $G_1$ contains a cycle of length $0$-mod~$3$, and we are done.
So $V_{\le 2}(G) = \{x, y\} = V_{2}(G)$,
and since $x$ and $y$ does not have a common neighbor (for otherwise triangles),
$x$ has a unique neighbor $u$ distinct from $y$ and $y$ has a unique neighbor $v$ distinct from $x$ and $u$.
Suppose first that $uv \in E(G)$. We put $G'=G-\lbrace x,y\rbrace$.
It is easy to see that every vertex of $G'_{u,v}$ distinct from the vertex $\lbrace u,v\rbrace$ is of degree at least $3$ in $G'_{u,v}$.
Then $G'_{u,v}$ contains a cycle $C$ of length $0$-mod~$3$.
If $\lbrace u,v\rbrace$ is not a vertex of $C$, clearly we are done.
Suppose now that $\{u, v\}$ is a vertex of $C$.
We put $C=(x_1, x_2,\ldots,x_r,x_1)$, where $x_{1} = \{u, v\}$.
If $u$ or $v$ is a common neighbor of $x_{r}$ and $x_{2}$, clearly we are done.
If it is not the case, we may suppose that $x_2$ is adjacent to $v$ and that $x_r$ is adjacent to $u$.
Then $P=(v,x_2,\ldots,x_r,u)$ is a path of $G$ such that $|P| \equiv 1 \pmod 3$.
Since $x, y \notin V(P)$,
$C'=(x,y,P,x)$ is a cycle of $G$ of length $0$-mod~$3$.
\vspace{0.2cm}
So, we may suppose that $uv \notin E(G)$.
We distinguish two cases:
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Case 1.} $\{u, v\} \cap V_{\ge 4}(G) \neq \emptyset$.
Without loss of generality, we may suppose that $u \in V_{\ge 4}(G)$.
Then it is easy to see that every vertex of $G'=G-\lbrace x,y\rbrace$ distinct from $v$ is of degree at least $3$ in $G'$.
By Theorem~\ref{Chen and Saito2},
$G'$ (and therefore $G$) contains a cycle of length $0$-mod~$3$, and then we are done.
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Case 2.} $\{u, v\} \cap V_{\ge 4}(G) = \emptyset$, i.e., $u, v \in V_{3}(G)$.
We put again $G'=G-\lbrace x,y\rbrace$, and we consider the graph $G'_{u,v}$.
Suppose that the vertex $\lbrace u,v\rbrace$ of $G'_{u,v}$ has degree at least $3$ in $G'_{u,v}$.
Since each of the vertices $u$ and $v$ has exactly $2$ neighbors in $G-\lbrace x,y,v,u\rbrace$,
and since $\lbrace u,v\rbrace$ has degree at least $3$ in $G'_{u,v}$,
it follows that $u$ and $v$ have at most one common neighbor in $G'$,
and then it is easy to see that at most one vertex of $G'_{u,v}$ is of degree less than $3$ in $G'_{u,v}$.
By Theorem~\ref{Chen and Saito2}, $G'_{u,v}$ contains a cycle $C$ of length $0$-mod~$3$,
and then as above we get a cycle of $G$ of length $0$-mod~$3$.
So, we may suppose that $\lbrace u,v\rbrace$ has degree at most $2$ in $G'_{u,v}$.
Then necessarily, $u$ and $v$ have two common neighbors $w$ and $z$ in $G'$.
Observe that $x, y, v $ and $u$ have no neighbors in $G-\lbrace x,y,v,u, w,z\rbrace$ and that $wz \notin E(G)$.
Suppose that $\{w, z\} \cap V_{\ge 4}(G) \neq \emptyset$.
Consider then the graph $G''=G-\lbrace x,y,v\rbrace$.
Then, it is easy see that $\sigma_2(G'')\geq 5$, and hence by the induction hypothesis, we are done.
So, we may suppose $w, z \in V_{3}(G)$.
We consider now two subcases.
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Case 2.1.} $w$ has a neighbor $a$ in $G-\lbrace x,y,v,u, w,z\rbrace$
and $z$ has a neighbor $b$ in $G-\lbrace x,y,v,u, w,z\rbrace$ distinct from $a$.
Suppose first that $ab \in E(G)$.
We consider the graph $G_1=G-\lbrace x,y,v,u, w,z \rbrace$.
It is easy to see that $\sigma_2(G_1)\geq 5$ and then by the induction hypothesis we are done.
Suppose now that $ab \notin E(G)$.
Then the graph $G_2=G_1+ab$ is of minimum degree at least $3$.
Then $G_2$ contains a cycle $C_1$ of length $0$-mod~$3$.
If $C_1$ does not contain the edge $ab$ of $G_2$, we are done.
If $C_1$ contains $ab$, then by deleting this edge and by adding the vertices $w$, $u$ and $z$,
we get a cycle of $G$ of length $0$-mod~$3$, and so we are done.
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Case 2.2.} The vertices $w$ and $z$ have a common neighbor $a$ in $G-\lbrace x,y,v,u,w,z\rbrace$.
It is easy to see that all the vertices of $G_1=G-\lbrace x,y,v,u, w,z\rbrace$ distinct from $a$ are of degree at least $3$ in $G_1$,
and then by Theorem~\ref{Chen and Saito2}, we are done.
So, the assertion is true for $n$, and Theorem~\ref{0modulo3 sigma2 k=1} is proved.
{$\quad\square$\vs{3.6}}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{Sec:introduction}
Instabilities of the oscillators used for up- and down-conversion of signals in communication systems give rise to the phenomenon known
as \emph{phase noise}.
The impairment on the system performance can be severe even for high-quality oscillators, if the continuous-time waveform
is processed by long filters at the receiver side.
This is the case, for example, when the symbol time is very long, as happens when using orthogonal frequency division multiplexing.
Typically, the phase noise generated by oscillators is a random process with memory,
and this makes the analysis of the capacity challenging.
The phase noise is usually modeled as a Wiener process, as it turns out to be accurate in describing the phase noise statistic
of certain lasers used in fiber-optic communications~\cite{FoschiniVannucci}. As the sampled output of the filter matched to the transmit filter
does not always represent a sufficient statistic~\cite{BarlettaISIT2014, BarlettaCROWNCOM2014}, oversampling does help in achieving higher rates over the continuous-time
channel~\cite{Martalo2013, GhozlanISIT2013, GhozlanGLOBECOM}.
To simplify the analysis, some works assume a modified channel model where the filtered phase noise does not consider amplitude fading,
and thus derive numerical and analytical bounds~\cite{Barletta2013, BarlettaTIT2014, GhozlanISIT2014, BarlettaITW2015}.
The aim of this paper is to give a capacity lower bound without
any simplifying assumption on the statistic of filtered phase noise. Specifically,
we extend the existing results for amplitude modulation, partly published in~\cite{GhozlanISIT2013}, and present new
results for phase modulation.
\emph{Notation:} Capital letters denote random variables or random processes. The notation $X_m^n = (X_m,X_{m+1},\ldots, X_n)$ with $n \ge m$
is used for random vectors. With ${\cal N}(0, \sigma^2)$ we denote the probability distribution of a real Gaussian
random variable with zero mean and variance $\sigma^2$. The symbol $\stackrel{{\cal D}}{=}$ means equality in
distribution.
Given a complex random variable $X$, we use the notation $|X|$ and $\angle X$ to denote the amplitude and the phase of $X$,
respectively. The binary operator $\oplus$ denotes summation modulo $[-\pi,\pi)$.
The operators $\expect{\cdot}$, $\ent{\cdot}$, and $\mi{\cdot}{\cdot}$ denote expectation, differential entropy, and mutual information,
respectively.
\section{System model}
\label{Sec:system}
The output of a continuous-time phase noise channel can be written as
\begin{equation}
Y(t) = X(t) e^{j\Theta(t)} + W(t),\qquad 0\le t\le T \label{eq:model}
\end{equation}
where $j=\sqrt{-1}$, $X(\cdot)$ is the data bearing input waveform, and $W$ is a circularly symmetric complex white Gaussian noise.
The phase process is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Theta}
\Theta(t) = \Theta(0) + \gamma\sqrt{T} B(t/T),\qquad 0\le t\le T,
\end{equation}
where $B(\cdot)$ is a standard Wiener process, i.e., a process characterized by the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item $B(0)=0$,
\item for any $1\ge t> s\ge 0$, \mbox{$B(t)-B(s)\sim {\cal N}(0,t-s)$} is independent of the sigma algebra generated by \mbox{$\{B(u): u\le s\}$},
\item $B(\cdot)$ has continuous sample paths.
\end{itemize}
One can think of the Wiener phase process as an accumulation of white noise:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ThetaWiener}
\Theta(t) = \Theta(0) + \gamma \int_0^t B'(\tau)\mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} \tau,\qquad 0\le t\le T,
\end{equation}
where $B'(\cdot)$ is a standard white Gaussian noise process.
\subsection{Signals and Signal Space}
\label{subsec:signals}
Suppose $X(\cdot)$ is in the set ${\cal L}^2[0,T]$ of finite-energy signals in the interval $[0,T]$.
Let $\{\phi_{m}(t)\}_{m=1}^\infty$ be an orthonormal basis of ${\cal L}^2[0,T]$. We may write
\begin{align}
X(t)= \sum_{m=1}^\infty X_m \: \phi_m(t),
\quad W(t) = \sum_{m=1}^\infty W_m \: \phi_m(t) \label{eq:W}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
X_m &= \int_{0}^{T} X(t) \: \phi_m(t)^\star \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} t,
\end{align}
$x^\star$ is the complex conjugate of $x$, and the $\{W_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$ are independent and identically distributed (iid),
complex-valued, circularly symmetric,
Gaussian random variables with zero mean and unit variance.
The projection of the received signal onto the $n-$th basis function is
\begin{align}
Y_n &= \int_{0}^{T} Y(t) \: \phi_n(t)^\star \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} t\\
&= \sum_{m=1}^\infty X_m \int_{0}^{T} \phi_m(t) \: \phi_n(t)^\star \: e^{j\Theta(t)} \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} t + W_n \\
&= \sum_{m=1}^\infty X_m \: \Phi_{mn} + W_n. \label{eq:mimo}
\end{align}
The set of equations given by \eqref{eq:mimo} for $n=1,2,\ldots$ can be interpreted as the output of an infinite-dimensional multiple-input multiple-output channel, whose
fading channel matrix is $\Phi=[\Phi_{mn}]$.
\subsection{Receivers with Finite Time Resolution}
\label{Sec:receiver}
Consider a receiver whose time resolution is limited to $\Delta$ seconds, in the sense that every projection must
include at least a $\Delta$-second interval. More precisely, we set $ML\Delta=T$, where $M$ is the number of independent
symbols transmitted in $[0,T]$ and $L$ is the oversampling factor, i.e., the number of samples per symbol.
The integrate-and-dump receiver with resolution time $\Delta$ uses the basis functions
\begin{align}
\phi_m(t) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
1/\sqrt{\Delta}, & t \in [(m-1)\Delta,m\Delta) \\
0, & \text{elsewhere}.
\end{array} \right. \label{eq:rect}
\end{align}
for $m=1,\ldots,ML$.
With the choice~\eqref{eq:rect}, the fading channel matrix $\Phi$ is diagonal and the channel's output for \mbox{$n=1,\ldots,ML$} is
\begin{align}
Y_n &= X_n \: \frac{1}{\Delta} \int_{(n-1)\Delta}^{n \Delta} e^{j\Theta(t)} \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} t+ W_n \nonumber\\
&=X_n \: e^{j \Theta((n-1)\Delta)}\frac{1}{\Delta} \int_{(n-1)\Delta}^{n \Delta} e^{j(\Theta(t)-\Theta((n-1)\Delta))} \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} t+ W_n \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{{\cal D}}{=} X_n \: e^{j \Theta_n}\frac{1}{\Delta} \int_{0}^{\Delta} e^{j\gamma \sqrt{\Delta} B_n(t/\Delta)} \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} t+ W_n \label{eq:Ync}\\
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} X_n \: e^{j \Theta_n} \int_{0}^{1} e^{j\gamma \sqrt{\Delta} B_n(t)} \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} t+ W_n \nonumber\\
&=X_n \: e^{j \Theta_n} F_n+ W_n,\label{eq:Yne}
\end{align}
where we have used the notation $\Theta_n=\Theta((n-1)\Delta)$ and $F_n = \int_{0}^{1} e^{j\gamma \sqrt{\Delta} B_n(t)} \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} t$.
In~\eqref{eq:Ync} we have used~\eqref{eq:Theta}, the property $B(t/T)-B((n-1)\Delta/T)\stackrel{{\cal D}}{=}B(t/T-(n-1)\Delta/T)$,
the substitution
\begin{equation}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
t\leftarrow t-(n-1)/\Delta \\
B_n(t/T) \leftarrow B(t/T - (n-1)\Delta/T),
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
and the property $\sqrt{T}B_n(t/T)\stackrel{{\cal D}}{=} \sqrt{\Delta}B_n(t/\Delta)$. Finally, in step~$(a)$ we have used the
substitution $t \leftarrow t/\Delta$.
Since the oversampling factor is $L$, we have $X_{kL+1}=X_{kL+2}=\ldots=X_{kL+L}$ for $k=0,\ldots,M-1$, and we can write the model~\eqref{eq:Yne}
as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:contmodel}
Y_n = X_{\lceil n/L \rceil L} \: e^{j \Theta_n} F_n+ W_n
\end{equation}
for $n=1,\ldots, ML$.
The vectors $X_1^{ML}$, $F_1^{ML}$, and $W_1^{ML}$
are independent of each other.
The variables $\{X_{kL}\}_{k=1}^M$ are chosen as iid with zero mean and variance
$\expect{|X_{n}|^2}$, and the average power constraint is
\begin{align}
\expect{\frac{1}{T}\int_0^T |X(t)|^2 \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} t} &= \frac{1}{ML\Delta} \sum_{n=1}^{ML} \expect{|X_n|^2 } \nonumber\\
&=\frac{\expect{|X_n|^2 }}{\Delta}\le {\cal P}. \label{eq:power}
\end{align}
Since we set the power spectral density of $W$ to 1, the power ${\cal P}$ is also the SNR, i.e.,
$\mathsf{SNR} = {\cal P}$.
Using~\eqref{eq:ThetaWiener}, the variables $\Theta_1^{ML}$ follow a discrete-time Wiener process:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ThetaWiener1}
\Theta_n = \Theta_{n-1} + N_{n-1}, \qquad n=1,\ldots, ML,
\end{equation}
where the $N_n$'s are iid Gaussian variables with zero mean and variance $\gamma^2 \Delta$.
The fading variables $F_n$'s are complex-valued and iid, and $F_n$ is independent of $\Theta_1^{n}$.
In other words, $F_n$ is correlated only to $N_n$, and is independent of the vector $(N_1^{n-1},N_{n+1}^{ML})$.
Note that for any finite $\Delta$, or equivalently for any finite oversampling factor $L$, the vector $Y_1^{ML}$ does not
represent a sufficient statistic for the detection of $X$ given $Y$ in the model~\eqref{eq:model}.
\section{Lower bound on capacity}\label{Sec:upper}
We compute a lower bound to the capacity of the continuous-time Wiener phase noise channel~\eqref{eq:contmodel}-\eqref{eq:ThetaWiener1}.
For notational convenience, we use the following indexing for $i=1,\ldots, L$ and $k=1,\ldots, M$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:model1}
Y_{(k-1)L+i} = X_k \: e^{j \Theta_{(k-1)L+i}} F_{(k-1)L+i} + W_{(k-1)L+i},
\end{equation}
and we group the output samples associated with $X_k$ in the vector ${\bf Y}_k=Y_{(k-1)L+1}^{(k-1)L+L}$.
The capacity is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:capacity}
\capacity{\mathsf{SNR}} = \lim_{M\rightarrow \infty}\frac{1}{M}\sup \mi{X_1^M}{{\bf Y}_1^M}
\end{equation}
where the supremum is taken among the distributions of $X_1^M$ such that the average power constraint~\eqref{eq:power} is satisfied.
The mutual information rate can be lower-bounded as follows:
\begin{align}
&\frac{1}{M}\mi{X_1^M}{{\bf Y}_1^M} = \frac{1}{M}\sum_{k=1}^M\micnd{X_k}{{\bf Y}_1^M}{X_1^{k-1}} \nonumber\\
& \stackrel{(a)}{=}\frac{1}{M}\sum_{k=1}^M\micnd{|X_k|}{{\bf Y}_1^M}{X_1^{k-1}}+\micnd{\angle X_k}{{\bf Y}_1^M}{X_1^{k-1},|X_k|} \nonumber\\
& \stackrel{(b)}{\ge}\frac{1}{M}\sum_{k=1}^M \mi{|X_k|^2}{||{\bf Y}_k||^2}+\micnd{\angle X_k}{{\bf Y}_{k-1}^k}{X_{k-1},|X_k|} \nonumber\\
& = \underbrace{\mi{|X_1|^2}{||{\bf Y}_1||^2}}_{I_{||}} + \underbrace{\micnd{\angle X_1}{{\bf Y}_{0}^1}{X_{0},|X_1|}}_{I_{\angle}} \label{eq:first}
\end{align}
where step~$(a)$ follows by polar decomposition of $X_k$, step~$(b)$ holds by a data processing inequality, by reversibility of the map $x \mapsto x^2$ for non-negative reals,
and because $X_1^{k-1}$ is independent of $(X_k, {\bf Y}_k)$. Finally, the last equality follows by stationarity of the processes.
\subsection{Amplitude Modulation}
By choosing a specific input distribution that satisfies the average power constraint we always get a lower bound on
the mutual information,
so we choose the input distribution as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:input_distr}
p_{|X_k|^2}(x) = \left\{\begin{array}{lr}
\frac{1}{\lambda} \exp\left(-\frac{x-\Delta^{-t} }{\lambda}\right) & x\ge \Delta^{-t} \\
0 & \text{elsewhere}
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
where $\lambda = \mathsf{SNR} \Delta-\Delta^{-t}>0$ with $t>0$. Note that with this choice the average power constraint is satisfied with equality, i.e., $\expect{|X_k|^2}=\mathsf{SNR}\Delta$.
Similar to the method used in~\cite{GhozlanISIT2013}, we give here a lower bound to the first term on the right hand side (RHS) of~\eqref{eq:first} in the form
\begin{equation}
I_{||}\ge \expect{-\ln q_{V}(V)} - \expect{-\ln q_{V |\: |X_1|^2}(V |\: |X_1|^2)}
\end{equation}
where $V=||{\bf Y}_1||^2$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:aux_output}
q_V(v) = \int_0^\infty p_{|X_1|^2}(x) q_{V |\: |X_1|^2}(v | x) \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} x.
\end{equation}
Specifically, we choose the \emph{auxiliary channel} distribution as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:auxiliary}
q_{V |\: |X_1|^2}(v | x) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi \nu x}} \exp\left(-\frac{(v-L(1+x\expect{G}))^2}{\nu x}\right)
\end{equation}
where $G=||{\bf F}_1||^2/L$ and $\nu>0$, for which we have\footnote{Details are provided in the extended version of the paper.}
\begin{align}\label{eq:V_given_X}
&\expect{-\ln q_{V |\: |X_1|^2}(V |\: |X_1|^2)} = \frac{1}{2}\ln\left(\pi\nu\right)+\frac{1}{2} \expect{\ln(|X_1|^2)}\nonumber\\
&\quad + \frac{L}{\nu}\left(\frac{\expect{|X_1|^2}}{\Delta} \variance{G}+ 2\expect{G}+\expect{\frac{1}{|X_1|^2}}\right)\nonumber\\
&\le \frac{1}{2}\ln\left(\pi\nu\lambda\right)+\frac{\Delta^{-t} }{2\lambda} + \frac{L}{\nu}\left(\mathsf{SNR}\cdot \variance{G}+ 2+\Delta^t\right)
\end{align}
where the inequality is due to $\expect{G}\le 1$, $\expect{|X_1|^2}\le\mathsf{SNR}\Delta$, the bound $\expect{|X_k|^{-2}}\le \Delta^t$ which follows from the support of $|X_k|^2$, and
\begin{align}
\expect{\ln|X_1|^2} &= \int_{\Delta^{-t}}^\infty \frac{1}{\lambda} \exp\left(-\frac{x-\Delta^{-t} }{\lambda}\right) \ln(x) \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} x \nonumber\\
&= \ln\lambda + \int_{\Delta^{-t}/\lambda}^\infty \exp\left(-\left(u-\frac{\Delta^{-t} }{\lambda}\right)\right) \ln(u) \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} u \nonumber\\
&\le \ln\lambda +\frac{\Delta^{-t} }{\lambda}. \label{eq:explogX}
\end{align}
By substituting~\eqref{eq:auxiliary} and~\eqref{eq:input_distr} into~\eqref{eq:aux_output}, and
by following similar steps to those of~\cite{GhozlanISIT2013}, we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq:V}
\expect{-\ln q_{V}(V)} \ge -\frac{\Delta^{-t} }{\lambda}+\frac{1}{2}\ln(L^2\mu^2\lambda^2+\lambda\nu).
\end{equation}
By putting together~\eqref{eq:V_given_X} and~\eqref{eq:V} we obtain
\begin{align}
I_{||}&\ge -\frac{3\Delta^{-t} }{2\lambda}+\frac{1}{2}\ln(L^2\mu^2\lambda^2+\lambda\nu) - \frac{1}{2}\ln\left(\pi\nu\lambda\right)\nonumber\\
&\quad - \frac{L}{\nu}\left(\mathsf{SNR}\cdot \variance{G}+ 2+\Delta^t\right). \label{eq:amplitude_mi}
\end{align}
In the limit of large time resolution we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:averageG}
\lim_{\Delta\rightarrow 0} \frac{\variance{G}}{\Delta^3} = \frac{\gamma^2}{45}.
\end{equation}
Now we let the time resolution grow as a power of the SNR, i.e., $\Delta^{-1}=\lceil \mathsf{SNR}^\alpha \rceil$, and the parameter $\nu=\rho\Delta^{-\beta}$, with $\rho>0$. By using~\eqref{eq:averageG} into~\eqref{eq:amplitude_mi}, in order to find a tight bound in the interval $1/3\le\alpha\le 1$ we need to satisfy the conditions\footnote{Details are provided in the extended version of the paper.} $\alpha < 1/(t+1)$ and $\beta \ge 1$. The tightest bound is obtained with $\beta=1$ and $\rho=4$:
\begin{align}\label{eq:limit_amplitude1}
\lim\limits_{\mathsf{SNR}\rightarrow\infty}\left\{ I_{||} - \frac{1}{2}\ln(\mathsf{SNR}) \right\} \ge -\frac{1}{2}\ln(4\pi e).
\end{align}
For $0<\alpha<1/3$ we need to satisfy the conditions $\alpha < 1/(t+1)$ and $\alpha \ge 1/(\beta+2)$, and the tightest bound is obtained by choosing $\beta = \alpha^{-1}-2$ and $\rho = 2\gamma^2/45$:
\begin{align}\label{eq:limit_amplitude2}
\lim_{\mathsf{SNR}\rightarrow\infty}\left\{I_{||}-\frac{3\alpha}{2}\ln\left(\mathsf{SNR}\right)\right\}
&\ge - \frac{1}{2}\ln\left(\frac{2\pi\gamma^2 e}{45}\right).
\end{align}
\subsection{Phase Modulation}
The second term in the RHS of~\eqref{eq:first} can be lower-bounded as follows
\begin{align}
&\micnd{\angle X_1}{{\bf Y}_{0}^1}{X_{0},|X_1|} \stackrel{(a)}{\ge} \micnd{\angle X_1}{\Phi}{X_{0},|X_1|}\nonumber\\
&\ge \expect{-\ln q_{\Phi|X_0,|X_1|}(\Phi|X_0,|X_1|)} -\expect{-\ln q_{\Phi|X_0^1}(\Phi|X_0^1)} \label{eq:phase}
\end{align}
where step~$(a)$ is due to a data processing inequality with
\begin{align}\label{eq:processing_phase}
\Phi&=\angle(Y_1 (Y_0 e^{-j\angle X_0} )^\star) \nonumber\\
&=\angle X_1 \oplus \angle(|X_1|F_1+W_1) \oplus \angle(|X_0|F_0^\star e^{j N_0}+W_0^\star),
\end{align}
and the last inequality follows by choosing the auxiliary channel
\begin{equation}\label{eq:auxiliary_phase}
q_{\Phi|X_0^1}(\phi|x_0^1) = \frac{\exp(\zeta \cos(\phi-\angle x_1))}{2\pi I_0(\zeta)}
\end{equation}
where $I_0(\cdot)$ is the zero-th order modified Bessel function of the first kind, and $\zeta$ is a positive real number. Since we assume an uniform input phase distribution,
the output distribution is also uniform:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:uniform}
q_{\Phi|X_0,|X_1|}(\phi|x_0,|x_1|) = \int_0^{2\pi} q_{\Phi|X_0^1}(\phi|x_0^1) \frac{1}{2\pi} \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} \angle x_1 = \frac{1}{2\pi}.
\end{equation}
Using~\eqref{eq:auxiliary_phase}, the second term in the RHS of~\eqref{eq:phase} can be upper-bounded as follows for any $\Delta \le \bar\Delta<\infty$:
\begin{align}
\expect{-\ln q_{\Phi|X_0^1}(\Phi|X_0^1)} &= \ln(2\pi I_0(\zeta)) - \zeta\expect{ \cos(\Phi-\angle X_1)}\nonumber\\
&\le \ln(\pi\sqrt{\pi})+\frac{1}{2}\ln\left(\frac{1}{\zeta}\right)+\zeta \rho\nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{2}\ln\left(2\pi^3 e\rho\right) \label{eq:phase_mod}
\end{align}
where the inequality is due to $I_0(\zeta)\le \sqrt{\pi}/2 \cdot e^\zeta/\sqrt{\zeta}$ derived in~\cite[Lemma 2]{GhozlanISIT2010}, and from the result of Appendix~\ref{App:cos} with
\begin{equation}
\rho = 1-\expect{F_0 e^{-j N_0}}\expect{F_1}+2e^{-3\gamma^2\Delta/8}\expect{|X_1|^{-2}}K_{\bar\Delta}
\end{equation}
where $K_{\bar\Delta}>1$ is a finite number\footnote{For example, choosing $\gamma^2\Delta=0.01$ gives $K_{\bar\Delta}=8.1353$. See the extended version of the paper for a detailed derivation.}.
The last step in~\eqref{eq:phase_mod} is obtained by choosing $\zeta = (2\rho)^{-1}$.
In the limit of large time resolution we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:averageRho}
\lim_{\Delta\rightarrow 0} \left\{\frac{\rho}{\Delta}- 2 K_{\bar\Delta} \Delta^{t-1}\right\} \le \frac{2}{3}\gamma^2
\end{equation}
where the inequality follows from the bound $\expect{|X_1|^{-2}}\le \Delta^t$. Choosing $t=1$ and putting together~\eqref{eq:phase} and~\eqref{eq:uniform}-\eqref{eq:averageRho}
we get
\begin{align}
\lim_{\Delta\rightarrow 0} \bigg\{I_{\angle}+\frac{1}{2}\ln(\Delta)\bigg\} \ge \frac{1}{2}\ln\left(\frac{3}{\pi e (\gamma^2+3 K_{\bar\Delta})}\right),
\end{align}
and letting the time resolution grow as a power of the SNR, i.e., $\Delta^{-1}=\lceil \mathsf{SNR}^\alpha \rceil$, for $0<\alpha\le 1/2$ we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:limit_phase}
\lim_{\mathsf{SNR}\rightarrow \infty} \left\{I_{\angle}-\frac{\alpha}{2}\ln(\mathsf{SNR})\right\}\ge \frac{1}{2}\ln\left(\frac{3}{\pi e (\gamma^2+3 K_{\bar\Delta})}\right).
\end{align}
\section{Discussion}\label{Sec:discussion}
As a byproduct of~\eqref{eq:limit_amplitude1}, \eqref{eq:limit_amplitude2}, and~\eqref{eq:limit_phase}, a lower bound to the capacity pre-log is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:prelog}
\lim_{\mathsf{SNR}\rightarrow\infty} \frac{\capacity{\mathsf{SNR}}}{\ln(\mathsf{SNR})} \ge
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
2\alpha & 0<\alpha\le 1/3 \\
(1+\alpha)/2 & 1/3\le\alpha\le 1/2 \\
3/4 & 1/2 \le \alpha < 1.
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
Figure~\ref{fig} shows the lower bounds on the capacity pre-log versus the parameter $\alpha$, as reported by~\eqref{eq:prelog}.
The contributions of amplitude and phase modulation are also shown separately: Amplitude modulation reaches full degrees of
freedom by sampling more than $\sqrt[3]{\mathsf{SNR}}$ samples per symbol, while phase modulation achieves at least half of the available degrees
of freedom by using a time resolution that scales as $1/\sqrt{\mathsf{SNR}}$.
The input distribution that achieves the capacity lower bound is uniform in phase and the square amplitude is distributed as a shifted exponential~\eqref{eq:input_distr}.
The statistic used for detecting $|X_k|$ is $||{\bf Y}_k||$, and the one used for detecting $\angle X_k$ is $\angle \left( Y_{(k-1)L+1} \left(Y_{(k-1)L}e^{-j\angle X_{k-1}}\right)^\star \right)$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{./prelog_lower_bound.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Capacity pre-log lower bounds as a function of $\alpha$ at high SNR. The oversampling factor $L$ is $L=\lceil \mathsf{SNR}^\alpha \rceil$.}
\label{fig}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}\label{Sec:conclusion}
We have derived a lower bound to the capacity of continuous-time Wiener phase noise channels with an average transmit power constraint.
As a byproduct, we have obtained a lower bound to the capacity pre-log at high SNR that depends on the growth rate
of the oversampling factor used at the receiver. If the oversampling factor grows proportionally to $\mathsf{SNR}^\alpha$,
then a capacity pre-log as high as that reported in~\eqref{eq:prelog} can be achieved.
\appendices
\section{A lower bound to $\expect{ \cos(\Phi-\angle X_1)}$}\label{App:cos}
The expectation can be simplified as follows:
\begin{align}
&\expect{ \cos(\Phi-\angle X_1)} \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \expect{ \cos( \angle(|X_1|F_1+W_1)-\angle(|X_0|F_0 e^{-j N_0}+W_0))}\nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} \expect{\cos(\angle(|X_1|F_1+W_1))}\expect{ \cos(\angle(|X_0|F_0 e^{-j N_0}+W_0))}\nonumber\\
&\ +\expect{\sin(\angle(|X_1|F_1+W_1))}\expect{ \sin(\angle(|X_0|F_0 e^{-j N_0}+W_0))}\nonumber\\
&=\expect{\cos(\angle(|X_1|F_1+W_1))}\expect{ \cos(\angle(|X_0|F_0 e^{-j N_0}+W_0))} \label{eq:app_expectation}
\end{align}
where step~$(a)$ is due to~\eqref{eq:processing_phase}, step~$(b)$ to the addition formula for cosine and independence of random variables, and the last step follows because $\expect{\sin(\angle(|X_1|F_1+W_1))}=0$ as $F_1$ and $W_1$ have symmetric pdfs with respect to the real axis.
The first expectation on the RHS of~\eqref{eq:app_expectation} can be written as
\begin{align}
\expect{\Re\{e^{j\angle(|X_1| F_1+W_1)}\}}&= \expect{\Re\{e ^{j\angle F_1}e^{j\angle(|X_1 F_1|+W_1)}\}}\nonumber\\
&= \expect{\cos(\angle F_1)\cos(\angle(|X_1 F_1| +W_1))} \label{app:first_expectation}
\end{align}
where the first step is due to the circular symmetry of $W_1$, and the second step because of the symmetric pdfs of $F_1$ and $W_1$.
A lower bound to~\eqref{app:first_expectation} is given by
\begin{align}
&\expect{\Re\{e^{j\angle(|X_1| F_1+W_1)}\}}\stackrel{(a)}{\ge} \expect{\Re\{F_1\}\cos(\angle(|X_1 F_1| +W_1))} \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(b)}{\ge}\expect{ \Re\{F_1\}1(\Re\{F_1\}\ge 0)\left(1-\frac{1}{|X_1 F_1|^2}\right)} \nonumber\\
&\quad+\expect{\Re\{F_1\}1(\Re\{F_1\}< 0) }\nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(c)}{\ge} \expect{\Re\{F_1\} - 1(\Re\{F_1\}\ge 0)\frac{1}{|X_1 F_1|^2} }\nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(d)}{\ge} \expect{\Re\{F_1\} - \frac{1}{|X_1 F_1|^2} } \nonumber\\
&\ge \frac{2}{\gamma^2\Delta}\left(1-e^{-\gamma^2\Delta/2}\right) - \expect{\frac{1}{|X_1|^2}} K_{\bar\Delta} \label{app:cos2}
\end{align}
where step~$(a)$ holds because $|F_1|\le 1$, $(b)$ follows by $\cos(x)\le 1$ and by\footnote{The proof is provided in the extended version of the paper.}
\begin{equation}
\expect{\cos(\angle(\rho +W_1))} \ge 1-\frac{1}{\rho^2}, \qquad \rho>0,
\end{equation}
step~$(c)$ because $\Re\{F_1\}\le 1$, step~$(d)$
is obtained by subtracting $\expect{1(\Re\{F_1\}<0)\: |X_1 F_1|^{-2}}$, and the final inequality uses $\expect{|F_1|^{-2}}\le K_{\bar\Delta}$ for a finite suitable $\bar\Delta$
\footnote{The proof is provided in the extended version of the paper.}.
Following an analogous derivation used for finding~\eqref{app:cos2}, for the second factor on the RHS of~\eqref{eq:app_expectation} we have
\begin{align}
&\expect{\Re\{e^{j\angle(|X_0| F_0 e^{-j N_0}+W_0)}\}}\ge \expect{ \Re\{F_0 e^{-j N_0}\} - \frac{1}{|X_0 F_0|^2} } \nonumber\\
&\ge \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{\gamma^2\Delta}}\erf\left(\sqrt{\frac{\gamma^2\Delta}{8}}\right) e^{-3\gamma^2\Delta/8} - \expect{\frac{1}{|X_0|^2}} K_{\bar\Delta} \label{app:cos3}
\end{align}
where $\erf(\cdot)$ is the error function, and the closed form for $\expect{F_0 e^{-j N_0}}$ is provided in Appendix~\ref{App:expect}. Using~\eqref{app:cos2} and~\eqref{app:cos3} into~\eqref{eq:app_expectation}, with $\Re\{\expect{F_1}\}\le 1$, $\Re\{\expect{F_0 e^{-j N_0}}\}\le e^{-3\gamma^2\Delta/8}$,
$\expect{|X_0|^{-2}}\ge 0$, and $\expect{|F_0|^{-2}}\ge 0$, the final result is
\begin{align}
\expect{ \cos(\Phi-\angle X_1)} &\ge \expect{F_0 e^{-j N_0}}\expect{F_1}\nonumber\\
&\quad-2e^{-3\gamma^2\Delta/8}\expect{\frac{1}{|X_1|^2}} K_{\bar\Delta}.
\end{align}
\section{Evaluation of $\expect{F_0 e^{-j N_0}}$}\label{App:expect}
Knowing that $N_0=\sigma\int_0^1 B(\tau)\mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} \tau$ with $\sigma=\gamma\sqrt{\Delta}$, we compute
\begin{align}
\variance{\sigma B(t)-N_0} &= \sigma^2\variance{B(t)}+\variance{N_0}-2\sigma\expect{B(t)N_0} \nonumber\\
&=\sigma^2 (t + 1) -2\sigma^2 \int_0^1 \expect{B(t)B(\tau)} \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} \tau \nonumber\\
&=\sigma^2(t^2-t+1)\label{app:variance}
\end{align}
where the last step follows from the property of Wiener processes $\expect{B(t)B(\tau)}=\min\{t,\tau\}$. Thus we have
\begin{align}
\expect{F_0 e^{-j N_0}}&= \int_0^1 \expect{e^{j(\sigma B(t)-N_0)}} \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} t \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(a)}{=}\int_0^1 e^{-\variance{\sigma B(t)-N_0}/2} \mathop{}\mathopen{\mathrm{d}} t \nonumber\\
&=\sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{\sigma^2}} e^{-\frac{3}{8}\sigma^2} \erf\left(\sqrt{\frac{\sigma^2}{8}}\right)
\end{align}
where in step~$(a)$ we used the characteristic function of a Gaussian random variable, and in the last step we used~\eqref{app:variance}.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
L. Barletta and G. Kramer were supported by
an Alexander von Humboldt Professorship endowed by the
German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
A (topological) dynamical system\ $(X,T)$, where $X$ is a compact metric space and $T:X\to X$ is a continuous transformation,
gives rise to several ``hyper-systems''. For example, $T$ acts naturally on $2^X$, the space of
all compact subsets of $X$ equipped with the Hausdorff metric. Likewise, $T$ extends to a continuous
(in the weak-star topology) operator on the compact space of all (Borel) probability measures on $X$,
by the formula $(T\mu)(A) = \mu(T^{-1}(A))$ (see e.g. \cite{BS}).
In the same spirit (although now the domains are not necessarily compact), several versions of so-called \emph{functional envelope} of a dynamical system have been considered. In~\cite{AuKS} the authors introduce and study the (non-compact) ``hyper-system'' $(C(X,X), F_T)$, whose phase space $C(X,X)$ consists of all continuous self-maps of $X$, and the transformation $F_T: C(X,X) \to C(X,X)$ is defined by $F_T(\varphi) = T \circ \varphi$ ($\varphi \in C(X,X)$). Notice that $C(X,X)$ is a topological\ semigroup with respect to the uniform topology and $F_T$ is uniformly continuous (because $T$ is uniformly continuous).
Since $X$ is compact, the uniform metric agrees with the compact-open topology and it is also equivalent to the Hausdorff metric applied to the graphs of functions $X\to X$ (which are closed in $X\times X$). However, these two metrics are in general not uniformly equivalent, therefore the two versions, ``uniform" and ``Hausdorff", of the functional envelope (both addressed in \cite{AuKS}) may differ in some dynamical properties which depend on the metric (for example the topological\ entropy in non-compact systems does).\footnote{On the other hand, it is easy to see that the essential dynamical properties of the functional envelopes do not depend on the metric applied on $X$.} In the present paper we focus exclusively on the uniform metric, nonetheless some of our results extend without much effort to the Hausdorff metric as well. Also note that the action of $F_T$ is by the composition with $T$ on the left. The action by the composition on the right is always a contraction (by which, throughout this note, we understand that it does not increase the distance) in the uniform metric on $C(X,X)$ (it is an isometry if $T$ is surjective), so it is not very interesting in the studies of entropy.
Now suppose additionally that the map $T$ is a homeomorphism. Then the space $H(X,X)$ of all self-homeomorphisms of $X$ is invariant under $F_T$ and $(H(X,X), F_T)$ becomes another kind of functional envelope (also addressed in \cite{KS}). Now $H(X,X)$ is a topological group, in general not compact and not even complete in the uniform metric. It is thus customary to consider this group with the equivalent, but complete, symmetric metric obtained as the sum of the uniform distance and the uniform distance between inverses. However, the second part of this metric is easily seen to be invariant under $F_T$. Thus, despite the fact that it makes the action of $F_T$ distal, it does not contribute to entropy (which is our main subject of interest), therefore, from our point of view it is sufficient to equip $H(X,X)$ with the uniform distance (the lack of completeness will not bother us at all).
\medskip
It is known that the topological\ entropy of the ``hyper-system'' induced on probability measures behaves
quite radically: it equals zero if and only if $\mathsf h_{\mathsf{top}}(X,T)=0$, otherwise it is infinite
(see \cite{GW1}, \cite{GW2}). For the hyper-system on $2^X$ the si\-tua\-tion is different: If $T$ has positive entropy then the hyper-system has infinite entropy, otherwise the hyper-system may have zero, finite positive or infinite entropy (see \cite{KO}). In this paper we will be interested in the \emph{topological} entropy of the functional envelopes. Since no other entropy will be addressed, in what follows we will skip
the adjective ``topological''. Likewise, all topological\ spaces in this note are \emph{metric}, hence also this adjective will be skipped.
\medskip
Let us gather some basic known facts and open problems concerning the entropy of the functional envelopes:
\begin{enumerate}
\item [(1)] The entropy of $(C(X,X), F_T)$ is always not smaller than that of $(X,T)$; to see this it
suffices to consider the subsemigroup of constant self-maps, which is conjugate to $(X,T)$.
\item [(2)] On the other hand, it is not known whether the same inequality holds for $(H(X,X),F_T)$, see~\cite{KS}.
\item [(3)] There are examples of zero entropy continuous maps on countable spaces and on the
interval, for which $(C(X,X), F_T)$ has infinite entropy \cite{AuKS}.
\item [(4)] On the other hand, analogous examples for $(H(X,X), F_T)$ are missing.
\item [(5)] S. Kolyada and J. Semikina \cite{KS} conjecture that the functional envelope $(C(X,X), F_T)$ has entropy either zero or infinity. At present it is known that the conjecture holds true for all Peano continua and for all compact spaces with continuum many connected components \cite{KS}. Otherwise the conjecture remains open. The same problem can be posed for the functional envelope $(H(X,X),F_T)$ in
case $T$ is a homeomorphism.
\end{enumerate}
\medskip
In this paper we resolve some questions of this type:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)] If $T$ is a self-homeomorphism of a compact zero-dimensional space $X$ then both functional
envelopes $(C(X,X),F_T)$ and $(H(X,X),F_T)$ have infinite entropy except when $T$ is equicontinuous,
in which case both entropies are equal to zero, see Theorem~\ref{T:zerodim}.
This answers positively the question (2) and the Kolyada--Semikina conjecture (5) (also the version for
$(H(X,X),F_T)$) for homeomorphisms on compact zero-dimensional spaces.
\item[(b)] As an immediate consequence we get that there exist zero entropy homeomorphisms such that
$(H(X,X),F_T)$ has infinite entropy, providing examples called for in (4). We also give
a simple direct example, see the end of Section~\ref{S:zero-dim case}.
\item[(c)] There exists a positive (even infinite) entropy homeomorphism $T$ of a compact space $X$
such that $(H(X,X),F_T)$ has entropy zero, see Corollary~\ref{C:Tpositive FT zero}. This proves that
the general question (2) has a negative answer.
\begin{comment}
\item[(d)] In the direction of resolving the conjecture (5) we provide an example, for which the
$\epsilon$-entropy of $(H(X,X), F_T)$ is positive and finite for every (sufficiently small)
parameter $\epsilon$. This is very different from all so-far known examples, in which the positivity
of the entropy of $(H(X,X), F_T)$ led to infinite value of $\epsilon$-entropy for some fixed parameter
$\epsilon$. Nonetheless, in our example, the $\epsilon$-entropies grow inverse-proportionally to
$\epsilon$ and the overall entropy still equals infinity. We are unable to eliminate this effect
and we propose a refined version of Kolyada's conjecture.
\end{comment}
\end{enumerate}
The item (c) above is solved using a new class of spaces, which we call \emph{Slovak spaces}\footnote{The definition was postulated by the Slovak member of the team of authors and the examples were constructed during the visit of the Polish authors in Slovakia. Besides, the notion of Polish spaces already exists, and we believe that Slovakia also deserves to have its own class. And finally, our example of a Slovak space resembles a country with many mountain ranges, just like Slovakia.}, defined by the combination of two properties: the existence of a minimal homeomorphism, say $T$, and nonexistence of homeomorphisms other than the powers of~$T$. For such spaces we prove that the functional envelope
$(H(X,X), F_T)$ always has entropy zero. Of course, it is completely unclear that such spaces exist, not to mention that we would like the system $(X,T)$\ to have positive (or even infinite) entropy. Thus, large part of the paper is devoted to delivering appropriate examples, see Section~\ref{S:Slovak}.
As a byproduct, nonetheless an interesting and important outcome of our work, we prove
that among Slovak spaces we find long searched for examples of non-degenerate continua of type (1,0) (admitting a minimal homeomorphism but not a minimal non-invertible map) other than the circle (see \cite{BKS} for the formulation of the problem).
\section{Preliminaries}
A {\it continuum} is a nonempty, compact and connected space. A continuum is {\it decomposable} if it is a union of two proper subcontinua, otherwise it is called {\it indecomposable}. The {\it composant of a point} $x$ is the union of all proper subcontinua of $X$ which contain $x$. By a \emph{composant in $X$} we will mean the composant of some point. The continuum is said to be \emph{irreducible between two different points $x,y$} if there is no proper subcontinuum containing both $x$ and $y$. We will say, for short, that $x,y$ is an \emph{irreducible pair}.
We recall some known facts on composants and irreducible pairs; they all can be found in (or easily deduced from) \cite[pp. 83, 97, 196--205]{Na}.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(C1)] Unless $X$ is degenerate, the composants are dense connected subsets of $X$ and they cover $X$.
\item[(C2)] A subset $A$ of $X$ contains an irreducible pair if and only if there exist proper composants, but none of them contains $A$.
\item[(C3)] A decomposable continuum has either just one composant $X$ or three composants: $X$ and two proper composants that cover $X$.
\item[(C4)] If $X$ is a non-degenerate indecomposable continuum then its composants are pairwise disjoint, hence form a partition of $X$ into sets of first category, and thus there are uncountably many of them.
\end{enumerate}
We make an additional observation (which is not included in \cite{Na}):
\begin{lemma}\label{compan}
If $\varphi:X\to Y$ is a continuous map between continua and $Y$ has more than one composant, then each composant $\alpha$ of $X$ is mapped either into a proper composant of $Y$ or onto $Y$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} By (C2), if $\varphi(\alpha)$ is not contained in a proper composant then it contains an irreducible pair. A pair of preimages (of this pair) is contained in $\alpha$, hence in a subcontinuum
$C$ of $\alpha$. The image of $C$ is a continuum which contains an irreducible pair, so it is not proper, thus $\varphi(\alpha) = Y$. \hfill $\square$
\end{proof}
A dynamical system $(X,T)$ is called {\it minimal} if every forward orbit is dense
(if $T$ is a homeomorphism it suffices that every full orbit is dense). It is well known that a minimal system contains neither subinvariant nor superinvariant (i.e., such that $T(A)\subset A$ or $T(A)\supset A$, respectively) nonempty proper closed subsets (see \cite[Lemma 3.10]{BOT}). It is also well known that if $X$ is connected then every minimal map $T$ is \emph{totally minimal}, i.e., all iterates $T^n$, except of identity, are minimal.
A space $X$ is called of \emph{type $(i,j)$}, where $i,j\in\{0,1\}$, depending on whether there exists a minimal homeomorphism on $X$ (then $i=1$, otherwise $i=0$) and whether there exists a minimal non-invertible continuous map on $X$ (then $j=1$, otherwise $j=0$). For example, the interval
is of type $(0,0)$ (due to the fixed point property), the circle is of type $(1,0)$ (and up to now it was the unique non-degenerate continuum known to be of this type), the two-torus is of type $(1,1)$ and the pinched torus (two points glued together) is of type $(0,1)$.
We take this opportunity to prove a simple, yet never observed fact concerning decomposable continua with
three composants.
\begin{theorem}\label{threecomposants}
If $X$ is a decomposable continuum with three composants then it admits no minimal maps (is of type $(0,0)$).\footnote{None of the zeros in type $(0,0)$ follows trivially from the periodic point property. A counterexample exists in \cite[Proposition 1]{HMP}: the continuum $X$ is formed by two concentric circles connected by a spiral (which is a continuous injective image of the real line), whose one ``tail" wraps around the smaller circle from outside and the other ``tail" approaches the larger circle from inside. This continuum has three composants (the complements of each circle and $X$).
Any irrational rotation of the circles extends easily to a self-homeomorphism of $X$ having no periodic points. It is also easy to find noninvertible continuous surjections without periodic points.}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be the two proper composants.
Define $A=\overline{X\setminus\alpha}$ and $B=\overline{X\setminus\beta}$ (both are nonempty). If $A=B=X$ then $\alpha$ and $\beta$ have empty interiors implying that every proper subcontinuum is nowhere dense
(by (C3) and (C2), every proper subcontinuum is a subset of either $\alpha$ or $\beta$). Since $X$, being decomposable, is a union of two such subcontinua, this is impossible. Thus, we have e.g. $A\neq X$. Let $T:X\to X$ be a minimal map. Every proper subcontinuum $C$ is mapped by $T$ to a proper subcontinuum (otherwise it would be a superinvariant nonempty proper closed set). Thus $T(\alpha)$ contains no irreducible pairs, hence $T(\alpha)\neq X$. By Lemma~ \ref{compan}, $\alpha$ is mapped into a proper composant (likewise, so is $\beta$). Since $T$ is surjective and $\alpha\cup\beta = X$, both proper composants cannot be mapped into the same one. Now it is easy to see that either $T(A) \supset A$ and $T(B) \supset B$, or $T(A) \supset B$ and $T(B) \supset A$. In either case $T^2(A) \supset A$. Since $A$ is nonempty, closed and proper, $T^2$ is not minimal, a contradiction with total minimality on the connected space~$X$. \hfill $\square$
\end{proof}
A dynamical system $(X,T)$ is an {\it extension} of $(Y,S)$, or $(Y,S)$ is a {\it factor} of $(X,T)$, if there exists a continuous surjection $\pi\colon X\to Y$ such that $\pi T=S\pi$. The map $\pi$ is called a {\it factor map}. The factor map $\pi$ is an {\it almost 1-1 factor map} and $(X,T)$ is an {\it almost 1-1 extension} of $(Y,S)$ if the set of singleton fibers, i.e., the set $\{x\in X: \, \pi^{-1}(\pi (x)) =x\}$ is residual in $X$ (it suffices that it is dense). A factor of a minimal system is minimal and an almost 1-1 extension of a minimal system is minimal (see e.g. \cite{D}).
A point $x\in X$ is (forward) {\it periodically recurrent}\footnote{In the literature, this property is often called \emph{regular recurrence}, however, we believe that \emph{periodic recurrence} is more informative.} if for every open neighborhood $U$ of $x$ there exists $k\in\mathbb N$ such that $T^{kn}(x)\in U$ for all $n\in\mathbb N$.
\emph{Adding machines} are infinite compact monothetic zero-dimensional groups. Since every adding machine is homeomorphic to the Cantor set, we will denote both by the letter $\mathfrak C$. By fixing a topological generator $c_0$ and defining $h:\mathfrak C\to \mathfrak C$ by $h(c) = c\oplus c_0$ (where $\oplus$ denotes the addition in the adding machine) we obtain a minimal equicontinuous dynamical system $(\mathfrak C,h)$ which is called an \emph{odometer}. Odometers are characterized as minimal systems in which every point is periodically recurrent (see e.g. \cite{D}).
{\it Solenoids} are quotient spaces of the product $[0,1]\times \mathfrak C$ of the interval with the Cantor set, with respect to the relation identifying the points $(1,c)$ and $(0,h(c))$, where $h$ is as described above. {\it Generalized solenoids} are quotient spaces of the product $[0,1]\times \mathfrak C$ of the interval with the Cantor set, with respect to the relation identifying the points $(1,c)$ and $(0,h(c))$, where $h$ is any minimal homeomorphism of the Cantor set $\mathfrak C$. Generalized solenoids are indecomposable continua.
\medskip
Since in this paper we will be addressing topological\ entropy not only in compact dynamical system s, but also in non-compact ones, let us recall the definition of topological entropy in this more general setup (see, e.g., \cite{W}).
Let $(Z;\varrho)$ be a space and $T:Z\to Z$ be uniformly continuous. For every $n\geq 1$ the function
$\varrho_{n}(x,y):=\max\{\varrho(T^j(x),T^j(y)):0\le j\le {n-1}\}$ defines a metric on $Z$ equivalent with $\varrho$. Fix an $n\ge 1$ and $\epsilon >0$ and let $K$ be a compact set in $Z$.
A subset $E\subset K$ is called \emph{$(n,\epsilon)$-separated\/}, if
for any two distinct points $x,y\in E$, $\varrho_{n}(x,y)>\epsilon$.
Since $K$ is compact, $E$ is finite.
Denote by $\mathsf{sep}(n,\epsilon; K)$ the maximal cardinality of an
$(n,\epsilon)$-separated set in $K$.
The \emph{topological entropy of $T$ on $K$}
is defined by
$\mathsf h_{\mathsf{top}} (T, K):=\lim_{\epsilon \to 0}\limsup_{n\to\infty}
\frac{1}{n}\log \mathsf{sep} (n,\epsilon; K)$
and the \emph{topological entropy} of $T$ is defined by
$\mathsf h_{\mathsf{top}} (T):= \sup_K \mathsf h_{\mathsf{top}} (T,K)$
where $K$ ranges over all compact subsets of $Z$.
\medskip
If $\varphi$ is a map, we denote its graph by $\mathsf{graph}(\varphi)$. If $x$ is a continuity/discontinuity point of $\varphi$, also the point $(x,\varphi(x)) \in \mathsf{graph}(\varphi)$ will sometimes be called a continuity/discontinuity point of $\varphi$. We hope this will cause no misunderstandings.
\section{Entropy of functional envelopes; the homogeneous and the zero-dimensional cases}\label{S:zero-dim case}
We begin by solving (positively) the problem (2) for homogeneous spaces. Recall that $X$ is \emph{homogeneous} if for any two points $x,y\in X$ there exists a homeomorphism $f: X\to X$ such that $f(x)=y$. If $X$ is compact, we have even more: for each $x\in X$ there exists a \emph{compact} family $\mathcal F_x \subseteq H(X,X)$ such that for every $y\in X$ there is an $f\in \mathcal F_x$ satisfying $f(x)=y$. Indeed, by Effros Theorem \cite[Theorem~2.1]{E} (see also \cite{Un}), the evaluation map $E_{x}\colon H(X,X)\to X$, given by $E_{x}(h)=h(x)$, is both continuous and open. Since $X$ is homogeneous, this map is also surjective. Moreover, $H(X,X)$ is complete in the equivalent symmetric uniform metric. Now the existence of a compact family $\mathcal F_x$ follows directly from \cite[Lemma 6]{B}.
\begin{proposition}\label{P:homo0}
Let $T: X\to X$ be a homeomorphism of a homogeneous compact space. Then the entropy of the functional envelope $(H(X,X), F_T)$ is at least as large as that of $(X,T)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Fix some $x\in X$ and let $E_{x}: H(X,X)\to X$ be the evaluation map. Clearly $E_{x}$ is a contraction (i.e., does not increase the uniform distance), $E_{x}(\mathcal F_x)=X$ and $E_{x}\circ F_T=T\circ E_{x}$. This implies that for every $n$ and $\epsilon$ there are at least as many $(n,\epsilon)$-separated (under $F_T$) homeomorphisms in the compact set $\mathcal F_x$ as there are $(n,\epsilon)$-separated (under $T$) points in $X$. This clearly implies the assertion. \hfill $\square$
\end{proof}
The next theorem resolves completely the question about the entropy of the functional envelope on the group of homeomorphisms in compact zero-dimensional spaces. Recall that a homeomorphism $T:X\to X$ is called \emph{equicontinuous} if the family of all forward and backward iterates of $T$ is equicontinuous. We will be needing the following characterization of equicontinuous homeomorphisms on compact zero-dimensional spaces. Because the proof of this ``folklore'' fact is hard to find, we provide it below.
\begin{lemma}\label{L:equi}
Let $X$ be a compact zero-dimensional space. A homeomorphism $T:X\to X$ is equicontinuous if and only if the
dynamical system\ $(X,T)$\ is a union of odometers and periodic orbits, if and only if every point $x\in X$ is periodically recurrent under $T$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If $T$ is an equicontinuous homeomorphism then it is distal, hence the space is a union of minimal sets
(see e.g. \cite{Aus}). By the Halmos--von Neumann Theorem, any minimal equicontinuous system is the rotation of a compact monothetic group, and every zero-dimensional compact monothetic group is either finite cyclic or an adding machine (i.e., the corresponding dynamical system\ is an odometer). This obviously implies that each point in the whole system is periodically recurrent.
Now suppose all points are periodically recurrent. Let $\mathcal P$ be a partition of $X$ into finitely many closed-and-open (we will say \emph{clopen}) sets of diameter at most $\epsilon$. The collection of all $\mathcal P$-names of the points of $X$ is closed and shift-invariant, so it is a subshift. Suppose that the collection of the $\mathcal P$-names
is infinite. Then, by \cite[Corollary on page 63]{BW}, there are two different and forward asymptotic $\mathcal P$-names. Taking disjoint neighborhoods of these names (in the symbolic space), we see that at least one of them fails to be periodically recurrent (a contradiction occurs along common multiples of the periods with which the points visit their selected neighborhoods).
So, there are only finitely many $\mathcal P$-names, i.e., the partition $\mathcal P$ generates (via the dynamics) a finite sigma-algebra with clopen atoms.
Letting $\delta>0$ be the minimal distance between these atoms, we see that any points $x,y\in X$ with $d(x,y)<\delta$ satisfy, for each $n\ge 0$ the condition: $T^nx$, $T^ny$ belong to the same atom of $\mathcal P$. Thus $d(T^nx$, $T^ny)<\epsilon$. The same is true for $T^{-1}$, concluding the proof of equicontinuity. \hfill $\square$
\end{proof}
\medskip
\begin{theorem}\label{T:zerodim}
Let $T:X\to X$ be a self-homeomorphism of a compact zero-dimensional space. Then the entropies of $(C(X,X),F_T)$ and $(H(X,X),F_T)$ are either both zero or both infinite. They are equal to zero if and only if $T$ is equicontinuous.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} If $T$ is equicontinuous then there exists an equivalent metric on $X$ for which $T$ is an isometry (an invariant\ metric). By compactness, the two metrics are uniformly equivalent. Thus, the corresponding uniform metrics on $C(X,X)$ (and $H(X,X)$) are also uniformly equivalent, implying that the entropies of $F_T$ will not change if we change the metric. For the invariant metric $F_T$ is also an isometry, hence the entropies of $(C(X,X),F_T)$ and $(H(X,X),F_T)$ are equal to zero.
Now suppose $T$ is not equicontinuous. Then, by the proof of Lemma~\ref{L:equi}, there exists a finite partition $\mathcal P$ of $X$ into clopen sets, such that the subshift on the $\mathcal P$-names contains a nonperiodic point. This implies that the complexity $c(n)$ of this subshift (the number of blocks of length $n$) satisfies $c(n)\ge n+1$ (see \cite{HM}).\footnote{It is known that only periodic subshifts have bounded complexity, the next lowest possibility is $c(n)=n+1$ and occurs e.g. in the subshift consisting of $\{0,1\}$-sequence s with at most one symbol 1 and, for minimal subshifts, in Sturmian systems.} Let $\epsilon$ be the smallest distance between the atoms of $\mathcal P$. The complexity yields that given $n$ there exist (more than) $n$ $(n,\epsilon)$-separated points for $T$. Further, there exist (more than) $n!$ permutations of these points. If every such permutation could be extended to a homeomorphism of the whole space, we would have obtained $n!$ homeomorphisms which are $(n,\epsilon)$-separated in the uniform distance under $F_T$. We will use this principle to create our compact family of homeomorphisms with hyper-exponential rate of separation.
Fix a decreasing to zero sequence\ $\delta_k$ and for each $k$ let $\mathcal Q_k$ be a finite partition into
clopen sets of diameter not exceeding $\delta_k$. Let $q_k$ denote the cardinality of $\mathcal Q_k$. Let $n_k$
be a large integer (how large we will specify later). As we have noticed earlier, we can select $n_k$ points in $X$ which are $(n_k,\epsilon)$-separated under $T$. Some element $Q$ of the partition
$\mathcal Q_k$ contains at least $\frac{n_k}{q_k}$ of these points. We would like to be able to permute
these points by homeomorphisms.
Let $X_0$ denote the (possibly empty) closure of the set of all isolated points of $X$ and let
$X_1$ be the (also possibly empty) rest of $X$. If at least half of the $\frac{n_k}{q_k}$ $(n_k,\epsilon)$-separated points contained in $Q$ lie in $X_0$, we can replace them by nearby isolated points, so that the new points remain $(n_k,\epsilon)$-separated and lie in $Q$. Now, every permutation of these points can be extended to a homeomorphism which is different from identity only on $Q$. In the remaining case, at least half of our points lie in $X_1$ and thus in a small Cantor set contained in $Q$ and clopen in $X$. Again, these points are permutable by homeomorphisms differing from identity only on $Q$.
So, in either case, we have found $(\frac{n_k}{2q_k})!$ homeomorphisms permuting some $\frac{n_k}{2q_k}$ $(n_k,\epsilon)$-separated points, and differing from identity only on a set of diameter not exceeding $\delta_k$. Let us denote this family of homeomorphisms by $K_k$. Notice that they are all $(n_k,\epsilon)$-separated under $F_T$. It is obvious that the families $K_k$ converge uniformly to identity as $k$ grows, so the collection $\{\mathsf{id}\}\cup\bigcup_k K_k$ is compact.
The entropy of the functional envelope $(H(X,X),F_T)$ (and thus also that of $(C(X,X),F_T)$) is hence estimated from below by the number $\limsup_k h_k$ where $h_k=\frac1{n_k}\log((\frac{n_k}{2q_k})!)$.
Since $n!>(\frac n2)^{\frac n2}$ (and thus $\log(n!)>\frac n2(\log \frac n2)$), we get
$h_k > \tfrac 1{4q_k}(\log n_k - \log 4q_k)$. It suffices to choose $n_k$ so that $\log n_k$ grows essentially faster than $q_k$ to get infinite entropy. \hfill $\square$
\end{proof}
\begin{question}
Is an analogous theorem true for continuous non-invertible self-maps $T$ on compact zero-dimensional spaces and the functional envelope $(C(X,X), F_T)$?
\end{question}
As promised, we now give a simple direct example of a zero-entropy homeomorphism $(X,T)$\ with infinite entropy of $(H(X,X),F_T)$.
\begin{example}
Consider the action of the ``+1'' map on the one-point compactification of the integers.
The space is compact zero-dimensional, $T$ has entropy zero and is not equicontinuous. Theorem \ref{T:zerodim} implies that $(H(X,X),F_T)$ has infinite entropy.
\end{example}
\section{Slovak spaces}\label{S:Slovak}
In most examples of infinite compact spaces admitting a minimal homeomorphism (the circle, the torus, the Cantor set) there are usually uncountably many such homeomorphisms. On the other hand, some other spaces admit no minimal homeomorphisms. Do there exist ``intermediate'' infinite compact spaces in the sense that they admit some, but at most countably many, minimal homeomorphisms?
It is known, see \cite{dG}, that for every abstract group $G$ there exists a topological space $X$ such that $H(X,X)\simeq G$, i.e., $H(X,X)$ is algebraically isomorphic to $G$. Such a space $X$ always exists in the class of one-dimensional, connected, locally connected, complete spaces and always exists in the class of compact, connected, Hausdorff (not necessarily metrizable) spaces. (However, such a space need not exist in the class of compact metric spaces, because a compact metric space has cardinality at most $\mathfrak{c}$, while there are groups of arbitrary cardinalities.) Moreover, as proved in \cite{dGW}, if $G$ is countable then $X$ can be chosen to be a Peano continuum of any positive dimension.
In particular, there is a Peano continuum $X$ with $H(X,X)$ being the trivial group (then $X$ is called a \emph{rigid space for homeomorphisms}). Also, there is a Peano continuum $X$ such that $H(X,X)\simeq \mathbb Z$, i.e., $H(X,X) =\{T^n:\, n\in \mathbb Z\}$, the elements of $H(X,X)$ being pairwise distinct. In view of these facts, we are interested in whether there exists a compact (metric) space $X$ such that $H(X,X)\simeq \mathbb Z$ and the generating homeomorphism $T$ is minimal.
\smallskip
We adopt the following definition.
\begin{definition}
A compact space $X$ is called a \emph{Slovak space} if it has at least three elements, admits a minimal homeomorphism $T$ and $H(X,X)=\{T^n:n\in\mathbb Z\}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}\label{cardinality}
If $X$ is a Slovak space then the cyclic group $H(X,X)$ is infinite (i.e., isomorphic to $\mathbb Z$), and all its elements, except identity, are minimal homeomorphisms.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The first condition in the definition eliminates two trivial cases: the one-point space and the two-point space. It is elementary to check that for any larger finite space $X$, $H(X,X)$ (which is the group of all permutations of a finite set) has at least two generators, so $X$ is not Slovak. Any infinite compact space admitting a minimal homeomorphism does not have isolated points (the complement of the set of isolated points would then be nonempty, closed, proper and invariant), and thus any Slovak space is perfect (in particular, its cardinality equals $\mathfrak{c}$). If $T$ is a generator of $H(X,X)$ then the powers $T^n$ are different for different exponents (moreover, each pair of powers differs at every point), otherwise the system $(X,T)$ would contain periodic orbits, contradicting minimality. Thus $n\mapsto T^n$ is an isomorphism between $\mathbb Z$ and $H(X,X)$.
Suppose that $T^n$ for some $n>1$ (or $n<-1$) is not minimal. This is only possible when $X$ decomposes into pairwise disjoint clopen sets $X_0,X_1,\dots,X_{k-1}$ ($k>1$ being a divisor of $n$) which are cyclically permuted by $T$. Then each $X_i$ is infinite and invariant under $T^k$. The homeomorphism defined as $T^k$ on $X_0$ and identity on $X\setminus X_0$ is not the identity ($T^k$ must not have fixed points), but it has fixed points, hence it is not a nonzero power of $T$, either. So, $X$ is not a Slovak space. \hfill $\square$
\end{proof}
Notice that the above theorem implies that for every Slovak space there are exactly two possible choices of the generator of $H(X,X)$: a $T$ and $T^{-1}$ (both minimal). The next theorem establishes even more precisely the basic topological properties of Slovak spaces.
\begin{theorem}\label{continuum}
Every Slovak space is a non-degenerate continuum.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We need to show that every Slovak space is connected. Fix a Slovak space $X$ and a homeomorphism $T$ (of course minimal) which generates $H(X,X)$. Suppose that $X$ is not connected. Then $X$ is a union of
two nonempty, disjoint (hence proper), clopen subsets: $X=A\cup B$. Let $C=B\setminus T(B)$. Since $T$ is a homeomorphism, the set $C$ is again clopen. By minimality, $B$ is not superinvariant, hence $C$ is nonempty. Clearly, so defined set satisfies $C\cap T(C)=\emptyset$. Let us define a function $S\colon X\to X$ by the formula
$$S(x) = \begin{cases} T(x), & \text{if $x \in C$,} \\
T^{-1} (x) , & \text{if $x\in T(C)$,}\\
x,& \text{if $x\in X\setminus(C\cup T(C))$.}
\end{cases}
$$
It is obvious that $S$ is a self-homeomorphism of $X$. Notice that any element of the set $C$ is periodic with period two. Thus $S$ is not minimal and different from identity. In view of the preceding theorem, such an $S$ must not exist on a Slovak space, a contradiction. \hfill $\square$
\end{proof}
A priori it is not clear that Slovak spaces exist. We prove the existence of such spaces in the class of one-dimensional continua. We remark that minimality is completely inessential in our considerations of the entropy of the functional envelope. Instead of minimality we should require that the generating homeomorphism has positive topological\ entropy. (In fact, we will provide examples with both minimality and positive entropy satisfied.) Minimality requirement makes Slovak spaces more interesting and useful for the future application to types of minimality (see Section \ref{lastsection}). Also notice that for Slovak spaces, positivity or finiteness of the entropy of $(X,S)$ does not depend on the choice of $S\in H(X,X)$, $S\neq\mathsf{id}$. Thus we can speak about \emph{zero, finite positive} and \emph{infinite entropy} Slovak spaces. Moreover, we can accept the entropy of the generating homeomorphism $T$ (or of $T^{-1}$, which is the same) to be called \emph{the entropy of the Slovak space}.
\medskip
Before we provide an evidence for the existence of Slovak spaces, we prove that regardless of the entropy of the Slovak space, the functional envelope $(H(X,X), F_T)$ has always entropy zero.
\begin{proposition}\label{P:Slovak entropy}
If the group $H(X,X)$ is countable then $(H(X,X), F_T)$ has entropy zero for any $T\in H(X,X)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
In any compact space, the group of homeomorphisms with the uniform metric is Polish, being complete in the equivalent symmetric uniform metric. It is also homogeneous hence either discrete or perfect. However, a perfect Polish space is uncountable. Therefore if the group of homeomorphisms is countable, it is discrete. Since only finite subsets of a discrete space are compact, every action on a discrete space has entropy zero. \hfill $\square$
\end{proof}
We will now pass to an effective production of a Slovak space (in fact we will construct a family of such spaces). The following lemma will be useful in the construction.
\begin{lemma}\label{L:UC}
Let $T:X\to X$ be a homeomorphism of a compact space $X$. Fix some $x_0\in X$ not periodic under $T$ and let $f:X\setminus\{x_0\}\to [0,1]$ be continuous (at every point of its domain). Let $F = \sum_{n\in\mathbb Z} a_n f\circ T^n$, where the coefficients $a_n$ are all strictly positive, $\sum_{n\in\mathbb Z}a_n=1$ and with the ratios $\frac{a_{n-1}}{a_n}$ bounded from above ($F$ is defined on $X'$, the complement of the orbit of $x_0$). Then the mapping $(x,F(x))\mapsto(Tx,F(Tx))$ is a uniformly continuous homeomorphism of the graph of $F$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Since $x_0$ is not periodic, all the points $T^n x_0$ are distinct, moreover, $X'$ is nonempty (the orbit of $x_0$ is infinite, countable and homogeneous, so it cannot be compact) and $T$-invariant.
By summability of the sequence\ $a_n$, $F$ is a continuous function on its domain. Now, since $T$ and $T^{-1}$ are uniformly continuous on $X'$, it is clear that the specified map is a homeomorphism of the graph of $F$. We only need to verify its uniform continuity.
Let $d$ be the metric in $X$. Let $A\ge 1$ denote an upper bound for $\frac{a_{n-1}}{a_n}$. Fix $\epsilon>0$. Let $n_0>0$ be such that $\sum_{n\in\mathbb Z\setminus[-n_0,n_0-1]}a_n<\frac\epsilon{5A}$. Let $r$ be such that the $2r$-balls $B(T^nx_0,2r)$ are disjoint for $|n|\le n_0$. Denote by $U_n$ the analogous $r$-balls in the reversed order: $U_n=B(T^{-n}x_0,r)$, $|n|\le n_0$. Note that these balls are separated by distances at least $r$. For easier writing denote $f_n = f\circ T^n$, remembering that $f_n(Tx) = f_{n+1}(x)$. Since each of the functions $f_n$ with $|n|\le n_0$ is continuous (hence uniformly continuous) on the complement of $U_n$, and we consider only finitely many functions, there exists $\delta<\min\{r,\frac\epsilon{5A}\}$ such that if $d(x,x')<\delta$ and both points $x,x'$ lie outside $U_n$ then $|f_n(x) - f_n(x')|<\frac\epsilon{5A(2n_0+1)}$. Because $T$ is uniformly continuous on $X$, we can choose $\delta$ small enough to also satisfy $d(x,x')<\delta\implies d(Tx,Tx')<\epsilon$. This concludes the definition of $\delta$ for our given $\epsilon$. Suppose $(x,F(x))$ and $(x',F(x'))$ are $\delta$-close (at each coordinate) in $X'\times[0,1]$. In particular, $Tx$ and $Tx'$ are $\epsilon$-close. All we need to show is that $|F(Tx)-F(Tx')|<\epsilon$.
First we notice that since $\delta<r$, the set $\{x,x'\}$ can intersect at most one of the balls $U_n$
with $|n|\le n_0$. In such case let ${\bar n}$ denote the corresponding index. Otherwise ${\bar n}$ is not defined. Next, we write
\begin{multline*}
|F(Tx)-F(Tx')| =\left|\sum_{n\in\mathbb Z}a_n\bigl(f_n(Tx)-f_n(Tx')\bigr)\right|= \left|\sum_{n\in\mathbb Z}a_n\bigl(f_{n+1}(x)-f_{n+1}(x')\bigr)\right|\le\\ \sum_{n\in\mathbb Z}a_n|f_{n+1}(x)-f_{n+1}(x')| = \sum_{n\in\mathbb Z}a_{n-1}|f_n(x)-f_n(x')|=
\end{multline*}
\begin{multline*}
\sum_{n\in \mathbb Z\setminus[-n_0,n_0]}a_{n-1}|f_n(x)-f_n(x')| \ \ + \\
\sum_{n\in [-n_0,n_0]\setminus\{\bar n\}}a_{n-1}|f_n(x)-f_n(x')|\ \ + \\
a_{{\bar n}-1}|f_{\bar n}(x)-f_{\bar n}(x')|
\end{multline*}
(if ${\bar n}$ is not defined the last term simply does not occur).
The first sum is smaller than $\frac\epsilon{5A}$, because the indices for $a_{n-1}$ range within $\mathbb Z\setminus[-n_0-1,n_0-1]$ what is contained in $\mathbb Z\setminus[-n_0,n_0-1]$. So is the second one, because it has at most $2n_0+1$ terms, each not exceeding $\frac\epsilon{5A(2n_0+1)}$. Only the last term cannot be estimated so easily.
To do this, we need the inequality $|F(x)-F(x')|<\frac\epsilon{5A}$ (which follows from the assumption that the pairs $(x,F(x))$, $(x',F(x'))$ are $\delta$-close at each coordinate).
We have
$$
\tfrac\epsilon{5A} > |F(x)-F(x')| =
$$
\begin{multline*}
\Bigl|\sum_{n\in \mathbb Z\setminus[-n_0,n_0]} a_n\bigl(f_n(x)-f_n(x')\bigr) \ \ + \\
\sum_{n\in[-n_0,n_0]\setminus\{\bar n\}}a_n\bigl(f_n(x)-f_n(x')\bigr)\ \ + \\
a_{\bar n}\bigl(f_{\bar n}(x)-f_{\bar n}(x')\bigr)\Bigr|.
\end{multline*}
Analogously as before, the first and second sums are smaller (in absolute value) than $\frac\epsilon{5A}$.
This easily yields that
$$
a_{\bar n}|f_{\bar n}(x)-f_{\bar n}(x')|<\tfrac{3\epsilon}{5A},
$$
hence, multiplying both sides by $\frac{a_{\bar n-1}}{a_{\bar n}}$ (bounded by $A$), we get
$$
a_{{\bar n}-1}|f_{\bar n}(x)-f_{\bar n}(x')|<\tfrac{3\epsilon}{5}.
$$
We can now return to the estimation of $|F(Tx)-F(Tx')|$, and get that it is smaller than
$\tfrac{\epsilon}{5A}+\tfrac{\epsilon}{5A}+\tfrac{3\epsilon}{5} \le \tfrac{5\epsilon}{5} = \epsilon$
(recall that $A\ge 1$). \hfill $\square$
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{C:pre-Slovak}
If the inverted ratios $\frac{a_n}{a_{n-1}}$ are also bounded from above, then the map $(x,F(x))\mapsto(Tx,F(Tx))$ extends to a homeomorphism $\widetilde T$ of the closure of the graph of $F$,
which we will denote by $\widetilde F$. If $(X,T)$\ is minimal (not periodic) then the dynamical system\ $(\widetilde F,\widetilde T)$ is a minimal almost 1-1 extension of $(X,T)$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Applying Lemma \ref{L:UC} to $T^{-1}$ we get that $(x,F(x))\mapsto(T^{-1}x,F(T^{-1}x))$ is uniformly continuous as well. Therefore, the map $(x,F(x))\mapsto(Tx,F(Tx))$ extends to a homeomorphism $\widetilde T$ of $\widetilde F$. Clearly, $(\widetilde F,\widetilde T)$ is a topological\ extension of the system $(\overline{X'},T)$; the projection to the first coordinate serves as the corresponding factor map. Moreover, this projection is injective at all points of $X'$, because these are continuity points of $F$, hence the sections of $\widetilde F$ at such points are singletons. This implies that the projection from $\widetilde F\to \overline{X'}$ is an almost 1-1 extension (singleton fibers are dense in $\widetilde F$). Finally, if $(X,T)$\ is minimal nonperiodic, then $\overline X'=X$. Now we use the general fact that an almost 1-1 extension of a minimal system is minimal, to deduce minimality of $(\widetilde F,\widetilde T)$. \hfill $\square$
\end{proof}
\begin{comment}
Let $h\colon X\to X$ be a homeomorphism of a compact space $X$, and let $r\colon X\to (0,\infty)$ be a continuous function. For $n\ge 1$ and $x\in X$ we define $r^n(x)=\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}r(T^ix)$.
We let $Y$ be the product $\{(x,t)\in X\times\mathbb R\colon 0\leq t\leq r(x)\}$ with the points $(x,r(x))$ and $(h(x),0)$ identified for all $x\in X$. The {\it suspension flow over $h$ with ceiling function $r$} is the flow $\Phi=\{\phi_{t}\}_{t\in\mathbb R}$ on $Y$ with $\phi_{t}\colon Y\to Y$ defined, for positive $t$, by
$$
\phi_{t}(x,t_{0}) = (h^n(x), t+t_0-r^n(x)),
$$
where $n\ge 1$ is the largest integer such that $t+t_0-r^n(x)\ge 0$. For $t<0$, $\phi_t$ is defined simply as $(\phi_{-t})^{-1}$.
\end{comment}
Let $h\colon Y\to Y$ be a homeomorphism of a compact space $Y$. Let $X$ be the compact space obtained from $Y\times [0,1]$ by identifying the pairs $(y,1)$ with $(h(y),0)$ (for every $y\in Y$).
The \emph{suspension flow over $h$} is the flow $(\phi_t)_{t\in\mathbb R}$ defined on $X$ by the formula
$$
\phi_{t}(y,s) = (h^{\lfloor t+s\rfloor}(y), \{t+s\}),
$$
where $\lfloor\cdot\rfloor$ and $\{\cdot\}$ denote the integer and fractional parts of a real number, respectively. A flow is called \emph{minimal} if every its orbit is dense in the phase space. Clearly,
the suspension flow over a minimal homeomorphism is minimal. Recall, that the topological\ entropy of a flow is
defined as the topological\ entropy of the time-one map.
\medskip
\begin{theorem}\label{T:slovak}
There exist Slovak spaces. The entropies of Slovak spaces exhaust the interval $[0,\infty]$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We start with the Cantor set $\mathfrak C$ and a minimal homeomorphism $h:\mathfrak C\to \mathfrak C$.
The suspension flow over $h$ is a minimal flow $\phi_t$ whose phase space is the generalized solenoid $X$ induced by $(\mathfrak C,h)$ (see above). By~\cite{Eg} (see also \cite{F}) there exists $t_0\in\mathbb R$ such that $T=\phi_{t_0}$ is a minimal homeomorphism on $X$. We are going to apply Lemma~\ref{L:UC} and Corollary~\ref{C:pre-Slovak} to the system $(X,T)$. To this end, we fix a point $x_0\in X$ and we shall define a function $f:X\setminus\{x_0\}\to [0,1]$. Let $g:[-\frac12,\frac12]\to [0,1]$ be defined as
$$
g(x) = \begin{cases} \frac{1}{2}\left(1-\cos \frac{\pi}{x} \right), & \text{if $x \in [-\frac12, 0)$,} \\
0 , & \text{if $x\in[0,\frac12]$.}
\end{cases}
$$
Note that $g$ is continuous except at $0$ where it is discontinuous from the left and continuous from the right (it is a version of so-called \emph{topologist's sine curve}). Let $\gamma$ denote the composant of $X$ which contains $x_0$. It is clear that each composant equals the orbit under the suspension flow $\phi_t$ of every its element, in particular $\gamma$ is the orbit of $x_0$. This determines a natural continuous bijection $p:\mathbb R\to \gamma$ by the formula $p(t)=\phi_{t\cdot t_0}(x_0)$ ($\mathbb Z$ maps onto the $T$-orbit of $x_0$). Let $J= p([-\frac12, \frac12]\setminus\{0\})$ and define $f_J: J \to [0,1]$ as $g \circ p^{-1}$. Now let $f: X\setminus \{x_0\}\to [0,1]$ be any continuous extension of $f_{J}$ (we apply Tietze's Extension Theorem to $X\setminus \{x_0\}$ and its closed subset $J$). Note that $f$ and $x_0$ satisfy the assumptions from Corollary~\ref{C:pre-Slovak}.
Next, let $F = \sum_{n\in\mathbb Z} a_n f\circ T^n$ where the coefficients $a_n$ satisfy the assumptions from both Lemma~\ref{L:UC} and Corollary~\ref{C:pre-Slovak}. The closure $\widetilde F\subset X\times[0,1]$ of the graph
of $F$ is going to be our desired Slovak space. By Corollary~\ref{C:pre-Slovak}, the mapping $(x,F(x))\mapsto(Tx,F(Tx))$ defined on the graph of $F$ extends to a homeomorphism $\widetilde T :\widetilde F \to \widetilde F$, the system $(\widetilde F,\widetilde T)$ is a minimal almost 1-1 extension of $(X,T)$. It remains to show that $H(X,X)=\{\widetilde T^n:n\in\mathbb Z\}$.
\smallskip
Given $n\in \mathbb Z$, we can write $F= a_n f\circ T^n+\sum_{k\neq n}a_k f\circ T^k$ and we notice that the first
term is undefined at $T^{-n}x_0$ with the ``topologist's sine curve'' type of discontinuity along the main composant, while the remaining series represents a function continuous at this point. So, $F$ has the same ``topologist's sine curve'' type of discontinuity at every point of the orbit $O(x_0)$, and clearly it is continuous everywhere else. The almost 1-1 factor map $\pi:\widetilde F\to X$ coincides with the projection on the first coordinate and it is 1-1 at all continuity points of $F$, while $\pi^{-1}(T^n(x_0))$ is a closed interval $W_n$ (in fact $W_n = \{x_0\} \times [v_n, v_n + a_{-n}]$, where $v_n = \sum_{m\neq -n} a_m f \circ T^m(x_0)$).
Let us observe the path-components of $\widetilde F$. It is easy to see that they are the following: for points
in $\pi^{-1}(X\setminus\gamma)$ they are homeomorphic (via $\pi$) to the composants of $X$, and are continuous injective images of the real line. The set $\pi^{-1}(\gamma)$ breaks into countably many path-components, each being a continuous injective image of the closed half-line. It starts with the interval $W_n$ on the closed end and ends with the open ``topologist's sine curve'', adjacent to (containing in its closure) the next interval $W_{n+1}$. Let $Z$ be the collection of the closed
end-points of the path-components contained in $\pi^{-1}(\gamma)$ (see Figure~1) and note
that $Z$ is in fact an orbit under $\widetilde T$.
\begin{figure}[ht]\label{component}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=12.5cm]{path-component.pdf}
\caption{\small\label{F:one}A piece of $\pi^{-1}(\gamma)$ with three complete path-components (one of them is marked with a thicker line). A point $y\in Z$ and its successor $y'\in Z$ are also marked. (The continuous perturbations caused by further terms of the sum defining $F$ are ignored.)}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Let us call the \emph{successor} of $y\in Z$ the unique point $y'\in Z$, different from $y$, which belongs to the closure of the path-component of $y$. Obviously, the successor of $y$ is $\widetilde Ty$, but it is crucial for us that the successor relation is defined without referring to $\widetilde T$, in purely topological terms.
So, let now $\varphi$ be an arbitrary self-homeomorphism of $\widetilde F$. It sends path-components to path-components, preserving the type (real line or closed half-line), hence it also preserves the set $Z$ of
the closed ends of the half-line type components. Moreover, it preserves the successor relation on $Z$. This easily implies that on $Z$, $\varphi$ coincides with some iterate $\widetilde T^n$ ($n\in\mathbb Z$), and because $Z$ is dense in $\widetilde F$ (being an orbit under a minimal map), $\varphi=\widetilde T^n$, which completes the proof that $\widetilde F$ is a Slovak space.
\smallskip
Since $(\widetilde F,\widetilde T)$ is an almost 1-1 extension of $(X,T)$\ which is 1-1 except on a countable set, it has the same topological\ entropy as $(X,T)$\footnote{An almost 1-1 extension which is 1-1 except on a countable set is \emph{principal} (preserves the Kolmogorov--Sinai entropy of every \im). It is so, because the countable set in the base system has measure zero for every \im\ (every such measure is nonatomic, as long as the base system has no periodic points), and so is the measure of its preimage in the extension system. So, the extension is 1-1 up to measure, and the extension system is isomorphic to the base system, in particular has the same K--S entropy (again, this is true for every \im). By the variational principle, every principal extension also preserves the topological\ entropy.}, which equals $t_0\mathsf h_{\mathsf{top}}(h)$. Moreover, if $h$ is (for example) topological ly weakly mixing, then every irrational $t_0$ produces minimal $\phi_{t_0}$.\footnote{The values of $t_0$ for which the map $\phi_{t_0}$ is not minimal are precisely such that $\exp(2\pi it_0)$ belong to the multiplicative subgroup of the torus $S_1$ generated by the roots of unity and the topological\ eigenvalues of $h$. Thus the property that all irrational numbers $t_0$ produce minimal $\phi_{t_0}$ holds not only for topological ly weakly mixing minimal homeomorphisms, but also for those which have only rational topological\ eigenvalues.} Since there are topological ly weakly mixing minimal Cantor systems with arbitrary entropy in $[0,\infty]$\footnote{It is known (\cite{Leh}) that every aperiodic ergodic system has a topologically mixing strictly ergodic model.}, we deduce that the entropy of Slovak spaces can have any value within this range. \hfill $\square$
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Our Slovak space $\widetilde F$, being a continuum with uncountably many composants, is indecomposable (by the property (C3), see also (C4)). The system $(\widetilde F,\widetilde T)$ is a topological\ extension of an irrational circle rotation.
\end{remark}
\begin{question}
Is every Slovak space $X$ an indecomposable continuum?
\end{question}
Theorem \ref{threecomposants} eliminates continua with three composants, so, in view of (C3), the above question concerns only the one-composant continua.
\begin{remark}\label{circ}
An analogous construction applied to the circle (in place of the generalized solenoid) and irrational rotation (in place of the map $T$), which produces a one-composant continuum, does not work. One obtains a graph of a map $F$ defined on the circle with the orbit of a selected point $x_0$ removed. Now, there are many homeomorphisms of the circle (not just powers of the rotation) which preserve this orbit (as a set), and many of them can be lifted and then extended continuously to the closure of the graph of $F$. We skip the details.
\end{remark}
Putting Theorem~\ref{T:slovak} and Proposition~\ref{P:Slovak entropy} together we obtain a negative answer to the question~(2) in the Introduction:
\begin{corollary}\label{C:Tpositive FT zero}
There exists a dynamical system\ given by a homeomorphism of a compact space with finite positive or even infinite entropy, whose functional envelope on the group of homeomorphisms has entropy zero.
\end{corollary}
\section{Surjections of Slovak spaces}\label{lastsection}
In this section we are going to study surjective maps of the Slovak spaces constructed in the preceding section, and we are going to show that every non-invertible surjection has a fixed point. In particular, if $\varphi\colon\widetilde F\to\widetilde F$ is minimal then it is invertible.
\smallskip
From now on, if $A$ is a subset of $X$, we will write $\widetilde A$ to denote $\pi^{-1}(A)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{composant lemma}If $\varphi:\widetilde F\to\widetilde F$ is a continuous surjection then
$\varphi^{-1}(\widetilde\gamma)=\widetilde\gamma$ (hence, by surjectivity, $\varphi(\widetilde\gamma)=\widetilde\gamma$).
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Note that $\varphi(\widetilde\gamma)$ is not the whole space (it has too few
path-components for that). So, by Lemma \ref{compan}, $\varphi(\widetilde\gamma)$ is contained in one composant. It now suffices to show that the complement of $\widetilde\gamma$ is mapped into itself. The path-components of that complement are composants $\widetilde\alpha$ of $\widetilde F$ different from $\widetilde\gamma$. Each of them is both pathwise connected and dense in $\widetilde F$ (see (C1)) and so must be its image $\varphi(\widetilde\alpha)$. Thus this image is contained in a dense path-component of $\widetilde F$. The path-components of $\widetilde\gamma$ are not dense, hence $\varphi(\widetilde\alpha)$ is contained in a composant different from $\widetilde\gamma$, which ends
the proof. \hfill $\square$
\end{proof}
Let $C_n$ denote the path-component of $\widetilde\gamma$ containing the interval $W_n$ (see Figure~1). By Lemma \ref{composant lemma} (and continuity of $\varphi$) $\varphi(C_{n})$ is
a subset of some (unique) path-component $C_{m}$. We define $\zeta\colon\mathbb Z\to\mathbb Z$ by the rule $\zeta(n)=m \iff \varphi(C_{n})\subset C_{m}$. Note that if $\zeta(n)=m$ then $\varphi(\overline{C_{n}})=\varphi(C_{n}\cup W_{n+1})\subset \overline{C_{m}} \subset C_m\cup C_{m+1}$. This implies that either $\zeta(n+1)=\zeta(n)$ or $\zeta(n+1)=\zeta(n)+1$. Let us denote $\mathbb D=\{n\in\mathbb Z:\zeta(n+1)=\zeta(n)\}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{mini1}
If\,\ $\mathbb D$ is bounded from below or above then $\varphi=\widetilde T^l$ for some $l\in\mathbb Z$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume $\mathbb D$ is bounded from above (the other case is symmetric). Therefore there exist $l, n_0\in\mathbb Z$, such that $\zeta(n)=n+l$ for all $n\geq n_0$. This means that for $n> n_0$,
$\varphi$ sends the intervals $W_{n}$ into the intervals $W_{n+l} = \widetilde T^l(W_n)$. Hence, on the dense set $\bigcup_{n>n_0}W_n$, we have the equality $\pi\circ\varphi = T^l\circ\pi$. This equality (between two continuous maps from $\widetilde F$ into $X$) holds on a closed set, hence it holds on the whole $\widetilde F$. In particular, it holds on the $\widetilde T$-invariant union of the singleton fibers by $\pi$. Here, the equality can be rewritten as $\varphi = \pi^{-1}\circ T^l \circ \pi$. But on this set $\pi^{-1}\circ T^l \circ \pi$ equals $\widetilde T^l$. We have shown that the equality $\varphi = \widetilde T^l$ holds on a dense set, which clearly concludes the proof. \hfill $\square$
\end{proof}
Note that it follows from the proof of the lemma \ref{mini1} that for any continuous and surjective $\varphi\colon\widetilde F\to\widetilde F$ the set $\mathbb D$ is either empty or unbounded from both sides.
\begin{lemma}\label{mini2}
If a function $\varphi\colon\widetilde F\to\widetilde F$ is continuous and surjective then $\varphi$ is a minimal homeomorphism or it has fixed point.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By lemma \ref{mini1} it is enough to consider functions $\varphi$ such that the set $\mathbb D$ is unbounded from both sides. Therefore it is easy to see that there exists $n\in\mathbb Z$ such that $\zeta(n)=n$. That means $\varphi(\overline{C_{n}})\subset\overline{C_{n}}$. It is well known that the (closed) topologist's sine curve has the fixed point property (this is in fact true for every arc-like continuum, see \cite[Corollary 12.30]{Na}). Therefore $\varphi$ has a fixed point in $\overline{C_{n}}$. \hfill $\square$
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
There exists a non-degenerate continuum of type $(1,0)$ which is not homeomorphic to the circle.
\end{corollary}
Note that in fact in theorem \ref{T:slovak} we have constructed an uncountable family of different continua which are all of type $(1,0)$.
\begin{remark}
An analogous construction applied to an irrational rotation of the circle (see Remark \ref{circ}) does not produce a space of type $(1,0)$. There exist minimal homeomorphisms of the circle which preserve the backward orbit (with respect to the rotation) of the selected point $x_0$ and whose forward orbit of $x_0$ is disjoint from the rotation-orbit of $x_0$. Many of such homeomorphisms can be lifted and then extended to the closure of the graph of $F$, producing a non-invertible minimal map. Again, we skip more details.
\end{remark}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
From a conceptual point of view the transformation of light into matter is one of the most appealing physical processes. The possibility to create an electron-positron pair by merging two real photons (Breit-Wheeler process \cite{breit_collision_1934}) is a direct manifestation of the equivalence of mass and energy, postulated first by Einstein. Hitherto, however, this process has not been observed in a laboratory. Experimentally, electron-positron photoproduction was studied only indirectly via the trident process, i.e.\ by colliding a highly relativistic electron beam with an optical laser in the SLAC E-144 experiment \cite{burke_positron_1997} \highlight{(the experimental findings could be explained within the two-step approximation, i.e. by the assumption that the electrons first radiate real gamma photons which subsequently decay into pairs via the Breit-Wheeler process). To understand the results of the measurement theoretically, nonlinear effects (i.e. the simultaneous absorption of several laser photons) must be taken into account \cite{burke_positron_1997,hu_complete_2010,ilderton_trident_2011,king_trident_2013}.}
\begin{figure}[b!]
\centering
\includegraphics{Fig1}
\caption{\label{fig:pcdiagram}Leading-order Feynman diagram for electron-positron photoproduction inside a plane-wave background field (nonlinear Breit-Wheeler process). The double lines represent Volkov states (solutions of the interacting Dirac equation, which take the plane-wave background field into account exactly \cite{landau_quantum_1981,volkov_ueber_1935}), the wiggly line the incoming photon. As long as the total pair-production probability is much smaller than unity, the spectrum for the final particles is determined to a good accuracy by simply evaluating this diagram and neglecting radiative corrections \cite{meuren_polarization-operator_2015}.}
\end{figure}
Due to the continuous improvement of laser technology the experimental observation of the nonlinear generalization of the Breit-Wheeler process (see \figref{fig:pcdiagram}) is now within reach, e.g., at upcoming high-power laser facilities like the APOLLON-10P laser \cite{cheriaux_apollon_2012}, the Extreme Light Infrastructure~\cite{ELI}, the Vulcan $\unit[10]{PW}$ laser \cite{andrey_lyachev_10pw_2011} at the Central Laser Facility~\cite{CLF}, and the Exawatt Center for Extreme Light Studies~\cite{XCELS}. Therefore, this process has recently been considered by several authors \cite{wollert_tunneling_2014,krajewska_breit-wheeler_2014,titov_breit-wheeler_2013,fedotov_pair_2013,jansen_strongly_2013,king_photon_2013,nousch_pair_2012,titov_enhanced_2012,krajewska_breit-wheeler_2012,hebenstreit_pair_2011,ipp_streaking_2011,orthaber_momentum_2011,tuchin_non-linear_2010,heinzl_finite_2010,bulanov_multiple_2010,dunne_catalysis_2009,schutzhold_dynamically_2008} (see also the reviews \cite{battesti_magnetic_2013,di_piazza_extremely_2012,ruffini_electronpositron_2010,ehlotzky_fundamental_2009,mourou_optics_2006,marklund_nonlinear_2006,ritus_1985,mitter_quantum_1975}).
The decay of a photon into an electron-positron pair is an intrinsic quantum process, which has no classical analogue and must be described in the realm of quantum field theory, e.g., by calculating the corresponding $S$-matrix element. This implies that we can only determine the total probability for the decay and the asymptotic momentum distribution for the final particles.
However, it is well known that in the case of a plane-wave laser field with electric field amplitude $E_0$ and central angular frequency $\omega$ the formation region of the basic QED processes nonlinear Compton scattering and nonlinear Breit-Wheeler pair production are $\xi$-times smaller than the laser period in the ultra-relativistic regime $\xi \gg 1$. Here, $\xi = \nfrac{|e|E_0}{(m\omega c)}$ is the classical intensity parameter, with $e<0$ and $m$ denoting the electron charge and mass, respectively \cite{di_piazza_extremely_2012,ritus_1985}. Hence, the total probability for nonlinear Compton scattering and nonlinear Breit-Wheeler pair production can be calculated by applying the local constant-crossed field approximation, i.e.\ by averaging the corresponding probability in a constant-crossed field over the laser pulse \cite{meuren_polarization-operator_2015,di_piazza_extremely_2012,ritus_1985,nikishov_pair_1967,narozhny_quantum_1965,nikishov_quantum_1964,nikishov_quantum2_1964,reiss_absorption_1962}.
As pointed out by Ritus \cite{ritus_1985}, this procedure is justified for the calculation of total probabilities but fails in general for the momentum distribution of the final particles (this has also been recently observed numerically in \cite{harvey_testing_2015} for nonlinear Compton scattering). The reason are interference effects arising from processes occurring at macroscopically separated space-time points, which are neglected from the beginning when the averaging procedure is applied to the probabilities. As a laser field is oscillatory, each cycle typically contains two formation regions where the electron-positron pair is created with the same asymptotic quantum numbers. An interference between different pathways is therefore expected from general principles similar to a multi-slit experiment.
\highlight{The fact that the substructure of the spectrum can be attributed to interference effects is well known from other processes. For nonlinear Thomson (Compton) scattering this was, e.g., reported in Refs. \cite{seipt_nonlinear_2011,mackenroth_nonlinear_2011,heinzl_beam-shape_2010,krafft_spectral_2004,narozhnyi_photon_1996}, for Schwinger pair production interference effects are, e.g., discussed in Refs. \cite{akkermans_ramsey_2012,dumlu_interference_2011,dumlu_stokes_2010,hebenstreit_momentum_2009}.}
Nonetheless, the average over the laser pulse shape on the probability level \highlight{(incoherent summation of all possible processes)} rather than the amplitude level \highlight{(coherent summation of all possible processes)} is the state-of-the-art approach for the implementation of strong-field QED processes in so-called particle-in-cell (PIC) codes \cite{edwards_strongly_2016,grismayer_seeded_2015,tamburini_laser-pulse-shape_2015,vranic_particle_2015,gonoskov_extended_2015,gelfer_optimized_2015,green_simla_2015,lobet_ultrafast_2015,ridgers_modelling_2014,tang_qed_2014,bashmakov_effect_2014,mironov_collapse_2014,narozhny_creation_2014,brady_synchrotron_2014,ji_energy_2014,bulanov_electromagnetic_2013,lobet_modeling_2013,ridgers_dense_2013,ridgers_dense_2012,nerush_kinetic_2011,sokolov_numerical_2011,duclous_monte_2011,elkina_qed_2011,nerush_laser_2011,fedotov_limitations_2010,bulanov_schwinger_2010,kirk_pair_2009,bell_possibility_2008}. Therefore, it is desirable to revisit this approach and show how it could be extended if a higher precision becomes necessary. To this end we study here for the first time the quantitative influence of interference effects on the spectra for electron-positron photoproduction in the semiclassical regime.
By applying a stationary-phase analysis to the leading-order $S$-matrix element for electron-positron photoproduction it is shown below that in the strong-field regime $\xi\gg 1$ all qualitative features of the spectrum (including the substructure caused by interference effects) can be understood using the following semiclassical description: at each laser phase the pair-production probability \textit{amplitude} is calculated by employing the local constant-crossed field approximation. It predicts the local momentum spectrum of the pair immediately after the particles are brought on shell. The latter is then employed as initial condition for the classical propagation which provides the asymptotic momentum distribution. Finally, the probability for the production of a pair with given asymptotic momenta is obtained by squaring the probability amplitude, taking the interference between pairs which have the same asymptotic momenta but originating from different formation regions into account.
This intuitive picture provides a clear physical reason for many properties of the asymptotic momentum distribution like its extension and the regions of highest probability. Moreover, it explains the strong dependence of the spectrum on the carrier-envelope phase (CEP) for ultra-short laser pulses reported in \cite{krajewska_breit-wheeler_2012}. In the context of vacuum pair production classical features have been identified in \cite{chott_classical_2007}. Furthermore, a similar semiclassical analysis has been carried out in \cite{mackenroth_nonlinear_2013,mackenroth_nonlinear_2011,mackenroth_determining_2010} to explain various features of the emission spectra for nonlinear Compton scattering and has been exploited in \cite{mackenroth_determining_2010} to put forward a scheme for determining the CEP in ultra-short and ultra-intense laser beams via nonlinear single-Compton scattering.
We point out that electron-positron photoproduction has a lot of commonalities with laser-induced ionization processes. In fact, the procedure outlined above is closely related to similar approaches used in atomic physics to describe the time evolution of an electron after tunnel ionization \cite{kohler_frontiers_2012,corkum_plasma_1993}.
Interestingly, this semiclassical three-step model allows us to distinguish between a ``classical'' and a ``quantum'' absorption of laser four-momentum in the process. As the decay of a photon into an electron-positron pair is forbidden in vacuum, a certain amount of laser four-momentum must be absorbed initially to bring the massive particles on shell (this part will be called quantum absorption here, see \secref{sec:classicalvsquantumabsorption}). Afterwards, the charged particles are further accelerated by the laser field, which implies a classical energy-momentum transfer. Below, these two processes are distinguished for the first time and it is shown that classical absorption dominates for $\xi\gg 1$. Correspondingly, the laser is predominantly depleted from the classical energy-momentum transfer.
To establish the validity of the outlined semiclassical approach, we compare its predictions with a full numerical calculation of the leading-order $S$-matrix element (see \figref{fig:pcdiagram}). In this way we show that already for $\xi \gtrsim 5$ the interference substructure obtained from the local constant-crossed field approximation applied on the probability amplitude level is in very good agreement with the full numerical result.
As the $S$-matrix integrals are highly oscillating in the regime $\xi\gg1$, the numerical calculation is, in principle, a challenging task \cite{titov_enhanced_2012,krajewska_breit-wheeler_2012}. We present here a new scheme, which is substantially more efficient than other employed methods \highlight{(see \secref{sec:ftmasterintegrals})}. Hence, it becomes feasible to evaluate the three-dimensional differential probability on a grid which is fine enough to completely resolve the interference substructure of the spectrum. To obtain the total pair-production probability, however, the numerical evaluation of the compact expressions derived in \cite{meuren_polarization-operator_2015} is still much faster.
Note that for nonlinear Compton scattering the final phase space has been studied in \cite{seipt_asymmetries_2013,boca_electron_2012,krajewska_compton_2012,boca_thomson_2010} for moderate values of the parameter $\xi$ ($\xi\lesssim 10$) and the computation of total probabilities can also be significantly simplified by employing the method proposed in \cite{dinu_exact_2013}.
\highlight{The paper is organized as follows. In \secref{sec:ppp} our notation is introduced and the well-known leading-order expression for the pair-production probability [see \eqref{eqn:paircreation_probabilitycanonincalparametrization}] is expressed using Lorentz-invariant momentum parameters (see \secref{sec:invariantmomentumparameters} for details). Furthermore, the numerical scheme for the numerical evaluation of the pair-production probability is described in \secref{sec:ftmasterintegrals}. Afterward, the main new result of the present paper, the disentanglement between classical and quantum aspects of the pair-production process, is presented in \secref{sec:semiclassicalpicture}.}
From now on we use natural units $\hbar = c = 1$ and Heaviside-Lorentz units for charge [$\alpha = \nfrac{e^2}{(4\pi)} \approx \nfrac{1}{137}$ denotes the fine-structure constant], the notation agrees with \cite{meuren_polarization_2013,meuren_polarization-operator_2015}.
\section{Pair production probability}
\label{sec:ppp}
In this paper we consider the decay of a photon with four-momentum $q^\mu$ ($q^2=0$) and polarization four-vector $\epsilon^\mu$ into an electron and a positron with four-momentum $p_1^\mu$ and $p_2^\mu$, respectively ($p_i^2=m^2$). In vacuum, this transition is forbidden by energy-momentum conservation (for all photon energies). Inside an electromagnetic background field, however, the so-called (nonlinear) Breit-Wheeler process is in general allowed (see \figref{fig:pcdiagram}). Here, we focus on plane-wave laser fields described by the classical field tensor
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:fieldtensor}
F^{\mu\nu}(\phi) = \sum_{i=1,2} f_i^{\mu\nu} \psi_i'(\phi),
\quad
f_i^{\mu\nu} = k^\mu a_i^\nu - k^\nu a_i^\mu,
\end{gather}
where $\phi=kx$ is the laser phase, $x^\mu$ the position four-vector, $k^\mu$ the characteristic four-momentum of the laser photons and $a_i^\mu$ and $\abs{\psi_i'(\phi)} \lesssim 1$ characterize the strength and the shape of the field, respectively, along the two possible polarization directions [$i=1,2$; $\psi_i(\pm\infty)=\psi'_i(\pm \infty)=0$; the prime denotes the derivative of a function with respect to the argument]. Furthermore, we introduce the classical intensity parameters
\begin{gather}
\xi_i = \frac{\abs{e}}{m} \sqrt{-a_i^2},
\quad
\xi = \sqrt{\xi_1^2 + \xi_2^2}
\end{gather}
and the quantum-nonlinearity parameter $\chi = (\nfrac{kq}{m^2}) \xi$ (note that $kq \geq 0$ as $q^2=0$ here).
If a laser field is sufficiently intense and depletion effects are negligible, it can be considered as a classical background field. Correspondingly, the pair-production probability is obtainable using the formalism of strong-field QED in the Furry picture \cite{furry51} (for more details see, e.g., \cite{meuren_nonlinear_2015,battesti_magnetic_2013,di_piazza_extremely_2012,ruffini_electronpositron_2010,ehlotzky_fundamental_2009,mourou_optics_2006,marklund_nonlinear_2006,dittrich_probingquantum_2000,fradkin_quantum_1991,ritus_1985,mitter_quantum_1975} \highlight{and the literature cited in the introduction}).
\subsection{Invariant momentum parameters}
\label{sec:invariantmomentumparameters}
Using the canonical light-cone basis (see \appref{sec:lccappendix} for more details), we introduce the Lorentz-invariant momentum parameters $r$, $t_1$ and $t_2$
\begin{subequations}
\label{eqn:momentumincanonicallcb}
\begin{align}
p^\mu_1 &= r' q^\mu + s' k^\mu + t'_1 m \Lambda_1^\mu + t'_2 m \Lambda_2^\mu,
\\
p^\mu_2 &= -r q^\mu - s k^\mu - t_1 m \Lambda_1^\mu - t_2 m \Lambda_2^\mu.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Here, $t_i'=t_i$ and $r'=r+1$ due to momentum conservation and the quantities
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:momentumincanonicallcbssprime}
s = \frac{1}{2r} \frac{m^2}{kq} (1 + t_1^2 + t_2^2),
\quad
s' = \frac{1}{2r'} \frac{m^2}{kq} (1 + t_1^2 + t_2^2)
\end{gather}
are determined by the on-shell conditions $p_1^2=p_2^2=m^2$. We point out that we consider only plane-wave fields with a finite duration. Correspondingly, the four-momentum $q^\mu$ ($p_{1}^\mu$, $p_{2}^\mu$) denotes the asymptotic four-momentum in vacuum before (after) the interaction with the laser pulse. In particular, we do not introduce dressed masses and momenta for the electron and the positron \cite{di_piazza_extremely_2012,ritus_1985}.
For later convenience we also define the quantities \cite{ritus_1985}
\begin{subequations}
\label{eqn:momentumincanonicallcc_Rw}
\begin{align}
R &= r+\frac{1}{2} = \frac{kp_1-kp_2}{2kq} = \frac{kp_1-kp_2}{2(kp_1+kp_2)},
\\
w &= -\frac{1}{r(r+1)} = \frac{4}{1-4R^2} = \frac{(kq)^2}{(kp_1) (kp_2)}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
to characterize how the initial photon four-momentum is split between the outgoing particles (unlike $r$ and $r'$ the parameters $R$ and $w$ are anti-symmetric and symmetric with respect to the electron and the positron four-momentum, respectively). As $kq > 0$, $kp_i>0$ and $r'=r+1$ we conclude from \eqref{eqn:momentumincanonicallcb} that $r\in (-1,0)$, $r'\in (0,1)$, $R \in (-\nfrac{1}{2},+\nfrac{1}{2})$ and $w \in [4,\infty)$.
Note that the map from $R\to w$ has no inverse (i.e.\ the information about the sign of $R$ is lost). Correspondingly, the quantities $kq$ and $w$ [see \eqref{eqn:momentumincanonicallcc_Rw}] specify $kp_1$ and $kp_2$ uniquely up to the sign of $R$. However, we will later see that this sign does not influence the spin-summed pair-production probability.
\highlight{Using the Lorentz-invariant momentum parameters $r$ ($R$), $t_1$ and $t_2$ to describe the asymptotic momenta of the created electron-positron pair has the advantage that they characterize the process in a frame-independent way. In particular, we do not have to work in a frame where the collision is head on. However, in this frame the parameters $t_i$ have a simple interpretation, as they measure the transverse momentum of the pair in units of the electron rest mass, whereas $R$ measures in general how the initial photon four-momentum $q^\mu$ is distributed between the electron and the positron.}
Note that in the seminal papers \cite{nikishov_pair_1967,ritus_1985} the differential pair-production rate inside a constant-crossed field is expressed with respect to the two parameters $u$ and $\tau$, which are related to the parameters $w$ and $t_2$ introduced here as follows
\begin{subequations}
\begin{gather}
w
=
\frac{qf^2q}{\sqrt{(p_1f^2p_1)(p_2f^2p_2)}}
=
4u,
\\
t_2^2 = \tau^2,
\quad
\tau = \frac{p_1 f^* p_2}{m \sqrt{qf^2q}}
\end{gather}
\end{subequations}
($f^{\mu\nu} = f_1^{\mu\nu}$). Therefore, the comparison between the results obtained here for a laser pulse and those reported previously for a constant-crossed field is straightforward in canonical light-cone coordinates.
The reason why the parameter $t_1$ does not appear in the final expression for the pair-production rate in a constant-crossed field is related to the fact that $t_1$ is not a constant of motion (with respect to the classical equations of motion, see \secref{sec:classicalinterpretationofthestatpoints}). Correspondingly, the final (asymptotic) value of $t_1$ will depend on the subsequent classical evolution of the charged particles and therefore on the nonlocal properties of the background field (see also the discussion in \secref{sec:initialconditionsclassicalpropagation}). To avoid this problem, $t_1$ is not specified for a constant-crossed background field and only pair-production rates (not total probabilities) are calculated. For a laser pulse with finite duration, however, one obtains a total probability rather than a rate. Furthermore, as the particles leave the background field at a certain point, it is possible to specify the momentum distribution of the final particles with respect to the parameter $t_1$.
Finally, we note that the amount $n k^\mu$ of absorbed laser four-momentum is related to the introduced Lorentz invariant momentum parameters as follows
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:momentumconservationpaircreation}
p_1^\mu + p_2^\mu = q^\mu + n k^\mu,
\quad
n = \frac{1}{2} w \frac{m^2}{kq} (1 + t_1^2 + t_2^2).
\end{gather}
We will later show that this (asymptotic) value contains both a classical and a quantum contribution (see \secref{sec:classicalvsquantumabsorption}). As the laser-photon energy is only well defined for monochromatic fields, $n$ is in general not an integer and only $n k^\mu$ is a meaningful quantity. Nevertheless, we will call $n$ the number of absorbed laser photons.
\subsection{Total and differential probability}
\label{sec:totalanddifferentialprobability}
Using the parameters introduced in \secref{sec:invariantmomentumparameters}, the total probability $W(q,\epsilon)$ for the decay of a gamma photon with four-momentum $q^\mu$ ($q^2=0$) and polarization four-vector $\epsilon^\mu$ ($\epsilon{}q =0$) into an electron-positron pair (see \figref{fig:pcdiagram}) can be written as (see, e.g., \cite{meuren_polarization-operator_2015} \highlight{and the literature cited in the introduction})
\begin{subequations}
\label{eqn:paircreation_probabilitycanonincalparametrization}
\begin{align}
W(q,\epsilon)
&=
\int_{-\nfrac{1}{2}}^{+\nfrac{1}{2}} dR \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty} dt_1 dt_2 \, \frac{d^3W}{dR dt_1 dt_2},
\\
\frac{d^3W}{dR dt_1 dt_2}
&=
\frac{m^2}{(kq)^2} \frac{w}{8} \, \frac{1}{(2\pi)^3} \sum_{\text{spin}} \abs{\mc{M}(p_1,p_2;q)}^2,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $i\mc{M}(p_1,p_2;q) = \epsilon_\mu \, \bar{u}_{p_1} \mc{G}^\mu(p_1,q,-p_2) v_{p_2}$ is the reduced $S$-matrix element for the process %
\footnote{Note that in Eq.\,(3) and Eq.\,(A19) of \cite{meuren_polarization-operator_2015} the $i$ is erroneously missing.}
and we sum with respect to the final spin quantum numbers of the created particles (for simplicity they are not indicated). Here, $u_{p_1}$ and $v_{p_2}$ denote the Dirac spinors for the electron and the positron, respectively, and $\mc{G}^\mu$ the nonsingular part of the laser-dressed vertex [see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertexfinal_nonsingularpartcanonicalparametrization}].
In \eqref{eqn:paircreation_probabilitycanonincalparametrization} the phase-space integrals are written in terms of the invariant momentum parameters defined in Eqs.\sdist(\ref{eqn:momentumincanonicallcb}) and (\ref{eqn:momentumincanonicallcc_Rw}) and $\nfrac{d^3W}{(dR dt_1 dt_2)}$ represents the differential pair-creation probability with respect to those parameters. In order to calculate it we note that
\begin{multline}
\label{eqn:paircreation_spinsummedmatrixelement}
\sum_{\text{spin}} \abs{\mc{M}(p_1,p_2;q)}^2
=
\epsilon_\mu \epsilon^*_\nu \tr \mc{G}^\mu(p_1,q,-p_2) \\\times (\s{p}_2-m) \bar{\mc{G}}^\nu(p_1,q,-p_2) (\s{p}_1+m).
\end{multline}
For on-shell momenta the nonsingular part of the dressed vertex is given by (see \cite{meuren_polarization_2013,meuren_polarization-operator_2015} for more details)
\begin{multline}
\label{eqn:dressedvertexfinal_nonsingularpartcanonicalparametrization}
\mc{G}^\rho(p_1,q,-p_2)
=
(-i e) \bigg\{
\gamma_\mu \Big[\mathfrak{G}_{0} g^{\mu\rho}
+
\sum_{j=1,2} \, (G_1 \mathfrak{G}_{j,1} f^{\mu\rho}_j
\\+
G_2 \mathfrak{G}_{j,2} f_j^{2\mu\rho}) \Big]
+
i \gamma_\mu \gamma^5 \sum_{j=1,2} \, G_3 \mathfrak{G}_{j,1} f_j^{*\mu\rho} \bigg\},
\end{multline}
where
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:dressedvertex_Givswkq}
\begin{gathered}
G_1(R,kq) = e \frac{Rw}{kq},
\quad
G_2(R,kq) = -\frac{e^2}{2} \, \frac{w}{(kq)^2},
\\
G_3(R,kq) = -\frac{e}{2} \, \frac{w}{kq}.
\end{gathered}
\end{gather}
Furthermore, the so-called master integrals $\mathfrak{G}_{0} = \mathfrak{G}_{0}(w,t_1,t_2)$ and $\mathfrak{G}_{j,l} = \mathfrak{G}_{j,l}(w,t_1,t_2)$ are given by (the notation agrees with \cite{meuren_nonlinear_2015})
\begin{subequations}
\label{eqn:dressedvertexmasterintegrals}
\begin{align}
\mathfrak{G}_{0}
&=
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} d\phi \, e^{i \widetilde{S}_\Gamma(w,t_1,t_2;\phi)},
\\
\mathfrak{G}_{j,l}
&=
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} d\phi \, [\psi_j(\phi)]^l e^{i \widetilde{S}_\Gamma(w,t_1,t_2;\phi)},
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
with the nonlinear, field-dependent phase
\begin{subequations}
\label{eqn:dressedvertex_reducedphase_onshell}
\begin{gather}
\widetilde{S}_\Gamma(w,t_1,t_2;\phi) = \frac{w}{2} \frac{m^2}{kq} \mathfrak{S}_\Gamma(t_1,t_2;\phi),
\end{gather}
\begin{multline}
\mathfrak{S}_\Gamma(t_1,t_2;\phi) = (1 + t_1^2 + t_2^2) \phi
\\+ \sum_{i=1,2} \, \int_{-\infty}^{\phi} d\phi'\, \Big[ \xi^2_i \psi^2_i(\phi') - 2 t_i \xi_i \psi_i(\phi') \Big].
\end{multline}
\end{subequations}
From \eqref{eqn:dressedvertexfinal_nonsingularpartcanonicalparametrization} we conclude that the pair-creation probability can be calculated algebraically once the master integrals are known. As the integration range of $\mathfrak{G}_{j,l}(w,t_1,t_2)$ is naturally bounded, a numerical calculation is readily accomplished (for $l\neq0$, more details are provided in \secref{sec:ftmasterintegrals}). To determine $\mathfrak{G}_{0}(w,t_1,t_2)$ we integrate by parts and after neglecting the boundary terms we obtain the relation
\begin{multline}
\label{eqn:dressedvertexmasterintegrals_G0relation}
\mathfrak{G}_{0}(w,t_1,t_2)
=
- \frac{1}{2n} \frac{m^2}{kq} w \sum_{i=1,2} \Big[\xi^2_i \mathfrak{G}_{i,2}(w,t_1,t_2) \\- 2t_i \xi_i \mathfrak{G}_{i,1}(w,t_1,t_2) \Big]
\end{multline}
[$n>0$, see \eqref{eqn:momentumconservationpaircreation}].
\subsection{Fourier-transformed master integrals}
\label{sec:ftmasterintegrals}
From \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_reducedphase_onshell} we infer that the dependence of the master integrals $\mathfrak{G}_{j,l}(w,t_1,t_2)$ on $w$ is very simple. \highlight{As a consequence, their Fourier transforms $\tilde{\mathfrak{G}}_{j,l}(z,t_1,t_2)$ [defined in \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_masterintegrals_wft}] can be calculated analytically.} To this end we have to consider $\mathfrak{G}_{j,l}(w,t_1,t_2)$ as a function of $w\in(-\infty,+\infty)$, even though only the parameter range $w\in[4,\infty)$ is important from a physical point of view [the master integrals are everywhere well defined, see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertexmasterintegrals}]. After interchanging the order of integration, we obtain the following representation
\begin{multline}
\label{eqn:dressedvertex_masterintegrals_wft}
\tilde{\mathfrak{G}}_{j,l}(z,t_1,t_2)
=
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} dw \, e^{-i \frac{1}{2} w \frac{m^2}{kq} z} \, \mathfrak{G}_{j,l}(w,t_1,t_2)
\\=
4\pi \, \frac{kq}{m^2} \frac{[\psi_j(\phi_{z})]^l}{\mathfrak{S}'_\Gamma(t_1,t_2;\phi_{z})},
\end{multline}
where the prime denotes the derivative with respect to the laser phase $\phi$ [see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_reducedphase_onshell}] and $\phi_{z}$ is the (unique) solution of the equation $\mathfrak{S}_\Gamma(w,t_1,t_2;\phi_{z}) = z$. The uniqueness of $\phi_{z}$ follows from the fact that
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:dressedvertex_reducedphase_onshellderivative}
\mathfrak{S}'_\Gamma(t_1,t_2;\phi) = 1 + \sum_{i=1,2} \, \big[ t_i - \xi_i \psi_i(\phi) \big]^2
\end{gather}
is always greater than zero on the real axis. Thus, the calculation of the Fourier-transformed master integrals $\tilde{\mathfrak{G}}_{j,l}(z,t_1,t_2)$ reduces to a root-finding problem (which is solvable numerically with low computational costs).
\highlight{Once $\tilde{\mathfrak{G}}_{j,l}(z,t_1,t_2)$ is calculated on a grid in $z$ with sufficient resolution, the quantities $\mathfrak{G}_{j,l}(w,t_1,t_2)$, which are related to $\tilde{\mathfrak{G}}_{j,l}(z,t_1,t_2)$ by an inverse Fourier transform [see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_masterintegrals_wft}], can be calculated numerically on a grid in $w$ very efficiently by means of a \textit{single} Fast-Fourier Transform (FFT) \cite{press_numerical_2007,cooley_algorithm_1965}. Therefore, this approach reduces the problem of calculating $\mathfrak{G}_{j,l}(w,t_1,t_2)$ as a function of $w$, $t_1$ and $t_2$ on a three-dimensional grid to an effectively two-dimensional problem [from the viewpoint of computation costs, assuming that the root-finding problem in \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_masterintegrals_wft} causes no significant overhead with respect to the FFT]. In comparison with a direct calculation of $\mathfrak{G}_{j,l}(w,t_1,t_2)$ [see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertexmasterintegrals}] using standard algorithms for highly, nonuniformly oscillating integrals, \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_masterintegrals_wft} reduces the required computational effort substantially.}
Alternatively, one could also perform the change of variables $\phi\to z = \mathfrak{S}_\Gamma(w,t_1,t_2;\phi)$ in \eqref{eqn:dressedvertexmasterintegrals} and evaluate the master integrals directly via FFT. The change of variables is one-to-one as $\mathfrak{S}'_\Gamma(t_1,t_2;\phi) > 0$, see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_reducedphase_onshellderivative}. This approach has been applied in \cite{di_piazza_strong_2009} to the analogous problem of nonlinear Thomson scattering.
\section{Semiclassical picture}
\label{sec:semiclassicalpicture}
By combining all relations presented in \secref{sec:ppp}, the numerical evaluation of the leading-order $S$-matrix element for the nonlinear Breit-Wheeler process and the determination of the momentum distribution for the created particles is straightforward. However, we obtain no further physical insights into the pair-production process in this way, as the $S$-matrix does not reveal any details about the dynamics taking place inside the interaction zone. Therefore, an intuitive semiclassical picture is now developed, which is applicable for strong background fields ($\xi\gg 1$). Using optical lasers (photon energy $\omega\sim\unit[1]{eV}$) intensity parameters $\xi \gtrsim 100$ are accessible at existing and upcoming laser facilities \cite{yanovsky_ultra_2008,cheriaux_apollon_2012,ELI,andrey_lyachev_10pw_2011,CLF,XCELS}. In this regime the actual transformation from light to matter (which happens within a microscopically small formation region $\delta\phi \sim \nfrac{1}{\xi}$ in the laser phase) can be separated from the subsequent classical propagation of the created particles.
In order to verify the reliability of the semiclassical approach (which is to a large extend similar to the one used in PIC codes), we compare its predictions with full numerical calculations. To this end we consider a linearly polarized laser field [$\psi=\psi_1$, $\psi_2=0$, $\xi=\xi_1$] with the following pulse shape
\begin{gather}
\psi'(\phi) = \sin^2[\nfrac{\phi}{(2N)}] \, \sin(\phi + \phi_0)
\end{gather}
for $\phi \in [0,2\pi N]$ and zero otherwise. Here, $N$ denotes the number of cycles and $\phi_0$ the CEP of the pulse (the numerical values of the parameters used in the calculations are given in the captions of the figures). Furthermore, we assume that the incoming photon has parallel polarization ($\epsilon^\mu = \Lambda_1^\mu$, see \appref{sec:photonpolarizationappendix}). In this case the trace in \eqref{eqn:paircreation_spinsummedmatrixelement} is given by
\begin{multline}
\label{eqn:paircreation_linpoltracelambda1}
-\frac{1}{e^2} \Lambda_{1\mu}\Lambda_{1\nu} \tr[...]^{\mu\nu}
\\=
2m^2 (w-4) \big[ -\xi^2 \abs{\mathfrak{G}_{1,1}}^2
+ 2\xi t_1 \Re (\mathfrak{G}_{0}^* \mathfrak{G}_{1,1}) \big]
\\+ 4m^2\abs{\mathfrak{G}_{0}}^2 \big[2t_1^2
-(\nfrac{w}{2})(1+t_1^2+t_2^2) \big]
\end{multline}
and we denote the probability by $W_\parallel(q) = W(q,\epsilon=\Lambda_1)$ [see \eqref{eqn:paircreation_probabilitycanonincalparametrization}].
\subsection{Stationary-phase analysis}
\label{sec:stationaryphaseanalysis}
\highlight{To obtain an intuitive semiclassical picture, we apply now a stationary-phase analysis to the master integrals defined in \eqref{eqn:dressedvertexmasterintegrals}. However, our calculation does not precisely follow the method of steepest descent, which is the standard approach (see, e.g., \cite{ritus_1985,reiss_absorption_1962,narozhnyi_photon_1996} and also \cite{airy_intensity_1838}). Instead, it is shown that the integral along the real line is dominated by those points where the second derivative of the phase vanishes. Of course, the final result agrees with the one obtained using the method of steepest descent, but the derivation is less complicated as it does not require the deformation of the integration contour within the complex plane.}
From \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_reducedphase_onshell} we conclude that in the regime $\xi\gg 1$ the master integrals are in general highly oscillating. From the derivative of the phase
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:dressedvertex_reducedphase_onshellderivative_general}
\widetilde{S}'_\Gamma(w,t_1,t_2;\phi) = \frac{w}{2} \frac{m^2}{kq} \mathfrak{S}'_\Gamma(t_1,t_2;\phi)
\end{gather}
we infer that the master integrals have no stationary point on the real integration line (the prime denotes the derivative with respect to the laser phase $\phi$). Focusing on the case of linear polarization [see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_reducedphase_onshellderivative}]
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:dressedvertex_reducedphase_onshellderivative_linpol}
\mathfrak{S}'_\Gamma(t_1,t_2;\phi) = 1 + t_2^2 + \big[ t_1 - \xi \psi(\phi) \big]^2,
\end{gather}
we find that the stationary points $\varphi_k^{\pm}$ of the phase $\widetilde{S}_\Gamma(\phi) = \widetilde{S}_\Gamma(w,t_1,t_2;\phi)$ [defined by $\widetilde{S}'_\Gamma(\varphi_k^{\pm})=0$] are complex and given by
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:paircreation_statpointslinpol}
\psi(\varphi_k^{\pm}) = \frac{1}{\xi} \left( t_1 \pm i \sqrt{1 + t_2^2} \right).
\end{gather}
To obtain the leading-order approximation to the master integrals in the regime $\xi\gg 1$, one could apply the method of steepest descent, i.e.\ deform the integration contour inside the complex plane such that it passes through the stationary points (see, e.g., \cite{ritus_1985,reiss_absorption_1962,narozhnyi_photon_1996}). However, the desired result is derived much faster by noting that the stationary points $\varphi_k^{\pm}$ are located pairwise very close to the real line if $\abs{t_2} \lesssim 1$ \highlight{(analogously to nonlinear Compton scattering and other processes \cite{narozhnyi_photon_1996,mackenroth_nonlinear_2011,meuren_high-energy_2015} inside a plane-wave field;} for $\abs{t_2} \gg 1$ the pair-production probability is exponentially suppressed, see below). Mathematically, we have to deal with two stationary points which coalesce in the limit $\xi\to\infty$. For $\xi\gg 1$ the two stationary points nearly coalesce, a situation which is discussed, e.g., in \cite{chester_extension_1957} (see also \cite{meuren_nonlinear_2015}, App.\,H and \cite{olver_nist_2010}, Chap.\,36).
\highlight{Due to the presence of two stationary points $\varphi_k^{\pm}$ close to each (quasi-) stationary point $\phi_k$ defined by
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:paircreation_statpointeq}
\psi(\phi_k) = \nfrac{t_1}{\xi},
\end{gather}
we expect that the integral along the real line is dominated by small formation regions $\delta\phi$ around the points $\phi_k$} [for a linearly polarized laser field; in general we obtain two equations $\psi_i(\phi_k) = \nfrac{t_i}{\xi_i}$ ($i=1,2$) which should be fulfilled simultaneously]. From \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_reducedphase_onshellderivative_linpol} we conclude that the oscillation frequency of the phase is as small as possible at these points \highlight{(i.e. $\widetilde{S}_\Gamma''=0$)} because the dominating contribution to the oscillation frequency becomes stationary (an intuitive physical interpretation for this condition is given in \secref{sec:classicalinterpretationofthestatpoints}). In the following, we will call the points $\phi_k$ (and not $\varphi_k^{\pm}$) stationary points for simplicity (to stress the difference, the points $\varphi_k^{\pm}$ are called \textit{true} stationary points). Moreover, we assume that all stationary points $\phi_k$ are located sufficiently far away from each other, i.e.\ we ignore subtleties arising around the extremal points of $\psi(\phi)$ [note that pair production is ineffective in these regions, as $\psi'(\phi)$ is small].
As the main contribution to the master integrals arises from the regions around the phases $\phi_k$ where $t_1 \approx \xi \psi(\phi_k)$, we expand the phase $\widetilde{S}_\Gamma(\phi) = \widetilde{S}_\Gamma(w,t_1,t_2;\phi)$ [see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_reducedphase_onshell}] around a stationary point $\phi_k$ up to cubic order
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:dressedvertex_linpol_phasesemiclassicapprox}
\begin{gathered}
\widetilde{S}_\Gamma(\phi)
\approx
\widetilde{S}_\Gamma(\phi_k) + a (\phi-\phi_k) + \frac{1}{3} b (\phi-\phi_k)^3
\\
a = \frac{w}{2} \frac{m^2}{kq} (1 + t_2^2),
\quad
b = \frac{w}{2} \frac{m^2}{kq} [\xi \psi'(\phi_k)]^2.
\end{gathered}
\end{gather}
Here, we focus on the regime $\chi \gtrsim 1$ (where the pair-production probability is not exponentially suppressed, see below) and define the formation region $\delta\phi = \phi-\phi_k$ around $\phi_k$ by the requirement that the phase in \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_linpol_phasesemiclassicapprox} remains of order one (see, e.g., \cite{baier_concept_2005,baier_electromagnetic_1994}). As $a\sim\xi$ and $b\sim \xi^3$, the formation region scales as $\delta\phi\sim\nfrac{1}{\xi}$ (we always assume $\xi\gg 1$ in this section). Correspondingly, both the linear and the cubic term have to be taken into account. Higher-order terms do not change the behavior of the phase significantly (within the formation region) and can be neglected to leading order. We will show in \secref{sec:classicalvsquantumabsorption} that the scaling $\delta\phi\sim\nfrac{1}{\xi}$ for the formation region is reasonable from a physical point of view, as the energy absorbed classically from the background field within $\delta\phi$ is sufficient to bring the particles on shell.
After the change of variables from $\phi$ to $t = \sqrt[3]{b} (\phi-\phi_k)$ the phase is approximately given by [see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_linpol_phasesemiclassicapprox}]
\begin{gather}
\widetilde{S}_\Gamma(\phi)
\approx
\widetilde{S}_\Gamma(\phi_k) + x t + \frac{1}{3} t^3,
\end{gather}
where
\begin{gather}
\begin{gathered}
x = \frac{a}{\sqrt[3]{b}} = \left[ \frac{\nfrac{w}{2}}{\abs{\chi(\phi_k)}} \right]^{\nfrac{2}{3}} (1+t_2^2),
\\
\frac{1}{\sqrt[3]{b}} = \frac{2}{w} \frac{kq}{m^2} \left[ \frac{\nfrac{w}{2}}{\abs{\chi(\phi_k)}} \right]^{\nfrac{2}{3}},
\end{gathered}
\end{gather}
and the absolute value of $\chi(\phi) = \chi \psi'(\phi)$ denotes the local value of the quantum-nonlinearity parameter $\chi = (\nfrac{kq}{m^2})\xi$ \cite{di_piazza_extremely_2012,ritus_1985}.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics{Fig2}
\caption{\label{fig:spectrum_t1t2_N5interferencecompare}
Momentum distribution for the created electron-positron pair [see \eqref{eqn:paircreation_probabilitycanonincalparametrization}] for the parameters $\chi=1$, $\xi=5$, $N=5$ and $\phi_0=\nfrac{\pi}{2}$ [the longitudinal momentum characterized by $R$ is integrated numerically and the incoming photon has parallel polarization ($\epsilon^\mu = \Lambda_1^\mu$)]. The parameters $\xi=5$ and $\chi=1$ could be obtained by colliding $\unit[17]{GeV}$ photons head-on with optical ($\omega=\unit[1.55]{eV}$) laser pulses having an intensity of $\unitfrac[10^{20}]{W}{cm^2}$ (note that few-cycle laser pulses are envisaged, e.g., at the petawatt field synthesizer (PFS) in Garching \cite{ahmad_frontend_2009}). \textbf{a}) Full numerical calculation of the spectrum [see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_masterintegrals_wft}]. \textbf{b}) Local constant-crossed field approximation applied on the amplitude level [see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_linpol_semiclassicapprox_masterints}]. The inset shows that the interference pattern is lost if the local constant-crossed field approximation is applied on the probability level. \textbf{c}) Outline for $t_2=0$. Solid line: full numerical calculation; dotted (dashed) line: local constant-crossed field approximation applied on the amplitude (probability) level.}
\end{figure*}
Finally, we obtain from the stationary point $\phi_k$ [defined by \eqref{eqn:paircreation_statpointeq}] the following contribution to the master integrals [in the case of a linearly polarized laser field, see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertexmasterintegrals}]
\begin{subequations}
\label{eqn:dressedvertex_linpol_semiclassicapprox_masterints}
\begin{gather}
\mathfrak{G}_{0}(w,t_1,t_2)
\approx
\frac{kq}{m^2} \frac{2}{w} \left[ \frac{\nfrac{w}{2}}{\abs{\chi(\phi_k)}} \right]^{\nfrac{2}{3}} 2\pi \Ai(\rho) \, e^{i \widetilde{S}_\Gamma(\phi_k)},
\end{gather}
\begin{multline}
\mathfrak{G}_{1,1}(w,t_1,t_2)
\approx
\frac{t_1}{\xi} \mathfrak{G}_{0}(w,t_1,t_2)
-
i \left( \frac{kq}{m^2} \frac{2}{w} \right)^2
\\\times\,
\left[ \frac{\nfrac{w}{2}}{\abs{\chi(\phi_k)}} \right]^{\nfrac{4}{3}} \, 2\pi \Ai'(\rho) \, \psi'(\phi_k) \, e^{i \widetilde{S}_\Gamma(\phi_k)},
\end{multline}
\end{subequations}
where $\rho = \left\{ \nfrac{w}{[2\abs{\chi(\phi_k)}]} \right\}^{\nfrac{2}{3}} (1+t_2^2)$, $\chi(\phi) = \chi \psi'(\phi)$, $\chi = (\nfrac{kq}{m^2})\xi$ and $\Ai$ denotes the Airy function \cite{olver_nist_2010}.
As the properties of the Airy function imply that pair production is exponentially suppressed for $\chi \ll 1$ and $\abs{t_2}, w\gg 1$ \cite{meuren_polarization-operator_2015,di_piazza_extremely_2012}, we will consider $\chi = 1$ in the numerical calculations. Experimentally, the regime $\chi\gtrsim 1$, $\xi\gg1$ is accessible with presently available technology, i.e.\ by colliding $\unit{GeV}$ photons (obtainable, e.g., via Compton backscattering \cite{muramatsu_development_2014,leemans_multi-gev_2014,powers_quasi-monoenergetic_2014,wang_quasi-monoenergetic_2013,kim_enhancement_2013,phuoc_all-optical_2012,esarey_physics_2009,leemans_gev_2006}) with strong optical laser pulses.
\subsection{Interference substructure of the spectrum}
\label{sec:interferencesubstructure}
To compare the results derived in \secref{sec:stationaryphaseanalysis} with those already known in the literature, we consider first a constant-crossed background field [$\psi(\phi)=\phi$]. In this case the stationary-point equation $t_1 = \xi \psi(\phi_k) = \xi \phi_k$ [see \eqref{eqn:paircreation_statpointeq}] has only one solution and the approximations leading to \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_linpol_semiclassicapprox_masterints} are exact. Correspondingly, we obtain the probabilities (rates) for pair creation inside a constant-crossed background field given, e.g., in \cite{nikishov_pair_1967,ritus_1985} by combining \eqref{eqn:paircreation_linpoltracelambda1} with \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_linpol_semiclassicapprox_masterints}.
For an oscillatory plane-wave background field, however, one finds in general more than one stationary point. Physically, this implies that the electron-positron pair can be created with the same asymptotic quantum numbers at different laser phases (note that different formation regions are usually separated on the macroscopic scale given by the laser wavelength). In accordance with general principles we expect that the existence of different pathways with the same final state causes interference effects similar to those in a multi-slit experiment \highlight{(for the importance of interference effects see also \cite{seipt_nonlinear_2011,mackenroth_nonlinear_2011,heinzl_beam-shape_2010,krafft_spectral_2004,narozhnyi_photon_1996,akkermans_ramsey_2012,dumlu_interference_2011,dumlu_stokes_2010,hebenstreit_momentum_2009}).}
The presence of interference fringes in the spectrum is demonstrated in \figref{fig:spectrum_t1t2_N5interferencecompare}. The first subplot was obtained using a full three-dimensional numerical calculation of the spectrum based on the method introduced in \secref{sec:ftmasterintegrals} [see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_masterintegrals_wft}]. As shown in the second subplot, the semiclassical approximation introduced in \secref{sec:stationaryphaseanalysis} is already for $\xi=5$ in very good agreement with the exact result.
Due to the fact that the background field is approximated locally around each stationary point as a constant-crossed field during the derivation of \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_linpol_semiclassicapprox_masterints}, we call the semiclassical approximation also local constant-crossed field approximation. However, it is important that the local constant-crossed field approximation is applied on the level of the probability amplitude (i.e.\ we do not simply average the spectrum of a constant-crossed field over the laser pulse shape). The essential difference between both approaches is the presence of the phase factor $\exp{[i \widetilde{S}_\Gamma(\phi_k)]}$ in \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_linpol_semiclassicapprox_masterints}, which gives rise to the interference substructure once the contribution of multiple stationary points is taken into account. If the spectrum is calculated for each stationary point separately and the result is added on the probability level, the interference fringes are lost (see inset in \figref{fig:spectrum_t1t2_N5interferencecompare}; so far this approach was called local constant-crossed field approximation in the literature).
As the interference pattern is determined by the phase factor $\exp{[i \widetilde{S}_\Gamma(\phi_k)]}$, we conclude from \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_reducedphase_onshell} that the oscillation frequency of the interference fringes in the spectrum scales as $\sim\xi^3$ for $w$, $\sim \xi^2$ for $t_1$ and $\sim \xi$ for $t_2$. Here, we define the oscillation frequency of the spectrum with respect to a momentum parameter $x$ as the inverse of the change $\delta x$ which is needed to advance from one local maximum of the differential probability to an adjacent one. The difference between the oscillation frequencies for $t_1$ and $t_2$ is clearly visible in \figref{fig:spectrum_t1t2_N5interferencecompare}.
In order to fully resolve the interference substructure of the spectrum we used for $\xi\sim10$ a grid in momentum space ($w$, $t_1$, $t_2$) with $\sim 10^5 \times 10^4 \times 10^3 = 10^{12}$ data points (to obtain the two-dimensional plots we integrated numerically over the remaining momentum variable). From the above scaling laws for the oscillation frequency we conclude that this choice ensures enough sampling points per oscillation period of the interference fringes. As a cross-check we ensured that the total pair-creation probability calculated here by integrating numerically over the complete spectrum agrees with the one obtained in \cite{meuren_polarization-operator_2015} using the optical theorem.
As the interference substructure is an intrinsic nonlocal effect, it cannot be included easily into existing PIC schemes. However, the exact resolution of the transverse momentum components is beyond the achievable precision of existing codes. Therefore, their overall precision should be increased first before interference effects can be studied.
\subsection{Classical interpretation of the stationary points}
\label{sec:classicalinterpretationofthestatpoints}
To obtain an intuitive interpretation of the stationary points discussed in \secref{sec:stationaryphaseanalysis}, we consider the classical equations of motion for an electron (positron) inside a plane-wave laser field. They predict that the time evolution of the electron four-momentum $P^\mu(\phi)$ is given by \cite{meuren_tests_2014,di_piazza_extremely_2012,meyer_covariant_1971,sarachik_classical_1970}
\begin{multline}
\label{eqn:ced_chargeinplanewavefield_momentumfourvectorsolution}
P^\mu(\phi)
=
P_0^\mu + \frac{e}{kP_0} \, \mathfrak{F}^{\mu\nu}(\phi,\phi_0) P_{0\nu}
\\+
\frac{e^2}{2(kP_0)^2} \, \mathfrak{F}^{2\mu\nu}(\phi,\phi_0) P_{0\nu},
\end{multline}
where $P_0^\mu = P^\mu(\phi_0)$ denotes the four-momentum at the laser phase $\phi_0$ and
\begingroup
\allowdisplaybreaks
\begin{multline}
\mathfrak{F}^{\mu\nu}(\phi,\phi_0)
=
\int^{\phi}_{\phi_0} d\phi'\, F^{\mu\nu}(\phi')
\\=
\sum_{i=1,2} f_i^{\mu\nu} [\psi_i(\phi)-\psi_i(\phi_0)]
\end{multline}%
\endgroup
the integrated field tensor [compare with \eqref{eqn:fieldtensor}]. To obtain the corresponding result for a positron we have to change the sign of the charge ($e\to-e$) in \eqref{eqn:ced_chargeinplanewavefield_momentumfourvectorsolution}. Note that a laser field does not have a dc component [$\psi_i(\pm\infty)=0$], which implies that the electron (positron) four-momentum does not change asymptotically [$P^\mu(-\infty) = P^\mu(+\infty)$]. This observation is in agreement with the Lawson-Woodward theorem \cite{lawson_lasers_1979,woodward_theoretical_1948}, which states that a plane-wave laser field cannot accelerate particles.
The classical time evolution becomes particularly transparent if the four-momentum is expanded in the canonical light-cone basis [see \eqref{eqn:canonicallcb}]
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:classicaldynamics_momentumincanonicallcc}
P^\mu(\phi) = \rho(\phi) q^\mu + \sigma(\phi) k^\mu + m \sum_{i=1,2} \tau_i(\phi) \Lambda_{i}^\mu.
\end{gather}
The conservation of $kP=kP_0$ implies that also $\rho(\phi)=\rho(\phi_0) = \nfrac{kP}{kq}$ is conserved and
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:classicaldynamics_momentumincanonicallcc_onshellcondition}
\sigma(\phi) = \frac{1}{2} \frac{m^2}{kP_0} \big[1 + \tau_1^2(\phi) + \tau_2^2(\phi)\big]
\end{gather}
is determined by the on-shell condition $P^2(\phi) = m^2$. Therefore, the nontrivial dynamic is entirely described by the transverse degrees of freedom
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:ced_planewave_electronmomentumevolutionlcc}
\tau_i(\phi) = \tau_i(\phi_0) - \xi_i [\psi_i(\phi)-\psi_i(\phi_0)].
\end{gather}
Correspondingly, also $\tau_{2}(\phi) = \tau_{2}(\phi_0)$ is conserved for a linearly polarized laser field [$\psi_2(\phi)=0$].
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics{Fig3}
\caption{\label{fig:spectrum_N2xicompare}\textbf{Left side}: Numerically calculated differential pair-production probability as a function of the transversal momentum parameters $t_1$ and $t_2$ (the longitudinal momentum characterized by $R$ is integrated numerically). The incoming photon has parallel polarization ($\epsilon^\mu = \Lambda_1^\mu$), the laser pulse $N=2$ cycles (such short pulses are envisaged, e.g., at the PFS in Garching \cite{ahmad_frontend_2009}) and $\chi=1$. We compare two different CEPs and two different intensities: \textbf{a}) $\phi_0=0$, $\xi=10$; \textbf{b}) $\phi_0=0$, $\xi=5$; \textbf{c}) $\phi_0=\pi$, $\xi=10$; \textbf{d}) $\phi_0=\pi$, $\xi=5$. The solid white lines confine the phase-space region where the pair can be produced at a phase $\phi$ with $\abs{\psi'(\phi)} \geq 0.5$ and the dashed white lines indicate the transverse momenta for which the pair can be produced at a local field peak. After integrating over $t_1$ and $t_2$ we obtain for the total pair-production probability $W_{\parallel} = 0.09\,\%$ ($\xi=10$) and $W_{\parallel} = 0.045\,\%$ ($\xi=5$), up to this precision it is independent of the CEP. \textbf{Right side}: Plot of the laser pulse shape [solid line: $\psi'(\phi)$, dashed line: $\psi(\phi)$].}
\end{figure*}
Using the above results we consider now the classical evolution of the electron and the positron four-momentum $p_1^\mu(\phi)$ and $p_2^\mu(\phi)$, respectively. Requiring the boundary conditions $p_i^\mu(\infty) = p_i$ [see \eqref{eqn:momentumincanonicallcb}], we obtain
\begin{subequations}
\label{eqn:paircreation_momentumincanonicallcb_classical}
\begin{align}
p_1^\mu(\phi) &= r' q^\mu + s'(\phi) k^\mu + m \sum_{i=1,2} t_i(\phi) \, \Lambda_{i}^\mu,
\\
p_2^\mu(\phi) &= -r q^\mu - s(\phi) k^\mu - m \sum_{i=1,2} t_i(\phi) \, \Lambda_{i}^\mu,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $r'=r+1$,
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:paircreation_tiphi_classical}
t_i(\phi) = t_{i} - \xi_i \psi_i(\phi)
\end{gather}
[note that $t_i=t_i(\infty)$ as $\psi_i(\infty)=0$] and [compare with \eqref{eqn:momentumincanonicallcbssprime}]
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
s(\phi) &= \frac{1}{2r} \frac{m^2}{kq} [1 + t_1^2(\phi) + t_2^2(\phi)],
\\
s'(\phi) &= \frac{1}{2r'} \frac{m^2}{kq} [1 + t_1^2(\phi) + t_2^2(\phi)].
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Furthermore, the following relation holds [compare with \eqref{eqn:momentumconservationpaircreation}]
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:momentumconservationpaircreation_instantaneous}
p_1^\mu(\phi) + p_2^\mu(\phi)
=
q^\mu + Q^\mu,
\quad
Q^\mu = n(\phi) k^\mu,
\end{gather}
where
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:momentumconservationpaircreation_instantaneous_n}
n(\phi) = \frac{w}{2} \frac{m^2}{kq} [1 + t_1^2(\phi) + t_2^2(\phi)].
\end{gather}
Assuming that a) the photon with four-momentum $q^\mu$ transforms within the short formation region $\delta\phi\sim\nfrac{1}{\xi}$ around a given laser phase $\phi_{\text{c}}$ into an electron-positron pair [see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_linpol_phasesemiclassicapprox} and the discussion below] and b) the charged particles subsequently obey the classical equations of motion, we conclude from \eqref{eqn:momentumconservationpaircreation_instantaneous} that the four-momentum $Q_{\text{c}}^\mu = n(\phi_{\text{c}})k^\mu$ must be absorbed ``non-classically'' from the background field during the pair-creation process itself (i.e.\ within the formation region). As the direct transformation of a real photon into a real electron-positron pair is kinematically forbidden, $n(\phi_{\text{c}})$ is always greater than zero. Stated differently, the four-momentum $Q_{\text{c}}^\mu$ is needed to bring the massive particles on shell with the right initial conditions $p_1^\mu(\phi_{\text{c}})$ and $p_2^\mu(\phi_{\text{c}})$ such that the subsequent classical propagation results in the asymptotic four-momenta $p_1^\mu=p_1^\mu(\infty)$ and $p_2^\mu=p_2^\mu(\infty)$.
To verify the correctness of this semiclassical picture, we demonstrate now that it is in perfect agreement with the results obtained in \secref{sec:stationaryphaseanalysis} (i.e.\ it is valid in the regime $\xi\gg 1$). To this end we note the following relation [see Eqs.\sdist(\ref{eqn:paircreation_tiphi_classical}), (\ref{eqn:momentumconservationpaircreation_instantaneous_n}) and (\ref{eqn:dressedvertex_reducedphase_onshellderivative_general})]
\begin{multline}
\label{eqn:paircreation_phaseoscillationvsn}
n(\phi) = \frac{w}{2} \frac{m^2}{kq} \Big\{ 1 + \sum_{i=1,2} [t_i - \xi_i \psi_i(\phi)]^2 \Big\}
\\= \widetilde{S}'_\Gamma(w,t_1,t_2;\phi).
\end{multline}
Correspondingly, the quantity $n(\phi)$, which is defined in \eqref{eqn:momentumconservationpaircreation_instantaneous_n} based on the classical equations of motion, corresponds exactly to the oscillation frequency of the master integrals [$\widetilde{S}'_\Gamma(w,t_1,t_2;\phi)$, see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_reducedphase_onshellderivative_general}], which are obtained from the full quantum calculation of the pair-creation probability [see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertexmasterintegrals}].
As discussed in \secref{sec:stationaryphaseanalysis}, the master integrals are dominated by small formation regions $\delta\phi\sim\nfrac{1}{\xi}$ around the (quasi-) stationary points $\phi_k$ defined by $t_{i} = \xi_i \psi_i(\phi_k)$ [i.e.\ $t_i(\phi_k) = 0$; see \eqref{eqn:paircreation_statpointeq} and \eqref{eqn:paircreation_tiphi_classical}]. This result of the stationary-phase analysis has a very intuitive explanation within the semiclassical picture developed above. According to \eqref{eqn:paircreation_phaseoscillationvsn} the stationary points correspond exactly to those laser phases where $n(\phi)$ is minimal. As the non-classical absorption of the four-momentum $Q^\mu$ can be depicted as a tunneling process (see also \cite{wollert_tunneling_2014}), it is natural to interpret $n(\phi)$ as a measure of the effective tunneling distance. Therefore, the above intuitive picture also predicts that the pair-creation process happens predominantly at those laser phases where $n(\phi)$ is minimal, in agreement with the full quantum calculation.
\subsection{Scaling laws for the spectrum}
\label{sec:spectrumscalinglaws}
From the discussion in the previous section we expect that many properties of the asymptotic momentum distribution can be understood from the classical equations of motion [see \eqref{eqn:classicaldynamics_momentumincanonicallcc}]. As an example, they predict that the spectrum extends up to $\xi_i$ in the variables $t_i$ in the general case of elliptical polarization.
This supposition is confirmed by the stationary-phase analysis carried out in \secref{sec:stationaryphaseanalysis}. For the special case of a linearly polarized laser field [$\psi_2(\phi)=0$] we obtain $\abs{t_1} \lesssim \xi$, as for $\abs{t_1}>\xi$ the stationary-point equation $t_1 = \xi \psi(\phi_k)$ has no solution [see \eqref{eqn:paircreation_statpointeq}]. However, the differential probability with respect to $t_2$ is now entirely determined by quantum effects during the pair-creation process itself, which implies $\abs{t_2} \lesssim 1$ [$t_2$ is a constant of motion if $\psi_2(\phi)=0$]. The correctness of this bound can be seen explicitly from the argument $\rho$ of the Airy function [see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_linpol_semiclassicapprox_masterints} and the discussion below]. The observation that pair production is exponentially suppressed for $\abs{t_2} \gg 1$ is in agreement with the fact that the true stationary points $\varphi_k^{\pm}$ are located far away from the real axis in this case [see \eqref{eqn:paircreation_statpointslinpol}]. Both scaling laws are verified numerically in \figref{fig:spectrum_N2xicompare}.
Moreover, \figref{fig:spectrum_N2xicompare} shows that all qualitative features of the spectrum in $t_1$ except the interference substructure can be understood from the classical acceleration of the charged particles in the laser field. In particular, the position and extension of the spectrum (solid lines) is predicted well by the classical equations of motion. Furthermore, the highest pair-creation probability is obtained for those momentum parameters which require that the process happens around a peak of the laser intensity (dashed lines).
We point out that for short laser pulses the classical acceleration has a preferred direction, which depends strongly on the CEP of the pulse. This can be seen from the plot of $\psi(\phi)$ in \figref{fig:spectrum_N2xicompare}, which determines the final momentum of the particles [see \eqref{eqn:ced_planewave_electronmomentumevolutionlcc}]. Correspondingly, the large CEP effects visible in the spectrum can be understood from classical physics (for the nonlinear Breit-Wheeler process they were first reported in \cite{krajewska_breit-wheeler_2012}).
For a linearly polarized background field [$\psi_2(\phi) = 0$] $R$ and $t_2$ are constants of motion [see Eqs.\sdist(\ref{eqn:momentumincanonicallcc_Rw}) and (\ref{eqn:paircreation_momentumincanonicallcb_classical})]. Therefore, the differential probability distribution with respect to $R$ and $t_2$ is entirely determined by the pair-production process itself and remains invariant under the subsequent classical propagation of the particles. This is demonstrated in \figref{fig:spectrum_wt2}. After integrating over $t_1$, the spectrum looks very similar to the one obtained for a constant-crossed field (after averaging over the laser pulse shape). In particular, we observe no substructure due to interference effects. For a fixed value of $t_1$, however, the differential spectrum shows clear interference fringes (see inset in \figref{fig:spectrum_wt2}).
Finally, we note that the scaling laws given above for the momentum variables imply that the available phase-space in $R$, $t_1$ and $t_2$ for the nonlinear Breit-Wheeler process is proportional to $\xi$. Correspondingly, the linear increase of the total pair-production probability as a function of $\xi$ in the regime $\xi\gg 1$ \cite{meuren_polarization-operator_2015} is a pure kinematic effect.
\subsection{Classical vs. quantum absorption of\\ laser four-momentum}
\label{sec:classicalvsquantumabsorption}
The results obtained in \secref{sec:classicalinterpretationofthestatpoints} [in particular \eqref{eqn:momentumconservationpaircreation_instantaneous_n}] allow us to distinguish theoretically between the four-momentum which is absorbed quantum-mechanically from the laser field during the pair-creation process itself (quantum absorption)
\begin{subequations}
\label{eqn:paircreation_nquantumvsnclassicalA}
\begin{gather}
n_{\text{q}} k^\mu = p_1^\mu(\phi_k) + p_2^\mu(\phi_k) - q^\mu
\end{gather}
and the four-momentum which is transferred classically from the laser to the charged particles during the acceleration of the particles (classical absorption)
\begin{gather}
n_{\text{cl}} k^\mu = p_1^\mu + p_2^\mu - [p_1^\mu(\phi_k) + p_2^\mu(\phi_k)].
\end{gather}
Asymptotically, however, we observe only the sum of both processes [see \eqref{eqn:momentumconservationpaircreation}]
\begin{gather}
n = n_{\text{q}} + n_{\text{cl}}.
\end{gather}
\end{subequations}
Here, $p_1^\mu(\phi_k)$ and $p_2^\mu(\phi_k)$ [$p_{1,2}^2(\phi_k) = m^2$] denote the initial values for the classical propagation, which starts at the laser phase $\phi_k$ once the real pair is already produced [see \eqref{eqn:paircreation_momentumincanonicallcb_classical} and \secref{sec:initialconditionsclassicalpropagation}]. Correspondingly, $n_{\text{q}} k^\mu$ represents the four-momentum which must be transfered non-classically to bring the particles on shell during the creation process (see \secref{sec:classicalinterpretationofthestatpoints}) and $n_{\text{cl}} k^\mu$ denotes the four-momentum which is transfered after the production until the pair leaves the laser field with asymptotic four-momenta $p_1^\mu$ and $p_2^\mu$, respectively. Note that the classical acceleration of the particles (i.e.\ the absorption of $n_{\text{cl}}$ laser photons) does not contradict the Lawson-Woodward theorem \cite{lawson_lasers_1979,woodward_theoretical_1948}, as the charged particles are created inside the laser pulse.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics{Fig4}
\caption{\label{fig:spectrum_wt2}Differential probability with respect to the parameters $t_2$ and $R$ for $\chi=1$, $\xi=10$, $N=5$ and $\phi_0=\nfrac{\pi}{2}$ [full numerical calculation, $t_1$ is integrated numerically and the incoming photon has parallel polarization ($\epsilon^\mu = \Lambda_1^\mu$)]. The inset shows $\nfrac{d^3W_{\parallel}}{(dRdt_1dt_2)}$ for $t_1=0$ [in arb. units, see \eqref{eqn:paircreation_probabilitycanonincalparametrization}]. The pronounced interference pattern vanishes after the integral in $t_1$ is taken. Note that the (spin-summed) differential probability does not depend on the sign of $R$ and $t_2$.}
\end{figure}
In the case of linear polarization [$\psi_2(\phi)=0$] $t_2$ is a constant of motion and the stationary points are determined from $t_1 = \xi \psi(\phi_k)$ [see \eqref{eqn:paircreation_statpointeq}]. Therefore,
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:paircreation_nquantumvsnclassical}
n_{\text{q}} = \frac{1}{2} w \frac{m^2}{kq} (1 + t_2^2),
\quad
n_{\text{cl}} = \frac{1}{2} w \frac{m^2}{kq} t_1^2.
\end{gather}
Using the scaling laws discussed in \secref{sec:spectrumscalinglaws} we conclude that the quantum and the classical absorption scale as $n_{\text{q}} \sim \nfrac{\xi}{\chi}$ and $n_{\text{cl}} \sim \nfrac{\xi^3}{\chi}$, respectively.
An intuitive understanding of the scaling law for $n_{\text{q}}$ is obtained by squaring \eqref{eqn:paircreation_nquantumvsnclassicalA}, which shows that
\begin{gather}
n_{\text{q}} \geq 2\frac{m^2}{kq}.
\end{gather}
This lower bound becomes an equality at the pair-production threshold, which is obtained for $p_1^\mu(\phi_k)= p_2^\mu(\phi_k)$ (i.e.\ for $w=4$ and $t_2=0$ in the case of linear polarization).
Note that although we indicated $n_{\text{q}}$ as the number of ``quantum-absorbed'' laser photons (referring to the fact that the electron and the positron are virtual inside the formation region), the scaling law $n_{\text{q}} \sim \xi$ (for $\chi\gtrsim 1$) can be understood by noting that the four-momentum which is transferable classically during the formation region $\delta\phi \sim \nfrac{1}{\xi}$ [see \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_linpol_phasesemiclassicapprox} and the discussion below] scales as $\sim \xi k^\mu$ [see \eqref{eqn:classicaldynamics_momentumincanonicallcc} and \eqref{eqn:momentumconservationpaircreation_instantaneous_n}].
In conclusion, the classical energy transfer during the propagation of the particles is much larger than the energy transfer which takes place during the pair-creation process itself in the regime $\xi\gg 1$ ($n_{\text{cl}} \gg n_{\text{q}}$). Correspondingly, a possible depletion of the background field (e.g., due to the development of a QED cascade) is dominated by the classical energy transfer from the laser to the pairs.
\subsection{Initial conditions for the classical propagation}
\label{sec:initialconditionsclassicalpropagation}
The semiclassical picture established in \secref{sec:classicalinterpretationofthestatpoints} agrees with the basic principles used in PIC codes. In order to include the Breit-Wheeler process into a PIC code, the main difficulty is to determine the correct initial conditions for the classical propagation of the charged particles. To this end the spectrum obtained for a constant-crossed field is usually employed (see \secref{sec:stationaryphaseanalysis}). As $R$ and $t_2$ are constants of motion [see Eqs.\sdist(\ref{eqn:momentumincanonicallcc_Rw}) and (\ref{eqn:paircreation_momentumincanonicallcb_classical})], the asymptotic momentum distribution in $R$ and $t_2$ obtained for a constant-crossed field using the $S$-matrix approach agrees with the initial momentum distribution in $R$ and $t_2$ immediately after the particles are brought on shell. Therefore, this approach is reasonable for the two parameters $R$ and $t_2$.
In contrast, the appropriate initial condition for $t_1(\phi_k)$ is far from clear, as $t_1(\phi_k)$ is not conserved by the classical equations of motion. At first sight one could expect the existence of a distribution function which determines the initial condition for $t_1$ (similar as for $R$ and $t_2$). However, we showed in \secref{sec:classicalinterpretationofthestatpoints} that the fixed value $t_1(\phi_k)=0$ should be used. This condition defines the stationary points [for linear polarization, see \eqref{eqn:paircreation_statpointeq}] and therefore leads to \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_linpol_semiclassicapprox_masterints} which represent the probabilities inside a locally constant-crossed field. Correspondingly, the usage of \eqref{eqn:dressedvertex_linpol_semiclassicapprox_masterints} to determine the probability distributions for $R$ and $t_2$ requires the initial condition $t_1(\phi_k)=0$ for the classical propagation.
\section{Summary and conclusions}
In the present paper the momentum distribution for electron-positron pairs produced via the nonlinear Breit-Wheeler process has been investigated for short laser pulses. Using a newly developed numerical scheme \highlight{(see \secref{sec:ftmasterintegrals})} we have calculated for the first time the spectrum on a three-dimensional lattice which fully resolves the interference substructure even in the ultra-relativistic regime $\xi \gg 1$. Furthermore, we have investigated the local constant-crossed field approximation and showed that it reproduces the spectrum (including the interference fringes) for $\xi \gg 1$ if it is applied on the probability-amplitude level. Correspondingly, three effects determine the final momentum distribution in the regime $\xi\gg 1$: The production of an electron and a positron with physical mass $m$ inside a constant-crossed field, their subsequent classical acceleration by the laser field and the interference between all production channels which lead to the same asymptotic quantum numbers. Accordingly, we verified that the produced electron and positron behave like classical particles after they have left the formation region \highlight{(see \secref{sec:semiclassicalpicture}, in particular \secref{sec:classicalinterpretationofthestatpoints} and \secref{sec:spectrumscalinglaws})} and that the substructure of the spectrum can be attributed to interferences between the contributions of different formation regions similar to those in a multi-slit experiment \highlight{(see \secref{sec:interferencesubstructure})}. Furthermore, it is shown that one can distinguish between a classical and a quantum absorption of laser photons \highlight{(see in particular \secref{sec:classicalvsquantumabsorption})}. As the former is dominant in the regime $\xi \gg 1$, a possible depletion of the laser field during the development of a QED cascade is mainly caused by the classical acceleration of the created charged particles. \highlight{In summary, the new findings presented here allow a disentanglement between classical and quantum aspects of the pair-production process.}
\section*{Acknowledgement}
S.M. would like to thank Alexander M. Fedotov, Thomas Grismayer, Karen Z. Hatsagortsyan, Oleg Skoromnik, Matteo Tamburini, Marija Vranic, Anton W\"ollert and Enderalp Yakaboylu for fruitful discussions. Furthermore, he is grateful to the Studienstiftung des deutschen Volkes for financial support. All plots have been created with Matplotlib \cite{hunter_matplotlib_2007} and the GSL \cite{GSL} has been used for numerical calculations.
\textit{Note\,added.---} After the publication of the first preprint of this paper the references \cite{seipt_caustic_2016,nousch_spectral_2016,seipt_analytical_2016,dinu_quantum_2016,jansen_strong-field_2015} appeared, which cover related aspects. The authors are very thankful to Daniel Seipt for insightful discussions about the findings reported in Refs. \cite{seipt_caustic_2016,nousch_spectral_2016}.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
Globular clusters are the remnants of
some of the most violent epochs of star formation
in the history of the Universe.
The compositions of the present-day stars
provide a detailed chemical inventory
to probe those ancient nucleosynthesis and
enrichment events.
Nevertheless, detailed chemical inventories for some
Galactic globular clusters are still relatively unknown.
Only recently were the chemical compositions
of a large sample of stars examined in one
such cluster, \mbox{NGC~4833}\
\citep{carretta14}.
The properties and orbital parameters of \mbox{NGC~4833}\ are listed
in Table~\ref{basicdata}.
\mbox{NGC~4833}\ has one of the more extended, richly-populated
blue horizontal branches among
Galactic globular clusters
(e.g., \citealt{menzies72,samus95,melbourne00,piotto02}).
This metal-poor cluster
is a member of the ``old'' globular cluster population
(e.g., \citeauthor{melbourne00}; \citealt{marinfranch09}),
and it ranks in the top quartile of most luminous clusters
around the Milky Way \citep{harris96}.
The proper motion measurements and orbit calculations
of \citet{casettidinescu07} suggest that
\mbox{NGC~4833}\ and \mbox{NGC~5986}, another old and metal-poor cluster,
share similar orbital characteristics.
\citeauthor{casettidinescu07}\ suggested
that these two clusters
are dynamically associated and could be
an accreted pair with a common
origin in a now-disrupted satellite galaxy.
\begin{table*}
\begin{minipage}{4.5in}
\caption{Basic properties and orbital parameters of \mbox{NGC~4833}
\label{basicdata}}
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\hline
Quantity &
Symbol &
Value &
Reference \\
\hline
Right ascension & $\alpha$ (J2000) & 12:59:34 & 1 \\
Declination & $\delta$ (J2000) & $-$70:52:35 & 1 \\
Galactic longitude & $\ell$ & 303.6{$^{\circ}$} & 1 \\
Galactic latitude & \textit{b} & $-$8.0{$^{\circ}$} & 1 \\
Luminosity & $M_{V}$ & $-$8.17 & 1 \\
Mass-to-light ratio & $M/L$ & 0.84~$\pm$~0.45 & 2 \\
Mass & $M_{*}$ & 1.2$\times 10^{5}$~$M_{\odot}$ & 1 \\
Central concentration & $c$ & 1.25 & 1 \\
Distance modulus & $m-M$ & 15.05~$\pm$~0.06 & 3 \\
Distance from Sun & R$_{\odot}$ & 6.5~kpc & 4 \\
Distance from Galactic Center & R$_{\rm G.C.}$ & 7.0~kpc & 4 \\
Perigalactic distance & R$_{\rm peri}$ & 0.7~$\pm$~0.2~kpc & 4 \\
Apogalactic distance & R$_{\rm apo}$ & 7.7~$\pm$~0.7~kpc & 4 \\
Maximum distance above Galactic plane & Z$_{\rm max}$ & 1.8~$\pm$~0.4~kpc& 4 \\
Orbital eccentricity & $e$ & 0.84~$\pm$~0.03 & 4 \\
Orbital period & $T_{\rm orbit}$ & 91~$\pm$~9~Myr & 4 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\\
References:\
(1)~\citealt{harris96};
(2)~\citealt{carretta14};
(3)~\citealt{melbourne00};
(4)~\citealt{casettidinescu07}
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}
Until last year, the only high-resolution spectroscopic
observations of stars in \mbox{NGC~4833}\ had been conducted by
\citet{pilachowski83}, who observed two stars,
\citet{gratton89}, who observed two stars, and
\citet{minniti93,minniti96}, who observed one.
These studies derived abundances of $\approx$~15--20
species in individual stars in \mbox{NGC~4833},
including O and Na abundances.
They recognized that [O/Fe] in some stars
was depleted relative
to the maximum [O/Fe] ratios
found in other clusters and
field stars of similar metallicity.
The small sample sizes limited these authors'
abilities to characterize the
global chemical properties of \mbox{NGC~4833}.
\citet{carretta14} observed 78 stars in \mbox{NGC~4833}\ with the
UVES and GIRAFFE spectrometers in the FLAMES instrument on the VLT.
This dataset enabled \citeauthor{carretta14}\
to characterize the pattern of light-element
(O, Na, Mg, Al, and Si) variations in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
That study also characterized the abundances of 18~species of
15~heavier elements.
\citet{carretta14} presented several forms of evidence that
suggest that \mbox{NGC~4833}\ may have been tidally stripped
more than the average cluster.
First, \mbox{NGC~4833}\ has a wide span of [Mg/Fe] ratios.
This property has only been identified in a few massive
or metal-poor clusters \citep{yong05,carretta09b,cohen12},
yet \mbox{NGC~4833}\ is only the 36$^{\rm th}$
most luminous Galactic globular cluster today.
Second, \mbox{NGC~4833}\ has an
eccentric orbit, small perigalactic distance, and modest
central concentration.
These values predict a high destruction rate
relative to other clusters \citep{casettidinescu07,allen08}.
Third, the inner-quartile range of the [O/Na] ratios
(IQR[O/Na]) in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
lies on the upper envelope of clusters in the
IQR[O/Na] versus luminosity correlation.
Evidence discussed by \citet{carretta14} indicates
that less-concentrated clusters of a given luminosity
may have larger values of IQR[O/Na] and have lost more mass
than more-concentrated ones.
Finally, the low mass-to-light ratio of \mbox{NGC~4833}\
hints that significant mass loss
may have occurred as low-mass stars have been
preferentially lost from the cluster.
\citet{carretta14} note that
no attempt has been made to detect
these escaped stars as tidal tails,
and potential investigators
may have been intimidated by the stellar crowding and
high reddening at the low Galactic latitude of \mbox{NGC~4833}.
The preponderance of evidence suggests that \mbox{NGC~4833}\
has lost a larger fraction of its initial
stellar mass than the average Galactic globular cluster.
Our sample includes only 15~stars in \mbox{NGC~4833},
but our data cover most of the optical spectral range.
We detect 43~species of 39~elements
heavier than He,
and this complements the more limited
chemical inventory derived from a larger sample of stars
studied by \citet{carretta14}.
These data enable us to focus new attention on the abundance pattern
exhibited by the heaviest elements in \mbox{NGC~4833},
those produced by neutron ($n$) capture reactions.
Throughout this work we
adopt the standard definitions of elemental abundances and ratios.
For element X, the logarithmic abundance is defined
as the number of atoms of X per 10$^{12}$ hydrogen atoms,
$\log\epsilon$(X)~$\equiv \log_{10}(N_{\rm X}/N_{\rm H}) +$~12.0.
For elements X and Y, [X/Y] is
the logarithmic abundance ratio relative to the solar ratio,
defined as $\log_{10} (N_{\rm X}/N_{\rm Y}) -
\log_{10} (N_{\rm X}/N_{\rm Y})_{\odot}$, using
like ionization states;
i.e., neutrals with neutrals and ions with ions.
We adopt the solar abundances listed in \citet{asplund09}.
Abundances or ratios denoted with the ionization state
indicate the total elemental abundance as derived from transitions of
that particular state.
\section{Observations}
\label{observations}
We have observed 15 probable members of \mbox{NGC~4833}\ with the
Magellan Inamori Kyocera Echelle (MIKE)
spectrograph \citep{bernstein03} on the
6.5~m Landon Clay (Magellan~II) Telescope at Las Campanas Observatory.
Table~\ref{obstab} presents a log of these observations,
and Figure~\ref{cmdplot} highlights these 15~stars on a
color-magnitude diagram of \mbox{NGC~4833}.
ThAr comparison lamp spectra have been taken immediately preceding or
following each observation.
The red and blue arms of MIKE are split
by a dichroic at $\approx$~4950\AA.
This setup provides complete wavelength coverage from
3350--9150\AA.
Data reduction, extraction, and wavelength calibration have been
performed using
the \textsc{CarPy}
MIKE data reduction pipeline
written by D.\ Kelson (see also \citealt{kelson03}).
Continuum normalization and order stitching
have been performed within the
\textsc{iraf} environment.
\begin{table}
\begin{minipage}{3.2in}
\caption{Observing log
\label{obstab}}
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
\hline
Star &
Slit &
Date &
UT$_{\rm start}$ &
$t_{\rm exp}$ &
RV \\
&
&
&
&
(s) &
(\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}) \\
\hline
2-185 & 1\farcs0 & 2011 03 18 & 04:41 & 2600 & 211.0 \\
2-277 & 1\farcs0 & 2011 03 18 & 03:38 & 3600 & 201.7 \\
2-882 & 1\farcs0 & 2011 03 18 & 02:42 & 3200 & 209.8 \\
2-918 & 1\farcs0 & 2011 03 18 & 05:27 & 3000 & 209.8 \\
2-1578 & 0\farcs7 & 2011 03 17 & 02:52 & 5400 & 201.3 \\
2-1578 & 0\farcs7 & 2011 03 17 & 06:33 & 1800 & 201.2 \\
2-1664 & 0\farcs7 & 2011 03 17 & 04:30 & 7200 & 199.5 \\
3-742 & 0\farcs7 & 2011 01 31 & 07:43 & 2400 & 206.4 \\
3-772 & 1\farcs0 & 2011 03 17 & 23:40 & 2800 & 203.0 \\
3-1509 & 1\farcs0 & 2011 03 18 & 01:56 & 2400 & 207.4 \\
4-224 & 0\farcs7 & 2011 01 28 & 08:22 & 1200 & 201.5 \\
4-341 & 0\farcs7 & 2011 01 28 & 08:47 & 2400 & 202.2 \\
4-341 & 0\farcs7 & 2011 01 29 & 08:22 & 2400 & 202.5 \\
4-464 & 1\farcs0 & 2011 03 18 & 00:29 & 2600 & 297.6 \\
4-1255 & 0\farcs7 & 2011 01 31 & 08:29 & 2400 & 205.9 \\
4-1398 & 1\farcs0 & 2011 03 18 & 01:16 & 2200 & 200.1 \\
4-1706 & 1\farcs0 & 2011 03 18 & 06:20 & 3400 & 187.9 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
\begin{table*}
\begin{minipage}{7.5in}
\caption{Photometry, model atmosphere parameters, and S/N ratios
\label{startab}}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccccccccc}
\hline
Star\footnote{This study, based on \citet{piotto02}} &
Star\footnote{\citet{menzies72}} &
Star\footnote{\citet{carretta14}} &
$V$ &
$(B-V)_{0}$ &
$(V-K)_{0}$ &
\mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ &
\mbox{log~{\it g}}\ &
\mbox{$v_{\rm t}$}\ &
{[M/H]} &
S/N &
S/N &
S/N &
S/N \\
&
&
&
&
&
&
(K) &
{[cgs]} &
(\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}) &
&
(3950~\AA) &
(4550~\AA) &
(5200~\AA) &
(6750~\AA) \\
\hline
2-185 & D102 & \ldots& 14.57 & 0.85 & 2.35 & 4670 & 1.55 & 1.75 & $-$2.2 & 25 & 50 & 50 & 110 \\
2-277 & D109 & \ldots& 14.90 & 0.87 & 2.26 & 4752 & 1.72 & 1.80 & $-$2.2 & 25 & 50 & 50 & 110 \\
2-882 & D193 & \ldots& 14.66 & 0.84 & 2.45 & 4665 & 1.57 & 1.70 & $-$2.2 & 20 & 40 & 50 & 110 \\
2-918 & C49 & 33027 & 14.75 & 0.83 & 2.40 & 4696 & 1.63 & 1.85 & $-$2.2 & 20 & 45 & 40 & 110 \\
2-1578 & C91 & 31836 & 14.12 & 0.89 & 2.26 & 4595 & 1.35 & 1.75 & $-$2.2 & 30 & 50 & 60 & 140 \\
2-1664 & C92 & \ldots& 14.34 & 0.86 & 2.82 & 4527 & 1.32 & 1.80 & $-$2.2 & 35 & 75 & 75 & 180 \\
3-742 & C129 & 31370 & 13.60 & 1.05 & 2.91 & 4357 & 0.93 & 2.00 & $-$2.2 & 25 & 65 & 75 & 200 \\
3-772 & D167 & \ldots& 14.50 & 0.89 & 2.37 & 4647 & 1.50 & 1.65 & $-$2.2 & 10 & 30 & 40 & 95 \\
3-1509 & C145 & 31929 & 14.38 & 0.87 & 2.52 & 4591 & 1.41 & 1.85 & $-$2.2 & 20 & 45 & 50 & 120 \\
4-224 & D136 & \ldots& 13.51 & 1.02 & 2.70 & 4385 & 0.96 & 2.05 & $-$2.2 & 20 & 45 & 55 & 120 \\
4-341 & D135 & \ldots& 13.56 & 1.05 & 2.69 & 4397 & 0.98 & 1.95 & $-$2.2 & 40 & 95 & 110 & 250 \\
4-464 & D153 & \ldots& 14.48 & 0.86 & 2.45 & 4628 & 1.48 & 1.90 & $-$2.2 & 10 & 40 & 45 & 115 \\
4-1255 & D49 & \ldots& 13.21 & 1.14 & 2.60 & 4344 & 0.84 & 2.15 & $-$2.2 & 35 & 80 & 90 & 215 \\
4-1398 & C191 & \ldots& 14.23 & 0.89 & 2.56 & 4556 & 1.33 & 1.85 & $-$2.2 & 15 & 45 & 50 & 115 \\
4-1706 & D41 & \ldots& 15.01 & 0.78 & 2.32 & 4764 & 1.76 & 1.85 & $-$2.2 & 25 & 45 & 50 & 105 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.3in]{f01.eps}
\caption{
\label{cmdplot}
The $B-V$ versus $V$ colour-magnitude diagram
using photometry from \citet{piotto02}.
Stars observed with MIKE are marked with circles.
The line is an isochrone from the PARSEC database
(v.\ 1.2S; \citealt{bressan12,chen14})
computed for an age of 13~Gyr and
metallicity $Z =$~0.00025.
The isochrone is
shifted to a distance modulus of 15.05
and a reddening of
$E(B-V) =$~0.32.
}
\end{figure}
Six stars were observed with the 0\farcs7$\times$5\farcs0 slit.
This setup yields a resolving power of $R \sim$~41,400 in the blue
and $R \sim$~36,300 in the red,
as measured from isolated ThAr lines in the
extracted comparison lamp spectra.
Nine stars were observed during poorer seeing conditions
with the 1\farcs0$\times$5\farcs0 slit,
which yields a resolving power of $R \sim$~30,500 in the blue and
$R \sim$~25,900 in the red.
Table~\ref{startab} presents
signal-to-noise (S/N) estimates based on
Poisson statistics for the number of photons collected
per pixel in the continuum.
These values are measured
from the co-added spectra.
We adopt a star naming convention based on the
\citet{piotto02} photometry files.
This convention has the form ``chip-ID.''
The first value (``chip'') indicates the
WFPC2 chip number, and the second value (``ID'')
indicates the star identification number.
Figure~\ref{specplot} illustrates a 25~\AA\ portion of
the MIKE spectra of all 15~stars observed in our study.
The spectra are sorted by increasing $V$-magnitude
from top to bottom.
Lines of nine species of six elements are marked.
This illustrates the richness of blue spectra
of red giant stars,
even when the overall metallicity
is less than 100~times the solar metallicity.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=270,width=6.0in]{f02.eps}
\caption{
\label{specplot}
Small portions of the blue spectra of all 15~stars in our study.
Identifications are given for 19~absorption lines.
Velocity shifts have been removed, and
the spectra have been shifted vertically
for the sake of illustration.
The stars are sorted by increasing $V$-magnitude from top to bottom.
}
\end{figure*}
\section{Radial velocities}
\label{rv}
We measure the stellar radial velocity (RV)
of each observation with respect to the ThAr lamp
by cross-correlating the echelle order
containing the Mg~\textsc{i} \textit{b} lines in each spectrum
against a template
using the \textit{fxcor} task in \textsc{iraf}.
We create the template by measuring the wavelengths of
unblended Fe~\textsc{i} lines in this order in star
\mbox{4-1255}, which has the highest S/N in a single exposure.
We compute velocity corrections to the Heliocentric rest frame
using the \textsc{iraf} \textit{rvcorrect} task.
This method yields a total uncertainty of $\approx$~0.6~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}\
per observation (see \citealt{roederer14}).
Table~\ref{obstab} presents the Heliocentric RV
measured for each observation.
We derive a mean Heliocentric RV to \mbox{NGC~4833}\ of 203.0~$\pm$~1.5~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}\
[s.e.m.]
($\sigma =$~5.9~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}\ [s.d.]).
All stars are within 2' of the cluster center, and the
RV of each star is within 2.5$\sigma$ of the systemic velocity.
There is a high probability that all 15~stars observed
are members of \mbox{NGC~4833}.
The mean heliocentric RV and dispersion of \mbox{NGC~4833}\
have been derived from high resolution GIRAFFE
spectra by two previous studies,
\citet{carretta14} and \citet{lardo15}.
\citeauthor{carretta14}\ reported a systemic velocity of
202.0~$\pm$~0.5~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}\ and a dispersion of
4.1~$\pm$~0.3~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}\ based on a sample of 78~stars.
\citeauthor{lardo15}\ reported a systemic velocity of
202.1~$\pm$~0.6~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}\ and a dispersion of
3.9~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}\ based on a sample of 82~stars.
Our values are in agreement.
These values are also in reasonable agreement
with previous measurements
derived from low-resolution spectra of smaller samples
of stars in \mbox{NGC~4833}\ by
\citet{geisler95}
(201.0~$\pm$~1.3~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}, $\sigma =$~4.6~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}, 12~stars)
and \citet{rutledge97}
(194.1~$\pm$~7.5~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}, $\sigma =$~3.3~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}, 26~stars).
For completeness, we note that
no abundances have been presented
from the spectra presented by
\citeauthor{lardo15}
\section{Equivalent Widths}
\label{ew}
We measure equivalent widths using a semi-automatic routine
that fits Voigt absorption line profiles to the
continuum-normalized spectra.
Following the same methods discussed in \citet{roederer14},
we inspect all equivalent width measurements by eye,
and we make manual adjustments to the fits when necessary.
Uncertainties in the equivalent widths are estimated
based on the S/N ratios that vary as a function of wavelength.
The complete list of equivalent widths is presented
in Table~\ref{ewtab},
which is
available in the Supplementary Information section
found in the online edition of the journal.
A short version is shown in the printed edition
to illustrate its form and content.
\begin{table}
\begin{minipage}{3.35in}
\caption{Atomic data and equivalent widths
\label{ewtab}}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
\hline
\hline
Wavelength &
Species\footnote{The number to the left of the decimal point indicates the atomic number, and the
number to the right of the decimal point indicates the ionization state
(0~$=$~neutral, 1~$=$~first ion)} &
E.P.\ &
$\log gf$\ &
Ref.\ &
2-185 &
\ldots \\
(\AA) &
&
(eV) &
&
&
&
\\
\hline
6707.80 & 3.0 & 0.00 & 0.17 & 1 & limit & \ldots \\
6300.30 & 8.0 & 0.00 & -9.78 & 2 & limit & \ldots \\
7771.94 & 8.0 & 9.14 & 0.37 & 2 & limit & \ldots \\
7774.17 & 8.0 & 9.14 & 0.22 & 2 & limit & \ldots \\
7775.39 & 8.0 & 9.14 & 0.00 & 2 & limit & \ldots \\
5682.63 & 11.0 & 2.10 & -0.71 & 2 & 23.9 & \ldots \\
5688.20 & 11.0 & 2.10 & -0.45 & 2 & 43.3 & \ldots \\
6154.22 & 11.0 & 2.10 & -1.55 & 2 & \ldots & \ldots \\
6160.75 & 11.0 & 2.10 & -1.25 & 2 & 13.1 & \ldots \\
4702.99 & 12.0 & 4.33 & -0.38 & 2 & 88.9 & \ldots \\
5528.40 & 12.0 & 4.34 & -0.50 & 2 & 95.7 & \ldots \\
5711.09 & 12.0 & 4.34 & -1.72 & 2 & 20.9 & \ldots \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\\
Notes.---
The full version of Table~\ref{ewtab} is available in the
supplementary material online.
Here, ``synth'' denotes lines used to derive an abundance
via spectrum synthesis, and ``limit'' denotes lines
used to derive an upper limit. \\
References.---
(1) \citealt{smith98};
(2) \citealt{fuhr09};
(3) \citealt{aldenius09};
(4) \citealt{lawler89}, using HFS from \citealt{kurucz95};
(5) \citealt{lawler13};
(6) \citealt{wood13};
(7) \citealt{doerr85a}, using HFS from \citealt{kurucz95};
(8) \citealt{wood14b};
(9) \citealt{sobeck07};
(10) \citealt{nilsson06};
(11) \citealt{denhartog11} for both $\log gf$\ value and HFS;
(12) \citealt{ruffoni14};
(13) \citealt{fuhr09}, using HFS from \citealt{kurucz95};
(14) \citealt{wood14};
(15) \citealt{roederer12a};
(16) \citealt{biemont11};
(17) \citealt{ljung06};
(18) \citealt{nilsson10};
(19) \citealt{palmeri05};
(20) \citealt{fuhr09}, using HFS/IS from \citealt{mcwilliam98} when available;
(21) \citealt{lawler01la}, using HFS from \citealt{ivans06};
(22) \citealt{roederer11c};
(23) \citealt{lawler09};
(24) \citealt{li07}, using HFS from \citealt{sneden09};
(25) \citealt{ivarsson01}, using HFS from \citealt{sneden09};
(26) \citealt{denhartog03}, using HFS/IS from \citealt{roederer08} when available;
(27) \citealt{lawler06}, using HFS/IS from \citealt{roederer08} when available;
(28) \citealt{lawler01eu}, using HFS/IS from \citealt{ivans06};
(29) \citealt{denhartog06};
(30) \citealt{roederer12b};
(31) \citealt{lawler01tb}, using HFS from \citealt{lawler01tbhfs} when available;
(32) \citealt{wickliffe00};
(33) \citealt{lawler04} for both $\log gf$\ value and HFS;
(34) \citealt{lawler08};
(35) \citealt{wickliffe97};
(36) \citealt{sneden09} for both $\log gf$\ value and HFS/IS;
(37) \citealt{lawler07};
(38) \citealt{ivarsson03}, using HFS/IS from \citealt{cowan05}---see
note on $\log gf$\ values there;
(39) \citealt{biemont00}, using HFS/IS from \citealt{roederer12b};
(40) \citealt{nilsson02}.
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
We observed four stars in common with the GIRAFFE sample
of \citet{carretta14}.
Those authors note that equivalent widths measured from their GIRAFFE
spectra are consistently larger than the equivalent widths
measured from their higher-resolution UVES spectra.
They adopt a linear transformation to convert their
GIRAFFE equivalent widths to the UVES scale.
We compare our measured equivalent widths
with their corrected GIRAFFE equivalent widths.
As illustrated in Figure~\ref{ewplot},
we find a difference of
$+$4.7~$\pm$~0.7~m\AA\ ($\sigma =$~5.4~m\AA)
in the sense that our equivalent widths are larger.
There is a slight trend with wavelength,
but this is only significant at the 2$\sigma$ level.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.3in]{f03.eps}
\caption{
\label{ewplot}
Comparison of equivalent widths measured by \citet{carretta14}
and us for four stars in common.
The top panel illustrates the equivalent widths,
and the bottom panel illustrates the differences
as a function of wavelength.
The dotted lines represent a 1:1 correspondence,
and the solid lines represent the linear fits.
}
\end{figure}
\citet{carretta07} note that the transformation
from the GIRAFFE scale to the UVES scale is necessary
to ensure agreement with equivalent widths
measured independently by other investigators.
Equivalent widths measured from their UVES spectra of stars in
\mbox{NGC~6752} are in reasonable agreement with those
measured from $R \sim$~110,000 spectra obtained by \citet{yong03},
$\langle\Delta\rangle = +1.7 \pm 0.4$~m\AA\ ($\sigma =$~5.6~m\AA).
Our equivalent width measurements are made
with the same techniques and software
used to examine hundreds of metal-poor stars observed
with MIKE \citep{roederer14}.
The \textsc{CarPy}
software package used to extract the MIKE observations
is also identical.
Our previous work found excellent agreement among the
equivalent widths measured from MIKE spectra and those
measured from echelle data collected at McDonald Observatory.
There was a difference of
$+$0.7~$\pm$~0.2~m\AA\ ($\sigma =$~4.0~m\AA)
for the HRS on the
Hobby-Eberly Telescope
and a difference of
$+$1.0~$\pm$~0.1~m\AA\ ($\sigma =$~3.7~m\AA)
for the Tull Coud\'{e} Spectrograph on the Harlan J.\ Smith Telescope.
Furthermore, \citeauthor{roederer14}\ made extensive
comparisons between the equivalent widths for weak lines
in stars in common with \citet{carretta02}, \citet{johnson02},
\citet{ivans03}, \citet{cayrel04}, \citet{honda04}, and \citet{lai08}.
The offsets were all
$\leq$~1.3~m\AA.~
Thus we conclude that equivalent widths measured
from MIKE spectra taken with the 0\farcs7 slit
are not systematically in error.
We also investigate whether the wider MIKE slit used
for some of our observations may be the source of this difference.
Two of the four stars in \mbox{NGC~4833}\ in common with \citet{carretta14}
were observed using the 0\farcs7 slit, and two were observed
using the 1\farcs0 slit.
The mean difference
is $+4.5 \pm 1.1$~m\AA\ ($\sigma =$~6.2~m\AA)
for the two stars observed with the 0\farcs7 slit
and
$+4.8 \pm 0.8$~m\AA\ ($\sigma =$~4.6~m\AA)
for the two stars observed with the 1\farcs0 slit.
The difference is not significant,
and we conclude that the different slits are
not the source of the discrepancy.
In principle, poor sky subtraction could result in a
systematic bias in the equivalent widths measured from a single night.
The four stars in common with \citet{carretta14} were observed
on three different nights.
Star \mbox{3-742} was observed on 2011 01 31, when the moon
was only 6~per cent illuminated and 69{$^{\circ}$}\ away from \mbox{NGC~4833}.
The other three stars were observed on 2011 03 17 and 2011 03 18,
when the moon was $>$90~per cent illuminated and $>$78{$^{\circ}$}\
away from \mbox{NGC~4833}.
The mean difference is
$+5.6 \pm 1.6$~m\AA\ ($\sigma =$~6.7~m\AA)
for the observations near new moon and
$+4.2 \pm 0.7$~m\AA\ ($\sigma =$~4.6~m\AA)
for the observations near full moon.
The difference is not significant,
and we conclude that poor sky subtraction is not the
source of the discrepancy.
Finally, we note that Roederer, Marino, \& Sneden (\citeyear{roederer11c})
examined spectra of several stars in globular cluster \mbox{M22}
that were taken on the same two nights in March, 2011.
That study compared the equivalent widths measured in those
stars with those measured by \citet{marino11}.
Again, the offset is small,
$\langle\Delta\rangle = +1.8 \pm 0.3$~m\AA\ ($\sigma =$~3.7~m\AA).
There is no compelling evidence that our MIKE observations
of \mbox{M22} or \mbox{NGC~4833}\
conducted in March, 2011, are contaminated
by the solar spectrum reflected by the full moon.
In conclusion,
we cannot explain the 4.7~m\AA\ offset
in the mean equivalent width differences
between our data and that of \citet{carretta14}.
In Section~\ref{compare},
we find that the cumulative effect of the
choice of Fe~\textsc{i} lines used for the analysis,
the $\log gf$\ values, and this equivalent width
difference is 0.04~dex.
This value is relatively small,
and we do not pursue the matter further.
\section{Broadband photometry and reddening}
\label{photometry}
Table~\ref{startab} presents the photometry and colours.
$V$ and $(B-V)$ are taken from \citet{piotto02}\footnote{
Downloaded from http://www.astro.unipd.it/globulars/ on 2010 October 22}
and have been transformed
by those authors to the Johnson system from their
\textit{Hubble Space Telescope} (\textit{HST})
WFPC2 $F439W$ and $F555W$
broadband photometry.
$K$ magnitudes are taken from the Two-Micron All Sky Survey
(2MASS; \citealt{skrutskie06}).
The $(B-V)$ and $(V-K)$ colours
are dereddened according to the differential
reddening maps of \citet{melbourne00}
and the extinction coefficients of \citet{cardelli89}.
All 15~stars that we have observed are within 2' of the cluster center,
and the full range of reddening for these stars
is 0.310~$\leq E(B-V) \leq$~0.322
according to the \citeauthor{melbourne00}\ maps.
The differential reddening is a small
effect compared to the relatively large extinction
toward \mbox{NGC~4833}\ at low Galactic latitude
($b = -$8{$^{\circ}$}).
\section{Model atmospheres}
\label{atmpar}
We interpolate model atmospheres from
the \textsc{atlas9} $\alpha$-enhanced grid \citep{castelli03}.
We use a
recent version of the line analysis code \textsc{moog}
(\citealt{sneden73}; see also \citealt{sobeck11}),
operated in batch mode,
to perform the analysis.
In Section~\ref{models}, we discuss our methods
to estimate the appropriate model atmosphere parameters.
We compare these values with those derived
by \citet{carretta14} in Section~\ref{compare}.
\subsection{Model parameters}
\label{models}
We first estimate the stellar effective temperature (\mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$})
using the metallicity-dependent $V-K$ colour-\mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ relations
of \citet{alonso99b}.
We transform the $K$~magnitudes
from the 2MASS system to the TCS system
according to Equation~5 of \citet{ramirez05a}.
We refine the initial estimate by
fitting a line to the relation between
dereddened $K$ magnitude, $K_{0}$, and \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\
calculated from $(V-K)_{0}$.
Figure~\ref{kmagteff} illustrates this relationship.
The standard deviation of the residuals
with respect to this fit is 97~K,
which we adopt as the
uncertainty in \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ for each star.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.3in]{f04.eps}
\caption{
\label{kmagteff}
Relationship between dereddened $K$ magnitudes
and \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ predicted by dereddened $(V-K)$ colours,
which are approximated on the
right axis for reference.
The linear least-squares fit is shown.
}
\end{figure}
The two stars that deviate most from the fit
are \mbox{2-1578} and \mbox{2-1664}.
Both stars are within 2$'$ of the cluster center,
as are most other stars in our sample.
No neighboring stars within 5~magnitudes and 10~pixels
are found in the \citet{piotto02}
photometry files,
and no faint contaminants
are apparent in the WFPC2 images.
No photometry error flags are reported for either star.
The $(V-K)_{0}$ colors of these stars
would need to be different by about $+$0.2~mag
and $-$0.2~mag, respectively,
to bring each star to the best-fit line
in Figure~\ref{kmagteff}.
These stars are only about 11$''$ apart,
so it is highly unlikely that
differential reddening
is underestimated for one and overestimated for the other.
We derive metallicities of these two stars
([Fe~\textsc{i}/H]~$= -$2.23 and $-$2.24,
[Fe~\textsc{ii}/H]~$= -$2.23 and $-$2.18,
respectively; Section~\ref{results})
that are in excellent agreement with the cluster means.
In summary, we find no reason to exclude
either star when computing the standard deviation
of the residuals to the fit shown in Figure~\ref{kmagteff}.
Uncertainties in $K_{0}$ translate to uncertainties
of only 33~K in \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ on average.
Small changes in the differential reddening
across the face of \mbox{NGC~4833}\
have a minimal effect on \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ when derived
this way.
$A(K)/E(B-V) \approx$~0.35 \citep{cardelli89},
so a differential reddening of $\pm$~0.012~mag in $E(B-V)$
\citep{melbourne00}
translates to $\pm$~0.004~mag in $K$.
The slope of the \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}-$K_{0}$ relation shown in
Figure~\ref{kmagteff} is 201~K/mag.
Thus differential reddening contributes an average of
$\approx$~1~K to the \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ uncertainty budget,
which is negligible.
We assume
that all giants in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
reside along a single red giant branch (RGB) fiducial
with [Fe/H]~$= -$2.2
(Section~\ref{iron}).
A change in [Fe/H] of 0.1~dex affects the
calculated \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ values by $<$~1~K,
which is also negligible.
\citet{melbourne00} derived the distance to \mbox{NGC~4833}\ using
the absolute magnitudes of RR~Lyrae variables along the
horizontal branch (HB).
We use this distance, $(m-M) =$~15.05~$\pm$~0.06,
to derive the surface gravities (\mbox{log~{\it g}})
for all 15~stars observed from the fundamental relation
$\log g = 4\log(T_{\rm eff,\star})
-\log(M/M_{\odot})
-0.4(M_{\rm bol,\sun} - M_{\rm bol,\star})
-10.61$.
Here, $M_{\rm bol,\star} =
{\rm BC}_{K} + m_{K} - (m-M)$,
and the constant 10.61 is derived from the
solar values given in \citet{cox00}.
We assume a mass of 0.8~$M_{\odot}$\ for all stars on the RGB in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
We interpolate BC$_{K}$ from
the grid of bolometric corrections presented by \citet{alonso99a}.
Uncertainties of 0.05 in magnitude, 97~K in \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$},
0.1~$M_{\odot}$\ in mass, and 0.06 in the distance modulus
only affect the derived \mbox{log~{\it g}}\ values by
0.02, 0.04, 0.05, and 0.03~dex, respectively.
Their collective uncertainties
contribute a total of 0.07~dex uncertainty in \mbox{log~{\it g}}.
We derive the microturbulent velocity, \mbox{$v_{\rm t}$},
by minimizing correlations between the equivalent width
(expressed as the $\log$ of the equivalent width
divided by $\lambda$)
of Fe~\textsc{i} lines and the abundances derived from them.
The internal uncertainty associated with this
method is $\approx$~0.05~dex.
Finally, we assign a single metallicity
to all model atmospheres,
[Fe/H]~$= -$2.2.
This is justified by our results
indicating that \mbox{NGC~4833}\ is mono-metallic
and has a mean metallicity
of [Fe~\textsc{ii}/H]~$= -$2.19~$\pm$0.013
(Section~\ref{iron}).
Our use of the $\alpha$-enhanced grid of models
is justified because the
most abundant electron-donating metals
are enhanced by factors of a few relative to Fe in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
when compared with the solar ratios.
\subsection{Comparison with Carretta et al.}
\label{compare}
\citet{carretta14} used a procedure similar to ours to derive
their \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ values for stars in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
Their procedure is discussed in detail by \citet{gratton07}.
There are four stars in common between our study and theirs,
and we derive a mean difference in \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ of
$-$28~$\pm$~1~K ($\sigma =$~2~K).
Both studies use the same 2MASS $K$ magnitudes
to calculate \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ after computing a relation
like that shown in Figure~\ref{kmagteff}.
There appears to be a zeropoint offset in the $V$ magnitudes
used to compute the initial relationship between
$V-K$ and \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}.
We adopt $V$ magnitudes from \citet{piotto02},
who calibrated their \textit{HST} $F555W$ magnitudes to $V$ in
the standard Johnson system.
\citeauthor{carretta14}\ used their own ground-based
$V$ magnitudes
calibrated with an absolute zeropoint uncertainty of 0.03~mag.
A systematic zeropoint difference of $\pm$~0.03~mag translates
to an average difference in \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ of
$\mp$~27~K,
exactly the difference found for these four stars.
The \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ offset between our study
and \citeauthor{carretta14}\
can be explained by the stated uncertainties
in the $V$-band zeropoints.
On average, our \mbox{log~{\it g}}\ values are
lower than those calculated by \citet{carretta14} by
0.21~$\pm$~0.02~dex ($\sigma =$~0.04~dex).
Small differences in the adopted solar constants,
mass of stars on the RGB in \mbox{NGC~4833},
and distance modulus to \mbox{NGC~4833}\
only affect this offset by 0.04~dex.
Adopting the \citeauthor{carretta14}\
\mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ values changes the \mbox{log~{\it g}}\ values by only 0.01~dex.
We adopt 0.21~dex as the systematic uncertainty
in \mbox{log~{\it g}}.
Our \mbox{$v_{\rm t}$}\ values are greater by 0.18~$\pm$~0.04~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}\
($\sigma =$~0.08~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$})
for the four stars in common with \citet{carretta14}.
We adopt 0.18~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$}\ as the systematic uncertainty
in \mbox{$v_{\rm t}$}.
Our metallicities (derived from Fe~\textsc{i} lines)
are lower by 0.20~$\pm$~0.02~dex ($\sigma =$~0.04~dex)
for the four stars in common with \citet{carretta14}.
The stated offset accounts for the different
adopted solar Fe abundances.
The discrepancy can be attributed to the
model atmosphere grids and line analysis codes,
as we now show.
We rederive metallicities for these four stars
using the \citeauthor{carretta14} model atmosphere parameters,
their line list and equivalent widths,
our adopted grid of models (\textsc{atlas9}),
and our adopted line analysis code (\textsc{moog}).
The metallicities are lower by
0.20~$\pm$~0.01~dex ($\sigma =$~0.02~dex),
which fully accounts for the discrepancy.
\section{Abundance analysis}
\label{analysis}
Abundances of lighter elements ($Z \leq$~30) that do not exhibit
broad isotope shifts (IS) or
hyperfine splitting structure (HFS)
are derived from equivalent widths.
We use \textsc{moog} to compute theoretical equivalent
widths that are forced to match the
measured values by adjusting the abundance.
Abundances of all other elements are derived
by matching synthetic spectra
with the observed spectra.
Lines of these elements are denoted by the word ``synth''
in Table~\ref{ewtab}.
When a line is not detected,
we derive a 3$\sigma$ abundance upper limit using
a version of the formula presented on p.\ 590 of
\citet{frebel08}, which is derived from
equation A8 of \citet{bohlin83}.
These lines are denoted by the word ``limit''
in Table~\ref{ewtab}.
The atomic data for all lines examined
are presented in Table~\ref{ewtab}.
References for the $\log gf$\ values, IS, and HFS
(when available) are also given in Table~\ref{ewtab}.
We derive C abundances from the
CH $A^2\Delta - X^2\Pi$ G band ($\approx$~4290--4330~\AA)
using a line list kindly provided by B.\ Plez (2007, private communication).
We derive N abundances from the
CN $B^2\Sigma - X^2\Sigma$ violet band ($\approx$~3875--3885~\AA)
using the line list from \citet{kurucz95}
after setting the C abundance using the CH G band.
We assume local thermodynamic equilibrium (LTE)
holds for the line-forming layers of the atmosphere
for all species except for those described below.
We adopt non-LTE corrections for
Li~\textsc{i} \citep{lind09},
O~\textsc{i} \citep{fabbian09},
Na~\textsc{i} \citep{lind11}, and
K~\textsc{i} \citep{takeda02}.
We use the
correction for the nearest point on the grid
when the stellar parameters
extend beyond the edges of the grids of
pre-computed non-LTE corrections.
These corrections are included in the abundances
presented in Tables~\ref{linetab}, \ref{abundtab}, and \ref{meantab}.
We include an additional 0.1~dex statistical uncertainty
in our error estimates to account for uncertainties
in the corrections.
We do not detect the Li~\textsc{i} 6707~\AA\ line;
corrections are based on the 3$\sigma$ upper limits
and range from $+$0.10 to $+$0.21~dex.
The non-LTE corrections for each of the
three high-excitation O~\textsc{i}
7771, 7774, and 7775~\AA\ triplet lines
range from $-$0.05 to $-$0.08~dex.
The non-LTE corrections for the Na~\textsc{i}
5682, 5688, 6154, and 6160~\AA\ lines
range from $-$0.02 to $-$0.14~dex.
The K~\textsc{i} 7698~\AA\ line is
contaminated by an atmospheric O$_{2}$ line;
fortunately, however, the K~\textsc{i} 7664~\AA\ line is not
contaminated.
\citet{roederer14} found that these two lines
yield consistent abundances (to better than 0.02~dex)
after non-LTE corrections are applied.
The non-LTE corrections for the K~\textsc{i} 7664~\AA\ line
range from $-$0.58 to $-$0.61~dex.
We apply one additional correction to the O abundance
derived from the high-excitation O~\textsc{i} triplet lines.
The [O~\textsc{i}]~6300~\AA\ line
is generally considered to be a reliable abundance
indicator formed under conditions of LTE
\citep{kiselman01}, but
the O~\textsc{i} 7771, 7774, and 7775~\AA\ lines
are not.
Both abundance indicators are detected in seven stars.
After applying the non-LTE corrections for the O~\textsc{i} triplet lines,
these lines still yield abundances higher
by $+$0.40~$\pm$~0.05~dex ($\sigma =$~0.13~dex)
than the [O~\textsc{i}] 6300~\AA\ line.
This offset between the O~\textsc{i} and [O~\textsc{i}] lines
is comparable to those found by
\citet{garciaperez06} and \citet{roederer14}
in other metal-poor giants.
We apply a downward correction to all non-LTE-corrected O~\textsc{i}
triplet line abundances by 0.40~dex.
We include an additional 0.05~dex uncertainty
to account for the uncertainty in this correction.
\section{Results}
\label{results}
Table~\ref{linetab} lists
the abundances or upper limits derived from each line examined
in each star.
Table~\ref{abundtab} lists the weighted mean abundances
of each species examined in each star.
We adopt the upper limit that provides the
strongest constraint on the abundance
when multiple lines of the same species are not detected.
The complete versions of
Tables~\ref{linetab} and \ref{abundtab} are
available in the Supplementary Information available online.
Table~\ref{meantab} lists the mean abundance ratios
of all species examined in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
These are computed using the
formalism presented in \citet{mcwilliam95}.
The statistical uncertainty, $\sigma_{\rm statistical}$,
is given by equation~A17 of \citeauthor{mcwilliam95}
This includes uncertainties in the equivalent width measurement or
line profile fitting, $\log gf$\ values, and any non-LTE corrections.
The total uncertainty, $\sigma_{\rm total}$,
is given by equation~A16 of \citeauthor{mcwilliam95}
This includes the statistical uncertainty and
uncertainties in the model atmosphere parameters.
We recommend that $\sigma_{\rm neutrals}$ for element A
be added in quadrature with $\sigma_{\rm statistical}$ for
element B when computing the ratio [A/B] when B is
derived from lines of the neutral species.
We recommend a similar procedure,
utilizing $\sigma_{\rm ions}$ instead of $\sigma_{\rm neutrals}$,
when element B
is derived from lines of the ionized species.
The adopted solar reference abundances
are listed in Table~\ref{solartab}.
\begin{table}
\begin{minipage}{2.6in}
\caption{Abundances derived from individual lines
\label{linetab}}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline
\hline
Star &
Species &
Wavelength &
$\log \epsilon$ &
$\sigma$ \\
&
&
(\AA) &
&
\\
\hline
2-185 & Li~\textsc{i} & 6707.80 & $<$ 0.53 & \ldots \\
2-185 & [O~\textsc{i}] & 6300.30 & $<$ 7.16 & \ldots \\
2-185 & O~\textsc{i} & 7771.94 & $<$ 6.83 & \ldots \\
2-185 & O~\textsc{i} & 7774.17 & $<$ 7.24 & \ldots \\
2-185 & O~\textsc{i} & 7775.39 & $<$ 7.40 & \ldots \\
2-185 & Na~\textsc{i} & 5682.63 & 4.51 & 0.20 \\
2-185 & Na~\textsc{i} & 5688.20 & 4.60 & 0.20 \\
2-185 & Na~\textsc{i} & 6160.75 & 4.74 & 0.21 \\
2-185 & Mg~\textsc{i} & 4702.99 & 5.38 & 0.32 \\
2-185 & Mg~\textsc{i} & 5528.40 & 5.60 & 0.29 \\
2-185 & Mg~\textsc{i} & 5711.09 & 5.53 & 0.15 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\\
Notes.---
The full version of Table~\ref{linetab} is available in the
Supplementary Information section online.
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
\begin{table*}
\begin{minipage}{4.6in}
\caption{Mean abundances in each star
\label{abundtab}}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
\hline
\hline
Star &
Species &
$N_{\rm lines}$ &
$\log\epsilon$ &
[X/Fe]\footnote{[Fe/H] is given for Fe~\textsc{i} and Fe~\textsc{ii}} &
$\sigma_{\rm statistical}$ &
$\sigma_{\rm total}$ &
$\sigma_{\rm neutrals}$ &
$\sigma_{\rm ions}$ \\
\hline
2-185 & Fe~\textsc{i} & 102 & 5.33 &$-$2.17& 0.06 & 0.14 & 0.00 & 0.00 \\
2-185 & Fe~\textsc{ii} & 6 & 5.27 &$-$2.23& 0.07 & 0.10 & 0.00 & 0.00 \\
2-185 & Li~\textsc{i} & 1 & $<$ 0.53 & \ldots& \ldots& \ldots& \ldots& \ldots \\
2-185 & C~(CH) & 1 & 5.62 &$-$0.64& 0.10 & 0.22 & 0.15 & 0.15 \\
2-185 & N~(CN) & 1 & 7.29 & 1.63 & 0.20 & 0.28 & 0.23 & 0.23 \\
2-185 & O~\textsc{i} & 4 & $<$ 6.83 & 0.31 & \ldots& \ldots& \ldots& \ldots \\
2-185 & Na~\textsc{i} & 3 & 4.61 & 0.55 & 0.12 & 0.17 & 0.13 & 0.17 \\
2-185 & Mg~\textsc{i} & 3 & 5.52 & 0.09 & 0.07 & 0.14 & 0.09 & 0.15 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\\
Notes.---
The full version of Table~\ref{abundtab} is available in the
Supplementary Information section online.
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\begin{minipage}{5.5in}
\caption{Mean abundance ratios in NGC~4833
\label{meantab}}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccc}
\hline
&
&
\multicolumn{5}{c}{This study} &
&
\multicolumn{2}{c}{\citet{carretta14}} \\
\cline{3-7} \cline{9-10}
Ratio &
Species or &
Mean &
Std.\ err.\ &
Std.\ dev.\ &
Num.\ &
Notes &
&
Mean &
Std.\ err.\ \\
&
molecule &
&
&
&
stars &
&
&
\\
\hline
{[C/Fe]} & CH & $-$0.44 & 0.06 & 0.24 & 15 & & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[N/Fe]} & CN & $+$1.28 & 0.09 & 0.36 & 15 & & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[O/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.81 & 0.08 & 0.22 & 8 & 1 & & $+$0.17 & 0.22 \\
{[Na/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.39 & 0.06 & 0.22 & 14 & 1 & & $+$0.52 & 0.29 \\
{[Mg/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.35 & 0.06 & 0.24 & 15 & & & $+$0.27 & 0.22 \\
{[Al/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$1.09 & 0.07 & 0.20 & 8 & 1 & & $+$0.90 & 0.34 \\
{[Si/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.74 & 0.02 & 0.09 & 15 & & & $+$0.47 & 0.04 \\
{[K/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.40 & 0.02 & 0.10 & 15 & & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Ca/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.49 & 0.011& 0.04 & 15 & & & $+$0.35 & 0.01 \\
{[Sc/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.19 & 0.03 & 0.11 & 15 & & & $-$0.11 & 0.01 \\
{[Ti/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.08 & 0.014& 0.06 & 15 & & & $+$0.18 & 0.02 \\
{[Ti/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.39 & 0.02 & 0.08 & 15 & & & $+$0.23 & 0.01 \\
{[V/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.44 & 0.03 & 0.10 & 15 & & & $-$0.08 & 0.01 \\
{[V/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.05 & 0.05 & 0.19 & 14 & & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Cr/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.26 & 0.02 & 0.07 & 15 & & & $-$0.24 & 0.02 \\
{[Cr/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.29 & 0.03 & 0.12 & 12 & & & $+$0.01 & 0.05 \\
{[Mn/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.58 & 0.03 & 0.11 & 15 & & & $-$0.54 & 0.01 \\
{[Fe/H]} & \textsc{i} & $-$2.25 & 0.02 & 0.09 & 15 & & & $-$2.02 & 0.01 \\
{[Fe/H]} & \textsc{ii} & $-$2.19 & 0.013& 0.05 & 15 & & & $-$2.01 & 0.02 \\
{[Co/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.39 & 0.04 & 0.14 & 14 & 1 & & $-$0.03 & 0.03 \\
{[Ni/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.06 & 0.015& 0.06 & 15 & & & $-$0.18 & 0.01 \\
{[Cu/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.65 & 0.05 & 0.14 & 9 & 1 & & $-$0.80 & 0.09 \\
{[Zn/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.19 & 0.02 & 0.10 & 15 & & & $+$0.07 & 0.03 \\
{[Rb/Fe]} & \textsc{i} &$<+$0.85 &\ldots&\ldots& 15 & & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Sr/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.18 & 0.03 & 0.12 & 14 & & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Y/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $-$0.22 & 0.03 & 0.11 & 15 & & & $-$0.15 & 0.06 \\
{[Zr/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.25 & 0.03 & 0.11 & 14 & & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Nb/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} &$<+$0.93 &\ldots&\ldots& 2 & & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Mo/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.19 & 0.11 & 0.23 & 4 & 1 & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Ba/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $-$0.02 & 0.016& 0.06 & 15 & & & $-$0.06 & 0.07 \\
{[La/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.08 & 0.03 & 0.13 & 14 & & & $+$0.05 & 0.03 \\
{[Ce/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.03 & 0.03 & 0.11 & 15 & & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Pr/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.19 & 0.09 & 0.29 & 10 & 1 & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Nd/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.18 & 0.03 & 0.11 & 15 & & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Sm/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.29 & 0.03 & 0.11 & 14 & & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Eu/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.36 & 0.03 & 0.13 & 15 & & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Gd/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.32 & 0.09 & 0.21 & 6 & 1 & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Tb/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.19 & 0.04 & 0.05 & 2 & 1 & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Dy/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.43 & 0.05 & 0.17 & 13 & 1 & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Ho/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.16 & 0.18 & 0.18 & 1 & 1 & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Er/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.33 & 0.08 & 0.20 & 7 & 1 & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Tm/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.19 & 0.07 & 0.10 & 2 & 1 & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Yb/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.01 & 0.08 & 0.25 & 9 & 1 & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Hf/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.27 & 0.04 & 0.06 & 2 & 1 & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Ir/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.66 & 0.11 & 0.11 & 1 & 1 & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Pb/Fe]} & \textsc{i} &$<+$0.02 &\ldots&\ldots& 15 & & & \ldots & \ldots \\
{[Th/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} &$<+$0.32 &\ldots&\ldots& 14 & & & \ldots & \ldots \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\\
Notes--- 1.\ Does not include one or more upper limits \\
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}
\begin{table}
\begin{minipage}{2.0in}
\caption{Adopted solar abundances
\label{solartab}}
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\hline
Element &
$Z$ &
$\log \epsilon_{\odot}$ &
Photospheric (P) \\
&
&
&
or meteoritic (M) \\
\hline
C & 6 & 8.43 & P \\
N & 7 & 7.83 & P \\
O & 8 & 8.69 & P \\
Na & 11 & 6.24 & P \\
Mg & 12 & 7.60 & P \\
Al & 13 & 6.45 & P \\
Si & 14 & 7.51 & P \\
K & 19 & 5.03 & P \\
Ca & 20 & 6.34 & P \\
Sc & 21 & 3.15 & P \\
Ti & 22 & 4.95 & P \\
V & 23 & 3.93 & P \\
Cr & 24 & 5.64 & P \\
Mn & 25 & 5.43 & P \\
Fe & 26 & 7.50 & P \\
Co & 27 & 4.99 & P \\
Ni & 28 & 6.22 & P \\
Cu & 29 & 4.19 & P \\
Zn & 30 & 4.56 & P \\
Rb & 37 & 2.52 & P \\
Sr & 38 & 2.87 & P \\
Y & 39 & 2.21 & P \\
Zr & 40 & 2.58 & P \\
Nb & 41 & 1.46 & P \\
Mo & 42 & 1.88 & P \\
Ba & 56 & 2.18 & P \\
La & 57 & 1.10 & P \\
Ce & 58 & 1.58 & P \\
Pr & 59 & 0.72 & P \\
Nd & 60 & 1.42 & P \\
Sm & 62 & 0.96 & P \\
Eu & 63 & 0.52 & P \\
Gd & 64 & 1.07 & P \\
Tb & 65 & 0.30 & P \\
Dy & 66 & 1.10 & P \\
Ho & 67 & 0.48 & P \\
Er & 68 & 0.92 & P \\
Tm & 69 & 0.10 & P \\
Yb & 70 & 0.92 & M \\
Hf & 72 & 0.85 & P \\
Ir & 77 & 1.38 & P \\
Pb & 82 & 2.04 & M \\
Th & 90 & 0.06 & M \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
Figures~\ref{teffplot1} and \ref{teffplot2} illustrate
abundance ratios as a function of \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}.
In most cases, no trends are found.
Subtle trends may be present in cases where
one of the elements in question
is known to vary with evolutionary status.
A small downward trend of [C/Fe]
and a corresponding increase in [N/Fe]
are found with decreasing \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}.
The Li upper limits get progressively lower
with decreasing \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$},
which is simply a reflection of relatively constant equivalent width
upper limits (from relatively constant S/N levels)
applied to stars with decreasing \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}.
There are also subtle differences at the $\approx$~1--2$\sigma$ level
($\approx$~0.10--0.15~dex)
in the mean [X/Fe] ratios between the
warm (\mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}~$>$~4500~K) and cool (\mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}~$<$~4500~K) stars,
where ``X'' represents
Sc, V~\textsc{i} and \textsc{ii},
Zn, Nd, Ce, Sm, Eu, and Dy.
We investigate these differences in detail
in Sections~\ref{irongroup} and \ref{dispersion}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.4in]{f05a.eps}
\hspace*{0.0in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.4in]{f05b.eps}
\caption{
\label{teffplot1}
Derived [X/Fe] ratios ($\log \epsilon$ for Li)
as a function of \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ for Li through Cr~\textsc{i}.
The dotted lines represent the solar ratios,
and the downward facing triangles represent upper limits.
}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.4in]{f06a.eps}
\hspace*{0.0in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.4in]{f06b.eps}
\caption{
\label{teffplot2}
Derived [X/Fe] ratios ([Fe/H] for Fe)
as a function of \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ for Cr~\textsc{ii} through Yb.
The dotted lines represent the solar ratios,
and the downward facing triangles represent upper limits.
}
\end{figure*}
Table~\ref{atmvar} lists the variations in
abundance ratios that result from
changes in the model atmosphere parameters
for one representative star
with high S/N ratios,
\mbox{4-1255}.
The final column of Table~\ref{atmvar} lists the
total variation, calculated by adding the
four individual variations in quadrature.
\begin{table*}
\begin{minipage}{4.3in}
\caption{Variations in Abundance Ratios Resulting from Changes in the
Model Atmosphere Parameters for Star 4-1255
\label{atmvar}}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
\hline
Ratio &
Ion &
$\delta$[X/Y]/$\delta$\mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ &
$\delta$[X/Y]/$\delta$\mbox{log~{\it g}}\ &
$\delta$[X/Y]/$\delta$\mbox{$v_{\rm t}$}\ &
$\delta$[X/Y]/$\delta$[M/H] &
$\sqrt{\Sigma\delta_{i}^{2}}$ \\
\hline
{[O/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.27 & $+$0.10 & $+$0.06 & $+$0.04 & 0.30\\
{[Na/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.06 & $+$0.00 & $+$0.07 & $+$0.01 & 0.09\\
{[Mg/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.06 & $-$0.03 & $+$0.01 & $+$0.00 & 0.07\\
{[Al/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.08 & $+$0.01 & $+$0.07 & $+$0.01 & 0.11\\
{[Si/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.11 & $+$0.04 & $+$0.07 & $+$0.03 & 0.14\\
{[K/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.03 & $+$0.01 & $-$0.03 & $-$0.01 & 0.04\\
{[Ca/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.01 & $+$0.02 & $-$0.03 & $-$0.01 & 0.04\\
{[Sc/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.01 & $+$0.05 & $+$0.07 & $+$0.05 & 0.10\\
{[Ti/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.08 & $-$0.01 & $+$0.02 & $-$0.02 & 0.09\\
{[Ti/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $-$0.06 & $-$0.02 & $-$0.04 & $-$0.01 & 0.08\\
{[V/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.11 & $+$0.02 & $+$0.07 & $+$0.05 & 0.14\\
{[V/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $-$0.02 & $-$0.05 & $+$0.00 & $-$0.07 & 0.09\\
{[Cr/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.04 & $-$0.01 & $+$0.02 & $-$0.01 & 0.05\\
{[Cr/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $-$0.12 & $+$0.00 & $+$0.03 & $-$0.02 & 0.13\\
{[Mn/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.03 & $+$0.04 & $+$0.10 & $+$0.05 & 0.12\\
{[Fe/H]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.15 & $-$0.03 & $-$0.07 & $-$0.02 & 0.17\\
{[Fe/H]} & \textsc{ii} & $-$0.06 & $+$0.08 & $-$0.04 & $+$0.05 & 0.12\\
{[Co/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.13 & $+$0.00 & $+$0.01 & $+$0.02 & 0.13\\
{[Ni/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.03 & $+$0.02 & $+$0.05 & $+$0.01 & 0.06\\
{[Cu/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.02 & $+$0.03 & $+$0.08 & $+$0.02 & 0.09\\
{[Zn/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $-$0.18 & $+$0.07 & $+$0.04 & $+$0.05 & 0.20\\
{[Sr/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.01 & $-$0.06 & $+$0.02 & $-$0.07 & 0.09\\
{[Y/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.09 & $-$0.01 & $+$0.02 & $+$0.00 & 0.09\\
{[Zr/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.05 & $-$0.01 & $+$0.02 & $+$0.00 & 0.05\\
{[Mo/Fe]} & \textsc{i} & $+$0.03 & $+$0.00 & $+$0.05 & $-$0.01 & 0.06\\
{[Ba/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.16 & $-$0.02 & $-$0.08 & $+$0.00 & 0.18\\
{[La/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.10 & $-$0.02 & $+$0.05 & $+$0.01 & 0.11\\
{[Ce/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.07 & $+$0.00 & $+$0.05 & $+$0.02 & 0.09\\
{[Pr/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.13 & $+$0.02 & $+$0.08 & $+$0.03 & 0.16\\
{[Nd/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.13 & $+$0.00 & $+$0.04 & $+$0.02 & 0.14\\
{[Sm/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.11 & $-$0.01 & $+$0.03 & $+$0.03 & 0.12\\
{[Eu/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.09 & $+$0.02 & $+$0.07 & $+$0.01 & 0.12\\
{[Gd/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.09 & $+$0.05 & $+$0.04 & $-$0.01 & 0.11\\
{[Tb/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.10 & $+$0.03 & $+$0.07 & $+$0.05 & 0.14\\
{[Dy/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.07 & $-$0.02 & $-$0.02 & $-$0.02 & 0.08\\
{[Er/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.00 & $+$0.03 & $+$0.00 & $+$0.01 & 0.03\\
{[Tm/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.09 & $-$0.04 & $+$0.00 & $-$0.08 & 0.13\\
{[Yb/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.21 & $-$0.09 & $+$0.04 & $-$0.08 & 0.25\\
{[Hf/Fe]} & \textsc{ii} & $+$0.12 & $+$0.07 & $+$0.09 & $-$0.02 & 0.17\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\\
Notes---
$\delta$\mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}~$= +$97~K,
$\delta$\mbox{log~{\it g}}~$= +$0.21~dex,
$\delta$\mbox{$v_{\rm t}$}~$= +$0.18~\mbox{km~s$^{\rm -1}$},
$\delta$[M/H]~$= +$0.20;
see Sections~\ref{models} and \ref{compare} for details.
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Comparison of abundance ratios}
\label{abundcompare}
Table~\ref{meantab} also lists
the mean abundance ratios derived by \citet{carretta14}
from their UVES spectra of stars in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
In many cases the two sets of mean abundances are
in reasonable (2$\sigma$) agreement.
At first glance,
several [X/Fe] ratios are not in agreement,
where ``X'' represents
O~\textsc{i},
Si~\textsc{i},
Ca~\textsc{i},
Sc~\textsc{ii},
Ti~\textsc{i} and \textsc{ii},
V~\textsc{i},
Cr~\textsc{ii},
Co~\textsc{i},
Ni~\textsc{i},
Zn~\textsc{i}, and
Nd~\textsc{ii}.
Most of these
differences can be explained by the
sets of lines used, the $\log gf$\ values,
and the adopted solar abundances,
as we now show.
\citet{carretta14} used the
atomic data and solar reference abundances
presented in \citet{gratton03}.
Their approach
ensures a uniform abundance scale
for the dozens of globular clusters observed
in the last decade using GIRAFFE and UVES.~
Our analysis incorporates atomic data from
more recent laboratory studies and
adopts the \citet{asplund09} solar abundance scale.
The appeal of using updated $\log gf$\ values is that
recent laboratory studies
regularly report uncertainties
on absolute transition probabilities as small as 5~per cent,
which is effectively negligible
when compared with other sources of uncertainty.
The choice of $\log gf$\ values is irrelevant
if only relative differences are of interest and
if the same set of lines
is employed for each star.
This condition is not met
since the S/N and stellar parameters vary,
thus we use updated $\log gf$\ values
whenever possible.
The [Ca/Fe] ratios provide a good example
of the consequences of this choice.
There are seven Ca~\textsc{i} lines
studied in the GIRAFFE spectra obtained by \citet{carretta14}.
The Ca~\textsc{i} $\log gf$\ values
used by \citeauthor{carretta14}\ and those we adopt from NIST
or \citet{aldenius09}
differ by $-$0.26~dex to $+$0.27~dex
for these lines.
Only one of these absolute differences is smaller than 0.17~dex.
In our study, we use three of these lines and
several others at shorter wavelengths.
Thus the exact set of lines measured significantly
affects the derived [Ca/Fe] ratios.
Substantial differences ($\geq$~0.05~dex) are also present
in the adopted $\log gf$\ values of lines of Na~\textsc{i},
Si~\textsc{i}, Sc~\textsc{ii}, Ti~\textsc{i},
Fe~\textsc{ii}, and Ni~\textsc{i}.
It is impossible to assess the exact differences
since no single source of $\log gf$\ values
covers all of the lines used by \citeauthor{carretta14}\ and us.
Our use of the \citet{asplund09} solar abundance scale
introduces several substantial differences in the [X/Fe] ratios
relative to \citet{carretta14}.
Our [O~\textsc{i}/Fe] ratios would change
by $-$0.06~dex on their scale;
[Na~\textsc{i}/Fe], $+$0.07~dex;
[Mg~\textsc{i}/Fe], $+$0.21~dex;
[Ca~\textsc{i}/Fe], $+$0.11~dex;
[Ti~\textsc{ii}/Fe], $-$0.13~dex;
[Cr~\textsc{ii}/Fe], $-$0.08~dex;
[Mn~\textsc{i}/Fe], $+$0.13~dex; and
[Zn~\textsc{i}/Fe], $+$0.07~dex.
We use our software, model atmospheres, and solar reference
abundances to rederive the [X/Fe] ratios using
the \citet{carretta14} line lists and equivalent widths
for the four stars in common.
On our scale, the \citeauthor{carretta14}\ ratios change by
$+$0.15~$\pm$~0.04~dex for [O~\textsc{i}/Fe],
$+$0.10~$\pm$~0.03~dex for [Si~\textsc{i}/Fe],
$-$0.05~$\pm$~0.05~dex for [Ca~\textsc{i}/Fe],
$+$0.05~$\pm$~0.03~dex for [Ti~\textsc{i}/Fe], and
$+$0.07~$\pm$~0.03~dex for [Ni~\textsc{i}/Fe].
These account for
about half of the total discrepancy
in O~\textsc{i}, Si~\textsc{i}, and Ni~\textsc{i},
but they widen the discrepancy for
Ca~\textsc{i} and Ti~\textsc{i}.
V~\textsc{i} and Co~\textsc{i} cannot be assessed
due to the corrections for HFS.~
\citeauthor{carretta14}\ only derived
abundances for Ti~\textsc{ii}, Cr~\textsc{ii},
Zn~\textsc{i}, and Nd~\textsc{ii} from their UVES spectra,
so we have no data in common.
To summarize,
some mean [X/Fe] ratios we have derived
are in disagreement with those found by \citet{carretta14}.
We can explain some of these discrepancies
in part by the different solar reference abundances,
and we attribute others to the different
sets of lines used and the $\log gf$\ values of those lines.
Finally,
the exact sets of stars observed could affect the mean values
of the light elements known to vary star-by-star.
\section{Discussion}
\label{discussion}
\subsection{Iron}
\label{iron}
We derive a mean metallicity,
$\langle$[Fe/H]$\rangle$, of
$-$2.25~$\pm$~0.02 ($\sigma =$~0.09)
from Fe~\textsc{i} lines in the 15~stars observed in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
We derive
$\langle$[Fe/H]$\rangle = -$2.19~$\pm$~0.013 ($\sigma =$~0.05)
from Fe~\textsc{ii} lines.
The standard deviation associated with
each of these values does not exceed
that expected from the model atmosphere uncertainties
listed in Table~\ref{atmvar}.
We find no evidence for an intrinsic dispersion
in the Fe abundances from one star to another within \mbox{NGC~4833},
which reaffirms the results of \citet{carretta14}.
As noted in Section~\ref{compare},
we find a metallicity lower by
0.20~$\pm$~0.02~dex ($\sigma =$~0.04~dex)
relative to \citet{carretta14} for four stars in common.
We have identified the causes of this discrepancy previously,
and now we compare the metallicity of \mbox{NGC~4833}\
to an external metallicity standard.
The temperature of the K-giant Arcturus ($\alpha$~Boo)
is known to better than 30~K
from measurements of its angular diameter and bolometric flux.
\citet{koch08} performed a differential abundance analysis
between Arcturus and
red giants in the moderately metal-poor
globular cluster \mbox{47~Tuc}
([Fe/H]~$= -$0.76~$\pm$~0.01 [statistical]\ $\pm$~0.04 [systematic]).
\citet{koch11} extended this differential analysis
to the very metal-poor cluster \mbox{NGC~6397}
([Fe/H]~$= -$2.10~$\pm$~0.02 [statistical]\ $\pm$~0.07 [systematic]),
which we use for our comparison.
We use the Fe~\textsc{i} line list from
\citet{koch11} to identify 19~lines in common
to three red giants in \mbox{NGC~6397}
(stars 7230, 8958, and 13414)
and three red giants in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
(stars \mbox{3-742}, \mbox{4-341}, \mbox{4-1255})
with similar \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}.
We measure equivalent widths for each of these lines
in \mbox{NGC~4833},
and we perform a differential abundance analysis between
\mbox{NGC~6397} and \mbox{NGC~4833}.
We find a mean difference in [Fe/H] of
$+$0.09~$\pm$~0.04~dex between \mbox{NGC~6397}
and \mbox{NGC~4833},
In other words, if we adopt
[Fe/H]~$= -$2.10~$\pm$~0.02 for \mbox{NGC~6397}
as derived by \citet{koch11},
we infer
[Fe/H]~$= -$2.19~$\pm$~0.04 for \mbox{NGC~4833}.
This value is in fair agreement with
our derived mean metallicity,
[Fe/H]~$= -$2.25~$\pm$~0.02.
On the basis of the differential globular cluster abundance scale
established by \citeauthor{koch08}\ relative to Arcturus,
we prefer the lower metallicity value for \mbox{NGC~4833}.
\subsection{Lithium through Silicon}
\label{light}
We do not detect Li in any of the stars in our sample.
The upper limits we derive
are illustrated in Figure~\ref{teffplot1}.
These limits rule out
substantial enhancement of the surface Li abundances
in these stars,
as has been found in a few red giants in other globular clusters
(e.g., \citealt{kraft99,smith99}).
Figure~\ref{lightplot1} shows the relationships among the
light elements C, N, and Na in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
There is a clear decrease in the [C/Fe] ratio with
increasing [N/Fe].
[C/Fe] also anti-correlates with [Na/Fe], and
[N/Fe] correlates with [Na/Fe].
There is no compelling evidence for a bi-modality
in either [C/Fe] or [N/Fe], but
this tentative conclusion should
be checked using larger sample sizes.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.3in]{f07.eps}
\caption{
\label{lightplot1}
Relationships among C, N, and Na in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
Black symbols mark data from this study.
The dotted lines indicate the solar ratios.
}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{lightplot2} reveals a
prominent anti-correlation between [O/Fe] and
[Na/Fe] in our sample of 15~stars in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
\citet{carretta14} detected O and Na in 51~stars
in their sample, and these data are shown for comparison
in Figure~\ref{lightplot2}.
The offset between our mean [O/Fe] and that of \citeauthor{carretta14}\
is apparent.
This offset is strongly influenced by two factors.
First, we only derive upper limits for [O/Fe]
in stars with [O/Fe]~$< +$0.4,
while \citeauthor{carretta14}\ detected O
in $\approx$~20 such stars.
These upper limits are not included in the mean
[O/Fe] value reported in Table~\ref{meantab}.
Second, two of the eight stars with O detections in our sample
show [O/Fe]~$\approx +$1.0,
which is $\approx$~0.2~dex higher than
the next-highest [O/Fe] ratio in any other star in our sample.
Neither of these stars, \mbox{4-224} and \mbox{4-1225},
was included in the \citeauthor{carretta14}\ sample.
The remaining stars in our sample are found to overlap the
\citeauthor{carretta14}\ data relatively well
in the [O/Fe] versus [Na/Fe] plane.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=6.5in]{f08.eps}
\caption{
\label{lightplot2}
Relationships among O, Na, Mg, Al, and Si in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
Black symbols mark data from this study,
and small gray circles mark data from \citet{carretta14}.
The dotted lines indicate the solar ratios.
}
\end{figure*}
Our data and that of \citet{carretta14}
independently exhibit a broad anti-correlation between
[O/Fe] and [Na/Fe].
This includes stars with [O/Fe] and [Na/Fe] ratios
consistent with normal halo field stars
and stars with depleted [O/Fe] and enhanced [Na/Fe] ratios.
\citeauthor{carretta14}\ calculated that 31~$\pm$~8 per cent
of stars in \mbox{NGC~4833}\ belong to the primordial component
(i.e., those with normal [O/Fe] and [Na/Fe] ratios).
Another 59~$\pm$~11 per cent
of stars belong to the intermediate component
(i.e., those with depleted [O/Fe] ratios and enhanced [Na/Fe] ratios),
and 10~$\pm$~4 per cent of stars belong to the extreme component
(i.e., those with [O/Na]~$< -$0.9; \citealt{carretta09a}).
Our sample is more than three times smaller than that of
\citeauthor{carretta14},
so we do not attempt to rederive these fractions.
The fraction of stars in the primordial component, one-third,
is typical of most globular clusters that have been studied.
The fraction of stars in the extreme component is
larger than in most clusters,
which have typically 2--3 per cent or less \citep{carretta09a}.
Figure~\ref{lightplot2} also reveals
correlations between
[O/Fe] and [Mg/Fe],
[Na/Fe] and [Al/Fe], possibly
[Na/Fe] and [Si/Fe], and possibly
[Al/Fe] and [Si/Fe].
Anti-correlations are also present among
[O/Fe] and [Al/Fe],
[Na/Fe] and [Mg/Fe], and
[Mg/Fe] and [Al/Fe].
These features were also present
in the sample of \citet{carretta14}.
Collectively, these abundance patterns
indicate that proton-capture reactions
operating at high temperatures occurred
in the stars that enriched
some of the present-day members of \mbox{NGC~4833}.
\citet{carretta14}
identified a bi-modal distribution
among the Mg and Al abundances
derived from the UVES spectra.
Our data confirm this separation, which
is easily discerned in the
[O/Fe] versus [Al/Fe],
[Na/Fe] versus [Mg/Fe],
[Na/Fe] versus [Al/Fe], and
[Mg/Fe] versus [Al/Fe]
planes in Figure~\ref{lightplot2}.
Trends involving [Si/Fe] are more subtle.
\citeauthor{carretta14}\ found evidence of such trends
in their sample,
which can be seen by simple
inspection of their Figure~8.
Similar inspection of our Figure~\ref{lightplot2}
only hints that [Si/Fe] may correlate with
[Na/Fe] and [Al/Fe] and anti-correlate with [Mg/Fe].
We divide our sample into two groups
to test whether these correlations are significant.
The [Mg/Fe] ratios are well-separated into two groups
divided at [Mg/Fe]~$\approx +$0.3,
and we compute the weighted mean [Si/Fe] ratio within each group.
In the Mg-rich group of stars,
$\langle$[Si/Fe]$\rangle = +$0.72~$\pm$~0.03;
in the Mg-poor group,
$\langle$[Si/Fe]$\rangle = +$0.76~$\pm$~0.04.
The [Si/Fe] ratios
are not significantly different in the Mg-rich and Mg-poor groups of stars.
We also compute $p$-values for the
linear correlation coefficient $r$
between [Si/Fe] and other light-element ratios.
The $p$-value
gives the probability that a random sample of
$N$ uncorrelated points would yield an experimentally-derived value
$\geq |r|$.
For example,
the $p$-value
for the [Na/Fe] and [Mg/Fe] ratios
shown in Figure~\ref{lightplot2} is 0.0002.
The $p$-values between [Si/Fe] and [O/Fe],
[Na/Fe], [Mg/Fe], and [Al/Fe]
are 0.645, 0.077, 0.019, and 0.356, respectively.
Only the anti-correlation between [Mg/Fe] and [Si/Fe]
is significant at the 2$\sigma$ level in our data.
Censored (``survivor'') statistical tests
can be applied to check whether the [Si/Fe] correlations
may be significant if upper limits are included.
We apply
the generalized version of Kendall's $\tau$ rank correlation test
to our data using the \textsc{asurv} code
(Rev.\ 1; \citealt{lavalley92})
as described in \citet{isobe86}.
This test evaluates whether
a correlation may be present between two variables
when upper limits are found in either variable.
We find that
correlations among [Na/Fe], [Mg/Fe], and [Al/Fe] are all
highly significant ($p <$~0.004 in each case).
We also find that
[Si/Fe] does not exhibit a significant correlation
with either [Na/Fe] or [Al/Fe] if the upper limits
are considered
($p >$~0.12 in each case).
We are unable to reproduce correlations between
[Si/Fe] and any other ratios,
except perhaps [Mg/Fe], in our data.
Our sample size is considerably smaller than that of
\citet{carretta14},
which may explain the difference in our results.
\subsection{Potassium through Zinc}
\label{irongroup}
Figure~\ref{lightplot3} illustrates the
relationships among [Mg/Fe], [K/Fe], [Ca/Fe], and [Sc/Fe].
Visual inspection of Figure~\ref{lightplot3} suggests that
[K/Fe] might anti-correlate with [Mg/Fe].
We calculate the mean [K/Fe] ratios
in the Mg-rich and Mg-poor groups of stars.
We find
$\langle$[K/Fe]$\rangle = +$0.36~$\pm$~0.03
for the Mg-rich group.
We find
$\langle$[K/Fe]$\rangle = +$0.45~$\pm$~0.03
for the Mg-poor group.
These ratios are only
distinct at the $\sim$~1.5$\sigma$ level,
which is not significant.
The $p$-value for the linear correlation between
[Mg/Fe] and [K/Fe] is 0.018, which is significant.
If [Mg/Fe] and [K/Fe] are anti-correlated,
we might also expect correlations between
[K/Fe] and [Na/Fe], [Al/Fe], or [Si/Fe];
however,
the $p$-values for the correlations between [K/Fe]
and other light elements are not significant at the
2$\sigma$ level.
We conclude that
the evidence for an anti-correlation between
[Mg/Fe] and [K/Fe] is curious but not compelling.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=5.0in]{f09.eps}
\caption{
\label{lightplot3}
Relationships among Mg, K, Ca, and Sc in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
Black symbols mark data from this study,
and small gray circles mark data from \citet{carretta14}.
The dotted lines indicate the solar ratios.
}
\end{figure*}
Hints of
an anti-correlation
between [Mg/Fe] and [Sc/Fe] are
seen in Figure~\ref{lightplot3}, but a
closer analysis suggests otherwise.
Figure~\ref{teffplot1} demonstrates that
the three lowest [Sc/Fe] ratios are found in
three of the four coolest stars in our sample,
signaling that these low ratios
could be an artifact of the analysis.
This correlation appears weaker
if only the 11~stars with \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}~$>$~4500~K
are considered.
When dividing the sample of all 15~stars
into Mg-rich and Mg-poor groups,
we find
$\langle$[Sc/Fe]$\rangle = +$0.16~$\pm$~0.03
in the Mg-rich group and
$\langle$[Sc/Fe]$\rangle = +$0.25~$\pm$~0.04
in the Mg-poor group.
If only the 11~stars with \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}~$>$~4500~K
are considered,
we find
$\langle$[Sc/Fe]$\rangle = +$0.19~$\pm$~0.01
in the Mg-rich group and
$\langle$[Sc/Fe]$\rangle = +$0.27~$\pm$~0.04
in the Mg-poor group.
The [Sc/Fe] ratios
are not distinct at the
2$\sigma$ level.
We also conduct a line-by-line differential analysis
of the [Sc/Fe] ratios
in two stars
(\mbox{2-185} and \mbox{2-918})
with similar stellar parameters
(\mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}~$=$~4670~K and 4696~K, respectively)
and different [Mg/Fe] ratios
([Mg/Fe]~$= +$0.09 and $+$0.40, respectively).
An unweighted average of these differentials
yields $\delta$[Sc/Fe]~$= +$0.018~$\pm$~0.043~dex,
which indicates no difference.
Finally, we note that \citet{carretta14} found
no evidence for an anti-correlation between
[Mg/Fe] and [Sc/Fe] in their data,
which are also shown in Figure~\ref{lightplot2}.
We conclude that
there is no compelling evidence
for variations in the [Sc/Fe] ratios
within \mbox{NGC~4833}.
\citet{cohen11b},
\citet{cohen12}, and
\citet{mucciarelli12}
detected an
anti-correlation between [Mg/Fe] and [K/Fe] in
the massive, metal-poor globular cluster \mbox{NGC~2419}.
\citet{mucciarelli15}
found a smaller, but significant, anti-correlation
between [Mg/Fe] and [K/Fe] in \mbox{NGC~2808}.
These two massive clusters are the only ones
where such relations have been identified
\citep{carretta13}.
Our results indicate that such extreme
variations in K do not occur in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
\citet{cohen12} also detected an anti-correlation
between [Mg/Fe] and [Sc/Fe] in their \mbox{NGC~2419} data,
and there is no compelling evidence for
a similar relation in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
Figure~\ref{irongroupplot}
compares the mean [X/Fe] ratios for elements
in and near the iron group (loosely considered
here as K through Zn; 19~$\leq Z \leq$~30)
in \mbox{NGC~4833}\ and normal metal-poor halo field stars.
The comparison stars are drawn from the
sample of 98~red giants examined by \citet{roederer14}.
Upper limits in the comparison sample have been omitted
from Figure~\ref{irongroupplot} for clarity.
Overall, there is excellent agreement between
the mean [X/Fe] ratios for elements in the iron group
in \mbox{NGC~4833}\ and normal halo field stars.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=270,width=6.5in]{f10.eps}
\caption{
\label{irongroupplot}
[X/Fe] ratios for elements, X, in the iron group.
The large black square indicates the mean
abundances in \mbox{NGC~4833}, and the small
gray diamonds represent individual red giant halo field
stars analyzed by \citet{roederer14}.
The dotted lines indicate the solar ratios.
}
\end{figure*}
\citet{gratton04} pointed out that the [Ca/Fe]
in two stars in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
reported by \citet{gratton89}
is higher by $\approx$~0.2--0.3~dex than
the [Ca/Fe] ratio in other metal-poor globular clusters.
The \citeauthor{gratton89}\ result was already at odds with the
data of Pilachowski et al.\ (\citeyear{pilachowski83}).
Neither \citet{carretta14} nor we reproduce
this high [Ca/Fe] ratio in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
\subsection{Neutron-capture elements}
\label{ncap}
Figure~\ref{ncapplots} illustrates the heavy-element
abundance distributions in each star observed in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
For comparison,
Figure~\ref{ncapplots} also shows
the abundance distribution of the
main component of the \mbox{$r$-process}\
as found
in the metal-poor giant \mbox{CS~22892--052}
\citep{sneden03,sneden09,roederer09}.
There is generally good agreement among the heavy-element
abundance distribution from one star to the next in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
Large variations in the heavy-element
distributions, like those found in
$\omega$~Cen (e.g., \citealt{norris95,smith00}),
M2 \citep{yong14},
M22 \citep{marino09,roederer11c}, or
\mbox{NGC~1851} \citep{yong08,carretta11}
are excluded.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11a.eps}
\hspace*{0.1in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11b.eps}
\hspace*{0.1in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11c.eps} \\
\vspace*{0.1in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11d.eps}
\hspace*{0.1in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11e.eps}
\hspace*{0.1in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11f.eps} \\
\vspace*{0.1in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11g.eps}
\hspace*{0.1in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11h.eps}
\hspace*{0.1in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11i.eps} \\
\vspace*{0.1in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11j.eps}
\hspace*{0.1in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11k.eps}
\hspace*{0.1in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11l.eps} \\
\vspace*{0.1in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11m.eps}
\hspace*{0.1in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11n.eps}
\hspace*{0.1in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=2.2in]{f11o.eps}
\caption{
\label{ncapplots}
Heavy element abundance pattern for each star observed in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
The red lines mark the template of the main component
of the \mbox{$r$-process}\ (\mbox{CS~22892--052}).
Filled symbols mark detections, and downward-facing triangles
mark 3$\sigma$ upper limits.
}
\end{figure*}
Figure~\ref{ncapavgplot} shows the mean heavy element abundance
distribution for all 15~stars observed in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
Three templates are shown for comparison.
The red line marks the main component of the \mbox{$r$-process},
and this line is identical to that found in Figure~\ref{ncapplots}.
The
thick gold line marks the
distribution found in the metal-poor giant \mbox{HD~122563}
\citep{honda06,roederer12b},
frequently referred to as the distribution
produced by the weak component of the \mbox{$r$-process}.
The long-dashed blue line marks the
distribution predicted by the main and strong components
of the \mbox{$s$-process}\ \citep{sneden08,bisterzo11}.
These curves
illustrate the general characteristics of
$r$- and \mbox{$s$-process}\ nucleosynthesis
and are not intended to be rigid representations.
For example,
the abundance distributions that result from
\mbox{$s$-process}\ nucleosynthesis
depend on the parameters of stars passing through the
thermally-pulsing asymptotic giant branch phase of evolution
(e.g., \citealt{busso99,bisterzo10}).
The mean heavy element abundance distribution in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
traces the main component of the \mbox{$r$-process}\
within $\approx$~2$\sigma$ for the elements
with $Z \geq$~57.
Ba ($Z =$~56) is enhanced by $\approx$~0.3~dex
relative to the template for the main component of the \mbox{$r$-process}\ when
normalized to Eu.
Sr, Y, Zr, and Mo ($Z =$~38, 39, 40, and 42, respectively)
are enhanced by $\approx$~0.9, 0.5, 0.9, and 0.6~dex.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.3in]{f12.eps}
\caption{
\label{ncapavgplot}
Average heavy element abundance pattern in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
Filled squares mark detections, and arrows mark 3$\sigma$ upper limits.
The red line,
thick gold line, and long-dashed blue line
represent the main component of the \mbox{$r$-process},
the weak component of the \mbox{$r$-process}, and the
main and strong components of the \mbox{$s$-process}\
as described in the text.
Each of the three curves has been renormalized
to the mean Eu abundance in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
}
\end{figure}
One possible explanation of the
Sr, Y, Zr, Mo, and Ba enhancements could
be a small contribution from some form of \mbox{$s$-process}\ nucleosynthesis.
If so, the results of \citet{roederer10}
suggest that we might expect enhancement of
other elements with a substantial \mbox{$s$-process}\ component
in solar system material,
such as Yb, Hf, and Pb ($Z =$~70, 72, and 82).
No such enhancements are observed.
Another possible explanation is that the
weak component of the \mbox{$r$-process}\ has contributed
to the heavy elements in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
Halo field stars, like \mbox{HD~122563}, whose heavy elements
have been produced by this mechanism do not typically
show Ir ($Z =$~77), which is detected in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
Our data suggest that
the most likely explanation
for the heavy element abundance distribution
in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
is a combination of the main and weak components
of the \mbox{$r$-process}.
A single \mbox{$r$-process}\ with physical characteristics
intermediate between those of the main and weak
components of the \mbox{$r$-process}\
could also be responsible.
Figure~\ref{ncapgcplot} compares the heavy element
abundance distribution in \mbox{NGC~4833}\ with six other
metal-poor globular clusters.
These clusters are selected for comparison
because large numbers of heavy elements have been
studied in multiple red giants within each cluster.
The top panel of Figure~\ref{ncapgcplot}
compares \mbox{NGC~4833}\ with three clusters with [Fe/H]~$< -$2.0:\
M15 ([Fe/H]~$= -$2.53, RGB stars only; \citealt{sobeck11}),
M92 ([Fe/H]~$= -$2.70; \citealt{roederer11b}),
and
\mbox{NGC~2419} ([Fe/H]~$= -$2.06; Cohen et al.\ \citeyear{cohen11b}).
The bottom panel of Figure~\ref{ncapgcplot}
compares \mbox{NGC~4833}\ with three other clusters with [Fe/H]~$> -$2.0:\
M2 ([Fe/H]~$= -$1.68, $r$-only group of stars; \citealt{yong14}),
M5 ([Fe/H]~$= -$1.40, RGB stars only; \citealt{lai11}),
and
M22 ([Fe/H]~$= -$1.81, $r$-only group of stars;
Roederer et al.\ \citeyear{roederer11c}).
The distributions are normalized to the Eu abundance
to eliminate differences in the overall amount of
heavy elements from one cluster to another.
Regardless, these differences are small:\
$\langle$[Eu/Fe]$\rangle = +$0.36 (\mbox{NGC~4833}),
$+$0.55 (M15),
$+$0.54 (M92),
$+$0.38 (M2),
$+$0.46 (M5),
$+$0.35 (M22), and
$+$0.30 (\mbox{NGC~2419}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.3in]{f13.eps}
\caption{
\label{ncapgcplot}
Average heavy element abundance pattern in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
and six other metal-poor globular clusters.
All ratios have been normalized to Eu.
The three comparison clusters shown in the top panel have
$\langle$[Fe/H]$\rangle < -$2.0,
and the three comparison clusters
shown in the bottom panel have
$\langle$[Fe/H]$\rangle > -$2.0.
References are given in the text.
}
\end{figure}
A few general trends emerge from this comparison.
First,
the [X/Eu] ratios are consistently sub-solar
when ``X'' represents the lighter \mbox{$n$-capture}\ elements.
The [Y/Eu] and [Zr/Eu] ratios are similar
in all of the
clusters where they have been examined.
Small enhancements
in Sr, Y, Zr, Mo, and Ba
relative to the main component of the \mbox{$r$-process}\
are not unusual in metal-poor globular clusters.
Second, there is a consistent upward trend
in the [X/Eu] ratios when ``X'' represents
Ba through Sm.
Third, there is a consistent
downward trend in [X/Eu] when ``X'' represents
Gd through Yb.
In summary,
the heavy element distribution in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
closely resembles
that in other well-studied metal-poor globular clusters.
\subsection{Heavy Element Dispersion in NGC~4833}
\label{dispersion}
In many globular clusters,
the heavy elements appear to be homogeneous
at the limit of observations.
M15 is unique among all known clusters
in that
(1) it has a large range
(spanning $>$~0.7~dex, \citealt{sneden97,worley13})
of heavy-element abundances relative to Fe,
(2) the star-to-star abundance distribution
remains relatively constant and
appears to have originated predominantly
via \mbox{$r$-process}\ nucleosynthesis, and
(3) the heavy-element dispersion shows
no correlation with the light element dispersion.
These characteristics of M15 have been
verified by
\citet{sneden97,sneden00}, \citet{preston06},
\citet{otsuki06}, \citet{sobeck11}, and \citet{worley13}.
\citet{roederer11a} reanalyzed literature data
and presented evidence
that several other metal-poor clusters
(M3, M5, M13, and \mbox{NGC~3201})
may also exhibit a less-extreme \mbox{$r$-process}\ dispersion.
\citet{roederer11b} reported
an \mbox{$r$-process}\ dispersion in M92, which was not
found in the higher-quality data
obtained by \citet{cohen11a}.
The [La/Fe] and [Eu/Fe] ratios showed a high degree
of correlation for stars within each of these clusters.
This would not be expected if the La and Eu abundances
were independent measures of a sample
with no cosmic dispersion in La or Eu.
The [La/Eu] ratios were constant, indicating
that the distributions were constant
and only the total amount of material
(relative to, e.g., H or Fe) was changing.
In principle, errors in the choice of model atmosphere could also
produce the observed correlation since the
La~\textsc{ii} and Eu~\textsc{ii} lines
form similarly.
This possibility was dismissed because no correlation
was found among other species
that might also form similarly, including
Sc~\textsc{ii} and Ti~\textsc{ii}.
In these clusters,
the \mbox{$r$-process}\ dispersion did not correlate with the
[Na/Fe] ratio, which was chosen to represent
the light-element dispersion commonly found in globular clusters.
We calculate a $p$-value of 0.001
for the relation between
[La/Fe] and [Eu/Fe] in 15~stars in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
The null hypothesis
that [La/Fe] and [Eu/Fe] are not correlated is rejected
at a $>$~3$\sigma$ significance level.
Figure~\ref{rprodispplot} illustrates the correlations
between [Eu/Fe] and eight heavy-element abundance ratios in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
These eight pairs of ratios are selected
because they have been measured in 14 or 15
of the 15~stars studied.
The correlations bear strong resemblance to those
identified by \citet{roederer11a}.
Of these eight ratios, only [Sr/Fe], [Ba/Fe], and [Nd/Fe]
do not correlate with [Eu/Fe] at a $>$~2$\sigma$ level.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.4in]{f14a.eps}
\hspace*{0.0in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.4in]{f14b.eps} \\
\caption{
\label{rprodispplot}
Correlations among heavy element ratios in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
for elements measured in 14 or more stars.
The red lines mark the weighted least-squares fits.
Dotted lines mark the solar values.
We have checked, and confirmed, the weighted fit for [Ba/Fe] versus [Eu/Fe],
which appears to deviate from what might be expected from a by-eye fit.
The uncertainty on this fit is considerably larger than for the
other rare earth elements, as can be seen in Figure~\ref{euslopes}.
}
\end{figure*}
Weighted linear least-squares fits to the data are also shown
in each panel in Figure~\ref{rprodispplot}.
A slope of $+$1 corresponds to a direct correlation,
$-$1 corresponds to a direct anti-correlation,
and 0 corresponds to no correlation.
The values of the slopes and 1$\sigma$ uncertainties
are illustrated in Figure~\ref{euslopes}.
The slopes
are remarkably consistent and non-zero, and the mean
slope (0.75~$\pm$~0.07, $\sigma =$~0.19) is
illustrated by the shaded box in Figure~\ref{euslopes}.
Only the slope between [Eu/Fe] and [Sr/Fe]
is not strongly positive
among the elements produced by \mbox{$n$-capture}\ reactions.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.3in]{f15.eps} \\
\caption{
\label{euslopes}
Slopes in the [X/Fe] versus [Eu/Fe] relationships,
where ``X'' represents a given species.
Recall that all ratios are constructed using
ions with ions (e.g., [La~\textsc{ii}/Fe~\textsc{ii}])
and neutrals with neutrals (e.g., [Na~\textsc{i}/Fe~\textsc{i}].
The vertical dashed line separates the light from the heavy elements.
The shaded region represents the mean $\pm$~1$\sigma$ of the slopes
of the eight heavy elements shown to the right of the vertical dashed line.
The horizontal dotted line marks a slope of zero.
}
\end{figure}
Slopes of the relations between [Eu/Fe] and lighter element ratios
($Z \leq$~30)
are shown in Figure~\ref{euslopes} for comparison.
Most of these slopes are consistent with zero,
in contrast to the slopes between [Eu/Fe] and other
elements produced by \mbox{$n$-capture}\ reactions.
There is no coherent, significant pattern among them.
This suggests that none of the lighter elements
correlate with Eu or other \mbox{$n$-capture}\ elements.
Figure~\ref{naheavyplot} illustrates
[Na/Fe] and eight of the heavy-element
ratios shown in Figure~\ref{rprodispplot}.
No correlations are apparent, and
the $p$-values indicate that
none of these correlations (including [Na/Fe] versus [Sm/Fe], not shown)
is even 1$\sigma$ significant.
The heavy element dispersion
is not related to the light element dispersion.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.4in]{f16a.eps}
\hspace*{0.0in}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.4in]{f16b.eps} \\
\caption{
\label{naheavyplot}
Relationships among heavy elements and [Na/Fe] in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
Black points mark our derived abundance ratios, and
gray circles mark those from \citet{carretta14}.
Dotted lines mark the solar values.
No correlations are apparent.
}
\end{figure*}
We have shown that the abundances of
the \mbox{$n$-capture}\ elements in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
correlate closely with one another
but not the lighter elements.
Next, we examine whether these correlations
reflect true abundance dispersions or
are an artifact of our analysis.
Atoms in the same state (e.g., ions)
would respond similarly to an inappropriate model atmosphere,
and the resulting abundance distributions would
be smeared out to lower and higher ratios
in a correlated fashion.
Table~\ref{atmvar} lists the 1$\sigma$ uncertainty
in each [X/Fe] ratio
that could be attributed to
uncertainties in the model atmosphere parameters.
For example, these values
are 0.11 and 0.12~dex
for [La/Fe] and [Eu/Fe].
The standard deviations of the
[La/Fe] and [Eu/Fe] ratios are each 0.13~dex.
The comparable magnitudes of these values
suggest that the correlated heavy element abundance ratios
may not have a cosmic origin.
To demonstrate this point, we
perform the following test.
Using the values presented in Table~\ref{atmvar},
we adjust the \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ values for each star
to force the individual [Eu/Fe] ratios
to equal the mean [Eu/Fe] ratio.
We then apply these \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ adjustments
to the individual [La/Fe] ratios to
derive revised [La/Fe] ratios for each star.
The standard deviation of the
revised [La/Fe] ratios is 30~per cent smaller
than the standard deviation of the
uncorrected ratios.
Other rare earth elements exhibit similar responses.
We conclude from this test that
random errors in \mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\
can account for a substantial portion of
the dispersion,
and we infer that random errors in the
other model atmosphere parameters
may have similar impact.
All of the heavy-element ratios shown to correlate
in Figure~\ref{rprodispplot} are derived from ionized atoms,
so other elements
detected as ions
(Sc, Ti, V, and Cr)
might exhibit similar characteristics.
However, Table~\ref{atmvar} indicates that the
[Sc~\textsc{ii}/Fe], [Ti~\textsc{ii}/Fe],
[V~\textsc{ii}/Fe], and [Cr~\textsc{ii}/Fe]
should not be expected to behave like, e.g.,
[La~\textsc{ii}/Fe] or [Eu~\textsc{ii}/Fe].
For example,
$\delta$[Ti~\textsc{ii}/Fe]/$\delta$\mbox{$v_{\rm t}$}~$= -$0.04,
while
$\delta$[La~\textsc{ii}/Fe]/$\delta$\mbox{$v_{\rm t}$}~$= +$0.05.
Responses to $\delta$\mbox{$T_{\rm eff}$}\ and $\delta$\mbox{log~{\it g}}\
are also dissimilar.
Even though both ratios are derived from
lines of ionized atoms,
the line strengths and
excitation potentials
are different.
The excitation potentials of Sc~\textsc{ii}, Ti~\textsc{ii},
V~\textsc{ii}, and Cr~\textsc{ii}
lines used range from 1.08 to 4.07~eV with a median of 1.50~eV,
while the excitation potentials of the
heavy rare earth elements' lines range from
0.00 to 1.38~eV with a median of 0.32~eV.
This difference is significant.
The
[Sc~\textsc{ii}/Fe], [Ti~\textsc{ii}/Fe],
[V~\textsc{ii}/Fe], and [Cr~\textsc{ii}/Fe]
ratios are not a good control group for
[La~\textsc{ii}/Fe] or [Eu~\textsc{ii}/Fe],
as was assumed by \citet{roederer11a}.
We conclude that there is no compelling evidence of
a cosmic origin for the
correlations among pairs of \mbox{$n$-capture}-element ratios
in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
The detected correlations likely result from
random errors in the model atmosphere parameters.
We suggest that the correlations identified among
literature data by \citet{roederer11a}
may also be the result of similar random errors
in the model atmosphere parameters.
The \mbox{$r$-process}\ dispersion in M15, however, is too large
($>$~0.7~dex)
to be explained entirely by this phenomenon,
and we note that \citet{tsujimoto14} have
recently offered a theoretical explanation of its origin.
\subsection{The $^{232}$Th nuclear chronometer in \mbox{NGC~4833}}
\label{age}
We derive upper limits on the Th abundance
based on the non-detection of the
Th~\textsc{ii} line at 4019~\AA.~
This line originates from radioactive $^{232}$Th,
which can only be produced via \mbox{$r$-process}\ nucleosynthesis.
This upper limit sets
a lower limit on the
age of the \mbox{$r$-process}\ material in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
We compare the Th abundance to Eu, a well-measured, stable
element presumably produced by the same nucleosynthesis channel.
The lowest Th/Eu ratio found in \mbox{NGC~4833},
in star \mbox{2-1664}, is
$\log \epsilon$(Th/Eu)~$< -$0.47~$\pm$~0.09.
If we assume the Th and Eu were produced
in the ratio reported in Table~9 of
\citet{roederer09},
this implies an age greater than 6.4~Gyr.
This value is not very constraining, but
it implies that the \mbox{$r$-process}\ material in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
is not young.
Alternatively, we could
assume that \mbox{NGC~4833}\ is old
\citep{melbourne00,marinfranch09}
and treat the initial Th/Eu production ratio as a free parameter.
An assumed age of 12~$\pm$~1.5~Gyr implies an initial
production ratio of
$\log \epsilon$(Th/Eu)~$= -$0.21~$\pm$~0.09.
This implies that the \mbox{$r$-process}\ material
was not produced in an ``actinide boost'' event
(cf.\ \citealt{hill02,schatz02}),
which would require an initial production ratio of
$\log \epsilon$(Th/Eu)~$= +$0.11~$\pm$~0.07
to yield an age consistent with the
prototype actinide boost halo star \mbox{CS~31082--001}.
To the best of our knowledge, no
actinide boost has yet been observed
in any globular cluster star.
$^{232}$Th has been detected in globular clusters
M5 \citep{lai11},
M15 \citep{sneden00},
M22 (Roederer et al.\ \citeyear{roederer11c}), and
M92 \citep{johnson01}.
We also report an unpublished upper limit on $^{232}$Th in M2,
$\log \epsilon$(Th/Eu)~$< -$0.42,
based on spectra obtained by I.U.R.\
and published in \citet{yong14}.
Ages calculated from the
$\log \epsilon$(Th/Eu) ratios are consistent with
ages deduced
by isochrone fitting \citep{marinfranch09},
as shown in Figure~\ref{ageplot}.\footnote{
\citet{yong08a,yong08b} detected Th in M4 and M5,
but the high [Th/Fe] ratio in M5 derived by \citeauthor{yong08b}
was not confirmed by \citet{lai11}.
We refrain from drawing any conclusions
from the [Th/Fe] ratios presented by \citeauthor{yong08b}}
The uncertainties are substantial, but
we would expect to find values in the lower right corner
of Figure~\ref{ageplot}
if an actinide boost is present in any of these six clusters
at the level found in \mbox{CS~31082--001}.
No detections are found here.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=3.1in]{f17.eps}
\caption{
\label{ageplot}
Comparison of globular cluster ages derived from
isochrone fitting and
radioactive decay of $^{232}$Th.
The relative ages presented by \citet{marinfranch09}
are based on stellar evolution models by \citet{dotter07}
and have been normalized to an absolute age of 13.0~Gyr.
The dotted line marks the 1:1 correspondence.
}
\end{figure}
The astrophysical site(s) responsible for
\mbox{$r$-process}\ nucleosynthesis are still debated.
Non-detection of the actinide boost
in globular clusters may provide
a new environmental test
of \mbox{$r$-process}\ nucleosynthesis models.
The sample of clusters where $^{232}$Th
has been studied is still small, however,
so new data are of great importance.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{conclusions}
We have collected new high-resolution spectroscopic
observations of 15~giants in the metal-poor globular cluster
\mbox{NGC~4833}.
We derive stellar parameters for these stars
and examine up to
354~lines of
48~species of
44~elements in each star.
We detect 43~species of 39~elements
and present upper limits derived from the non-detections
of the others.
Overall, the composition of stars in
\mbox{NGC~4833}\ appears relatively normal
for a metal-poor globular cluster.
We derive a mean metallicity of
$\langle$[Fe/H]$\rangle = -$2.25~$\pm$~0.02 ($\sigma =$~0.09)
from Fe~\textsc{i} lines and
$\langle$[Fe/H]$\rangle = -$2.19~$\pm$~0.013 ($\sigma =$~0.05)
from Fe~\textsc{ii} lines.
These uncertainties support the results of
\citet{carretta14} that there is no
internal Fe dispersion within \mbox{NGC~4833}.
Our derived mean metallicity is
0.20~$\pm$~0.02~dex lower than that derived by \citeauthor{carretta14}\
for four stars in common.
We derive [Fe/H]~$= -$2.19~$\pm$~0.04 for \mbox{NGC~4833}\
on the differential globular cluster scale
established by \citet{koch08,koch11}
relative to the K-giant Arcturus,
which supports our lower metallicity.
Our data reveal the abundance variations
among [O/Fe], [Na/Fe], [Mg/Fe], [Al/Fe], and possibly [Si/Fe]
commonly found in globular clusters.
There are bi-modal distributions among the
[Na/Fe], [Mg/Fe], and [Al/Fe] ratios.
Our results reaffirm those of \citet{carretta14}.
We also reproduce a hint of an anti-correlation
between [Si/Fe] and [Mg/Fe],
but our data do not reveal statistically-significant
correlations between [Si/Fe] and either [Na/Fe] or [Al/Fe].
We suspect the discrepancy between our data and
\citeauthor{carretta14}\ is a result of the smaller
sample size examined by us.
Quantitative measures of potential
anti-correlations between
[K/Fe] and [Mg/Fe] and between
[Sc/Fe] and [Mg/Fe]
reveal that neither is significant.
Furthermore,
neither [K/Fe] nor [Sc/Fe]
correlate with
[Na/Fe], [Al/Fe], or [Si/Fe]
at the 2$\sigma$ level.
Our data demonstrate that
\mbox{NGC~4833}\ does not possess
the extreme relations among [Mg/Fe], [K/Fe], and [Sc/Fe]
found in the globular clusters \mbox{NGC~2419} and \mbox{NGC~2808}.
We find no dispersion among any of the other iron-group elements
in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
We detect up to 20~\mbox{$n$-capture}\ elements in \mbox{NGC~4833},
and we place upper limits on four others.
Abundances of the rare earth elements
are consistent with \mbox{$r$-process}\ nucleosynthesis.
Sr, Y, Zr, Mo, and Ba
are enhanced relative to the scaled solar \mbox{$r$-process}\
distribution,
but low levels of Yb, Hf, and Pb
suggest that this is not due to enrichment by the \mbox{$s$-process}.
Instead, the weak and main
components of the \mbox{$r$-process}\ may be responsible.
The heavy-element abundance distribution in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
closely resembles that found in M5, M15, M92,
\mbox{NGC~2419}, and the \mbox{$r$-process}-only stellar groups in M2 and M22.
There is no correlation between the \mbox{$n$-capture}\ elements
and the light-element variations in \mbox{NGC~4833},
which reaffirms and expands upon results obtained by \citet{carretta14}.
Our analysis of correlations between [La/Fe], [Eu/Fe], and other
\mbox{$n$-capture}\ elements in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
reveals that they are likely due to random
errors in the stellar parameters,
and we conclude that there is no compelling evidence for
cosmic dispersion among the heavy elements in \mbox{NGC~4833}.
This cluster does not possess wide star-to-star variations
like those observed in
$\omega$~Cen, M2, M15, M22, or \mbox{NGC~1851}.
Upper limits derived from the non-detection of the
Th~\textsc{ii} line at 4019~\AA\
indicate that the \mbox{$r$-process}\ material in \mbox{NGC~4833}\
was not formed in an actinide boost event.
No other clusters that have been studied
show evidence of an actinide boost, either.
The potential non-detection of the
actinide boost in globular clusters
presents a new environmental test of
\mbox{$r$-process}\ nucleosynthesis models
that should be investigated further.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
I.U.R.\ thanks
E.\ Carretta for sending equivalent width measurements and
D.\ Yong for advice during the early stages of the analysis.
We appreciate the helpful suggestions and rapid response
of the referee.
This research has made use of NASA's
Astrophysics Data System bibliographic services,
the arXiv preprint server operated by Cornell University,
the SIMBAD and VizieR databases hosted by the
Strasbourg Astronomical Data Center,
the Atomic Spectra Database \citep{kramida13} hosted by
the National Institute of Standards and Technology,
and the Two Micron All Sky Survey, which is a joint project of the
University of Massachusetts and the Infrared Processing and Analysis
Center/California Institute of Technology,
funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
and the National Science Foundation.
\textsc{iraf} is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observatories,
which are operated by the Association of Universities for Research
in Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative agreement with the National
Science Foundation.
|
\section{Introduction}
Following the celebrated Ericksen-Leslie (EL) model \cite{ericksen1991liquid,Leslie1979} of uniaxial liquid crystals, several dynamical theories have been formulated over the decades. These theories often differ by the choice of order parameter (depending on the phase under consideration) and even different director formulations are available in the simplest case of uniaxial molecules. For example, while the EL theory defines the director as an unsigned (position dependent) unit vector in physical space, the Harvard theory \cite{forster1971hydrodynamics} defines the same order parameter as a differential one-form or vector field, as elucidated in Volovik's work \cite{volovik1980relationship}. This difference leads to intrinsically distinct transformation properties of the director field, which are reflected in substantial differences between the EL and the Harvard theories.
In the description of other nematic phases, such as the biaxial phase, de Gennes \cite{deGennes1969} showed the convenience of identifying the order parameter with a traceless symmetric tensor, the $Q-$tensor. This has the advantage of incorporating features of different liquid crystal phases (e.g. uniaxial and biaxial) by simply writing different expressions of the same tensor order parameter in terms of the director fields. Again, different theories of $Q-$tensor dynamics are available. Other than by the expression of the free energy or dissipation function, some of these theories again differ by intrinsic transformation properties of the $Q-$tensor. For example, in \cite{stark2003poisson} the alignment tensor is a (degenerate) covariant tensor field, while in Qian \& Sheng \cite{QS1998} the same tensor is simply a (position dependent) $3\times 3$ matrix. As before, this leads to substantial differences between the theories. In other situations, alignment tensor theories differ in whether or not inertial effects are retained in the rotational dynamics. When these effects are neglected, dissipation dominates to drive relaxation dynamics. For example, inertial rotation terms are neglected in the $Q-$tensor dynamics of Volovik \& Kats \cite{VK1981}, while the theory of Beris \& Edwards \cite{delaware1994thermodynamics} neglects inertial effects to formulate $Q-$tensor dynamics as a gradient flow on the space of symmetric covariant tensor fields. More generally, dissipation can be introduced by either the use of symmetric brackets \cite{delaware1994thermodynamics} (which are added to the Poisson bracket governing inertial effects) or the use of Rayleigh dissipation in Hamilton's variational principle \cite{sonnet2004continuum, Edwards2005131}.
In recent years, different approaches to director dynamics were shown to be equivalent when the director is defined as a unit vector. Indeed, while it is well known how the EL theory can also be formulated in terms of the molecular angular velocity (see Volovik's works \cite{Volovik1980,VK1981}), new developments \cite{gay2013equivalent,GBRaTr2012} have shown how several liquid crystal theories are actually special cases of Eringen's theory of micropolar fluids \cite{Eringen1993,Eringen1997}. Based on the variational approach, variants of these theories are constructed depending on how one expresses the free energy and the dissipation function. {\color{ black}As a result, these studies allowed the identification of the hydrodynamic helicity invariant for the conservative limit of several liquid crystal dynamical models \cite{gay2010helicity}.}
In this paper, we compare the $Q-$tensor dynamical theories of Qian \& Sheng (QS) \cite{QS1998} and Volovik \& Kats (VK) \cite{VK1981}. More particularly, upon restoring inertial effects in the VK theory (see also \cite{gay2010reduction}), we show that {\color{ black}its dissipationless limit arises as a specialization of the QS model}, under the common assumption of rotational dynamics for {\color{ black}biaxial liquid crystal phases}, that is \cite{GKSS2013}
\begin{equation}\label{evolution}
Q=RQ_0R^T
\end{equation}
(where $R(\mathbf{x},t)$ is a rotation matrix).
This evolution naturally arises from de Gennes' definition (see e.g. \cite{rey2012rheological})
\begin{equation}\label{Qdef}
Q=\int_{S^2}\!\left(\boldsymbol{u}\boldsymbol{u}-\frac13\boldsymbol{1}\right)f(\boldsymbol{u})\,\mathrm{d}^2\boldsymbol{u}\,,
\end{equation}
where $f$ is the statistical distribution of the molecular unit vector $\boldsymbol{u}$ (pointing along the long molecular axis) on the unit sphere $S^2$.
We shall show that using the above evolution in the variational principle for the QS model returns VK theory augmented to allow for inertial effects. More particularly, upon following Edwards' approach in \cite{Edwards2005131}, most of this paper focuses on the use of Hamilton's principle to formulate conservative dynamics, and this picture is eventually extended by the insertion of Rayleigh dissipation \cite{sonnet2004continuum}.
After discussing the variational principle for the conservative limit of the QS model for liquid crystal textures, Section 2 makes use of the evolution \eqref{evolution} to recover the VK theory in the absence of fluid flow. In addition, Eringen's wryness tensor is introduced as an auxiliary variable to obtain a micropolar variant of the VK model. Then, Section 3 extends the treatment to flowing liquid crystals. Section 4 deals with Rayleigh dissipation upon making use of the evolution \eqref{evolution} eliminating the need for the constraint $\operatorname{Tr}Q=0$ appearing in QS theory. Finally, Section 5 extends the treatment to consider nontrivial eigenvalue dynamics for the $Q-$tensor and this is done upon invoking the existence of a scaling factor, by mimicking the properties of microstretch fluids \cite{eringen2001microcontinuum1,eringen2001microcontinuum2,gay2009geometric}.
\section{Conservative texture dynamics: QS and VK theories}
In this section, we show that the QS model {\color{ black}specializes} to the VK theory, under the assumption of rotational evolution \eqref{evolution}. Upon considering the special case of a flowless nematic texture in the absence of dissipation, we shall derive the QS and VK theories from Hamilton's variational principle, along the lines of Edwards \cite{Edwards2005131}. In particular, we shall make use of the rotational symmetry by applying standard Euler-Poincar\'e techniques in geometric mechanics, following the works of Holm \cite{holm2002euler} and Gay-Balmaz \& Ratiu \cite{gay2009geometric}.
Upon denoting by $J$ the moment of inertia density, the conservative QS model for $Q-$tensor dynamics in a nematic texture reads
\begin{equation}\label{QStexture}
J\partial_t^2{Q}-h
=\lambda_0 \boldsymbol{1}
\end{equation}
where $h$ is the molecular field
\[
h=-\frac{\partial \mathcal{F}}{\partial Q}+\operatorname{div}\!\left(\frac{\partial \mathcal{F}}{\partial\nabla Q}\right)
\,,
\]
$\mathcal{F}$ is the Landau-de Gennes free energy
\begin{multline*}
\mathcal{F}=\frac{1}{2}(\alpha Q^2_{ij}+L_1Q^2_{ij,k}+L_2Q_{ij,j}Q_{ik,k})
\\\qquad
+\frac{4\pi}{P}L_1\varepsilon_{ijk}Q_{il}\partial_jQ_{kl}-\beta Q_{ij}Q_{jk}Q_{ki}
+\gamma(Q^2_{ij})^2
\end{multline*}
with $\alpha,L_1,L_2,\beta,\gamma,P$ phenomenological constants,
and $\lambda_0$ is a Lagrange multiplier enforcing $\operatorname{Tr} Q=0$, so that taking the trace of \eqref{QStexture} yields
\[
\lambda_0=\frac13\operatorname{Tr}\!\left(J\partial^2_t{Q}-h\right)=-\frac13\operatorname{Tr} h
\,.
\]
In the original paper \cite{QS1998}, an extra Lagrange multiplier enforces $Q=Q^T$, although here we drop the corresponding term by suitably symmetrising the molecular field such that $h=h^T$. The QS equation \eqref{QStexture} is evidently an Euler-Lagrange equation on the space of symmetric matrices, arising from the constrained variational principle
\begin{equation}
\delta\!\int_{t_1}^{t_2}\!\!\!\int\! \left(\frac{J}{2}\|\dot Q\|^2
-\mathcal{F}(Q,\nabla Q)
+\lambda_0\operatorname{Tr} Q\right)\mathrm{d}^3{x}\,\mathrm{d} t=0\,,
\label{QStextActPrinc}
\end{equation}
where the last term is the constraint enforcing the traceless condition. Recently, a similar approach was followed for biaxial {\color{ black}phases} in \cite{GKSS2013}, where constrained variational principles were used to prescribe the values of the first three rotational invariants in the sequence $\{\operatorname{Tr} Q^n\}$. On the other hand, in the same work, it is recognized how biaxial molecules require the $Q-$tensor to undergo purely rotational evolution of the type \eqref{evolution}. In again the same paper, the authors emphasize how the change of position of a molecule in space can be described by the angular velocity matrix, which in our notation reads
\[
\widehat{\nu}=(\partial_t{R})R^{-1}
\]
and whose corresponding angular velocity vector is $\nu_i=-\epsilon_{ikj}\widehat{\nu}_{jk}/2$. It is the purpose of this paper to introduce this variable explicitly in the QS model and show how the resulting equations coincide with the VK model in \cite{VK1981}, when the latter is augmented to consider inertial effects arising from $J\neq0$. {\color{ black}An immediate verification of this statement is obtained upon noticing that \eqref{evolution} implies ${\partial_t Q}=[\widehat{\nu},Q]$, which is then replaced in \eqref{QStexture}: then, taking the commutator of the latter equation with $Q$ yields the conservative VK equation \cite{VK1981} $J{\partial_t}[[\widehat{\nu},Q],Q]=\big[h,Q\big]$. The remainder of this paper shows that the reason for the appearance of these equations lies in the fact that the QS and VK models share the same Hamilton's variational principle, under the ansatz \eqref{evolution}. Therefore, their underlying minimization problems are equivalent.}
In order to introduce the variable $\widehat{\nu}$ {\color{ black}in the variational framework}, we apply Euler-Poincar\'e theory \cite{holm1998euler,holm2002euler,gay2009geometric} by replacing the evolution relation \eqref{evolution} in the action principle \eqref{QStextActPrinc}. This operation yields the Euler-Poincar\'e variational principle
\[
\delta\!\int_{t_1}^{t_2}\!\!\!\int\! \left(\frac{J}{2}\|[\widehat{\nu},Q]\|^2d^3x
-\mathcal{F}(Q,\nabla Q)
\right)\mathrm{d}^3{x}\,\mathrm{d} t=0\,,
\]
where the constraint has now been dropped appropriately and the rotational invariants $\operatorname{Tr} Q^n$ no longer contribute to the Landau-de-Gennes free energy. Then, upon computing the Euler-Poincar\'e variations
\begin{equation}\label{vars1}
\delta\widehat{\nu}=\partial_t{\widehat{\eta}}+[\widehat{\eta},\widehat{\nu}]
\,,\qquad\quad
\delta Q=[\widehat{\eta},Q]
\,,
\end{equation}
with $\widehat{\eta}=\delta{R} R^{-1}$, one is led to the Euler-Poincar\'e equations
\begin{equation}\label{VKdyn}
J\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\big[[\widehat{\nu},Q],Q\big]
=\big[h,Q\big]
\,,\qquad\ \
\frac{\partial Q}{\partial t}=[\widehat{\nu},Q]
\,.
\end{equation}
which coincide with the conservative limit of the VK model in \cite{VK1981}, upon setting $J=0$ to neglect inertial effects (and in the absence of fluid flow). These effects are also recovered in the VK model by retaining the corresponding terms in the Poisson bracket structures appearing in \cite{VK1981}. Notice that the traceless condition has never been imposed in this treatment because it naturally arises from a convenient choice of initial condition $\operatorname{Tr} Q_0 =0$. {\color{ black}This Euler-Poincar\'e variational approach was recently followed in \cite{BlGoKa} to study textures of biaxial nematic phases in an external field.}
Perhaps not surprisingly, the above equations combine into
\[
\big[J\partial_t^2{Q}-h,Q\big]=0\,,
\]
which is solved{\color{ black}, for example,} by
\[
J\partial_t^2Q-h
=\lambda_nQ^n
\,,
\]
for arbitrary time dependent functions $\lambda_n$. Alternatively, if $Q$ had not been considered \emph{a priori} as obeying \eqref{evolution}, then $\lambda_n$ would correspond to a sequence of Lagrange multipliers prescribing the values of $\operatorname{Tr} Q^{n+1}$. As an example, in \cite{GKSS2013}, the first three $\lambda_n$'s were considered, while the QS theory uses $\lambda_0$ only.
{\color{ black}Consequently, the VK model emerges as a more reliable alternative to the approach followed in \cite{GKSS2013}, since the rotational dynamics is intrinsically encoded in the model. Indeed, the Euler-Poincar\'e formulation of the VK model was recently adopted in \cite{BlGoKa}.}
In conclusion, we have proved that the conservative VK theory {\color{ black}emerges from the QS model, under} the assumption \eqref{evolution} of purely rotational dynamics of biaxial molecules. This relation between the two theories arises from the fact that both are derived from exactly the same action principle \eqref{QStextActPrinc}.
A micropolar theory of the above equations can also be obtained by noticing that \cite{gay2013equivalent}
\begin{align*}
\partial_i Q
&=[\partial_i RR^{-1}, Q]+R\partial_i Q_0R^{-1}
\\
&=[\partial_i RR^{-1}, Q]+R[Q_0,\widehat{\gamma}_{0i}]R^{-1}
\\
&=[Q,-\partial_i RR^{-1}+R\,\widehat{\gamma}_{0i} R^{-1}]
\\
&=:[ Q,\widehat{\gamma}_i]
\end{align*}
where we have invoked the existence of an initial \emph{wryness tensor} such that $\partial_i Q_0=[Q_0,\widehat{\gamma}_{0i}]$. In Eringen's micropolar theory \cite{Eringen1997}, the time-dependent wryness tensor
\[
\widehat{\gamma}_i:=-\partial_i RR^{-1}+R\,\widehat{\gamma}_{0i} R^{-1}
\]
identifies the amount of rotation under an infinitesimal displacement $\mathrm{d}\mathbf{x}$ and thus determines the spatial rotational strain \cite{holm1998euler}. Upon computing
\[
\delta\widehat{\gamma}_i
=[\widehat{\eta},\widehat{\gamma}_i]-\partial_i\widehat{\eta}
\]
and by writing $\mathcal{F}(Q,[Q,\widehat{\gamma}])=\Psi(Q,\widehat\gamma)$, one obtains the equations of motion
\begin{align}\label{ErText1}
&J\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\big[[\widehat{\nu},Q],Q\big]
=\left[Q,\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial Q}\right]
+\left[\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial\widehat{\gamma}_i},\widehat{\gamma}_i\right]
-\partial_i\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial\widehat{\gamma}_i},
\\
\label{ErText2}
&\frac{\partial Q}{\partial t}=[\widehat{\nu},Q]
\,,\qquad \qquad
\frac{\partial \widehat{\gamma}_i}{\partial t}
=[\widehat{\nu},\widehat{\gamma}_i]-\partial_i\widehat{\nu}.
\end{align}
These equations represent the micropolar version of the VK model. In the gauge theory of defects, an inhomogeneous initial condition on the wryness tensor can be associated with the presence of disclinations in the texture \cite{Volovick1980,holm1998euler,GBRaTr2012}.
Now that we have characterized how the QS and VK theories are related in the case of conservative texture dynamics, and have provided a micropolar variant of the VK model of biaxial liquid crystals, we shall proceed to consider the more general case of flowing liquid crystals. In this case the rotational degrees of freedom are coupled to the relabelling properties that characterize fluid flows.
\section{QS and VK theories for liquid crystal flows\label{sec:flows}}
As in the previous section, we start by focusing on the following QS equations for liquid crystal dynamics:
\begin{align}\label{QS1}
&\rho D_t \boldsymbol{u}= -\nabla
p-\partial_l\!\left(\frac{\partial
\mathcal{F}}{\partial{Q}_{ij\,,l}}\nabla{Q}_{ij}\right),
\\ \label{QS2}
&\rho JD_t^2Q-h=\lambda_0\boldsymbol{1}
\\ \label{QS3}
&
D_t \rho+\rho\operatorname{div}\boldsymbol{u}=0
\end{align}
where $D_t=\partial_t+\boldsymbol{u}\cdot\nabla$ is the ordinary convective derivative. Notice that the above equations are a slight generalization of the original QS equations in \cite{QS1998}, as they allow for a compressible fluid flow and the pressure is expressed in terms of an internal energy function $\mathcal{U}(\rho)$ as $p=\rho^2\mathcal{U}'-\mathcal{F}$. It is straightforward to observe that equations \eqref{QS1}-\eqref{QS2} arise from the following Eulerian action principle:
\begin{multline}
\delta\!\int_{t_1}^{t_2}\!\!\!\int\! \bigg(\frac12\rho\|\boldsymbol{u}\|^2+\frac{J}{2}\rho\|D_t Q\|^2
-\rho\,\mathcal{U}(\rho)
\\
-\mathcal{F}(Q,\nabla Q)
+\lambda_0\operatorname{Tr} Q\bigg)\,\mathrm{d}^3{x}\,\mathrm{d} t=0\,,
\label{QStextActPrincFluid}
\end{multline}
with variations
\begin{align*}
\delta\boldsymbol{u}&=\partial_t\boldsymbol{w}+(\boldsymbol{u}\cdot\nabla)\boldsymbol{w}-\boldsymbol{w}\cdot\nabla\boldsymbol{u}
\\
\delta\rho&=-\operatorname{div}(\rho\boldsymbol{w})
\\
\delta Q&=-(\boldsymbol{w}\cdot\nabla)Q+\Theta
\\
\delta (D_tQ)&=-(\boldsymbol{w}\cdot\nabla)D_tQ+D_t\Theta
\end{align*}
for arbitrary $\boldsymbol{w}$ and $\Theta$ vanishing at the endpoints.
Although the form of the variations above may look somewhat mysterious, they find a natural justification in terms of the relabelling properties of the action in \eqref{QStextActPrincFluid}. Here we shall follow an analogous treatment to that in \cite{GBRaTr2012}.
In order to show how this works, we shall introduce the Lagrangian fluid path $\mathbf{X}(\mathbf{x}_0,t)$ and its corresponding Lagrange-to-Euler map
\[
\rho(\mathbf{x},t)=\int\!\rho_0(\mathbf{x}_0)\,\delta(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{X}(\mathbf{x}_0,t))\,\mathrm{d}^3 x_0=:\mathbf{X}_*\rho_0
\,,
\]
whose fundamental role is expressing the Eulerian density $\rho(\mathbf{x}, t)$ in terms of its (fixed) Lagrangian correspondent $\rho_0(\mathbf{x}_0)$. Then following Euler-Poincar\'e theory we write the Eulerian velocity as $\boldsymbol{u}(\mathbf{x},t)=\dot{\mathbf{X}}(\mathbf{X}^{-1}(\mathbf{x},t),t)$ and observe that the relabelling property of the action in \eqref{QStextActPrincFluid} takes it into the form:
\begin{multline}
\label{ActPrinc2}
\int_{t_1}^{t_2}\!\!\!
\int\! \bigg(\frac12\rho_0\|\dot{\mathbf{X}}\|^2+\frac{J}{2}\rho_0\|\dot{\mathcal{Q}}\|^2
-\rho_0\,\mathcal{U}(\mathbf{X}_*\rho_0\circ\mathbf{X})
\\
-\frac{\rho_0}{(\mathbf{X}_*\rho_0)\circ\mathbf{X}}\,\mathcal{F}(\mathcal{Q},\nabla \mathcal{Q})
+(\mathbf{X}_*\lambda_0)\operatorname{Tr} \mathcal{Q}\bigg)\,\mathrm{d}^3{x}\,\mathrm{d} t
\end{multline}
where we have introduced $\mathcal{Q}=Q\circ\mathbf{X}$ and $\circ$ denotes standard composition of functions.
In turn, the above action identifies the expression of a Lagrangian $L_{\rho_0}$ of the type
\begin{equation}\label{unredLagr}
L_{\rho_0}(\mathbf{X},\dot{\mathbf{X}},\mathcal{Q},\dot{\mathcal{Q}})=\ell(\rho,\boldsymbol{u},Q,D_t Q)
\,,
\end{equation}
where $\ell(\rho,\boldsymbol{u},Q,D_t Q)$ is the Lagrangian appearing in the Eulerian action principle \eqref{QStextActPrincFluid}, which has now been written in \eqref{ActPrinc2} in terms of purely Lagrangian variables. {\color{ black}The relation \eqref{unredLagr} means that the Lagrangian description (arising from $L_{\rho_0}$) is equivalent to the Eulerian description (arising from $\ell$) -- in fluid mechanics, this is typically known as `relabelling symmetry'.}
At this point, without entering into the difficult question of computing the Euler-Lagrange equations for $\mathbf{X}$ and $\mathcal{Q}$, we observe that the previous Eulerian variations arise naturally from the definitions above. Thus, one has
\[
\delta\boldsymbol{u}=\delta (\dot{\mathbf{X}}\circ\mathbf{X}^{-1})
\,,\quad
\delta Q= \delta(\mathcal{Q}\circ\mathbf{X}^{-1})
\,,\quad
\delta \rho=\delta (\mathbf{X}_*\rho_0)
\]
along with the relations $\boldsymbol{w}=(\delta\mathbf{X})\circ\mathbf{X}^{-1}$, $\Theta=(\delta\mathcal{Q})\circ\mathbf{X}^{-1}$ and $(\partial_t\mathcal{Q})\circ\mathbf{X}^{-1}=D_t Q$.
Now that we have unfolded the relabelling features of the QS model, it is easy to proceed analogously to the previous section by making the evolution ansatz \eqref{evolution} for biaxial liquid crystal flows. Indeed, with the definitions above, we write
\begin{equation}\label{evol2}
\mathcal{Q}=\mathcal{R}\mathcal{Q}_0\mathcal{R}^{-1}
\end{equation}
(where $\mathcal{R}(\mathbf{x}_0,t)$ is a rotation matrix)
and introduce the angular frequency matrix $\widehat{\omega}=(\partial_t\mathcal{R})\mathcal{R}^{-1}$. Then, the variations $\delta\mathcal{Q}$ and $\delta\widehat{\omega}$ are expressed as in \eqref{vars1} (upon replacing $\widehat{\nu}$ by $\widehat{\omega}$ and $Q$ by $\mathcal{Q}$). However, in order to obtain the corresponding Eulerian description, we define
\begin{align*}
Q&=(\mathcal{R}\mathcal{Q}_0\mathcal{R}^{-1})\circ\mathbf{X}^{-1}=\mathcal{Q}\circ\mathbf{X}^{-1}
\\
\widehat{\nu}&=(\partial_t\mathcal{R}\,\mathcal{R}^{-1})\circ\mathbf{X}^{-1}=\widehat{\omega}\circ\mathbf{X}^{-1}
\,,
\end{align*}
so that we find
\begin{align*}
&D_t Q=[\widehat{\nu},Q]
\\
&\delta Q=[\widehat{\eta},Q]-(\boldsymbol{w}\cdot\nabla)Q
\\
&\delta\widehat{\nu}
=\partial_t\widehat{\eta}-(\boldsymbol{w}\cdot\nabla)\widehat{\nu}+(\boldsymbol{u}\cdot\nabla)\widehat{\eta}+[\widehat{\eta},\widehat{\nu}]
\end{align*}
with $\widehat{\eta}=(\delta\mathcal{R}\, \mathcal{R}^{-1} )\circ\mathbf{X}^{-1}$ arbitrary and vanishing at the endpoints. Then, Hamilton's principle associated to the action \eqref{ActPrinc2} is transformed into its Eulerian formulation as
\begin{multline}\label{actprinc3}
\delta\!\int_{t_1}^{t_2}\!\!\!\int\! \bigg(\frac12\rho\|\boldsymbol{u}\|^2+\frac{J}{2}\rho\|[\widehat{\nu},Q]\|^2
\\
-\rho\,\mathcal{U}(\rho)
-\mathcal{F}(Q,\nabla Q)\bigg)\,\mathrm{d}^3{x}\,\mathrm{d} t=0
\end{multline}
and by using the variational relations above, one is led to the Euler-Poincar\'e equations \eqref{QS1}, \eqref{QS3} and
\begin{align}\label{VK}
& \rho JD_t\big[[\widehat{\nu},Q],Q\big]
=\big[h,Q\big]
\,,\qquad\quad\, \
D_t Q=[\widehat{\nu},Q]
\end{align}
Again, these equations coincide with the conservative limit of the VK model in \cite{VK1981}, upon setting $J=0$ in order to neglect inertial effects, and they do not involve Lagrange multipliers since the invariants $\operatorname{Tr} Q^n$ are naturally preserved by the evolution of $Q$. In a similar fashion to that of the previous section, the $Q-$equations combine into
\begin{equation}
[\rho JD_t^2Q-h,Q]
=0
\,,
\label{QS-VK}
\end{equation}
which is the restriction of equation \eqref{QS2} under the assumption \eqref{evolution} of rotational evolution.
In conclusion, we have proved that the conservative VK theory of biaxial liquid crystals is a specialization of the QS model under the assumption \eqref{evolution} of purely rotational dynamics, and that this is due to their common action principle \eqref{QStextActPrincFluid}.
A micropolar fluid version of the above VK equations can be obtained by following the same steps as in the previous section, upon defining
$
\widehat{\xi}_i:=-\partial_i \mathcal{R}\mathcal{R}^{-1}+\mathcal{R}\,\widehat{\xi}_{0i} \mathcal{R}^{-1}
$ and $\widehat{\gamma}$ such that
\[
\rho\,\widehat{\gamma}:=\int\!\rho_0(\mathbf{x}_0)\widehat{\xi}(\mathbf{x}_0)\,\delta(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{X}(\mathbf{x}_0,t))\,\mathrm{d}^3 x_0\,.
\]
The equations of motion can be written upon computing
\begin{align*}
\dot{\widehat{\gamma}}_i+(\boldsymbol{u}\cdot\nabla)\widehat{\gamma}_i+(\partial_i u^k)\widehat{\gamma}_k
&=[\widehat{\nu},\widehat{\gamma}_i]-\partial_i\widehat{\nu}
\\
\delta{\widehat{\gamma}}_i+(\boldsymbol{w}\cdot\nabla)\widehat{\gamma}_i+(\partial_i w^k)\widehat{\gamma}_k
&=[\widehat{\eta},\widehat{\gamma}_i]-\partial_i\widehat{\eta}
\end{align*}
and by writing $\mathcal{F}(Q,[Q,\widehat{\gamma}])=\Psi(Q,\widehat\gamma)$. Then, upon denoting $p=\rho^2\mathcal{U}'-\Psi$, the action principle \eqref{actprinc3} yields
\begin{align}\label{micro1}
&\rho D_t {u}_i=-\partial_i
p-\partial_l\!\operatorname{Tr}\!\left(\widehat{\gamma}_i\,\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial\widehat{\gamma}_l}\right)
\,,\qquad
D_t Q=[\widehat{\nu},Q]
\\\label{micro2}
&\rho JD_t\big[[\widehat{\nu},Q],Q\big]
=\left[Q,\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial Q}\right]
+\left[\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial\widehat{\gamma}_i},\widehat{\gamma}_i\right]
-\partial_i\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial\widehat{\gamma}_i},
\\\label{micro3}
&
D_t{\widehat{\gamma}}_i+(\partial_i u^k)\widehat{\gamma}_k
=[\widehat{\nu},\widehat{\gamma}_i]-\partial_i\widehat{\nu}
\end{align}
These equations represent the micropolar version of the VK model for flowing liquid crystals.
\section{Rayleigh dissipation and rotational dynamics }
This section introduces dissipation in the previous liquid crystal models. Although dissipation can be introduced in the Hamiltonian framework by the use of symmetric brackets \cite{delaware1994thermodynamics}, the present framework makes the use of the Rayleigh dissipation function $\mathscr{R}(Q,\dot{Q})$, in which case the variational principle associated to the QS equation \eqref{QStexture} for texture dynamics {\color{ black}becomes}
\begin{multline}
\delta\!\int_{t_1}^{t_2}\!\!\!\int\! \left(\frac{J}{2}\|\dot Q\|^2
-\mathcal{F}(Q,\nabla Q)
+\lambda_0\operatorname{Tr} Q\right)\mathrm{d}^3{x}\,\mathrm{d} t
\\
=\int_{t_1}^{t_2}\!\!\!\int\operatorname{Tr}\!\left(\frac{\delta \mathscr{R}}{\delta \dot{Q}}\, \delta Q\right)
\,\mathrm{d}^3{x}\,\mathrm{d} t
\label{QStextActPrincDis
\end{multline}
so that \eqref{QStexture} {\color{ black}changes to}
\[
J\partial_t^2{Q}-h
=\lambda_0 \boldsymbol{1}-\frac{\delta \mathscr{R}}{\delta \dot{Q}}
\,.
\]
Here we have used the notation for the functional derivative, whose definition reads
\[
\delta \mathbf{F}(\mathbf{w})=\!\int\frac{\delta \mathbf{F}}{\delta \mathbf{w}}\cdot\delta \mathbf{w}\,\mathrm{d}^3 x
\]
On the other hand, under the rotational evolution \eqref{evolution} for biaxial nematics, one has $\mathscr{R}(Q,\dot{Q})=r(\widehat{\nu},Q)$ with the variations \eqref{vars1}, so that the relation $\delta\mathscr{R}=\delta r$ yields
\[
\frac{\delta r}{\delta \widehat{\nu}}=\left[\frac{\delta \mathscr{R}}{\delta \dot{Q}},Q\right].
\]
Eventually, as noticed already in \cite{GBRaTr2012}, the Euler-Poincar\'e variational principle with dissipation
\begin{multline}
\delta\!\int_{t_1}^{t_2}\!\!\!\int\! \left(\frac{J}{2}\|[\widehat{\nu},Q]\|^2
-\mathcal{F}(Q,\nabla Q) \right)
\mathrm{d}^3{x}\,\mathrm{d} t
\\
=\int_{t_1}^{t_2}\!\!\!\int\operatorname{Tr}\!\left(\frac{\delta r}{\delta \widehat{\nu}}\, \widehat{\eta}\right)
\,\mathrm{d}^3{x}\,\mathrm{d} t
\end{multline}
yields the equations of motion
\[
J\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\big[[\widehat{\nu},Q],Q\big]
=\big[h,Q\big]{-\frac{\delta r}{\delta \widehat{\nu}}}
\,,\qquad\ \
\frac{\partial Q}{\partial t}=[\widehat{\nu},Q]
\,,
\]
which represent the dissipative variant of the conservative VK equations \eqref{VKdyn} for texture dynamics. Again, these combine into
\[
\left[J\ddot{Q}-h+\frac{\delta \mathscr{R}}{\delta \dot{Q}},Q\right]
=0\,,
\]
where the dot notation stands for partial time derivative. The same approach applies to the micropolar theory \eqref{ErText1}-\eqref{ErText2}, whose dissipative version is obtained by inserting the term $-\delta r/\delta \widehat\nu$ into the right hand side of \eqref{ErText1}.
In the case of flowing liquid crystals, dissipation can be introduced by mimicking the same steps as above. For a consistent theory, it is essential to start with the Lagrangian $L_{\rho_0}(\mathbf{X},\dot{\mathbf{X}},\mathcal{Q},\dot{\mathcal{Q}})$ defined in \eqref{unredLagr} and write its dissipative action principle
\begin{multline}
\delta\!\int_{t_1}^{t_2}\!\!\!\int\! L_{\rho_0}(\mathbf{X},\dot{\mathbf{X}},\mathcal{Q},\dot{\mathcal{Q}})\,\mathrm{d} t
\\
=\int_{t_1}^{t_2}\!\!\!\int\!\left(\frac{\delta \mathscr{R}_{\rho_0}}{\delta \dot{\mathbf{X}}}\cdot \delta\mathbf{X}+\operatorname{Tr}\!\left(\frac{\delta \mathscr{R}_{\rho_0}}{\delta \dot{\mathcal{Q}}}\, \delta \mathcal{Q}\right)\right)
\mathrm{d}^3{x}\,\mathrm{d} t
\end{multline}
where $\mathscr{R}_{\rho_0}=\mathscr{R}_{\rho_0}(\mathbf{X},\dot{\mathbf{X}},\mathcal{Q},\dot{\mathcal{Q}})$. Then, upon assuming that $\mathscr{R}_{\rho_0}$ depends on $\mathbf{X}$ only through $\rho=\mathbf{X}_*\rho_0$ and using the same notation and definitions as in the previous section, we can write
\[
\mathscr{R}_{\rho_0}(\mathbf{X},\dot{\mathbf{X}},\mathcal{Q},\dot{\mathcal{Q}})=
\! r(\boldsymbol{u},\rho,Q,D_t{Q})
\]
with
\begin{align}\label{Raydissvar1}
\frac{\delta r}{\delta \boldsymbol{u}}&=\int\!\frac{\delta \mathscr{R}_{\rho_0}}{\delta \dot{\mathbf{X}}}(\mathbf{x}_0,t)\,\delta(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{X}(\mathbf{x}_0,t))\,\mathrm{d}^3 x_0
\,,\\\label{Raydissvar2}
\frac{\delta r}{\delta (D_t Q)}&=\int\!\frac{\delta \mathscr{R}_{\rho_0}}{\delta \dot{\mathcal{Q}}}(\mathbf{x}_0,t)\,\delta(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{X}(\mathbf{x}_0,t))\,\mathrm{d}^3 x_0
\,.
\end{align}
Eventually,
\begin{multline*}
\int\!\left(\frac{\delta \mathscr{R}_{\rho_0}}{\delta \dot{\mathbf{X}}}\cdot \delta\mathbf{X}+\operatorname{Tr}\!\left(\frac{\delta \mathscr{R}_{\rho_0}}{\delta \dot{\mathcal{Q}}}\, \delta \mathcal{Q}\right)\right)
\mathrm{d}^3{x}
\\
=
\int\!\left(\frac{\delta r}{\delta \boldsymbol{u}}\cdot \boldsymbol{w}+\operatorname{Tr}\!\left(\frac{\delta r}{\delta (D_t Q)}\, \delta {Q}\right)\right)
\mathrm{d}^3{x}\,,
\end{multline*}
{\color{ black}which then replaces the right hand side of \eqref{QStextActPrincFluid} so that} the QS equations \eqref{QS1}-\eqref{QS3} become
\begin{align}\label{QS1diss}
&\rho D_t \boldsymbol{u}= -\nabla
p-\partial_l\!\left(\frac{\partial
\mathcal{F}}{\partial{Q}_{ij\,,l}}\nabla{Q}_{ij}\right)-\frac{\delta r}{\delta \boldsymbol{u}},
\\ \label{QS2diss}
&\rho JD_t^2{Q}-h=\lambda_0\boldsymbol{1}-\frac{\delta r}{\delta {(D_tQ)}},
\\ \label{QS3diss}
&
D_t \rho+\rho\operatorname{div}\boldsymbol{u}=0
\,.
\end{align}
Alternatively, one may proceed by assuming the evolution \eqref{evol2} in $\mathscr{R}_{\rho_0}$ to write
\[
\int \!\mathscr{R}_{\rho_0}(\mathbf{X},\dot{\mathbf{X}},\mathcal{Q},\dot{\mathcal{Q}})\,\mathrm{d}^3 x_0=\int
\! r(\boldsymbol{u},\rho,\widehat{\nu},Q)\,\mathrm{d}^3 x\,,
\]
with \eqref{Raydissvar1} and
\begin{align*}
\frac{\delta r}{\delta \widehat{\nu}}
&=\int\!\left[{\frac{\delta \mathscr{R}}{\delta \dot{\mathcal{Q}}}(\mathbf{x}_0,t),\mathcal{Q}(\mathbf{x}_0,t)}\right]\delta(\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{X}(\mathbf{x}_0,t))\,\mathrm{d}^3 x_0
\,.
\end{align*}
Then,
\begin{multline*}
\int\!\left(\frac{\delta \mathscr{R}_{\rho_0}}{\delta \dot{\mathbf{X}}}\cdot \delta\mathbf{X}+\operatorname{Tr}\!\left(\frac{\delta \mathscr{R}_{\rho_0}}{\delta \dot{\mathcal{Q}}}\, \delta \mathcal{Q}\right)\right)\delta \mathrm{d}^3{x}
\\
=
\int\!\left(\frac{\delta r}{\delta \boldsymbol{u}}\cdot \boldsymbol{w}+\operatorname{Tr}\!\left(\frac{\delta r}{\delta \widehat{\nu}}\, \widehat{\eta}\right)\right)
\mathrm{d}^3{x}
\end{multline*}
and the dissipative version of the VK equations is obtained by inserting the term $-\delta r/\delta \widehat\nu$ into the right hand side of the first of \eqref{VK}, which is then accompanied by \eqref{QS1diss} and \eqref{QS3diss}. After verifying that ${\delta r}/{\delta \widehat{\nu}}=[{\delta r}/{\delta (D_t Q)},Q]$, these equations combine into
\begin{align*}
&\rho D_t \boldsymbol{u}= -\nabla
p-\partial_l\!\left(\frac{\partial
\mathcal{F}}{\partial{Q}_{ij\,,l}}\nabla{Q}_{ij}\right)-\frac{\delta r}{\delta \boldsymbol{u}},
\\
&\left[\rho JD_t^2{Q}-h+\frac{\delta r}{\delta (D_t Q)},Q\right]
=0,
\\
&
D_t \rho+\rho\operatorname{div}\boldsymbol{u}=0
\,.
\end{align*}
At this point, the micropolar formulation of VK dynamics can also be presented in dissipative form by following precisely the same steps as above. This consists of adding the term $-\delta r/\delta \boldsymbol{u}$ into the right hand side of the first in \eqref{micro1} and the term $-\delta r/\delta \widehat\nu$ into the right hand side of \eqref{micro2}.
It is important to emphasize that different Rayleigh functions produce different relaxation dynamics and therefore different physical results. Here, we shall not dwell upon the difficult question of what the correct expression of the Rayleigh function should be; see \cite{sonnet2004continuum}. Still, the results presented here remain valid independently of the particular choice of Rayleigh functional.
\section{Scaling and eigenvalue dynamics}
The evolution \eqref{evolution} is isospectral -- that is, the eigenvalues of $Q$ are preserved. However, more general cases are also allowed in liquid crystal dynamics. Then, the purely rotational motion can be extended in order to incorporate nontrivial eigenvalue dynamics. In the present geometric context this is achieved by allowing the evolution law to admit scaling. In light of this, one choice is to let $Q$ evolve under dilations as well as rotations, that is
\begin{equation}\label{confev}
Q=\lambda^2RQ_0R^T,
\end{equation}
where $\lambda(\mathbf{x},t)$ is a time-dependent positive function. For example, in the case of an initial uniaxial phase $Q_0=\sigma\left(\mathbf{n}_0\mathbf{n}_0-\boldsymbol{1}/3\right)$ (for some constant $\sigma$), the above relation yields
\[
Q=\sigma\lambda^2\!\left(\mathbf{n}\mathbf{n}-\frac13\boldsymbol{1}\right)
\!,
\]
where $\sigma\lambda^2$ may now acquire the meaning of a scalar order parameter. A more general situation can be studied by introducing two conformation tensors $A$ and $B$ such that $Q=\lambda^2RAR^T+\zeta^2R B R^T$. However, this possibility is left for future work.
The evolution law \eqref{confev} comes out in a natural fashion by considering the congruence transformation $Q=g Q_0 g^T$ for some invertible matrix $g(\mathbf{x},t)$. {\color{ black}Indeed, as shown in Appendix \ref{Appendix}, a natural choice is a matrix $g$ of the form $g=\lambda R$}. As an additional remark, we recall that such conformal rotations play a crucial role in Eringen's description of microstretch fluids \cite{eringen2001microcontinuum1,eringen2001microcontinuum2}, as enlightened in \cite{gay2009geometric}.
This motivates us to investigate the interplay between scaling and rotational degrees of freedom. To this purpose, we simply extend the Euler-Poincar\'e theory from previous sections to accommodate dilations.
Upon using the evolution law \eqref{confev}, one follows the procedure outlined in Section \ref{sec:flows} by defining
\begin{align*}
Q&=\mathcal{Q}\circ\mathbf{X}^{-1}=(\lambda^2\mathcal{R}\mathcal{Q}_0\mathcal{R}^{-1})\circ\mathbf{X}^{-1},
\\
\widehat{\nu}&=(\partial_t\mathcal{R}\,\mathcal{R}^{-1})\circ\mathbf{X}^{-1}
\,,
\\
\Lambda&=(\lambda^{-1}\partial_t\lambda)\circ\mathbf{X}^{-1}
\,,
\end{align*}
so that the variational principle \eqref{actprinc3} is modified to
\begin{multline}
\delta\!\int_{t_1}^{t_2}\!\!\!\int\! \bigg(\frac12\rho\|\boldsymbol{u}\|^2+\frac{J}{2}\rho\|[\nu,Q]\|^2+2\rho J\Lambda^2\|Q\|^2
\\
-\rho\,\mathcal{U}(\rho)
-\mathcal{F}(Q,\nabla Q)
\bigg)\,\mathrm{d}^3{x}\,\mathrm{d} t=0\,,
\label{}
\end{multline}
with the variations
\begin{align}\label{vars2}
&\delta Q=[\widehat{\eta},Q]+2\Xi Q-(\boldsymbol{w}\cdot\nabla)Q
\\
&\delta\widehat{\nu}
=\partial_t\widehat{\eta}-(\boldsymbol{w}\cdot\nabla)\widehat{\nu}+(\boldsymbol{u}\cdot\nabla)\widehat{\eta}+[\widehat{\eta},\widehat{\nu}]
\,,
\\
&\delta\Lambda=\partial_t\Xi-(\boldsymbol{w}\cdot\nabla)\Xi+(\boldsymbol{u}\cdot\nabla)\Lambda\,,
\end{align}
where $\widehat{\eta}$, $\Xi$ and $\boldsymbol{w}$ are arbitrary and vanish at the endpoints. Then, the resulting Euler-Poincar\'e equations extend the VK model to incorporate scaling:
\begin{align}\label{QS1bis}
&\rho D_t \boldsymbol{u}= -\nabla
p-\partial_l\!\left(\frac{\partial
\mathcal{F}}{\partial{Q}_{ij\,,l}}\nabla{Q}_{ij}\right),
\quad
D_t \rho=-\rho\operatorname{div}\boldsymbol{u},
\\ \label{QS2bis}
&\rho JD_t\big[[\widehat{\nu},Q],Q\big]
=\big[h,Q\big]
,
\quad\
D_t Q=[\widehat{\nu},Q]+2\Lambda Q,
\\ \label{QS3bis}
&
2\rho J \|Q\|^2(D_t\Lambda+2\Lambda^2)=\rho J \|[\widehat\nu,Q]\|^2+\operatorname{Tr}(h Q)
\,,
\end{align}
where we observe that the first three equations remain unchanged, while the modified $Q-$tensor dynamics produces an additional equation for the scaling quantity $\Lambda$ (the latter quantifies the time rate of $\operatorname{Tr}Q^n$ far all integers $n$).
Also, notice that the dynamics above can be rewritten upon replacing \eqref{QS2bis} and \eqref{QS3bis} by
\[
[\rho JD_t^2Q-h,Q]
=0
\,,\qquad\quad
\operatorname{Tr}\!\big((\rho J D_t^2Q-h)Q\big)=0
\,,
\]
where the latter is obtained by combining \eqref{QS3bis} with \eqref{QS2bis}. Note that the above dynamical system is also a special case of the QS model, since the former is obtained by making use of the ansatz \eqref{confev} in the variational principle \eqref{QStextActPrincFluid} underlying the QS equations of motion \eqref{QS1}-\eqref{QS3}.
At this stage, inserting dissipation is straightforward as it can be done by simply applying the method outlined in the previous section. Therefore, we shall just state the final results, which are as follows:
\begin{align*}
&\rho D_t \boldsymbol{u}= -\nabla
p-\partial_l\!\left(\frac{\partial
\mathcal{F}}{\partial{Q}_{ij\,,l}}\nabla{Q}_{ij}\right)-\frac{\delta r}{\delta \boldsymbol{u}},
\\
&\left[\rho JD_t^2{Q}-h+\frac{\delta r}{\delta (D_t Q)},Q\right]
=0,
\\
&
J\rho\operatorname{Tr}(QD_t^2Q)=\operatorname{Tr}\!\left(\!\left(h-\frac{\delta r}{\delta (D_t Q)}\right)\!Q\right),
\\
&
D_t \rho+\rho\operatorname{div}\boldsymbol{u}=0
\,.
\end{align*}
As before, the Rayleigh dissipation function is left arbitrary to allow for different modeling options. Possible choices of Rayleigh function are presented in \cite{sonnet2004continuum}.
\section{Conclusions and open questions}
This paper has compared three apparently different approaches to $Q-$tensor dynamics in the theory of liquid crystals. Starting from simple texture dynamics, the VK theory {\color{ black}for biaxial nematics was shown to emerge from the QS model}
under the preliminary assumption of conservative dynamics and by retaining inertial effects. In addition, a micropolar variant of the VK theory has been formulated by following Eringen's definition of the wryness tensor \cite{Eringen1997}. Already at this stage the use of Euler-Poincar\'e reduction theory is advantageous, and even more so in the case of flowing liquid crystals, which was the subject of Section 3. The relation between QS theory and VK dynamics was shown to hold in this more general case without essential modifications and the same holds for the corresponding micropolar variant. Finally, we applied Euler-Poincar\'e reduction to the dissipative action principle, thereby showing how rotational dynamics \eqref{evolution} can also be taken into account for dissipative liquid crystal flows. Notice that all the results obtained in this paper also apply to the special case of incompressible flows.
Another natural question was addressed regarding the possibility of $Q-$tensor flows that are more general than \eqref{evolution}. Indeed, while an isospectral flow of $Q$ is justified for biaxial molecules, other types of nematic molecules require more general evolutions which are then influenced by the terms $\operatorname{Tr} Q^n$ in the Landau-de Gennes free energy. A possible strategy to tackle this question was pursued by making use of the conformal rotation group, so that \eqref{evolution} is replaced by \eqref{confev}. This approach was followed by Eringen in his theory of microstretch fluids \cite{eringen2001microcontinuum1,eringen2001microcontinuum2}, and its geometric features have been exploited in \cite{gay2009geometric}. In the present paper, a full dynamical theory was developed based on the Qian-Sheng Lagrangian and dissipation was also included.
The work in this paper follows in the same direction as recent work \cite{GBRaTr2012}, which showed how Eringen's micropolar theory includes Ericksen-Leslie dynamics as a special case. It is hoped that the identification of relations between different liquid crystal theories will help provide a better understanding of the essential features captured in the various models. As mentioned in the introduction, an outstanding question concerns possible deep relations between the Harvard theory and EL dynamics. The answer to this question is among the most difficult, since the order parameter possesses essentially different transformation properties in the two models.
\paragraph{Acknowledgements} The authors are indebted to Paul Skerritt for a crucial step in the proof reported in the Appendix \ref{Appendix}. Also, the authors benefited from stimulating conversations with Fran\c{c}ois Gay-Balmaz and Arghir Dani Zarnescu. {\color{ black}Part of this work was developed at the Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences (Cambridge, UK), whose hospitality is greatly acknowledged. Financial support by the Leverhulme Trust Research Project Grant No. 2014-112 is also acknowledged.}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.